San Bernardino False Flag

Originally published at Akamai Tree blogspot on 12/7/15

As much as it pains me to say this, it’s turning out that the recent San Bernardino terror attack was most likely a false flag in the sense that it had government black operations involvement. The reason I say it pains me is because the term ‘false flag’ is now at risk of losing any meaning, since it seems as though every mass attack hyped in the media, at least in the West, shows some signs of having been a false flag/black operation. But, nonetheless, in every instance of one of these media-hyped attacks, much of the evidence converges to suggest that there is much more than meets the eye to the attack. This recent San Bernardino attack, which has been pinned on a couple, Syed Farooq and Tashfeen Malik (with no hard evidence that’s been released – just mere assertions from the FBI which are parroted by the media) is no different.

Firstly, virtually every eye witness account testified to there having been three tall, built, white male shooters dressed in military garb of roughly equal size and stature. [1] Therefore, it’s incredibly unlikely that any of these shooters could have been Tashfeen Malik, who reportedly only weighed around 90-110 lbs. and was 5’4″. And, of course, even if she was heavier and more substantial than what is being reported, it is still highly unlikely that anyone could have mistaken someone of that size as a tall, built, white male. These purported three tall, built, white males match the description of mercenaries, not a duo composed of some hapless amateur who recently purchased an AR-15 and his diminutive wife. Not only that, but Tashfeen Malik, when pictured shot on the ground next to the SUV, was not in full tactical gear, but in shorts, high heels, and a tummy blouse. This certainly doesn’t mean for sure she was not involved in the shooting, since it would make sense for her to change out of the tactical gear while trying to evade capture. But, if that was the plan, you would have expected Farooq to have done the same. He didn’t – he was in full tactical gear when killed.

Perhaps the most puzzling aspect to this shooting (and the subsequent investigation) is the third shooter. The so-called “third suspect” was detained by police as he was running from the black SUV. [2] In addition to this, a witness of the shooting stated that a third person dressed in military gear fled the scene. [3] There has been a complete and utter media blackout regarding this third shooter and the media is not pursuing this crucial identity in any of their news conferences. Now we’re supposed to believe this shooting was solely perpetrated by a couple? Additionally, no word has come from the police as to who this third suspect is and what his involvement was. Why? Because this person was one of the couple’s handlers. Reports of extra suspects having been detained and then never hearing a word about them ever again is a recurring theme in suspected false flag and/or facilitated attacks – Sandy Hook, OKC, Columbine, Isla Vista, etc.

Before getting to the couple’s background, it’s important to address the so-called shootout the couple had with the police who pursued them after they fled their Redlands home. It’s likely the police shoot out narrative was entirely false. According to the police, the couple began firing at police out of their blacked out Ford Expedition SUV with assault rifles. However, if you look at the photos of the SUV after the couple had been killed, the windows (which were riddled with bullet holes) were clearly rolled up, which means it is impossible that the police’s assertion that the couple shot out of the SUV with assault rifles the entire length of the chase is true. Why? Because the rifles’ length including the barrels was far too long to have shot out of a rolled up window with. The blowback from shooting a high powered rifle from a seated, cramped position that close to a window would have been far too great and glass from the windows would have exploded inside the car. You expect me to believe that two people who supposedly had just killed fourteen people with military precision were stupid enough to fire high powered rifles in an enclosed chamber? Give me a break, please. The couple probably did not shoot at the police, but were simply hunted down, killed, and then thrown in the back of a police SUV with no problem.

Now, to the background of the couple and the apartment. Firstly, it is very strange that the FBI only investigated the couple’s apartment for a mere hour. Even in mundane cases the FBI encounters on a weekly basis, they almost always investigate properties and close them off to anyone other than law enforcement for days, even weeks at a time. It’s obvious that the investigation wasn’t thorough, or even serious, because no fingerprints were lifted from the apartment (lifting fingerprints is standard operational procedure in any investigation). When the media stormed the residence, no fingerprint dust was left in the apartment.

There are additional oddities that have emerged from the FBI’s report of what they recovered from the apartment. The FBI reported that it recovered possibly incriminating electronic equipment that was physically damaged and left in garbage bins in the apartment. Are you kidding me? Anyone operating on the level of sophistication this couple allegedly was would know that the only way to reliably destroy hardware and along with it any trace of incriminating digital information is to write zeros to the entire memory volumes and then microwave and incinerate the hardware (including routers, modems, etc.). A few crushed cellphones in the garbage bin reeks of convenient, too good to be true evidence.

The FBI also reported having found evidence that Farooq had viewed ISIS propaganda on his computer right before he supposedly executed the shooting. This is suspiciously convenient as well, and makes little sense on top of that. Serious ISIS operatives don’t watch their own propaganda, especially right before going on a killing spree. The FBI has reported that they know the couple communicated with other potential radicalizers and terrorists in the United States, but never confirmed that they were in communication with anyone outside the United States, making it rather unlikely in my view that this couple was actually guided by ISIS (and more likely that they were facilitated by some American intelligence organization). The FBI admits there is no evidence to suggest that the couple was directed by ISIS. According to one spokesperson, “at this point we believe that they were more self-radicalized and inspired by the group than actually told to do the shooting.” Well, they were probably working under the direction of something, but it wasn’t ISIS. In fact, many have commented on the fact that the techniques the couple supposedly used (specific IEDs, etc.) resemble those used by highly trained classic al-Qaeda members, not your typical ISIS follower or member. Of course the three reportedly white male shooters never yelled “Allahu Akhbar” or anything of the kind despite the fact that nearly every Islamic terror attack is accompanied by something similar.

It’s also interesting that the pipe bombs the attackers used after the shooting never went off – they were inert. This couple has no background in electronics and the level of sophistication that their attempted explosives demonstrated couldn’t have been pulled off by anyone other than an expert, i.e., not the couple. The likely had to have had help in engineering these explosives. If they had real help from some kind of ISIS or al-Qaeda operative in the U.S., the explosives would have actually worked. What I think happened is that their U.S./Saudi/Pakistani intelligence handlers probably instructed them to build inert explosives as opposed to real ones. This is typical of many attempted terrorist bombings in the West – the explosives always malfunction without fail. This is because every one with the exception of the failed Times Square propane bomber has had a Western intelligence handler/agent provocateur who facilitates the attempted the attack and entraps the attacker.

The other evidence that supposedly points to this couple having been aligned with ISIS is painfully convenient as well. For anyone to believe that Tashfeen Malik, assuming she was one of the shooters, posted her allegiance to ISIS on Facebook while right in the middle of executing a mass shooting is just utterly naive. Unless you’re actually a highly trained and experienced operative, there’s no way you could even type correctly on a smartphone because of how much shock you would be in. And, of course, it’s extremely doubtful a trained operative would ever do something as idiotic as posting on Facebook while on a mission. The reality is that Tashfeen Malik was not one of the shooters.

Malik is a question unto herself. First of all, Tashfeen Malik sounds more like a code name than an actual Pakistani or Middle Eastern name. Secondly, there is nothing to suggest that the Tashfeen Malik who was killed in California ever actually existed other than what the media has portrayed. There is no corroborating evidence. The picture of her all over the internet hasn’t been matched to the face of her supposed body and none of her family members have confirmed that the person shot was actually Malik. Pakistani and Saudi intelligence (note the source) have confirmed that a Tashfeen Malik has lived in both of those countries (and, interestingly, Pakistani intelligence noted that she wasn’t known to be religious or political).

The theory on Malik is that she was radicalized while living in Saudi Arabia, where she supposedly lived for most of her life. However, there are conflicting reports as to how long Malik was actually in Saudi Arabia. According to the Saudi Interior Ministry, Malik only visited Saudi Arabia for a week at a time in 2008 and then again in 2013. That is not long enough to become radicalized. Her family (which is wealthy, by the way) had apparently lived in Saudi Arabia for 25 years after having moved from the Punjab province of Pakistan. This leads me to believe that she probably spent more time in Saudi Arabia than the Saudi Interior Ministry is admitting to. Reports have surfaced that while studying pharmacy at the Bahauddin Zakariya University in Islamabad (the alleged reason Malik returned to Pakistan), Malik attended an all-female madrassa in Multan called al-Huda, where law enforcement has hypothesized she may have become radicalized at. This seems unlikely, though, because Malik’s teachers at Bahauddin Zakariya claim she didn’t seem to be very religious at all, she certainly didn’t show any signs of having been radicalized, al-Huda is not a school associated with radical Islam, and because Malik left al-Huda before completing her studies to marry Farooq – not very dedicated it seems.

The truth is that no one really for sure who Tashfeen Malik actually was, if the woman shot in San Bernardino was in fact the same Malik as is documented by Pakistani and Saudi officials, where Malik was her entire life, or whether she was actually radicalized in the traditional sense or not (according to Pakistani intel, she didn’t appear to be). The transition from moderate, conservative Muslim in Pakistan to Salafist extremist is nowhere to be found and can’t be pinpointed at any point in her history – is it lost in time? Who knows. Seems as though it occurred on her flight to the U.S. She displayed near paranoid behavior in the United States such as insisting on wearing her burqa and niqab even while around relatives, removing pictures of herself from university databases, destroying identification cards, etc. This is not indicative of anything on its own, but the radical transformation of her behavior from when she lived in the Middle East to when she lived in the U.S. is curious.

She obviously wanted to stay as obscure as possible, a behavior which she didn’t display in Pakistan despite the fact that Pakistani intelligence tracks terrorists and suspected terrorists with far more vigilance than the U.S. does. What Malik resembles is a black operative. Nearly everything in her background suggests a Saudi/ISI/Al-Qaeda/CIA connection, not an ISIS connection. Her name is suspicious, and she displays a pattern of movement reminiscent of operatives under a Middle Eastern country’s (hint: Saudi Arabia or Pakistan’s) direction. It’s possible that Malik did indeed radicalize Farooq and effectively set him up as a patsy partially under the direction of some Middle Eastern country. That country is likely Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. Pakistani ISI has a colorful history of recruiting operatives and probably patsies from the mosques from the region of Pakistan Malik resided in. The Pakistani ISI has often cooperated with the CIA on Al-Qaeda and Afghanistan. This would certainly shed light on the reports of her association with the radical “Red Mosque” (Lal Masjid) in Islamabad, since the Red Mosque serves as an ISI recruitment center.

Further information regarding her family’s ties to Saudi Arabia would be helpful in inducting her possible relationship with Saudi intelligence, but there is currently a dearth of information on this topic.

Farooq is considerably less interesting a figure than Malik. Of Pakistani descent and having been born in Chicago, he appears to have been a relatively normal individual and somewhat dedicated Muslim. He visited Saudi Arabia a few times to complete the hajj, something many Muslims do. The only things that stands out about Farooq was his hobby of target shooting, interest in firearms, and his purported sharing of ideology and fixation on Israel with ISIS, as testified to by his father, who is also named Syed Farooq. Of course, having a “shared ideology” could mean nearly anything, and the father’s testimony should not be taken as completely reliable, since Syed Farooq’s father’s ex-wife has reported that he is a chronic alcoholic and mentally ill.

Much attention has been given to the story behind the AR-15 rifles the couple obtained. The media and FBI claim that the guns were obtained legally. This isn’t true. The AR-15 was not legally transferred from Enrique Martinez to Farooq, since there is no legal paper work regarding such a transaction. Secondly, since January 2000, California has mandated that all legal guns must have a fixed 10 round limit magazine. But the shooters fired off at least 50 rounds at a time and the rifles had illegal pistol grips on them. Farooq may have actually obtained the guns illegally and/or illegally modified them after the fact. But it is clear the guns themselves were illegal at the time. Also, it was reported initially by MSNBC from an ATF agent’s testimony that a straw buyer had purchased the guns purchased the AR-15 Farooq allegedly used for the police, not for Farooq. This reeks of there having been a handler or facilitator of Farooq’s in law enforcement/some three letter agency. Could have been a mistake, but suspicious nonetheless.

We also know that the San Bernardino Inland Regional Center (and, in some cases, the very room the shooting took place in) was used as a site for active shooter drills on a monthly basis in the area and that, on the day of the shooting, there was a nearby active shooter drill taking place. A few of the nurses in the facility thought that the shooting was in fact a drill. I don’t believe this is strong evidence, though. First of all, active shooter drills have become extremely common in every locale, so coincidences are quite likely. Secondly, it’s not clear that in the case of false flag killing sprees, simultaneous active drills would make the false flag any more successful or serve as some kind of requisite condition for a false flag killing spree to occur. Although I do admit that it does seem rather strange that virtually every one of these mass shootings is accompanied by a nearby active shooter drill.

We don’t know all the answers to this shooting yet, but what is clear to me is that if Farooq was indeed involved in the shooting, he probably had several handlers (probably from the intelligence services of some Middle Eastern country and from somewhere within the American intelligence apparatus) who facilitated and maybe even participated in the shooting. The FBI has a long history of radicalizing people, setting them up to carry out terrorist plots, and then foiling the very plot they helped orchestrate, sometimes even involving themselves directly in the attack. This is what appears happened with the Farooq family, although whether it was the FBI or some other agency foreign or domestic that orchestrated the attack is not yet known, and probably never will. Although, I highly suspect Pakistani ISI and/or Saudi intelligence with, at best, full complicity from an American intelligence agency such as the FBI, or, more likely, the CIA, and, at worst, full cooperation from one. Malik may have been one of those handlers and is in all likelihood the one of the persons responsible for his radicalization (if he was indeed radicalized as the media’s telling us). Another possibility which I consider unlikely is that Farooq and Malik were framed entirely and had nothing to do with the shooting. The reason I find this unlikely is because of Malik’s background, surveillance footage from a shooting range near the couple’s home showing Farooq firing an AR-15, and the fact that an IED assembly was found in the garage of the home.

I also doubt that local police forces were involved at all in the orchestration of the false flag (if this was a false flag). These kinds of operations are almost always carried out by the dark/black side of the CIA, often in cooperation with foreign intelligence operatives (especially in the case of Islamic terrorism) and are extremely insular and compartmentalized. Yet the Internet is always buzzing with accusations that these shooting are complete hoaxes and never happened based entirely on sophomoric analyses of released photos from the scene and on the alleged crisis actors spotted in video news coverage of the incident. It would be virtually impossible to keep such a massive conspiracy or deception a secret. Effective compartmentalization (which is necessary for any conspiracy of meaningful size or scale) would be impossible – you couldn’t pay all the eye witnesses, police, and crisis actors enough money or threaten them with their lives enough times to keep someone from coming forward at some point or slipping to someone that the event never happened at all. Hoax/crisis actor theories are just not feasible.


[1] San Bernardino terror attack

[2] San Bernardino chase

[3] San Bernardino shooting




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s