Skousen: More Evidence of False Flag Attack on Gays – Orlando, Santa Monica – The government attacks groups through agent provocateurs whom they want to create sympathy for

World Affairs Brief, June 24, 2016 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World.

Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (

This Week’s Analysis:

British Sovereignty Wins Over Globalism—For Now

Obama Defies Supreme Court

Behind the State Departments Push to Overthrow Assad

Trump Campaign Under Pressure

More Evidence of False Flag Attack on Gays

Gun Control Agenda Defeated Again



As I pointed out last week, one of the main reasons for the government planned attack in Orlando was to give yet more justification for treating homosexuals and their variants as a protected class. In typical case of conflict-creation strategy, the government attacks groups they want to create sympathy for, as in Orlando.

But it wasn’t the only one. Apparently another similar false flag attack was planned for a Gay Pride parade in Los Angeles. As Ed Griffin reported,

Santa Monica; Two police officers who wish to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation say that James Wesley Howell, an Indiana man who was found with a car full of explosives and weapons on Sunday morning, told police he was part of a team that planned shooting attacks on gay communities in Florida and California.

Howell told police he was turning himself in because he wanted protection. His story was that he had been assured by his recruiters that he would not be harmed in the shooting but, when he heard on the news that Omar Mateen, the lead gunman in the Orlando group, had been killed by sniper fire, he realized he was being set up as a patsy and would be killed.

More evidence has surfaced this week relative to the Orlando massacre that continues to indicate contradictions in the official narrative.

1. According to the Daily Mail, A doctor who is listed on the psychological evaluation for Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen, said she did not see him and she was not even living in Florida at the time when G4S security firm ordered the evaluation. Psychologist, Dr Carol Nudelman, who now lives in Colorado, said in a statement released through her attorneys to the Miami Herald that she never evaluated Mateen nine years ago for G4S, a security firm that was known as Wackenhut at the time.

G4S says this was a clerical error but refuses to say who the actual doctor was who did the exam. This problem indicates that Mateen was being groomed for something and the company was covering for his erratic mental state from the beginning.

2) The Justice Department said they would release partial recordings of Orlando shooter Omar Mateen’s 9/11 calls. As the uproar grew about partial release, the FBI said they would release full transcripts, but as The Intercept pointed out, the full transcripts did not include at least one call made by Mateen to 9/11. Why was that call entirely omitted?

According to, “On Wednesday, Catherine Herridge told the “Kelly File” audio captured on cell phones during the attack reveals Mateen was conversing with one or more people about tactics and he “was not talking to 911.”

The conversation was mentioned during an ABC News interview with one of the victims. “During the interview the eyewitness, who played dead for several hours during the attack as a strategy to stay alive, said that he had overheard a phone conversation that the shooter was engaged in,” Shepard Ambellas wrote on June 15.

“The eyewitness said that the shooter made mention that he was the ‘fourth shooter’ and that there were ‘three others,’ ‘snipers,’ along with a ‘female suicide bomber’ that was playing dead.

This is important because it means that the three other police in uniform that were supposedly shooting at Mateen were likely the other shooters. Last week, I said that it would have been impossible for Mateen to shoot over a 100 people if he were in a firefight with even one officer, let alone three. But as you will see below, the story about how many officers arrived on the scene is in dispute.

3) This account by one officer reported by the Washington Post describes 5 or 6 other officers arriving at the club “within minutes” of the call for help by a uniformed officer who had engaged Mateen. By the time they arrived they said they heard shots but couldn’t see the shooter because he was already holed up in a bathroom. However, the only reason the shooter was holed up in the bathroom is because he was escaping the fire of the first officer, who only had a handgun with limited rounds. The big question remains, if all of this is true, how did Mateen kill and wound 103 people while being engaged by a security officer and retreating to the bathroom? It just doesn’t add up.

4) One of Mateen’s gay partners said that they were in a threesome together when it was discovered that one of the partners had AIDS. Mateen wanted revenge on the gay club for being exposed to AIDS.

5) Here’s evidence of the first encounter where the FBI tried to lure Omar Mateen into an act of terror. Max Blumenthal and Sarah Lazare report for AlterNet:

“Before Omar Mateen gunned down 49 patrons at the LGBTQ Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, the FBI attempted to induce his participation in a terror plot. Sheriff Ken Mascara of Florida’s St. Lucie County told the Vero Beach Press Journal that after Mateen threatened a courthouse deputy in 2013 by claiming he could order Al Qaeda operatives to kill his family, the FBI dispatched an informant to ‘lure Omar into some kind of act and Omar did not bite.’

“While self-styled terror experts and former counter-terror officials have criticized the FBI for failing to stop Mateen before he committed a massacre, the new revelation raises the question of whether the FBI played a role in shifting his mindset toward an act of violence. All that is known at present is that an FBI informant attempted to push Mateen into agreeing to stage a terror attack in hopes that he would fall into the law enforcement dragnet.” The piece is part of AlterNet’s Grayzone Project.

In all government induced attacks like this, the FBI agent provocateur looks for emotional triggers that will agitate the target into action, like this AIDS revenge scenario that pushed Mateen into attack mode. The anti-gay narrative originally proffered was clearly false, but the government continues to insist upon it in order to promote gays as a protected class. Incredibly, the FBI still maintains there is “no evidence of gay lovers.”

If you are still skeptical about the FBI running domestic terror attacks, we have the testimony of a whistleblower within the agency who backs up these claims. David Stockman published this account, quoting

A former FBI agent has claimed that the agency manufacture[s] nearly all of the major terrorist plots they claim are carried out by terror groups. According to Michael German, the FBI routinely entrap vulnerable individuals who would never have committed any violence, and brainwash them into committing terrorist acts so they can be “caught” and “punished” by the FBI.

“They’re manufacturing terrorism cases,” Michael German, a former undercover agent with the FBI who now researches national-security law at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, told The Times. “These people are five steps away from being a danger to the United States.” ‘They target people who are genuinely psychotic’

Stephen Downs, an attorney and founding member of Project Salam , which gives legal support to Muslims, told Business Insider that ” the government has developed a technique of engaging targets in conversations of a somewhat provocative nature, and then trying to pick up on things the target says, which might suggest illegal activity – and then trying to push them into pursuing those particular activities.”

This is the definition of an agent provocateur, not an informant, as the FBI claims.

Last March, The Intercept profiled 25-year-old Sami Osmakac, who was “broke and struggling with mental illness” when he became the target of an FBI sting operation. “The FBI provided all of the weapons seen in Osmakac’s martyrdom video,” The Intercept reported. “The bureau also gave Osmakac the car bomb he allegedly planned to detonate, and even money for a taxi so he could get to where the FBI needed him to go.”

A recent study cited by BuzzFeed examined undercover operations for signs of entrapment by looking at terrorism prosecutions dating back to 9/11… The vast majority of the 317 cases involving undercover operations contained signs of entrapment.

While no case has ever been thrown out on the basis of this kind of entrapment, judges have taken notice and raised concerns over the danger of entrapping otherwise innocent individuals in sting operations.

Coleen Rowley, a former FBI special agent and division counsel whose May 2002 memo to the FBI Director exposed some of the FBI’s pre-9/11 failures, was named one of TIME magazine’s “Persons of the Year” in 2002. She is quoted in the AlterNet piece:

“It looks like it’s pretty much standard operating procedure for preliminary inquiries to interview the subject or pitch the person to become an informant and/or plant an undercover or informant close by to see if the person bites on the suggestion. … In the case of Mateen, since he already worked for a security contractor [G4S], he was either too savvy to bite on the pitch or he may have even become indignant that he was targeted in that fashion. These pitches and use of people can backfire.”

What many whistleblowers don’t understand is that these provocations are purposeful, not simply an attempt to recruit an informant backfiring.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.