Previous Update

Updates Index

(if there are any to speak of)
June 14 - 20, 2016

American Demon
The Orlando Shooting I Wasn't Going to Investigate

With the Iraqi's sailing through the Fallujah operation like they can do no wrong, they are wondering why they ever took so long to do it. And they have Mosul in their eyes. They are probably telling the Americans where to strike targets, and the Americans have not much choice but to hit them because they are supposed to have smart missiles. It's not like the Americans have an excuse for missing time and time again. Iraq has some of its own jets purchased from the U.S. "On [June 12] the Iraqi Defense Minister announced starting the preparations of the liberation operations of the areas located north of Tikrit and south of Mosul".

Mosul is possibly ruled by the Baathists rather than by ISIS. Here's from July 18, 2014:

Isis fighters have partially withdrawn from Iraq's second city, Mosul...

In an interview with the Guardian the governor, Atheel Nujaifi, who escaped from Mosul last month, said the Islamic State's main "strike force" had withdrawn from the city to fight the Iraqi army further south in Tikrit, he said. A smaller number of local Isis supporters remained in Mosul's western part, known as the right bank, he said.

Last month Isis staged a stunning advance, seizing Mosul and Tikrit, and raising the spectre of Iraq's collapse...

...But according to Nujaifi, most of the eastern half of Mosul is now dominated by the Naqshbandi Army, a group led by high-ranking Saddam-era Ba'athists including Izzat al-Douri, the king of clubs in the US deck of "wanted Iraqi" playing cards. Naqshbandi militants had taken down Isis flags from "a lot of buildings" and replaced them with their own, he said. Other sources inside Mosul confirmed that Isis fighters began to withdraw from the city about a week ago.

I recall this situation two years ago, but do not recall many follow-up articles. Apparently, ISIS came back to control the Mosul population,. However: "So far [July, 2014], there has been no conflict between the Naqshbandi Army and Isis, who are now facing off in Mosul on opposite banks of the Tigris river. " Apparently, the Baathists were on the eastern side of the Tigris. Are they still there? The eastern side smack where Mosul is not was anciently Nineveh, and Nahum 1:11 says that some one who plots evil against the Lord will launch out of Nineveh. There are two places in the first chapter of Nahum saying that Israel will not be afflicted again after Assyria's / Nineveh's defeat, and there is even some Armageddon terminology in that chapter. In chapter 2, the one from Nineveh appears to be the one who invades Israel, afterwhich God restores Israel. That didn't happen when Assyria invaded Israel in ancient times, when the ten tribes were carried off in God's wrath, out of the country. Therefore, Nahum 1:11 appears to be the neo-Seleucid anti-Christ of Daniel 11:21, who, in 11:31, is seen in Jerusalem with a successful invasion.

Iraq claims that 500 ISIS fighters were caught and arrested while trying to escape Fallujah as citizens. If true, how many more than that tried to flee, and why? I thought ISIS was the big bad monster no one could defeat.

Here's a headline: "Tribal Leader: US Prevents Iraqi Forces' Advance in Fallujah Operations". It figures. Someone's decided to blab on problematic U.S. excuses to slow the invasion. These sentiments must be getting around. The game is up. The Americans are being sized up for the rats that they are. Not the military workers or fighters, of course, but the leaders who call the shots. That's who I'm talking about.

An Iraqi tribal leader in the volatile province of al-Anbar blasted the US for blocking the Iraqi military forces' further advances in the strategic city of Fallujah.

"The Iraqi forces are only 3km away from the Fallujah bridge and after the full liberation of al-Karama and al-Saqlawiya, the city has no connections with the outside world," Sabah al-Isawi told FNA on [June 13].

"The security forces had made good progress in al-Halabesah region in the Southern parts of Fallujah but the command center of the international coalition (led by the US) has ordered them to withdraw and prevented their further advance," he added.

You're kidding. The U.S. thinks it's in charge of this operation, but then the U.S. military tells the world that this is not their battle; they're just there to help whatever the Iraqis decide to do. Shame. Unfortunately, there are no details along with the accusation, yet I fully believe the accusation. It sounds like the Iraqi's were "forced" to stop the advance. But another article out on the same day of the accusation may reveal why the U.S. tried to stop the advance: "The Federal Police Command announced on [June 13] about destroying the ISIS communications headquarters in southern Fallujah during the liberation battles of the city and informed about the killing of a number of ISIS members during the operations." There is no credit given to (in the article), nor mention of, U.S. air strikes per this event.

Another article speaks on the Halabesah area mentioned by the tribal chief. Apparently, it was while there, or immediately afterward, that the Iraqi forces were told to turn back. "The commander of the 2nd regiment in al-Somoud brigade, Colonel Orans Mohamed al-Eissawi, said in a press statement []June 13] obtained by that 'The joint security forces stormed into al-Halabesa area (10 km west of Fallujah),' indicating that, 'Dozens of ISIS members were killed during the operation.' Eissawi added, 'The military operation that targeted ISIS strongholds and gatherings surprised the enemy who started to flee to central Fallujah.'" That's all the article says. If the U.S. military alone puts out a message that it was bombing at this situation, I won't believe it. Southern Fallujah is where the Iraqis recently discovered a network of tunnels created and/or used by ISIS.

The first military U.S. helicopters were introduced into Iraq roughly on the 13th, a great way to save ISIS leaders working closely with the U.S. Fox: "Estimates for the number of IS fighters holed up in Fallujah vary from 1,000 to 2,500...In the north of the country, US Apache helicopters conducted strikes against IS targets for the first time in Iraq, near Qayyarah south of Mosul, the Pentagon said Monday." Why are they up north where there is less going on, while the siege of Fallujah is hot at this very moment???

One possibility is that the Americans communicated with the communications headquarters at southern Fallujah, informing them of where the air strikes would be so that ISIS fighters could clear out of those places. Or, the Americans have no communication with the ISIS leadership, yet seek to use the group by protecting its fighters as far as they can swing it. It's one or the other.

Suddenly, thousands of civilians in Fallujah were escaping, as could be expected if ISIS has only 1,000 to 2,500 fighters left. The ISIS escapees may have resolved to get to Mosul, or to that place where the Americans are using their helicopters. The Americans are saying that they didn't use the helicopters earlier because the Iraqis didn't want them to. It sounds far fetched seeing that the Americans are very welcome to use jets. In fact, the Iraqi's were waiting a long time for the Americans to give their air power for cover. Thanks to the Russians, the Americans were no longer able to play that stall-game. Everything has gone well for the Russians. As soon as they started to bomb ISIS' oil facilities, the Americans started to do the same. However, the Americans probably started to do the same in efforts to "own" certain facilities i.e. to keep the Russians from bombing them. That way, the Americans could manage the strikes to do the least damage possible.

If Baathists are in Fallujah, and they are expected to be, it makes sense that they might want to escape to Mosul's Baathist area. I've heard some reports of cruelty from the Iraqi army toward some Fallujah residents, but, perhaps, these may be some of the Baathists, having been caught. Baathists are interested in taking Baghdad, and Fallujah is near (about 30 miles) that capital. But why would Americans wish to protect Baathists if all they want is Baghdad, and not to ruin Assad?

As we read the following, keep in mind that Al-Jazeera is coordinating with Google and the United States, both opposed to Assad i.e. Al-Jazeera is bound to fabricate news on behalf of the Americans, ironically enough. The route of the Iraqis, when they met American resistance on Monday in southern Fallujah, was from the west side of the city, where the Iraqi's were two days earlier:

Iraqi Defense Minister Khaled al-Obeidi claimed during a visit to the battle zone Saturday that government forces were advancing along a new front from the west of the city.

He says the Iraqi army's Eighth Brigade has entered the western districts of Fuleihat and Subeihat and is advancing toward the Bou Alwan bridge.

Fighting raged along three fronts, but government attempts to push into the southern district of Shuhadah appeared to meet heavy resistance, despite government claims that elite counterterrorism units were just 3 kilometers from the city center.

Al-Jazeera TV reported that IS militants had repulsed government forces trying to enter Fallujah from the south.

The truth may be that there was no "heavy" ISIS resistance there, and that the resistance was from the Americans telling the Iraqis to turn back. If they did turn back momentarily, it allows Al-Jazeera to blame it on "heavy resistance" from ISIS. Here is from an Al-Jazeera article that makes the Iraqis look like their Fallujah invasion is based merely on scoring political points (cheap shot). Note that the Iraqis appear to be calling the shots on where the Americans are to strike:

The Iraqi Air Force has mounted its most intensive operations of the war to selectively strike ISIL targets in Fallujah with its US-supplied F-16 and AC-208 precision-strike aircraft, Chinese armed CH-4 drones, Russian-supplied attack helicopters and new Czech-supplied L-159 jets...

The Iraqi government, supported by the US-led coalition, is coordinating the battle for Fallujah. They are picking the targets for aerial strikes and commanding the broad framework of the operation.

My first impression is that the Americans made up some excuse for not attacking ISIS at the southern part of the city. The same article gives the impression that the PMF, the Shi'ite army fighting for the Iraqis, has not done well in the past when the Americans provided air cover and Intelligence. It's exactly what I expect: "The PMF cannot 'go it alone' in such [city] battles and do not achieve good results in intense urban fighting where coalition intelligence and strike capabilities are critically important." One could read that as the Americans doing their best to keep the Shi'ites from succeeding, and perhaps luring them into ISIS traps. The Americans had rushed to Iraq to become the war "advisors," which is to say they aspired the leadership positions in the war. Creeping in like that, the Americans wanted to be obeyed, having made such a "sacrifice." Yet, the Americans want another image of themselves, to pretend that the Iraqis are in full charge of their war.

The way in which Western society is better than Arab society is where the West applies great toleration with differing ideologies. People allow themselves to be dragged out, rather than killing / persecuting those with different points of view. The Arabs, on the other hand, are quick to kill one another based on some religious differences. The Arabs seem to view human life very cheaply. Western democracy is part-and-parcel with toleration, which is better than warring, but globalists are not truly democratic; they are as dictatorial / authoritarian as the Assad they are railing against. Globalists will be tolerant so long as they have the upper hand in power; if they don't, they will use a number of calculated methods to restore their primacy. Globalists want to order a world subservient to themselves, and globalism is very expensive precisely due to the cost of keeping control in a world prone to division. And division is bred by secularism when the chief ideology doesn't include oneness under Jesus' God. Globalists are complete vanity. Yes, I believe in toleration for non-Christian religions, but I also believe that Jesus ought to be the government-toted religion, not just because it secures God's blessing for society as a whole, but because it makes the Creator happy. A country doesn't need an expensive, wicked military when God is happy. The U.S. military concerns itself on the best way to kill humans. Chemical weapons are deemed immoral, but blowing someone's head off with chunks of exploded metal is "moral."

What happens when the Creator is offended day after day? Bad things. Horrible things. And globalists are the type to heap the blame on God for all the horrible things. Globalists are not only selfish and driven; they are completely stupid. To control the world, they need to spy on the entire world, for to act in "taking care" of their political foes. Isn't that what dictators do? As they spy, God spies on them, but they are too stupid to realize that, when they afflict an innocent person who merely differs with them, they will reap a painful result, obviously. The first rule of being a Christian is that we must not offend God if we want God to act on our behalf. We must do no wrong to others, or we will offend God.

The Al-Jazeera article above was written by Michael Knights, a member of Atlantic Council's Task Force on the Future of Iraq. It sure sounds Western. It's made to sound like an advisory group, but we must know better, that it tends to form the Iraqi future, not merely assist the Iraqis in their own decisions. The Iraqis are being plied with demands of toleration toward one another, yes, but whenever sectarian violence is desired by the globalists to achieve their ends, they pit one group against another in brutal war. The Westerners are not exactly the democrat angel that they portray themselves to be. If interested, see here:

Brookings senior fellow Kenneth M. Pollack traveled to Iraq from March 9 to March 19 [2016] with Michael Knights of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. The trip was sponsored in part by the Atlantic Council's Task Force on the Future of Iraq. They had extensive meetings in Baghdad, Sulaymaniyyah, and Irbil with Iraqi, Kurdish, American, and British officials. This is the second of a three-part survey on the situation in Iraq.

The first paragraph starts off giving the Iraqi president credit for desiring toleration, but then throws a bomb across his bow: "However, his government continues to have little to show for all its good intentions, and that is costing the prime minister support in a variety of quarters." That's the same as saying to the prime minister that the West is unhappy with his progress toward the Western agenda. Who rules in Iraq, anyway? And what happens to the Iraqi president (Haider al-Abadi) if he falls way short of Western will? The same as happens to Assad and others, we may assume. Is that toleration from the West? is that democracy in action? Oh, but wait, I forget: the West is a form of god that can live above the laws and rules it enforces on others. After all, the West is sacrificing so much of itself all on behalf of the Middle-Eastern people.

The article then lists several of Abadi's sins against Western will. "Even some of Abadi's closest allies among the moderate Sunni leadership are becoming frustrated that there is so little tangible progress on reconciliation." Nor is there reconciliation between Democrats and Republicans in the United States. Nor does Obama respect Jesus. The Muslims are suffering horror precisely due to opposing the God of Israel, and the West is following closely behind, about to reap its own horrors from cultivating its own animosity toward the God of Israel. Rather than recognizing this Western sin, the West wants Iraq to be just like itself. It would like to see Iraqi women turned into porn stars, and there should be "gay" bars all over Iraq, with the presidency of the country tolerant of that situation. Only then will the West be happy, having succeeded in its plots for societal engineering in Iraq.

The author admit to my accusations, but put it positively, as though the West is helping Iraq: "Finally, as many of the points above (and in Part I of this assessment) should have suggested, American influence in Iraq has increased in MEANINGFUL ways. Simply put, the United States is investing significant new resources in Iraq -- from additional military assets to considerable financial aid to more active diplomatic and military leadership -- and doing so is bearing obvious fruit." Translation: providing Iraq with military assistance requires Iraq to do what America wants it to do, and America knows best. Just like America knows best that a Palestinian state at Jerusalem is best for Israel, so the Shi'ite government in Baghdad should give more political powers to its sworn Baathist / Sunni enemies. Like I said, stupids.

"Of greatest importance, it is the combination of skillful personnel with some real resources to work with that has enabled the United States to once again exert meaningful influence on Iraqi activities." What's with this "meaningful" term? It must be a term used to please the Sunni and Kurds. Meaningful change in Iraq takes powers from the Iran axis, and gives it to the Sunni, who, if they could get the chance, would blow Abadi away. The West thinks it can make Arabs love one another, and is wasting itself trying to create some semblance of unity when, in no time at all, decades of effort and money will, with absolute certainty, evaporate into thin air if one type of Muslim even looks wrongly at another.

"The change is evident in Baghdad. Iraqis no longer dismiss the United States and its wishes, as was the case from 2012 to 2015...Iraqis increasingly recognize that only military operations backed (if not run) by the Americans are likely to succeed...Moreover, Iraqis know that only the United States can help them with their severe financial problems, and the billions of dollars the United States is working to get Baghdad have forced a great many Iraqi leaders to take notice." Ahh, the Unites States is willing to purchase Iraq's obedience, and, at first glance, is even willing to be deceived by Iraq's feigned obedience. But the Americans know better. They know the Iraqi's will be more obedient only for the short term when Obama hands over one or two billion, yet this sum has been deemed necessary for the short term. Why? Because Iraq is right now involved in pursuing ISIS no matter what excuses the Americans give it to hold the attacks off longer. The roof is caving in on the Americans, and they need to spend a little money to fix it. It doesn't matter whether the American people oppose this vain meddling in Iraq; the Obama administration is a dictatorship doing as it pleases.

"Nevertheless, Iranian influence remains very strong, unquestionably greater than that of the United States, as American diplomats readily attest. But Iranian influence is noticeably diminished in recent months...Iraqis know that Iran lacks the financial resources or international diplomatic clout to help Baghdad with its financial problems the way that the United States can (and is)." It's called throwing money away, and will cause Iran to give Iraq more of its own, like fuel into the fire that burns the American dollars to an ash heap.

I understand that Mr. Pollack opposes Iran, and wishes to see Iraq not in bed with Iran, but that situation is the fault of the Bush administration's spending 100's of billions to oust Saddam, and to thereafter fight the Sunni. Mr. Pollack is not wishing to return to a Sunni-led Iraq that enslaves the Shi'ites, but Mr. Pollack is definitely wishing. In order to get your wish in a way that sustains itself, you need to please God in your decisions. Do not allow a Palestinian state at Jerusalem, or you will not receive answered prayer from God. Push for a Palestinian state at Jerusalem, and you will encourage the Muslims to come attack Israel. They are bound to come anyway, because God is bringing them to punish Israel, but the more the West urges a Palestinian state, the greater the Muslim zeal to treat Israel with brutality once the zealots arrive.

What would Iran and Syria be like today had not Bush invaded? Together, the two would yet be too weak to pose a serious threat to Israel. Yet, now, there are rabid fighters above the law in every nook and cranny, able to organize themselves because the Syrian and Iraqi governments no longer hold control over vast areas. And these zealots are hating America so much more that eradicating Israel has become the hallmark of their hate for America. Iran's animosity toward Israel is in reality animosity for American intervention in the Middle East. Rather than help the cause of Israel, the West has spoiled it to an enormous degree. If you would like to help Israel, you need to do it God's way. Prophecy has promised that world oblivion will hinge on Israel's last-days events.

In order to help Israel God's way, you need to preach to Israel that it must abandon its Western secularism, and make Jesus the chief religion of the state. That is the only solution...that the stupids are loath to attempt. If only the West would elect devout Christians, there would be a chance for Israel to evade its portion of Armageddon. Alas, for 2017-2021, it will be either Clinton of Trump.

Not many weeks ago, McGurk (American overseer for to control the Iraqi war on ISIS) was asking the Iraqi's not to pull out of Mosul to deal with things back at Baghdad. McGurk was giving appearances that he really wanted to get ISIS in Mosul. But that was before the Fallujah operation, and so we can now understand why the Americans would want the Iraqi army to remain way up north in Iraq rather than to come south near Fallujah.

In Mr. Polack's 1st piece, we discover that Mosul got some specific fighters trained by the US. Pollack seems intent on making the American war on ISIS look a lot more effective than how the rest of the world views it: "The U.S.-led coalition's military campaign to 'defeat' Da'esh (the Arabic acronym for ISIS) appears to be going better than is widely realized. The media has begun to pick up on this, but so far, the accounts do not seem to do it justice. The coalition has trained (or retrained) six Iraqi brigades, typically called the 'Mosul Counterattack Brigades' or just the 'Counterattack Brigades.' It was these formations that did most of the work at Ramadi and several are being shifted north to begin the Mosul operation. They are performing considerably better than other Iraqi brigades, a fact that is increasingly understood throughout the Iraqi government, boosting their prestige and the influence of the United States." One could view this as shifting the best fighters that Iraq had to Mosul when the United States caught wind of Iraq's plot to attack Fallujah.

The article reads like a press release by the U.S. military, for to show pride in the war effort, and even to boast a lot. The weakening of ISIS is a result of the Americans, ultimately, not the Iraqis. Therefore, the Iraqis owe the Americans obedience. All the while, the Americans want ISIS to remain strong.

The possible reason that the American helicopters are up north while Iraqi's invade Fallujah may be to send Iraq the message, "Come on up here. We told you to come on up here." "The Iraqi high command remains very problematic...", Pollack says, a resounding confirmation that the Iraqi government is not in obedience. At first, I thought that the Americans wanted to attack Fallujah to stall the Mosul operation, but this now seems to be wrong. Instead, with the Mosul operation planned for the fall, the Iraqi's may have decided to do Fallujah in the meantime, a thing the Americans did not want. In fact, the Americans may have been plotting to have ISIS / Baathists in Fallujah conduct a major assault on Baghdad, luring some of the best men that Iraq has to Mosul in the meantime.

Pollack claims that, suddenly, the U.S. military was praising the very Iraqi army that was too in-shambles previously to attack Mosul: "Credit for this progress should go to Lt. General Sean MacFarland, the commander of Operation Inherent Resolve, and his team, who have taken a disorganized and fragmented effort [the Iraqi fighters not yet ready for Mosul] and turned it into something starting to resemble a well-oiled machine." Ah, now that the U.S. wants Iraq at Mosul, its military is a well-oiled machine.

Pollack may have gotten wind from his peers that the Americans planned to get ISIS to flee Mosul before the Iraqis came too close. Twice, Pollack says the ISIS fighters in Mosul are weaklings who cannot put up a decent fight: "This is especially problematic because the intelligence suggesting the fragility of Da'esh's forces in Mosul...raise the possibility that Da'esh forces there might implode or flee before the coalition is ready to take the city deliberately." Perhaps he heard through the grape vine that ISIS will be made to escape.

When it comes to the Iraqis paying a pro-Iran army to get its support, Pollock puts it like so: "The government's original plan was to start paying the Hashd, and so use the 'power of the purse' to gain control over them." He doesn't use the same negative terminology when it comes to purchasing Iraqi will with U.S. money.

"The Atlantic Council held a panel discussion analyzing the future of Iraq. The event also marks the launch of the Atlantic Councils Task Force on the Future of Iraq, which brings together over twenty-five Iraq experts from around the world." The Atlantic Council has been around for over 50 years: "It manages ten regional centers and functional programs related to international security and global economic prosperity. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C." The best way to prosper the world is to reduce the prices where corporations gauge the peoples, everywhere, always charging the most they can get for their products. The less that things cost, the more poor people can buy for their needs. It's too simple a solution for globalists. They need something more complicated to justify think tanks like Atlantic Council. This thing has the look of a Bilderberg club.

Now if I were to succeed in becoming a Christian president, all the democrat liberals would cry and gripe and, well, show no toleration, hypocrites that they are. They want Christians and minorities to show toleration so long as liberals rule. If even a quasi-Christian Republican becomes the president, the liberal democrats do nothing but gripe, scratch, lie and accuse for four years, or for longer if it takes them that long to get a liberal back in the White House. We saw Pollack above griping that the Iraqis aren't listening, and so long as that happens, the Iraqis will be tarnished and falsely accused until they either obey, or get replaced. That sort of "game" has become an accepted part of democracy, though, clearly, it needs another name, such as "junk."

True democracy is when a school elects a president by majority vote, and the entire school supports the president for better or for worse, seeking the best outcome together. False democracy is when someone says about the president, before he's elected, "he thinks men are better than women." Suddenly, all the women decide not to vote for him. All the men decide to vote for him, and then there's the schism, the women against the men, and nothing gets done. That what liberals have done to Democracy. The Republicans, once angelic by comparison, have started to do the same. Free speech will assure that junk government prevails, and this is the best the West has to offer the Middle East. Obama is a whole jerk trying to fix Iraq? You've got to be kidding. Can a piece of junk fix a broken machine where it doesn't fit the machine? Western democracy doesn't fit all of Iraq. It's the religious-versus-the secular problem.

The solution is obvious. Give Christians their own country in the U.S. and let them move there if they wish, or not move there, but at least they can have their own society if they wish, with laws and rules as they see fit. But this is intolerable for the liberals. Why? Because they truly do not have, nor practice, toleration. Their democracy is a sham. They wish to destroy Christianity altogether. If Christians were able to form their own country between Ohio and Texas, the globalist pigs would infiltrate it to impose their own pawns upon its highest offices. That's what you see, or at least the attempt, in the Middle East.

The solution for Iraq: give the Kurds their own country in Iraq; give the Sunni their own country in Iraq. If it's good for Palestinians to have their own country in Israel, the globalist will have nothing bad to say about SunniCountry in Iraq. Problem: for globalism, the fewer the countries in the world, the easier to control the whole. That's why the globalists deceived all the European nations (almost) to become one country. Once the globalist pawn rules the EU, control of the whole is much easier than trying to control every individual nation separately. A control freak is not a very good definition of a democracy, however.

I have a theory. The U.S. really is trying to destroy ISIS, as in dismantling the organization in Syria, but in the process, wanting to save its fighters, forcing them to go to other groups, hopefully to the "moderate" anti-Assad fighters. That makes a lot of sense. But without ISIS, the buffer zone between Baghdad and Kurdistan vanishes.

It wasn't until after writing the paragraph above that I landed, as the very next thing done, on this article:

Around 40 militants have defected from the Islamic State in Syria`s northern Aleppo province, aided by the main local armed group Faylaq al-Sham, the opposition Ara News website quoted a rebel spokesman as saying on Monday.

The IS deserters are now in a safe location and will be "closely monitored" by rebels, Ara News cited rebel spokesman Ali Jafaar as saying.

"Secret contract took place over the past two months between opposition factions and IS members wanting to defect," Jafaar said.

Here's from two updates ago: "Russia has officially requested the UN to sanction and delegitimize two militant groups -- Ahrar Al-Sham and Jaysh al-Islam..." The Unites States refuses to categorize Ahrar al-Sham as a terror group, and is snubbing its nose at Russia over the matter. What may be happening is that ISIS fighters are being coerced into the arms of al-Sham.

Obama comes out early in the week to say that his main goal in life if to wipe out ISIS. He does this while ISIS is being wiped out so that he can personally take the credit. Mr Obama, until you go over to Iraq and don a military uniform, and risk your life in an invasion, you've done nothing. Go back to your luxuriating. It's all you know to do well.

Another thing, that while Raqqah is not yet under siege, at least not critically, "Informed sources disclosed that the top treasury official of the ISIS terrorist group in the capital of the self-proclaimed Caliphate has left the city for an unknown destination with a large amount of cash." Another article: "VIDEO: Numbers of Highly Armed Non-Syrian ISIS Militants Leaving Raqqa Battlefields." The public announcement by U.S. officials saying that Raqqah is next may have had the purpose of causing ISIS fighters to flee in the meantime. The way that ISIS is acting, all-around, is suspicious. It's as though they are in disarray everywhere. If they have been ordered to undergo escape plots, the fighters would take it as a sign of weakness, which can explain the chaos.

Some media reported that the ISIS leader (Baghdadi) had been killed by a U.S. airstrike in Raqqah. The U.S. says it knows nothing. But then Syria has jets that may have been confused for American jets. There are different possibilities. One, the U.S. may have put out the story to demoralize ISIS, cause them to go over to al-Sham. Two, Obama wanted the credit because, a day or two earlier, Iraqis reported that they wounded Baghdadi on the Syria-Iraq border, afterwhich he escaped into Syria. Three, the U.S. owned him (to some degree, anyway) from the start and now wants to make an end of his part in the ISIS plot, moving on to a new phase. It became clear that ISIS can no longer exist so long as it continues to fight Nusra and al-Sham. This in-fighting became a severe complication for the U.S. Nusra and al-Sham in Aleppo were taking the weapons from Turkey, which can create a motive for an ISIS attack upon them. Even Google news is carrying the Baghdadi story.

Manbij has completely dropped out of the news over three days and counting since the Orlando shooting. The Kurdish advance must have been stalled. A Sputnik article: "The analysts described [Kurd] progress [toward Raqqah] as 'methodical' but to an extent hampered by the need to train new SDF fighters." It sounds like the Americans are telling the Kurds they're not ready yet.

Turkish weapons through Manbij to Raqqah were likely earmarked for ISIS, for they bypass Aleppo city. We might expect the same in Manbij as occurred in Fallujah, great throngs suddenly escaping. In fact, ISIS can be predicted to allow throngs to escape so that fighters can to with them. But they will need to leave their weapons and military trucks behind, and risk arrest and termination. If it appears that escaping with the masses isn't working, they will probably decide to fight. Not all of them would agree to flee.

According g to AINA, Kurds have been kidnapped in northern Aleppo (Turkish-border area) by ISIS as revenge for Manbij. In conjunction with this story, Sputnik claims that "Turkish military did not make any effort to prevent Daesh from digging deep trenches in broad daylight and filling them with explosive devices in the narrow stretch of land between the militant-held Syrian city of Jarabulus and the border, local residents told RT." This story circulates to contradict the Turkish claim that it opposes ISIS. The latter is needed by Turkey to fend off Kurds in the Aleppo area, where Kurds hope to set up their own state / province, or at least an arm thereof. This is why the Russian side of the story (almost daily) is credible. Jarabulus is on the Turk border north-east of Manbij, which gives the Russian story great meaning. However, I'm having a problem as to how explosives in trenches have any logic or purpose. Are they hiding the explosives that came from Turkey?

For Israel, Turkish animosity toward Assad was a good turn of events. For a while some half-dozen years ago, it appeared that any invasion of Israel by the Syria-Iran axis would include Turkey. But if Turkey succeeds in installing a moderate / pro-West Syrian government, Syria then becomes a buffer zone between Israel and Turkey. Israel wanted the U.S. to go further, into an invasion of Iran, or at least to destroy its nuclear capabilities, but the United States decided war with Iran was too risky for the already-fragile global economy. Besides, Obama had to carry an image of hand-shakiness with Iran, as well as an image of ending the Middle-East war. Much of the West thinks that Israel is asking too much of it. In the meantime, Israel is feeling-out the waters for a closer relationship with Russia for the purpose of drawing it away from Iran. In the meantime, Obama has distanced Russia from the West so that Russia got even closer to Iran. Obama couldn't care less about Israel's cries. But Russia is probably wishful thinking if it expects Israel to abandon the U.S. for itself. Israel's job now is to wait out Obama's last months, hoping that president Clinton doesn't whiplash Israel further.

I have no fear of president Clinton; her being even close to the presidency, at this point, is part of the sad comedy in the rush to Armageddon. Is this the best the Democrats have? Is Trump the best the Republicans have? Where did normal go? How do freaks become the president of America? Hillary is one of the worst examples of an American citizen, and yet Democrats want her to rule? Trump stands up as a financial wizard who thinks he can solve all the world's problems with a blast of breath from his lungs. He's now a candidate for the Wind God. We've already seen what a wind god can do to America in Obama. I've accepted that the destruction of morality is something we've got to sit and watch, one painful step at a time. We've got to watch billions of people take the wrong road to destruction. I can think of better things to watch. This is not a happy time.

I'm now reading the theory that Baghdadi was killed by U.S. strikes in Mosul. How does a media confuse the place of death between Raqqah with Mosul? Turkey first announced that a U.S. strike in Raqqah was responsible, but the American spokesman says that no strikes occurred on the day that Turkey claims the death. Here's the story, which may prove to be a waste of time:

Last week gave promise that things might be happening QUICKLY now. Perhaps it's a mirage that I'm suffering. Perhaps there is a long, dry spell still ahead. Turkey's new fear is that Assad will be ousted. Yes, and when that happens, the Americans are apt to give the Kurds the Aleppo area, which in turn wildly regenerates the PKK Kurds on the Turkish side of the Aleppo border. This is Turkey's new fear. Turkey now needs to re-consider whether to send weapons to anti-Assad Sunni in Aleppo. Maybe Assad wasn't such a bad guy after all.

The Unites States, for its part, fears that a Turkey falling-in-love-with-Assad scenario takes the cock close to Russia again, as in days gone by not so very long ago. The reason that this is looking like a dry desert to me is that Assad's overthrow is not best described as "quickly," and both Turkey and the U.S. have some time trying to figure out what angle they are going to commit to. Apparently, Turkey doesn't realize, or appreciate, that the Americans are doing it a favor to weaken ISIS in Aleppo, thus saving Nusra, and similar others, losses imposed by ISIS. But Turkey's concern is that Nusra and similar others will choose to house themselves with a pro-America Syria, once Assad is gone, leaving Turkey on the outside with mini-Kurdistan between them. Therefore, Turkey might getter align itself with ISIS than with Nusra and al-Sham, but this is doubly painful for Turkey at this time, watching ISIS get weaker to a Kurd-American alliance. Turkey deserves it, anyway, for it's unbridled animosity toward Israel in the days before the Syrian civil war.

But we await God's punishment on the West for its abandonment of Jerusalem to terrorism inside Israel. The West caused those terrorists to don political uniforms in the Palestinian Organization. They need only to wait until they get their country at Jerusalem before they take their bombs out of the inner pockets of their suits. At that time, we will discover that their ties are ropes intended for Israeli necks.

President Clinton, if she were wise, would not chose to be the president at this time. Talk about mirage's, she probably envisions her own glory as president. She has no idea what pricks are prepared to beset her. She's bound to make big mistakes with very hot consequences. What does she know about war? What does Trump know about war? Will either one of them be able to deliver to the globalists what they seek out in the Middle-East? If not, there will come to either of them scathing reports in the globalist media. In this way, they will be coerced to do the will of the globalists, brought ever-deeper into the Armageddon mire. There is no glory being stuck in the mud like that.

With Turkey slated to be the friend of the West, even Germany has sent advisors, or call them what you wish, to Manbij. It seems that, whatever the Western plot there, they don't want it to fail. It's serious. Turkey was screaming before Manbij; now the cock is becoming too bed-ridden with fever to scream. It has replaced its prime minister, hoping for some winds of change, but with the fox downwind of its coop, Turkey's hen is afraid to leave its nest. The biggest problem is, the fox is the United States. The cock had let go of Russia for the United States, only to find that the U.S. shape-shifted into a fox. The hen awoke one morning to find eggs gone from beneath her, and not one chick left in the coop, so the rooster replaced her with another hen, ordering her to deal differently with the fox. Everything that the Turks wished to birth on the Syria side of the border has been robbed by the United States. The first hen put up public signs, "Beware of Fox," to pressure the U.S. to change into some other animal, but, instead, the fox came with a weasel to Manbij. All the Turkish chicks fled Manbij, aside from those trapped inside. The French and the Germans might be wondering whether this is the best policy. And so the Manbij invasion seems to be on ice until the Turkey can be healed of its fever. The weasel cares nothing for Turkish relations with France, Germany and the rest of the EU snakes, and can invade Manbij at any moment against their wishes. Let's not forget that Manbij has a crew of Tehranosaurus rex's becoming impatient with US-stall tactics. All that handshaking between Obama and Tehran was for nothing, wasn't it?

The Syrian boar has put up signs of its own in public view, "Beware Snakes in the Grass." "Syria on [June 15] strongly condemned the presence of French and German special forces in Ain al-Arab and Manbij areas. In a statement to SANA, an official source at Foreign and Expatriates Ministry considered this presence as a blatant interference, a flagrant violation of UN Charter's principles and an overt unjustified aggression on the sovereignty and independence of Syria." Apparently, such hasty condemnation from the boar suggests reason to believe that the French and Germans are plotting something of damage to Assad's cause. Indeed, they are, hoping to keep all the anti-Assad forces from destroying one another. I have predicted that, in the future, the snakes will puke up three frogs for Armageddon. Unfortunately, there seems to be no Biblical way to identify what the three frogs (Revelation 16) refer to, aside from their being military allies of the anti-Christ. However, as one of them is from the throat of the dragon, while the Revelation dragon appears to be of the Roman world, it's at least a clue. One theory is that frogs were used as per the French.

Having said that, Germany is denying that it has Germans in Syria. Would Syria fabricate such a rumor? Did Syria depend merely on a media report for taking that position? Or is Germany in need of lying having been caught? Whatever the case, it leaves the frogs looking like they alone are trespassing Syrian turf.

For a good glimpse of what Putin's media is promoting continually that you won't find much in the West:

The article above is much the reason that the Reuters of the world would have you believe that Turkey opposes ISIS. This alliance is critical. The Americans may have become the fox precisely to distance themselves from the flood of accusations on a Turkey-ISIS partnership, especially as it was a triangular partnership involving the United States. Obama, the diseased swine who had his own Libyan ambassador murdered to hide his secret Turkish operations, is hoping that president Clinton will continue what he started, for she was the pork officer involved in those secret operations...which shipped Qadaffi's weapons to Salafist camps in Syria, by way of Turkey, which camps soon-after morphed into ISIS fighters. ISIS holds to a Salafist ideology. It was shortly after the Libyan scandal that ISIS arose.

It is disgusting to think that Obama ruined the Libyan nation just to get its weapons into Syria. Gaddafi may have been a hedonist and worse, but the Libyan nation was ruined as a whole by Obama (another hedonist) even while he claimed to care for Libyan peoples. It was apparent to all that Obama was offering American support to Muslim-Brotherhood agents (of north Africa) wishing to turn the region on its head, yet the American liberals went and gave him four more years anyway. At that time, even Obama's pork officer quit his administration. So, with the world of American foreign policy possibly passing to the liberals, what can we expect but a junk yard as the symbol of Mrs. Clinton's presidency, once it's all done with? There is a real possibility that the Clinton dog inside the United States, and forming a row of teeth with Rhodes globalists outside the U.S., will be in charge of globe-trodding from January of 2017. And there is nothing that God can do better, for his own entertainment's sake, but to drive the liberals mad while He abides the time. For this cause has God permitted British socialists and American liberals to arise in power, for to drive them mad with failures. They will be able to cling only to their mirages.

Just think of it. During the Libyan scandal, Mrs. Clinton was communicating to all with a private email server. She was the second-highest official in the country, and operating illegally with a private email server, the contents of which she deleted before the world could discover it. Like a child, she claimed she didn't know it was wrong to use such a system. "What difference does it make?" And here the liberals are willing to overlook her criminality, and all that might be behind her emails, to see her in charge of their world. What possible good fruit could result from such a background? All the demonically-inspired peoples, most of them in love with their demonic ways, roundly in favor of president Clinton.

Adding fuel to the fire, Hillary's replacement, John Kerry, has just announced that the United States is ready to resume war in Aleppo: "'Unless we get a better definition of how this [Russian-led] cessation [of hostilities] is going to work ... we are not going to sit there while Assad continues to offensively assault Aleppo and while Russia continues to support in that effort,' Kerry told a news conference." It's a Reuters article, which says nothing on Russia's point of view, which is simply this, that Nusra is not part of the cessation agreement. That is, there is no ceasefire agreement between Syria and Nusra. The two are permitted to continue warfare, so long as Nusra continues. Besides, if Kerry really believed that Syria was going to form a complete ceasefire just as it was starting to win the war, he has some of his own mirage problems. It is unfair for Kerry to make this accusation, and irresponsible of Reuters to publish it. It may be true that Syria is using bolder, stronger methods against Nusra than vice-versa, but that only explains why Kerry is crying the blues in public media. Not only is ISIS loosing fighters, but Nusra is weakening within Putin's shadow. There is no sun these days for the Western globe-trodders; their vines are shriveling, and Celebration Day seems far off.

Another article speaking to Kerry's comments says: "The February cease-fire has largely collapsed and little progress is being made to negotiate a political transition that is supposed to begin on August 1." Things are far worse in Syria than in Israel, and America has learned that they can't force peace between peoples there; how can they possibly expect a peaceful transition by this August? Are they nuts? If not, then all they want to do with the ceasefire is beat-up on Putin. This is the thanks he gets for agreeing to conduct the ceasefire against his own will, just because the West demanded it. Yes, it was lip-service on the part of the Russians, but they didn't need to take the job at all. The more I watch the West play its side of the game, the less I respect it, the more I despise it. The ceasefire was not Putin's idea. I have yet to hear the West call the opposition military to lay down its arms permanently. The West obviously doesn't want to end the civil war. It is willing to see 300,000 deaths to get a pro-American government. That is the bottom line, and all the fault for the misery is thrown upon Russia.

Let's put it this way, that if the Americans see fit to eradicate ISIS, why not do the same to the Nusra Front and similar other groups? Where are the Western calls to the opposition to stop the civil war? Where is the logical way of thinking, that it's better to have Assad and peace than seek to topple him at the expense of what the civil war has caused, and will yet cause? Plus, it seems that the U.S. is actually going for Russia's jugular if it sees the opportunity, risking a world war. Dictatorial lunatics for their global agenda. The Russians need to abide by American will, or bust. The Russians must agree to having Assad step aside because America expects to be obeyed by Russia, or else. This is where we are right now, as though a complete imbecile wants to rule the planet. I'm not pro-Assad. I've never liked him. He was probably sending Iranian weapons to Hamas, but this doesn't justify what the Americans have done to Syrians. Obama was fully notified that the civil war there would get some nasty goons involved in war. But this is what the Americans are welcoming, because it gives them the opportunity to control more of the Middle East, and maybe take a shot at Russia too. By comparison, Assad is an angel.

Last week, the Americans had the nerve to blast Russia for not bringing in some emergency relief for some Syrian refugees, as though the Russians own that responsibility while the U.S. is off the hook. This war was not started by Russia. It was fueled by the Americans. The Kurds in Manbij are complaining that aid is not coming to Manbij's refugees. Why isn't the aid ready at Turkey's border? The Americans, though they lie, said they have been planning weeks to invade Manbij. Did they forget to get the emergency relief to the Turkish border prior to the invasion? Oh, wait, that Russia's responsibility. Where is my head?

The Americans said they were invading Raqqah, then turned suddenly on Manbij without warning the people. The people of Manbij were caught by surprise, and were under persecution from ISIS immediately. As the U.S. wants the credit for defeating ISIS, why do they expect the Russians to bring the food and medicine? Because the American military machine has become an imbecile under president Imbecile. Obama has made new rules for the president's office that no one before him ever went by. Obama is the new, imbecilic generation.

If, as some are speculating, the Kurds feigned an attack on Raqqah for the purposes of surprising Manbij, not only would Manbij's residents have been given little time to prepare, but Raqqah's residents would have been jeopardized without short-term hope.

According to AINA, only 1,000 people have fled from Manbij this week, as of Wednesday, way down from the peak over the weekend. It means that ISIS has much control over of the remaining population. It's likely that ISIS took the foods of those who fled, and may now go another week or two before needing more food. By then, the rest of the people may have nothing to eat. There is no time to stall. Once started, an operation like this needs to be completed. Assad is willing to help, but the Americans say "no way." Russia is willing to help, but the Americans say, "no way." In that case, let the Americans take the blame for the increased murders and tribulations of the trapped civilians. AINA's is the first report (June 15) I've read this week on Manbij (some call it Manjib) progress: "Having seized control of the last route into Manbij on Friday, the SDF has yet to enter the town. 'We are closing in on Manbij,' Darwish said, adding that fighting continues on the city's outskirts. The Observatory said the SDF has taken about 105 villages and farms around Manbij since the start of the operation."

Yes, but if the Russians were called up for assistance, this might not continue as a stalemate for as long. It seems to me to be utterly irresponsible to allow Assad to attack Raqqah while Manbij is yet not conquered. That can create two tragic stalemates simultaneously. The Kurds won't mind fighting with Assad at Manbij. Who do the Americans think they are deciding on the Kurds' behalf whether Assad can join the fight? Go home, cry-babies, and let the men proceed. You're trespassing on Syrian soil, and have only your own aims at heart, at the expense of the Syrian civilians. Guaranteed, that if the Kurds got Assad to join the fight, the cry-babies would stop giving air support.

Here's Donald Trump being correct on the corruption of the American military:

Although Trump is a real "mouthpiece," he gives the impression that no one owns him. In this sense, he might be good for America, if he's able to remain independent, as president, not bogged down by globalist coercing, or subservient to their demands. On the other hand, Trump could be a disaster in certain areas. He makes voters nervous. Yet, no one can be as bad as Hillary, whose demeanor is built for deception. When her husband was discovered in cheap adultery, the liberals compensated by called him highly intelligent, good for the country in spite of his infidelity. It worked so well in liberal camps that the intelligence label was used for his wife. Hillary has been accused of corruption so many times that liberals should be seeing red flags. Perfect, for liberals love national destruction and human pollution; bring on the red flags.

Imagine a political party seeking the votes of all the country's citizens with non-American backgrounds, seeking to have them counteract the votes of all the peoples with American backgrounds. That's the destructiveness of the liberals, pitting newest citizen against oldest citizen. The philosophy of liberal politics is that the vote of a poor man is worth as much as the vote of a rich man, wherefore liberals put out the impression that they are for the poor and the workers. The only justifiable way to pit citizen against citizen is to hammer the liberals. Although Trump has the personality to accomplish this, he's much a liberal himself. His attempt to disguise himself as a Bible lover was pitiful. Where is the hope? Where's the light? I don't see any.

Foreign Policy, which has the intelligence level of a stark liberal, is blaming the Iraqi's for the stall at Fallujah: "The offensive had ground to a halt almost as soon as it began thanks to a lack of coordination within the Iraqi army, hundreds of concealed roadside bombs, and the flow of thousands of refugees from the city." This gives us a little insight on how American globalists are treating the situation: Iraqis not yet ready to go into Fallujah. The article also adds that the Americans did not want the Iraqis to attack Fallujah, wanting them up at Mosul instead.

"Lack of coordination within the army"??? They have done a great job so far, why this unfair charge? ISIS demons are fleeing the city already, not exactly a sign of a poorly-conducted attack. There is reason here to believe that there's something (or someones) in Fallujah the Americans want to protect from the Iraqis.

This new show by the Americans, that they want the Iraqis to invade Mosul al-promto, is itself suspicious. One logical possibility is that the Iraqi Kurds are bucking the U.S. for a Mosul invasion, with themselves as the invaders. It puts the Americans under pressure because a refusal will reach the ears of the Syrian Kurds. One way to alleviate the consequences of a refusal is to have the Iraqis own the Mosul invasion. That way, the Americans think they can get off the hook for not catering to Kurdish demands. The Americans cannot cater to Iraqi Kurds for their desire to control Mosul because the Americans need the Iraqis to obey them, and that can't happen if there is a divide between Americans and Iraqis.

American eagerness to invade Mosul. It's completely unexpected. They even sent in Apache helicopters to show their eagerness for Mosul. How can the Iraqis resist going to Mosul with such beautiful machines waxed up shiny? It's meant to be luring, isn't it? But the Iraqis are wondering why the helicopters don't come down to Fallujah. It's perfect weather to show these machines off in Fallujah. Come on down, Americans, give the badly-coordinated Iraqis some help in Fallujah. They'll even pay the gas. Bring 10 or 20. Bring 50. If the Americans really wanted to make ISIS cower, they'd come to Fallujah where the fighters are shaking in their boots, showing the world what weakening rats they truly are. This is what the Iraqis are accomplishing in Fallujah, yet has nothing good to say of it. Instead, it says that the Iraqi army is too chaotic for a Fallujah invasion. The Americans don't want to show the world that the Iraqis can succeed brilliantly. Expect American-made booby traps for the Iraqis. has a headline: "In Iraq, Apache Gunships Deploy to Mosul, But Not Fallujah: Pentagon." The apparent excuse for not sending them to Fallujah is the alleged Shi'ite abuse on the Sunni of the city. The Iraqis are investigating, no apparent proof found thus far. had the same storyline, but here it is from "U.S. Army AH-64 Apache attack helicopters have gone into action in Iraq for the first time in support of the slow-moving advance on Mosul but were being kept out of the ongoing siege of Fallujah, where increasing reports of abuses and killings of Sunni refugees have emerged." Some organization reported a "killing spree" (carried by Reuters) upon the Sunni escaping the city, but this has got to be either wholly fabricated, or wildly exaggerated, because the Iraqi army would not be permitted to do such a thing with the entire world watching, and with the Americans as their air cover. Chances are far greater that some Iraqi fighters beat up ISIS fighters posing as civilians. The article is, for the most part, badly coordinated. The writer is not ready yet; he needs to train more, for several months at least, and then we'll see.

Besides, if American jets are good for Fallujah, why not helicopters? Have the Americans ceased to send in the jets based on this allegation of abuse? I don't know. No one is reporting on either the Fallujah or Manbij invasions, as though both are dead in their tracks. The Washington Post, however, has an article on an Iraqi army taking a Mosul-area village. The storyline is suspicious, playing the tune of the U.S. military: "The Iraqi army wrested control of a village held by the Islamic State south of Mosul on Tuesday, nearly three months after launching an offensive to retake it...However, the head of the brigade, Brig. Gen. Badr Ahmed al-Luhaibi, was killed. The delay in recapturing the village had proved to be an embarrassment for the Iraqi army and the coalition, with the operation having been touted as the first real test of freshly trained Iraqi units."

It makes it sound as though the Iraqis were incapable of defeating a mere village, let alone a huge city like Mosul, exactly what the American military wanted the world to believe. But this was before seeing how weak ISIS truly is this past week. The Washington Post couldn't get away with such a dismal picture now. The Iraqi army at Fallujah didn't quite play to the American tune, did it? The same article then says: "Maj. Gen. Najim al-Jabouri, commander of the Mosul operation, had complained that the lack of armored support was hampering progress. 'In only three hours, we liberated the village and crushed the resistance,' said Lt. Col. Helan Mahmood, the head of an army commando unit that fought in Nasr...'Iraqi army units also retook the nearby village of Hajj Ali on Monday evening, he added." What a contrast to how the Post portrayed the Iraqis from the start of the article.

So, the Americans are apparently stalling the Iraqis at Fallujah based on an allegation only, and this is in the face of KNOWN torture from ISIS upon the same Sunni city people. Is this any time to halt the invasion, after starting it, based on an allegation? By all appearances, if the Iraqis had gone in immediately, ISIS rats would have fled in greater numbers. Delay allows the Americans to regroup ISIS. America is in Iraq for no other purpose but to defeat Assad's army. It cannot do so without ISIS fighters; everyone agrees.

Well, no sooner did Putin agree to a two-day ceasefire in Aleppo, for giving Kerry some lip-service obedience, that the major U.S. media carried the story...along with Assad's brutality in Aleppo. The manipulation of the American mind. It ignores the Russian accusation, that Nusra is using the ceasefire to stock up weaponry and fighters. It was completely predictable; it's not some sort of Russian fantasy. The Turks are stacking anti-Assad forces in Aleppo with killing machinery, and this concerns Kerry and the American media absolutely nothing. This is why I don't listen to their accusations. This is why I ignore their calls for "peace."

In the evening upon writing the paragraph above, this came out: "The United States will continue targeting al-Nusra Front terrorist organization which does not have any role in Syria's political future, US State Department spokesperson John Kirby told reporters on Thursday." This must be a response to Russian disappointment and skepticism. On Thursday, "Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says the United States is likely seeking to preserve the al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra Front terrorist group as a tool to unseat Syrian President Bashar al-Assad." I've been covering the news extensively for at least two weeks, and never have I read that the United States was bombing the Nusra Front. The article continues: "However, Washington has asked Moscow not to conduct airstrikes against the Nusra Front...Furthermore, the Russian foreign minister said he was stunned by US Secretary of State John Kerry's recent remarks..."

I again find myself siding with the Russians over the Americans. I find the Russians more honorable, sticking closer to the truth. I find the Americans desperate, wily, and untrustworthy. The U.S. is putting out junk, and Russia with Syria have every right to pursue the war in Aleppo. Kerry needs to apologize to Putin. "The ceasefire is too fragile, Kirby claimed, because of violations committed by the Syrian government and al-Nusra Front." Kirby, liar, there can be no violations because "The cessation of hostilities does not apply to terrorist organizations, such as Daesh and al-Nusra Front..." The Americans know this, but are putting out junk as bad publicity for Syria anyway.

Kerry's comment was a threat, that if the Syrians didn't cease attacking Nusra Front, the Americans would retaliate against Syria. The Russians immediately returned the threat, and it turns out the John Kerry's inner circle has virtually waged war on Russia.

Dozens of State Department officials have signed an internal document that calls for targeted military strikes against the Syrian government, according to the Wall Street Journal.

US Secretary of State John Kerry said on Friday that the internal memo on Syria signed by more than 50 US diplomats is an "important statement" that he would discuss when he gets back to Washington.

"It's an important statement and I respect the process, very, very much. I will ... have a chance to meet with people when I get back," Kerry told Reuters during a visit in Copenhagen.

This is a drastic turn, and Kerry is pretending not to be part of it from the start, almost as though he knew nothing about it. The article above is probably correct in saying: "The memo is sharply critical of US policy in Syria, calling for military strikes against the Assad government. An unnamed US official familiar with the document said the internal cable may be an attempt to shape the foreign policy outlook of the next US administration." Does this promise world war III just as soon as Hillary is The Boss? The French have decided to build a base in Syria.

Now look it. It was the United States' idea to have a ceasefire in which Syria would be bound. Syria even agreed. So far as I've read, Syria has not attacked any group that was part of the agreement. Yet, now, it's the U.S. State Department that wishes to attack Syria, thus breaking the ceasefire.

The worst thing that the U.S. can do for the world is to take a leadership position for the world. This very concept breeds competition, and Russia, of course, will want to be the world leader too. It's best not to have a world leader, isn't it, under these conditions? But you won't convince the Americans to drop the world-leadership quest. Who, therefore, will be responsible for the outcome when push comes to shove? Go home Americans, mind your own country. But, no, they are now building a NATO army in Poland. When was the last time Russia showed signs of wishing to invade Poland? Imagine the Russians putting 4,000 men on the Canadian border.

I think I'm a fair judge for both sides; I am not permitted by God to take the side of the Americans. Right is right and wrong is wrong. That's how Christians need to judge any feud between nations. One can ring off any number of misdeeds by Assad, but then one can ring off any number of misdeeds by Obama. Why does Assad need to go while Obama doesn't? Half of America wants Obama to go, but it doesn't take up arms to force him. Yet the O-mericans paid and weaponize Syrians to remove Assad, and having lost, they now cry about it, blaming Russia. I can think of bigger sins by Russia than trying to stop NATO from intruding into the Middle East. I'm being sarcastic; Russia is not guilty of anything for wishing to stop NATO's advance. NATO has become the second evil after Sovietism. NATO is the army of the globalist "caliphate" stretched too thin and far, unable to pay for itself, and predicted to be as useless as EU "unity." NATO is completely unnecessary, serving only to divide the superpowers. Putin has been willing to form economic partnerships with the West. What's the West's problem??? Are they complete idiots? Yes, they are.

If they just entertain Russia's friendly advances, it forces Russia to be on its best behavior, making it hard for Russia to even attempt a taking back of the nations once under the Soviet empire. Yes, the temptation was there, but as time is permitted to tick go without animosity from the West, the Russians may just forget about the old empire, and move on. After Putin, the old Soviets and KGBers can be a thing of the past.

Why was it fine for the West to take Ukraine away from the Soviets, yet the Russian part of the Ukraine is not permitted to be of Russia? Where is the fairness doctrine? Why should Russians in Ukraine be forced to live under a pro-West Ukrainian government against their will? Isn't it as bad as the Soviets unwilling to tolerate pro-West Russians? At one time, the West was an inspiration as compared to Soviet atheism, but no more.

While the Americans slander and abuse the Russians, the Americans expect the Russians to do America a magnificent favor by pushing for the ouster of Assad. It only goes to show what cracked pots (hold no water) the Americans are. They act like children. From ABC, the emphasis is on:
"•More than 220 civilians have been killed in the past week
•The majority of deaths are the result of government and Russian bombing
•The besieged city of Daraya has been under relentless barrel bombing"

If the majority of the deaths are due to the Syria axis, it means that the Syria axis is winning the battle, which is why the West is wanting to turn the world heart to its version of the battle. Assad using barrel bombs? I don't know. I don't trust Western accusations. But what's the greater evil, metal piercing body parts from exploded barrels, or metal piercing body parts from American bombs? When the West reports civilian deaths from U.S. strikes, no children are mentioned, but in this ABC story: "...50 of the dead listed as children." Who lists them, anyway? ABC's source claims that Assad is once again targeting hospitals, the same-old accusation as before. It is predictable that the West, becoming very desperate to succeed in Syria, will raise the brutality card on Assad to its greatest height in days and weeks to come. It does Assad no good to attack hospitals and schools. He is not some rodent leader of some rodent military group. He is the nation's president that needs to live with his actions, both now and after the war comes to an end, which is why he would not want the reputation of targeting schools and hospitals. ABC's source says the world isn't listening. Not a wonder.

Well, well, the emails and chat sessions of the Democrat establishment have been seized by hackers. There must be all sorts of juicy information there about the Hillary campaign. Already, fingers are being pointed at Russia. "Reuters was unable to verify the authenticity of the documents, which the blog said were among 'thousands of files and mails' removed from DNC servers that would soon be published on WikiLeaks. CrowdStrike issued a statement saying it 'stands fully by its analysis' that two groups affiliated with Russian intelligence were discovered in the DNC's network last month." Hillary should never work on her computer naked. I'm just kidding; it's a great way to get rid of the Russian spies. Guccifer took credit for the hacking.

What is Crowdstrike? I never did trust McAfee. It's predictable that anti-spy software built into computers from the purchase point (the store) of the computer are tools for a vast spy system of the globalists. The anti-spyware just needs to have a built-in method that allows someone on the outside to monitor someone's computer files as easily as the anti-spyware itself does.

I've had mixed feelings about CrowdStrike from the moment that it launched in stealth status last February [2012]. On the one hand, I'm a big fan of how Shawn Henry (President of CrowdStrike Services) helped move the FBI from a terribly incompetent position vis a vis cyber investigations (circa 2005-06) to one of the world's premiere cyber investigative bodies in just a few short years. On the other hand, I detest McAfee and I've openly ridiculed their so-called "reports" on more than one occasion. As an Israeli friend of mine put it, Anti-Virus companies aren't security companies. And I might add, they aren't intelligence organizations either. The one thing that McAfee does have are rich executives, including CrowdStrike co-founders Gregg Marston, Dmitri Alperovich, and George Kurtz who arranged CrowdStrike's $26 million Series A funding from Warburg Pincus where Kurtz was an Executive-in-Residence after McAfee was acquired by Intel for $7.86 Billion in cash.

"CrowdStrike's Director of Intelligence Adam Meyers" sounds Jewish. I'll bet that Crowdstrike is in bed with the side of Google that works for globalism. January 2013: "John McAfee says he infected laptops with malware, spied and stole passwords from Belize officials...John McAfee claims that he gave Belize officials cheap laptops that had been deliberately pre-infected with keylogging spyware." My own laptop came with McAfee, but I removed it. Good for me:

I [McAfee] purchased 75 cheap laptop computers and, with trusted help, installed invisible keystroke logging software on all of them - the keind that calls home (to me) and disgorges the text files. It also, on command, turns on and off, the microphone and camera - and sends these files on command.

I had the computers re-packaged as if new. I began giving these away as presents to select people - government employees, police officers, Cabinet Minister's assistants, girlfriends of powerful men, boyfriends of powerful women.

I hired four trusted people full time to monitor the text files and provide myself with the subsequent passwords for everyone's email, Facebook, private message boards and other passworded accounts. The keystroke monitoring continued after the password collection, in order to document text input and would later be deleted. So nothing was missed...

I'm no computer expert at all, but I don't see a problem in accomplishing what he says he did on the computers.

Welcome news from Fallujah finally turned up Thursday evening. Here are a some comments from "The Federal Police Command announced on Thursday liberating 25 percent of the areas of Fallujah from the ISIS control during the last phase of the liberation operations, while pointed out to the killing of 232 ISIS members during the battles in Fallujah." "Jawdat said in a press statement received by Iraqi News, 'The Federal Police forces continue to advance into the center of Fallujah amid total collapse among the ranks of the [ISIS] elements in the city,' pointing out that, 'ISIS began a mass escape from central Fallujah towards the areas of al-Halabsa and Albu Elwan west of the city.'" "Federal Police Chief, Lt. Gen. Raed Shaker Jawdat, said in a press statement, a copy of which was obtained by Iraqi News, 'The security forces managed, at noon today, to enter central Fallujah and advance into Baghdad Street and the metal bridge in the center of the city.'" Things are moving after all. I didn't read anything concerning U.S. air strikes; no credit given to them in all four articles out on Thursday (their Friday morning). By our morning, Western press came out with the story. The Iraqis had taken back Fallujah's government buildings. It all seems to be a cake-walk.

I don't include many big-name Western news pages because many take too long for me to load. I get Western news from pages sharing it that don't take long to load. The BBC reports on Friday morning, quoting Iraqis, that ISIS fighters at the city core are showing little resistance while fleeing into the western part of the city. The Iraqis are saying that ISIS has divided into mere "pockets." There is no pocket that remains a substantial threat, apparently. The Washington Post puts it the opposite, that ISIS is causing the Iraqis complications. The Americans don't want us to think that ISIS is so easily defeated, right? Western media likes to emphasize the complications in case the Americans need the complication card. This card is being laid all-week long, but, too late, the Iraqis have already won the game, like a man playing cards with a child. CBS, however, has used the "swift" word for the Iraqi advance, and: "An officer at the Baghdad command center told CBS News that the Iraqi army was in control of about half of Fallujah city on Friday, and that ISIS' remaining defensive lines were in disarray."

On their Thursday, Sputnik came out with an article possibly to highlight the non-action in Fallujah. On the 27 air strikes in Syria and Iraq combined, as reported by the U.S. military: "In Iraq, the coalition conducted 20 strikes near [not in] 10 cities, including Fallujah, where three strikes hit two Daesh units and destroyed 10 fighting positions, three machine guns, two rocket propelled grenade systems and a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device (VBIED)." In other words, the U.S. contributed virtually nothing while the Iraqis were liberating a quarter or more of the city and reaching the core. Possibly, "three machine guns" is an exaggeration. A mere three strikes in that city looks like lip-service to the Iraqis. I do understand that bombing ISIS in a city is dangerous for civilians, but I do not think that the Americans care for the civilians enough to stop raining bombs, if they need the victory enough. In this case, they don't want the victory. CENTCOM is releasing the bombing data daily in order to give appearances of being anti-ISIS.

Don't the Americans have aircraft equipped with machine-gun fire? These can hit ISIS fighters working the streets, especially between the factories in the industrial zones (said to be on the east side of Fallujah). No explosives means far less danger to civilians. Don't the Apaches have machine guns? Yes, they do. And they are called "attack helicopters." It's not a wonder that these helicopters, perfect for an operation like Fallujah, are not being brought to Fallujah. What possible excuse can the Americans have? The Iraqis don't want to know anymore. They now have the good news that they can take an entire city without American air power. In fact, things have gone better without it. Of all the air strikes from the Americans this week, all have been "near" the cities. There were only a few daily outside of Fallujah. The Iraqi's can do better with their own sky power.

I've just read a Press-TV article on the same successes, but there's no mention of American air strikes. "'Our advance is excellent so morale is high. We don't care what Daesh throws at us, we know we will win this battle,' said Jamal Abdullah, a federal police captain." It's being reported that ISIS has been forced to the north side of the city, and from there, we can either expect their being forced to fight to the death, or that the Americans will seek to have them escape with a for-the-sake-of-the-civilians excuse.

The U.S. is confirming only a few hundred ISIS fighters in Manbij. So what's the hold-up there? The Kurds have a few thousand fighters surrounding the city. As many as ten Kurds per one ISIS fighter, what's the hold up?

Also on Thursday: "The Iraqi military and Kurdish Peshmerga forces have reportedly launched operations to tighten the noose around the Takfiri Daesh terrorists in their stronghold of Mosul...There are reports that around 6,000 Peshmerga fighters are participating in the operation alongside regular Iraqi military forces."

I'm not covering the war in this update. I'm covering the U.S. military. It's a lot like covering a double-minded child. Lavrov is feisty, blaming Washington for the current peace talks going nowhere. The Americans are saying that Assad is responsible for the Syrian disaster because he won't step down, but then the Americans don't call Nusra and the Free Syria Army to end their rebellion. I've never heard the Americans blaming the war on the opposition, who started it. Isn't that position fundamentally in error, something a child might get wrong? But it's worse than mere childishness. It's of the devil. Just imagine what goes on in a soul whose life is being robbed in cruel death due to a war sweeping over, and multiply it by 100's of 1000's of times, all to have Assad step down. The U.S. supports this. It's one thing to want Assad to step down, and quite another to tolerate and cause this misery to the Syrian peoples in order to achieve it.

The CIA says it's counting "at least 18,000" ISIS members in Syria alone today. I suggest that number to be exaggerated because the CIA can't be trusted. Do I expect CIA operatives / spies in Fallujah and Manbij right now? How easy would that be?

Prior to the Bush war in Iraq, the Russians had no chance for infiltration into Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran or Syria. None of those countries wanted the Russians as special partners. It was absolutely safe for the Americans to stay home, and allow the Muslims to keep the Russians at a safe distance. Now look. Russia has gained a red carpet into Syria, and is minding its manners in order to get another one into Iraq and Egypt. It has been pushed by the Americans to get a closer friendship with Iran too, all moving forward to an Armageddon-like scenario. What Christian in his/her own right mind would wish to take sides with the CIA at this time? The CIA is very-likely working with Nusra as much as the CIA was working with al-Qaeda in Afghanistan to ruin Russian interests there.

The Russian invasion of Afghanistan was a Soviet thrust that wouldn't have put it in charge of the Middle East anyway. There was no need to attack Iraq in order to keep the Russians from controlling it. In fact, when Bush invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, Russia was on its knees in poverty, still shaken from the fall of Sovietism. Therefore, when Bush invaded the Middle East, one evil, Russian Sovietism, was replaced by another, all happening in Putin's face (Russian president 2000 - 2008). Putin managed to change the Russian law, allowing him to become the president beyond two four-year terms, and here we are, Putin's chance to defy America in the Middle East. We are seeing it right now.

Putin addressed his nation this past week: "In June, we are planning to officially launch talks with our Chinese partners on the creation of a comprehensive trade and economic partnership in Eurasia with the participation of the Eurasian Economic Union and China." One of the things that depresses me is Revelations 200-million man army from the Orient. It makes me feel like I'm wasting my time, and that of readers, to cover Middle-East news in expectation of fulfilled prophecy. I don't think the Orient, even if it included Russia, could produce 200 million fighters upon the Euphrates river.

I was hoping that, somehow, someone changed 20 million to 200 million in the remote past, and that almost all manuscripts of Revelation got the 200-million version thereafter. Twenty million is do-able today, but why would that many be needed to fend off the anti-Christ? Why would 200 million be needed? Talk about a Red carpet all over the Iraqi-Syria floor. It can predict that China has become fed up with Western intrusions, and, as we speak, the U.S. is bad-mouthing China too. And the reason that Putin is coming out to say that, right now, we're going to have a chit-chat with the Chinese, is to put into view a Russia-China muscle. It sure looks like a world-war scenario. But this could come and go repeatedly for 100 years.

On Syria: "However the president stressed that Russia aims for compromise in relations with west and opposes fueling of tensions [good statement, like one from a man versus a child]...When asked about the situation in Syria, the president noted that Russia counts on US to convince Syrian opposition to hold constructive dialogue with Damascus. He added that President Assad agrees on the need to create effective leadership in Syria...He noted that he agrees with the US proposal to include Syrian opposition representatives in current syrian government." He doesn't come across unreasonable at all. But the Americans don't want the opposition to merely have a minority role UNDER Assad. But then, it's none of America's business. It's between Assad and the opposition, and so long as America sticks itself into it, the opposition will continue to buck for Assad's removal (i.e. their supremacy guaranteed) thanks to US-military powers. If the Americans would go home, the opposition will be "happier" to sit down and take a minority role (they probably don't deserve it).

BUT, NOW, with the Russians so close to Assad, the Americans don't want to go home. It's too risky suddenly, because Russia gets to have primary grabs for the goodies in the New Syria. Yes, Russia has its foothold in the Middle-East, thanks to the American strategy back-firing between Bush and Obama.

One thing we can't accuse the writer of Revelation of: he wasn't fabricating a prophecy intended to have fulfillment anytime soon. No one speaks on an army of 200 million in a world that probably didn't have that many people worldwide. All the "laughable" things in Revelation are no longer laughable. After 1900 years, the Roman beast still exists. The conditions are perfect, at this time, to see a shallow partnership between Europe and Russia. Putin wants it. The next American president can create that situation, or the president after that. Such a partnership would alleviate fears of a world struggle between superpowers. But prophecy doesn't make me absolutely sure on whether such a partnership is to be expected. One of my main problems in predicting things is the unknown identification of Gog, whether it represents the Russians, or some globalist-West leadership. I feel sure that Gog is the Revelation dragon, yet it has Roman roots.

Right now, the Western globalists have the open door for a military headquarters in Mosul. The Russians haven't got a chance, so far as things now sit. Let's imagine either a European anti-Christ or a Russia one launching from the Iraq-Syria floor, and covering the mountains of Israel. How many men does such a phrase entail? Wouldn't one million fulfill it? But then why would the Orient send 200 million to defeat so relatively few? It's not adding up so long as we view the Oriental agenda as one to defeat the anti-Christ. But if we view it as one to control the Middle East, leaving large numbers behind in each major city, that makes better sense.

The easy prediction seems to be that Muslims will be amongst those covering Israel's mountains. Israel, in representing the Middle-East capital of the Americans, will be the thing to unite Muslims of all stripes and meanwhile make fighters out of ordinary workers, all joining the throngs behind the anti-Christ. If there is a question on whether a Western anti-Christ will tolerate the likes of jihadists in his company, that's where the current alliance between the U.S. and jihadists can answer the question. But as things now stand, there seems to be no way for an American invasion of Israel with jihadists along the way, not even with Obama. He doesn't have enough time left, anyway, unless, somehow, he gets a UN post, or a NATO post, in the future. We're just not there yet. There is time to reflect, and time to watch the 666 system come to fruition.

One of the problems with news gathering today is that major news media no longer send their people to the front lines. Instead, they just but articles from the few who do. Fortunately, it's now possible to get easy access to local media at the front lines, and, hopefully, their news will not be written deliberately to reflect globalist sentiments. The U.S. has had plenty of time to infiltrate Iraqi news media. To counter-balance, there are Russian media.

If Iraq were to abandon the United States and go over to the Russians because the Americans were discovered to be secretly in favor of ISIS, American Christians have no business opposing the Iraqis based on patriotism. God is calling us to justice and right-ness. You don't take your own country's position if it's in the wrong. Your number one country, and your only country, really, is God's kingdom. You don't betray its principles to be patriotic to your earthly kingdom, especially when it supports groups given to cold murder.

On the weekend, Iraq announced the killing of 500 ISIS fighters in Fallujah, a very high number as compared to most days. That battle appears over, paving the way for Mosul. According to the Kurd commander, ISIS is unable to cross from Iraq into Syria, a thing that is sure to pit the Americans against the Kurds that they just catered to.

Review of the Orlando Shooting

I wasn't going to look into the Orlando shooting in an effort to figure out whether it was a government-run hoax or real, false-flag murder. I decided to see what conspiracy theorists had to say about it, whether they had dug up anything suspicious. The first article I arrived to was one by Snopes. It has a photo of the outer wall where police claimed to break through it to the bathroom, where the shooter (Omar Mateen) was supposedly holding hostages for three hours. It says that explosives were used to break open the wall, very suspicious indeed. You don't agree to use explosives on a concrete-block wall with people on the other side. I just cannot fathom a decision like that from the police. The authorities would be immediately responsible for deaths and critical injuries. It even says that Omar was calm throughout the three hours, which argues for negotiating with him rather than exploding the wall. Why are there so many holes in the wall?

As you can see, none of the holes looks like it was created by an armored vehicle ramming into it, which police said they used for one of the holes. There are five holes in all, all vertical in shape. How does an armored vehicle create vertical shapes? The largest one in the middle has a suspicious corner knocked out of one block at the top. It looks like something accomplished with a sledge hammer. On the right side of the largest hole, one can see two circular shapes the size of a sledge-hammer head.

I see no tire marks in the grass. If it was a rainy day, there should be deep tire marks from the heavy vehicle.

What troubles me more is this: "Then Mateen -- whom police said had acted 'cool and calm' during discussions -- talked about killing more people. Alarmed police placed an explosive device against the block walls and detonated them. The breach failed, the hole [singular, not plural] not large enough to allow for a successful rescue. A cop rammed his Bearcat armored vehicle through the club wall. Hostages poured out. So did Mateen, guns blazing. With quick efficiency, officers shot him dead." This doesn't sit right with me. There are three holes through the wall large enough for the people to escape. Yet the story apparently claims that the explosives did not get them that large. What did? Did the police ram the vehicle three times into the wall? But look at how high the center of the three holes are, about 40 inches. The other two are higher.

Below is a Google page showing some Bearcat armored vehicles. The ram is on the front bumper. We would expect it to produce a square hole, or better yet a horizontal rectangle, with a center some 22 inches off the ground. That's not what the picture reveals.

To save his life, Omar had the ability to halt the people from crawling out the holes. "STOP," he could have said, "or I'll shoot." But the way the story reads here, they just walked out while he did nothing, afterwhich he jumps out himself only to be riddled with bullets..

There is more, for one doesn't expect an off-duty police officer to be working at this bar. But we read: "An off-duty Orlando police officer working at the club was investigating an underage drinker outside when he heard gunshots inside, according to the law enforcement source. The off-duty officer ran inside the club and traded gunfire with Mateen, backed up soon by three other Orlando police officers, the source said." It just looks too convenient, tailor-made for a hoax or false-flag murder (there is a difference).

Google has rigged things up so that when you ask for a conspiracy theory, pages come up first that debunk the conspiracy theorists. This is not the correct way to do it. While there may some ridiculous claims out there, Google can assure that they are the first ones to come up.

Dial-up Internet has become so slow, thanks to the more-complicated webpages, that I can't do sound investigations anymore. I didn't want to do an investigation on this event, anyway, but I started out Friday evening doing it more-or-less out of "entertainment," i.e. something different from my normal work. I need a change-up now and again.

Next, I got to the man who claims he held a door of the nightclub closed so that the shooter couldn't get out. Conspiracy theorists are suggesting that this man was part of the insider plot to keep customers from escaping. Which makes more sense? Well, the latter sounds highly unreasonable to anyone that doesn't believe the government would stage a mass-murder like this. Therefore, there is no choice but to believe the door-man's claim. But, really, would you stand at a door to assure that a man with rifle doesn't get out? You know that you'd be shot if you tried that, because, chances are, the gunman's going to want to escape. Suddenly, there is more reason to believe an insider job, for it is expected that the plotters would not want anyone to get out that could be the wrong kind of witness. It could even be worse than that because the object may have been to keep people trapped inside in order to kill as many as possible for media numbers; the more horrific, the better the government could achieve its goals.

The last thing one expects at a mass-shooting is a man (Luis Burbano) holding the door closed from the outside (his own claim) after he himself has stepped out. The natural inclination for a normal person would be to open the door, get out fast, and let others see the open door. It's a no-brainer. You can run away as soon as you're out, but you don't slam the door shut and keep it from opening to others. He claims that someone was pounding on the other side of the door, but that he wouldn't allow it to open for fear it was the gunman. Ah, wait a minute. The gunman was shooting his gun. He can't shoot as many bullets as the police claimed he did and wrap at the door at the same time. In other words, chances are that this man was holding the door while bullets were bring fired, meaning he knew it wasn't the gunman on the other side.

Luis' problem is that no one would press against a door if he thinks the gunman is on the other side. In his mind, he'd be thinking that bullets would be coming through the door. That's why I think Luis is an insider.

My computer doesn't allow most videos anymore. The first one at the page below is loading slowly as I write this paragraph, but the computer has no sound capability anyway. The page puts it like this: "DAHBOO 777 astutely caught the following video feed. Watch the short clip, notice how the interviewee is cut off when he mentions that more than one person was involved. I have not been able to fully identify the person in the video below before they were cut off after saying that a man was trying to hold the doors so people could not get out." It sounds like the media interviewer knew to cut the person off as soon as his/her story wasn't according to the storyline. When media are involved in events like this, it speaks to very-high-level people creating the events.

Here's how someone else puts it: "First, you have this report a live TV caller gave on a mainstream media channel claiming to have been inside the club when the shooting occurred. He said that when people tried to escape, someone was holding the door closed. As soon as he says this, the reporter 'loses him' and they change the subject." In a normal situation, the reporter would have been intrigued, and gone on to inquire more about it. It's already obvious that the government is behind this event.

I don't advocate conspiracy theorists because I don't know them. The page above was offered to you for any value in its video. The writer seems to believe that the shooter was a jihadist, and that the American government somehow lured him to conduct the attack along with accomplices in the bar. That was one of my theories, but I think I'm changing my mind. I am suspicious of Alex Jones when he is adamant that ISIS jihadists are invading America. If they were, they would be conducting bona fide terror acts in great numbers. What next? A government-sponsored attack on a Christian church? I'll bet it won't be a Catholic one.

As the shooter is supposedly dead (not necessarily true), it's possible that he was not a jihad lover at all. It's even possible that he was a government worker. The CIA has all sorts of people working on false ID's for protection purposes. Why can't these people be used as fake jihadists? They then go elsewhere and get another identity. Perhaps this Omar fellow was slated for Afghanistan after this shooting, and, so, now he's left the country; he's as good as dead. Who will ever know? The CIA can be creating false history for certain individuals slated to become mass-murderers inside the U.S. It wouldn't be difficult to accomplish if they made that choice.

Some conspiracy theorists can be Russian agents or pro-Communists inside the U.S. They can't all be, however.

A former policeman writes the page below, claiming that there could not have been a single shooter in the bar. But this man, who obviously doesn't think perfectly straight, comes out thinking that there was nothing by which to suggest a government conspiracy. His main claim is that, in order to kill and injure roughly 100 people, it would have been impossible with one man and his two guns. Gun-savvy readers would appreciate this article:

The former police officer, knowing that the official story doesn't add up to reality, has a real problem confessing at the end that a conspiracy is at the root of this event. Why is that? It's for the same reason that architects were afraid to come out on 9-11 to say that passenger jets could not compromise columns of steel, backed up by concrete floors, like a hot knife through butter. Fear of repercussions. Fear of being labeled a nut. Fear of rejection. It matters a lot when you're wanting to keep a job and friends.

Google doesn't bring up many pages with the door-man story unless one asks for it by including "holding the door" in the search query. Google definitely doesn't want people reading about this door man. He is the one who instantly convinced me, tonight, that the U.S. government is responsible for this mass-murder. Until proven otherwise, I'm treating it as a mass-murder, and the door man tends to prove that this is the correct view. Here is his story told with my comments is square brackets:

Nearby, he saw people moving through a small 'employee's only' door hidden behind a curtain, and followed after [who would put a curtain over an employee door? The plotters of the crime?]

On the other side of the door was a narrow hallway where Burbano estimates about 20 people were crawling over each other to get to the exit at the other end [As an employee passageway, the hallway would have been lit up. The 20 would have become reduced to ten in a few seconds flat, then five, then zero, as they exited the second door to freedom].

Burbano says he decided to shut the door behind him because the hallway was getting dangerously overcrowded [ridiculous, but he has an explanation].

Burbano was questioned about the rumors he locked other partiers inside the club during an interview With Fox News' Megyn Kelly on Sunday, and during the interview he admitted that it was risky.

'That was on my mind,' Burbano said. 'There was banging, there was pushing of the door...but at that point in time, I just tried doing what I thought would be best at that moment because {the gunshots were} getting louder and getting closer.'

So there you have it, the gunshots were being heard by this screwy-Luis character, meaning he knew that the gunman wasn't on the other side of the door. Yet he kept the door jammed shut just the same, people freaking out on the other side, some of them about to get shot, we may assume. Luis didn't mind coming on international TV to portray himself as a coward because it's better than being discovered as an accomplice to the mass-murder. He knew he had to go national with a story, to combat the conspiracy theorists and satisfy others asking questions concerning his suspicious activity, and, probably, the other insiders made him go on television with their concocted story.

"In his interview with Megyn Kelly, Burbano explained that he only shut the door for a few seconds, and to give the other 20 or so people in the narrow hallway room to move and exit safely." In a hallway, one can open a door to its max until its against the wall, giving just as much space in the hallway as when it's closed. Moreover, this reason for closing the door is at odds with forcing the door shut as people tried to open it. Note he says he shut the door for a few seconds only, not a great wonder if two men ended up on the other side with combined force that Luis and his accomplice were unable to counter.

Below we have Gonzalez' story, where someone is blocking the first door (into the hallway), with Gonzales himself apparently on the inner side of the door, unable to see into the hallway:

'In a moment of desperation we were all crawling on the floor trying to find a place to exit. I looked to my right and I could see people going through some curtains. We were digging through the curtains and we finally see a door.

'Fifty people were trying to jump over each other trying to exit the place. There was a guy holding the door and not letting us exit. Hes like "Stay inside, stay inside." As he is saying that, the shooter keeps getting closer and closer and the sound of the bullets is getting closer.

'Everyone starts to panic. People are getting trampled. We're shouting "Let us out, let us out!" Gonzalez recalled.

Luis explains the crowd of 20 due to a "fence" at a second door on the far end of the hallway. The fence was allegedly keeping the people from fleeing easily. Luis: "We just started pushing and pushing and then when we got that 10 second break we went to this alleyway which led for only employees and we tried, me and this random guy, tried blocking the door". Random-shmandom; it looks like his accomplice. Luis may have introduced this second person because he was in fact there, and because witnesses in the hallway are capable of proving it. Later, we discover that its not a hallway with ceiling, but an alleyway outdoors. We also find that there is no second door, by the looks of it, except that it might be a barricade of some sort that Luis calls a fence. It looks to be about three feet high, maybe four, easy for most men to jump over.

As people needed to dig through the curtain to find a door, the curtain was apparently a lot wider than the door itself, perfect if someone wants to hide the fact of a door behind it. Chances are, this curtain, if it was directly along the wall (no room for a person to walk between it and the door), went up shortly before the murder as part of the plot; people were not supposed to find the door, in other words. A curtain makes complete sense where the door could be opened from the inside. They were hoping the customers wouldn't find the door.

Yes, the plotters had the choice of replacing the normal lock with one that makes people unable to unlock the door from the bar room, but the fact that no such lock was in use tends to prove that the door was still in use, at least as an emergency exit. But you can't put a curtain over an emergency exit, right? No, you cannot. Therefore, even if the door was no longer in use by employees, the curtain over the door looks suspicious.

There is a good chance that Luis Burbano was one of the shooters, until he was sidetracked to keep people from getting away. Here is Luis revealing a hole in a fence, coupled with suspicious wording:

Burbano claimed he and a group of around 20 people were able to escape through a small side alley for employees just outside the main building. As the sounds of gunshots began to get closer and closer, Burbano and another witness held closed a small [not wide] door. Burbano said the entire group was "crammed" in the alley while trying to escape through a hole in a fence.

"We went to this alleyway which led for only employees and this random guy tried blocking the door, cause at that point, like I said, the bullets were getting louder and closer so we blocked this door,' Burbano told ABC News.

" that point there was about 20 people in front of us crammed in this little alleyway with a big hole in one of the fences and just trying to topple over, just trying to...escape, just run."

It definitely sounds as though the alleyway is fenced to the point where there was no allowable exit. It was either an enclosed yard, therefore, or an alley with a gate at the other end. It could be that the door was not required as an emergency exit. Or, it could be that it was required, and, if so, the gate at the other end had to be open-able by the general public. On this occasion, however, the plotters may have locked the gate.

Of further interest:

Then you have the fact that Broadcastify, the world's largest source of public safety, aircraft, rail, and marine radio live audio streams, just so happens to be missing the three hours of police scanner audio from midnight through 3 a.m. on June 12, the exact window the shooting took place in...

Broadcastify claims the reason the audio of that particular channel for those particular hours is missing is due to a "server outage".

I find that piece compelling. The police were talking over radio about their false-flag operation. THE ORLANDO POLICE. Like I said, we do not live in a democracy; it's now a dictatorship ruled by wicked men who wish for us to believe that it's pure, angelic democracy. The bulk of the peoples think that their leaders are corrupt only sexually, politically, and financially (conflict-of-interest type), but are not yet able to believe that they will tolerate or be agreeable to mass murders of their own citizens. It's not likely the case that this was a hoax, no one being killed, no one injured, as was the case at Boston Marathon. The latter had few killed, with all the rest (no more than about 25) feigning injuries. There were tampered photos with the one missing his legs pasted into them. None of the other 25-odd people in the images showed the severe injuries that were reported in the media. Even the blood spatters looked faked. The hospitals in Boston that were used were complicit, along with the Boston police, in the hoax. But with nearly 50 people reportedly dead here, it's hard to fake for funeral reasons. The plotters are not going to want the extra work and risks of feigning 50 deaths (and counting) all requiring legitimate funerals. It's very risky to make up 50 names and then report funerals that do not take place.

The dailysheeple page above has a variety of comments section with a variety of views from anti-government sorts. One that I find interesting for discussion purposes is from a Chief Bromden:

[G4S Security] hired 75 People, via an ad in Craigslist, in Orlando on 6/10, for cash, just prior To the Orlando Pulse Club incident. The ad specified only people with state-issued gun permits would be hired. Each was hired, for a role as crisis actor. Some were issued Issued sidearms and , told the pistols only contained blanks, were positioned Inside the Club, and told when the fired, it was all just "Part of the Show." Mixed in with this group, were 4 actual shooters, with live rounds, with orders to kill club goers. As they exited they told others to hold doors closed, until until the shootings ended, Inluding oen shooter who took out Omar the designated patsy.

Orlando area VHF/UHF radio comms - EMT / Police / Fire Referenced “the Drill’ There were NO EMT ambulance units dispatched to the Club during the incident. All online radio transmission archives covering Orlando for Midnight - 3:00am were removed from the site.

It's a pretty good theory for making regular attendees of the club hold doors rather than using paid government employees to do it. However, there have not been reports of many guns going off. Bromden's picture has what looks to be at least eight guns going off. While that error may have slipped his mind, he's also got another problem. If real people answering ads were killed that night, friends and relatives would generally know that they were not homosexuals, and moreover spouses would know that they got jobs from the ads. This wild theory from Bromden is highly unlikely, therefore. It would be "better" (less risky / complicated) to go in a shoot the regulars with a couple of government-paid or government-manipulated shooters. In that scenario, it's highly unlikely that the shooters didn't know that the two or more men at the doors would be in there as part of their murder plot. Luis Burbano's name and facial features looks like he could pass for having some an Arab. "Burbano" is a surname that I would trace to African Berbers in the Morocco-Spain theater.

Another murder suspect is, of course, the off-duty policeman that reportedly came in and started shooting at Omar. He was probably shooting to kill others with his pistol, explaining why the reports had Omar carrying both a rifle and a pistol. That is, Omar wasn't carrying the pistol at all, but all bodies with pistol bullets would be blamed on "his" pistol. It's a diabolical picture, which is why I call the American government a demon. I am not anti-government unless there is good reason. I am not opposed to authority so long as it's a Godly one. These people will jail innocent people with false-government accusations, or kill them, if they threaten this plot.

There doesn't seem to be a Middle-Eastern motive for this latest operation. I realize how senseless that sounds, but, really, what good will this event do for the Middle-Eastern war, on behalf of the United States? This government already has the green light to fight ISIS, meaning that the Orlando event was set off for another motive. However, it can perhaps be used to increase U.S. funds for fighting ISIS, then turn part of the funds over to those terrorists. Yet, these sorts of events advance the NSA's of the United States, as well as the ultimate globalist agenda of taking guns from citizens. I don't apologize for sounding just like a conspiracy theorist in this regard, because I think they are correct. With so many guns in the ownership of citizens, it makes for a complicated mass struggle between the government and the people. The globalists probably have, as part of their future agenda, some nasty, undesirable goals that are sure to turn people off enough to fight them. For this end, the government doesn't want armed citizens. There is simple logic to it, not at all far-fetched.

I'm "waiting" for them to feign an attack on Christians; after all, ISIS hates Christians too. If the government wants to see the drastic rise of conspiracy theorists, let them do an attack on Christians. It is excellent that their feigned attacks showed obvious cracks, for Christians will be reflecting back on those things when the false-flag operations come round to them. Obama must be lamenting if the first one is planned after he leaves office. Bill and Hillary would definitely like to see it during her first term. Utter nastiness is here. It's not in the distant future. It is here now. Along with demonic influences everywhere, there are demonic controls set up. It's not a wonder, it's not a surprise.

I'm not advocating for Christians to purchase guns to fight the government with them. Revelation 13:10 directs us not to do this, and it is logical, for our benefit, not to fight the government. If you can't see that, you need to reflect a little deeper. Revelation 13:10 does predict jailing Christians on false / empty charges, and they are to swallow pride at that time, go to jail with their best behavior, and wait for Jesus to arrive to set them free. The better Christians behave in jail, the better the jailmen will treat them.

The reason that some conspiracy theorists are quick to accuse the government is that they know. They also know what to look for. Where the average person sees nothing to indicate certain guilt, the conspiracy theorists knows beforehand that the government is capable of mass shootings, real or faked, and that mass shootings are an important part of its agenda. The government workers online, whose job it is to do damage control, will convince the people that the Luis-Burbano complication is not sufficient to warrant a government-conspiracy accusation. But I know better. Burbano makes it obvious for me, explaining why there were other suspicious parts to the event.

Here's a comments page on the following:

I was watching some coverage on the news this morning about the shooting in Orlando and they had an eyewitness on the phone. I thought it was kind of odd that as soon as this eyewitness said that someone was holding the emergency exit door shut from the outside the call was dropped. I mean im not much of a conspiracy believer but i found it strange the media is not mentioning this anywhere. They end up getting the witness back on the phone. He then says the person shutting the door was saying stay put [i.e. insisting not to open the door]. Which is even more odd. At first i thought "ok maybe an officer was holding the door closed and trying to calm people down". But then wouldnt the officer identify himself as law enforcement first? And wouldnt he be trying to get people out. Not leave them in the club with the gunman?...What do you guys think? Maybe the shooter had some help? Sorry if my recording came out crappy. Had to do it off my phone.

The truth is obviously being subdued. One might argue that the guy was cut off because the media manager(s) was listening in (fully expected), with a button at hand for silencing his voice. As the caller's claim turned out to be true, shouldn't he be allowed to tell his story now? I haven't read that he's been on the news again. The writer above says that "They end up getting the witness back on the phone," which can indicate that someone other than the one who silenced the call had him back on. They may never have had him off the phone. While off the air, he was probably talked into not mentioning the door item again if he wanted to go back on the air.

The quickness by which they blocked his first call, at the sound of the "door" word, speaks to the anchorperson, and/or managers listening in, being briefed by the plotters not to allow damaging content. It's an important point that the anti-conspiracy duds aren't making, and are unwilling to make. They are suggesting that the timing of the cut-off moment was completely coincidental, nothing to do with the mention of the door blocker. If there was a short delay of the live feed for the purpose of assessing whether any part of the conversation ever gets on the air, the person assessing it apparently allowed it while the anchorperson / manager listening silenced it.

Luis had the smarts enough to know you don't block a door with your body if there is a gunman on the other side wanting to get through. The door was likely made of two, thin metal plates, with soft fire-proofing material between them. Rifle bullets at close range will penetrate doors like that. If there was only one person on the other side of the door, banging on it, begging to have him open it, he would have, if he were a normal person. But there he was, with the opportunity to allow dozens to flow into the hallway, to their "escape hatch," and he refuses to let the door open. He would need to be fighting hard to keep this door from opening, and it makes sense that there was another man helping him out.

We would like to know the length and width of the alley to see for ourselves whether it was large enough to hold 50 people, in which case Luis' claim of a crammed 20 falls apart, especially if there was a block wall (bullet-proof) between the bar and the hallway (no need for everyone to get on their hands and knees, crawling). If it was CRAMMED with 20 who were unable to flee fast past the alley exit or fence, Luis' argument gets stronger, but if the alley could fit 30 or more people, he's an accomplice to murder for keeping the door shut. He needs to be taken to court for his actions. That's why he claims the door was closed for only a few seconds, to minimize the crime, but of course his motives were to keep the door closed much longer. It is a serious crime to hold a door closed in a situation like that.

Granted, half the people or more were dead drunk by that time (after 2 am), and this can play to the rats. Any error can be fathomed with a drunk, but then a drunk can't hold a door closed with people on the other side wanting to save their lives. There would be no ounce of energy spared in trying to get that door opened. The women would allow the men to the door to get it opened. The place likely had men well out-numbering women. Anything's possible, but, the problem is, Luis came on television only because Gonzales mentioned him; only because the upper-level rats needed Luis to fabricate a story to calm the fears arisen from Gonzales' testimony.

The story is not only about Luis' motive for keeping the door closed, it's about Luis coming to multiple media and telling his story roundly in the absence of other witnesses. Why aren't two or three amongst the 20 in the alley on television too? It is fully natural for the media people, if they were normal and non-complicit, to ask others in the alley to come on television. We would like to hear from the 20 whether Luis' story is the truth. The anti-conspiracy writers take Luis' story as the truth without asking questions, and ridicule those of us who question his story. One needs to be reminded on how unnatural a mass-shooting spree is. They were unheard of until this past generation.

Can the rats obtain a witness claiming to be of the 20 when he was not? Yes, but the more they emphasize this part of the story, the greater the risk that a true witness will come out to contradict Luis' story. We need only to hear that there was no barrier in the alley to keep people from escaping easily / quickly. That alone makes Luis a liar and an accomplice to murder. No locked gate at the end of the alley, no justifiable reason for 20 people in the alley, no reason for Luis to stay in the alley, no reason to hold the door closed. If the hole in the fence was not "small," as Luis says it was, the same guilt falls over him.

If 20 people were trapped there, they had time to use their phones, right? Where are the videos from the alley? Where are the calls to 911 from the alley? The government and the media have the power to put an end to speculation and questions. So far, the government has chosen to allow suspicion to circulate. At a Reddit comments page: "Good point. Where are the security cameras? Where were the bouncers? Where were the off duty police detail? How did he gain entry without being noticed? Where are the witnesses that actually saw the shooter? Why did no one tackle the guy like Christina's brother did the night before?"

Another one on the page reminds that no one else but the door man was taken on by the big media for an interview (but things may have changed since then). That's partially because all witnesses know that the government story is a lie, meaning they all know this was an inside job, and dare not appear on television. The other reason is that media are not asking / welcoming them to come on because the media managers are in bed with the plotters. No matter, the absence of witnesses on television brings the entire nation closer to accepting the truth about "their" government. If this were a real event, or, contrarily, a false-flag one in which the witnesses saw nothing malfunction badly, there would be streams of witnesses all over the big-media news. Gonzales has made that difficult now.

Show us the videos of the security cameras. But do it now, not after there is time to alter the video. And get witnesses on television so that other witnesses feel free to talk too. Let's get the whole story from the witnesses, especially the ones who are known to have been shot. We would like to see with our own eyes how many times the shooter managed to re-load his weapons. Probably, any one security camera would show evidence of more than one shooter.

I agree that, if I were in that situation, in a closed room with a gunman having an automatic gun, the last thing on my mind would be to take out the phone and start taking video / pictures...unless I were hit, lying on the floor. There were dozens wounded in every way possible, some seriously, others not. Some would simply have stayed on the floor, even if not shot badly, to indicate to the shooter not to shoot their way any longer, and of course to stay below the spray of bullets. Some of the injured or downed-pretenders are predicted to have taken phones out while the shooter was on the other side of the bar, firing in a different direction. There were tables throughout the room(s) to obscure wounded people from the shooter. There were people in the bathrooms immediately, we may assume, who were calling 911, right? Of course. Did they report more than one shooter? Let's hear the 911 calls.

The most damning statement is this short one from the page above: "They were in there for 3 hours, right? Nobody would have tried to film that?" Indeed. While the gunman was in the bathroom for a rather long period, and injured people remaining on the floor (at least one confessed to feigning injury), they all had the brilliant opportunity to use their phones...unless a second / third gunman was in the room, or unless the plotters lied about his being the lone gunman in the bathroom with hostages. If there are no phone videos / pictures, the plotters lied to us. If there are no phone videos / pictures, the gunmen always had control of the victims. Probably, the people in the bathroom poured out the hole(s) in the wall, unscathed by the gunman, because he was never in the bathroom. The gunman didn't jump out the bathroom hole, did he, just to get riddled with police / SWAT bullets? Did you notice that, in the image with the large hole in the bathroom wall, with bullet-hole markings around hole, no blood spatter can be seen on the bright-white wall?

I am not sure about the number of videos that have managed to surface. I haven't seen one yet. I have yet to read the number of people in the place total; the more there were, the greater the number of phone videos / pictures expected. As people heal in hospitals, video should start coming to television, right? A story like this always get huge coverage, as its part-and-parcel with the insider program. Only this time, the less coverage for the rats, the better not to expose their bloody whiskers.

Here's the scene of the crime from ABC News. Note the ability of some to run out the front and back doors:

Brandon Wolf was another one of the patrons who survived. Wolf told ABC News that he was dancing and "having a great time" before telling friends that he was going to the bathroom. He heard 12 to 20 gunshots fired when they were in the bathroom and so they just ran for the front door. They were able to make it out of the building but they still heard shots firing "for minutes."

Joshua McGill was at the club with his roommates...McGill and his friends sneaked out the back door and jumped over a fence to flee the site before he saw that he needed to take action. "I happened to see someone covered in blood stumbling through the parking lot," McGill said...

...Janiel Gonzales had just ordered a Red Bull when he heard the sound of shots, prompting him to drop to the floor. "He was just spraying [sounds like an automatic] very wildly, like whoever was in the way was going to get hit, basically," Gonzales told ABC News of the shooter.

Other witnesses have posted their accounts on the club's Facebook page, including Ricardo J. Negron Almodovar who identified himself as a survivor who was inside Pulse when the shooting unfolded. "People on the dance floor and bar got down on the floor and some of us who were near the bar and back exit managed to go out through the outdoor area and just ran," he wrote on the club's Facebook page.

There doesn't appear to have been any problem exiting the back door on the two occasions that it's mentioned. The article is short on detail in consideration of the number of witnesses mentioned. Why is ABC being so stingy? Which door was Luis holding shut, a third one on a side of the building? Apparently, yes, as we can see below.

I find McGill's testimony suspicious. Most-everything about the ABC piece caters to contradicting the idea that door blockers were on site. And that may have been ABC's purpose. Here is what ABC put out at another time: "There does seem to be at least one major discrepancy between Burbano's story and those that were LOCKED [caps mine] in the club. Witness Janiel Gonzalez told ABC News that it was the exit door to the outside, and not the 'employee's only' door that someone slammed shut." Is ABC deliberately contradicting Gonzales own story? What exterior door is ABC insinuating for Gonzales? He said it was the door behind the curtain, the door Luis went out of, and Luis himself says there was a curtain there.

"[Gonzales] said he heard another gun from a different direction, so he wonders if there were two gunmen." That's not from ABC. Imagine Gonzales telling these things to ABC, then learning that ABC refused to tell his story. Gonzales became a conspiracy believer right away, didn't he, thanks to ABC's treatment of him? It was ABC who dropped his call as soon as he said he saw a guy blocking the door.

If true that people were escaping freely out the front and back doors, it tends to wipe away the impression that men were securing the doors, which is one reason that I don't trust McGill's testimony. Another is that he claims to have gone to the hospital with a victim, serving to explain why he wasn't at the scene of the crime as the night wore on. If people could freely flow out the front and back doors, shouldn't a lot fewer than 103 people have been hit? It depends on how many were in there to begin with, and how large the place was, and how many gunmen there were. The plotters haven't yet given their number of total people, so far as I've read. The building appears to be about 65 feet from back to front, a relatively small place. If a lone shooter stands in the center, he can cover both doors at the same time rather easily, until he needs to reload. The employee's door, as you can see below, is roughly midway between the front and back wall. With 50ish people crowding in at the employee's door, it was a massive bulk that would have been shot mercilessly without many misses, thanks to Luis and/or his accomplice. Yet, people closest to the door were more likely to survive, or not get hit at all, due to the ones between them and the shooter(s). Gonzales survived this. As he claims he heard the man behind the door yelling, "Stay inside, stay inside," he was probably near or at the door.

With two shooters from opposite directions, one would have been at a corner on the back wall, and the other on a corner at the front wall, neither allowing many to escape through the two doors, neither pointing directly at the other. In his interview with another media, the Gonzales in ABC's quote said, "I'm pretty sure it was more than one person. I heard two guns going at the same time." He is therefore discovered as a non-insider.

Some anti-conspiracy pages are passing around the idea that Luis held the door closed to keep the shooter from escaping. Luis may have changed his story in an effort to seek heroism, but I reject that. Here is what he said on CNN: "In his interview with Megyn Kelly, Burbano explained that he only shut the door for a few seconds, and to give the other 20 or so people in the narrow hallway room to move and exit safely." If he then changed the story to act like he was prepared to get bullets in the chest for keeping the door closed, I reject that. By this time, days after the shooting, Luis knew the shooter had two other doors to escape from; he wasn't going to come running through a thick crowd of 50 maimed people to make his getaway in the alley, especially as the shooter would have staked this place out before the event, realizing that exiting into the alley wasn't at all conducive for getting quickly to his vehicle. Therefore, if Luis is trying to take credit for blocking the escape of the shooter, Luis' dreaming.

The page below shows a roof view of the building, as well as two street views showing what must be the alley (circled in red) and the door that Luis held closed. As you can see, the door is in a corner, opening to another wall at a right angle to the door. The door never takes up any space, wide open or closed. Luis was lying, therefore, when saying the door needed to be closed to add space for the crowd of 20. The alley goes toward the street. Scroll about midway down the page to find the photos.

You can access all three images from my files:

Note that the alley easily fits 20 people comfortably. Judging by the size of the width of the door, the alley is at least seven feet wide and 18 feet long (125 square feet) to the front corner of the building. Allowing two square feet per person standing, that alley fits at least 60 people crammed. Luis is guilty as infernal sin. There is no way that 20 people were "crammed" in there. Likely, Luis exagerrated the numbers in there because he needed the place crammed. There may have been as few as five, or, maybe just two, he and the other door blocker. That can explain why no one comes out to claim that they were in the alley.

The entire building appears to be about 2,700 square feet. Remove space for a bathrooms, a dance floor(s), a bar, and foyer, and this place probably doesn't hold much more than 120 persons. Don't mistaken the front canopy for a roof with floor space beneath it. A table of six would require about 50 square feet, with an additional 50 square feet of space between it and other tables. Assuming that no one was in the alley, and no one in the bathroom, 100 people hit sounds about right with maybe 20 escapees that were not supposed to escape. A few apparently got out through the alley.

When we get to the front corner of the building, where the white alley wall meets black, there appears to be no barricade / fence there when the image is enlarged. When not enlarged, one may be able to make out the dark top rail of gate, three feet high, maybe 42 inches, nearest the white wall. This dark area looks like shading due to image imperfection, rather than a top rail, when the image is enlarged. If there is no gate there, perhaps a fence of some sort was added for the massacre at some time after this image was taken. Either way, that alley would not be crowded to the max with 20 people, and some of them would have been able to jump a locked gate up to 42 inches high, meaning that Luis had enough room to allow others into the area, for to save their lives. He was required to allow them into the alley. Blocking the door amounts to partaking in the massacre.

The bathroom Problems Reveal Government Murder

Let's repeat from above: "Brandon Wolf was another one of the patrons who survived. Wolf told ABC News that he was dancing and 'having a great time' before telling friends that he was going to the bathroom. He heard 12 to 20 gunshots fired when they were in the bathroom and so they just ran for the front door. They were able to make it out of the building..." This tends to locate the bathrooms nearest the street, on the wall opposite the alley. We know the armored vehicle didn't ram the bathroom wall from the alley, not from the front patio, and so the only choice we have left is from the side parking lot.

It seems ridiculous that the same gunman who spent "minutes" shooting up the crowd would then allow 20 in the bathroom to walk out the hole without getting fired upon. We should like to hear from half of these 20, or even all of them, if indeed they were in there. The good news for the plotters: homosexuals are not prone to revealing themselves to the public. The bad news for the plotters is that the picture of the bathroom wall has the pipes going in the wrong direction, toward the back of the building. Sewers are under the street, are they not? If they are electrical pipes, they too would go to the street. Take another look at the pipes:

IMPORTANT. If the pipes are headed to the street, then this picture needs to be on the same side of the building as the alley. But that can't be correct because there is another commercial location along that side that doesn't allow a truck to ram the wall. The alley-view photo tells that it's a tint shop. I'm starting to get the impression that this hole-wall picture is from some other building that the CIA or FBI has in its files, and they are wanting for us to believe falsely that this was the scene at the Orlando bar.

There are two ways to view the situation: 1) the shooters never knew that they were being coerced into conducting the shooting by undercover police disguised as jihadists, and, in the end, the police simply shot the shooters dead. 2) the shooters were working for the authorities and were taken alive into a vehicle in the parking lot, afterwhich they went home to be with their wives and kids, who never knew. The wives will go to sleep with mass-murderers. The kids will say "I love you daddy" to mass murderers.

So, the question is, why did they decide to knock holes in the wall at the parking lot? Couldn't they have ended it differently, by sending SWAT inside? Well, by ending it in the parking lot, there were no witnesses of what happened amongst the injured peoples inside. They waited three hours, allowing injured peoples to leave who were able to make it on their own to the outdoors. And they then needed to clear the parking lot of all unwanted witnesses when they shot the wall up without shooting up the shooter (theory).

Daily Mail: "The only person to escape from his hiding place in an Orlando gay club bathroom has revealed how crazed gunman Omar Mateen laughed as he slaughtered his victims." According to the escapee, Norman Casiano, all other 30 people in the bathroom with him were killed. The gunman supposedly entered the bathroom and mercilessly sprayed them all while they were crammed into the toilet stalls. There are reasons to view this as a concocted part of the witness testimonies: 1) the bathrooms are near the front door, wherefore as many as 30 people are not expected to get trapped in a bathroom with the door to freedom near enough to make the attempt very appealing; 2) the scene contradicts the final event in a bathroom where 20 are allowed to get out a hole without being shot at all. In other words, Casiano may have been part of the insiders, giving false testimony. We now have 30 in a bathroom, 20 in a bathroom, 20 in the alley, and 50ish on the inner side of the employee's door, for a total of 120 persons already, not including others hit in the bar room and the ones who escaped without being hit.

Casiano says the gunman walked freely into the bathroom, and put his gun over the stall doors, pointing it down and without being attacked by anyone, including himself. He makes it sound as though virtually all men were tucked away in stalls, which is not realistic in my mind. They would have done better to wait at the door, peaking out, waiting for their opportunity to sprint or crawl to the front door. Anyone with a sense of survival would take that approach. We all want to know from the authorities on how close this bathroom door was to the front door, but the plan now may be to tear the building down and rebuild it with insurance money (we may never know the truth).

"[Wolf] heard 12 to 20 gunshots fired when they were in the bathroom and so they just ran for the front door." Sounds easy.

Look again at the roof-view of the building, assuming that the bathrooms are on the right half of the building's parking-lot side. From the white line (looks like the top of a wall) crossing the entire width of the roof at the mid-section, it appears that the left half of the building consists of an addition(s), meaning that bathrooms would have been provided for the original building on the right half. If the bathrooms were later moved into the addition, they would not have been moved far due to the need to connect with the main underground sewer pipe. In the alley-view of the building, one can see part of the front wall where there is no front door, wherefore the front door in under the canopy somewhere, probably at/near the center of the building (not the center of the canopy).

But there is a problem in serving customers under the canopy while customers in other parts of the building walk through the patio area in coming and leaving. It tends to lower the quality of the setting for those in the patio. An alternative front door solves this problem. There appears to be such a door where you see a black square-like shape at the mid-section of the parking-lot wall. The square area definitely looks like a canopy in the roof-view, which, if correct, is likely a canopy for a doorway. It's a perfect spot for the rear doorway of the original building.

A problem is definitely developing for the plotters. Look at the parking lot pavement on the roof-view's left half, having no grass between the parking lot and the wall. The bathrooms could not have been there, if the image of the holes in the wall are true pictures, for we see grass in that picture. I am able to envision, but not see, grass between the parking spots and the wall on the building's right half. There is clearly a green area visible inside the white, triangular curb, as well as green at the street, and more green at the rear of the building. One therefore expects green to appear where I claim the bathrooms ought to be. But not a spot of green exists there either.

In the hole-wall image, there is a pipe-like object on the ground that the man walks over. Near the end of this pipe, one can make out a t-fitting for a drain pipe, taking drain water from inside the building into the ground. Above the t-fitting, there is a small black hole into the wall, where I assume a vent pipe for the drain exited the wall. The pipe on the ground, in other words, must have been a vent stack to the roof, extending from the T-fitting to the roof and connecting to a pipe that came out the black hole.

The pipe on the wall, on the opposite side of the image, is the same grey color (painted?), but extending in the opposite direction, oddly enough. Again, it's going away from the street if this image is not a phony. Vent pipes are not permitted o be that low. An air vent pipe must be above the highest water-usage point, that usually being a sink. The pipes on the wall are definitely below sink level and cannot, therefore, be vent pipes. If they are drain pipes, why are they going away from the street, and away from the t-fitting that brings drain water to the main sewer pipe?

One of the two pipes on the wall shows a curvature, and electrical conduit is often like that. However, these are rather large conduit pipes for electrical wires merely for a bar room. Besides, electrical wires are typically passed through the inside of the building's finished walls (usually made of wood studs and drywall). One can see clearly wood studs and their damaged drywall at two holes in the wall. If these are electrical conduits for large wire, then this was more likely a factory than a bar. However, factories don't usually finish their interior walls.

The diameter of the pipe can be figured exactly by the fact that blocks are 16 x 8 inches. The pipe is two inches in outside diameter, therefore, making it 1.5 inches interior diameter, unless its wrapped with insulation, making it even smaller i.e. 1.25 interior diameter. In my area, the latter size is permitted only for bathroom-sink drains (kitchen drains require 1.5), and that's what this picture looks like, for the pipes exit the wall at a height exactly where a sink drain is expected. But the pipes are headed away from the street. It tends to mean that the t-fitting on the right side of the image enters a horizontal pipe in the ground that carries water to the left of the two people, and this tends to expose that this image is not from a wall in the orlando nightclub.

If you look at the center of the man's blue cap, you can see an inside corner in the wall, where the wall to his back juts out a half-block's distance (or perhaps a full block) beyond the wall to his front. Was this the reality at the Orlando building? In the roof-view image, no such jut can be seen that matches this one. There is a jut of about a one-block distance at the parking-lot wall, but the jut in the wall-hole image is a left-side inside corner while the jut in the roof-view is a right-side inside corner. That can't work.

[Update June 25. My mistake, I think. This alternative wall-hole image shows what I thought to be a corner in the blocks -- the jut -- to be an unpainted part of the wall. That sheet metal hanging from the roof area was supposedly over the unpainted part, yet it's not only looking too large for it, but in the first wall-holes-image it looks like a corner piece, perfect for wrapping around the jut. Moreover, I cannot guess what this sheet metal piece is for. It apparently goes down to the ground; there is nothing behind it upon the wall. Note that while they have a man (nice and clean, not a spot of blood) on the inside, the lights are off, again. It's very questionable as to why they haven't got their own lighting system if the building's system was out.]

The next question is whether the wall-hole image is on the back wall of the Orlando building. I cannot make out any parking lot at the back, for it seems to be fully green of the same shade that exists at the front where it's almost-certainly lawn.

The final question is whether the armored vehicle could get between the tint shop and the alley, then ram the alley wall, in case the bathrooms are there. Here is the street-view image again, which has no distortions like the others. Although not easy to do, a vehicle might just be able to get into the space between the two buildings, ram the fence with hardly any room to build momentum, then ram the wall. I judge about 12 feet of space between the fence and the building, while the vehicle is likely more than 12 feet long.

In the street-view image, it's not possible for me to make out definitively whether the exterior walls are a simple block finish. Perhaps your images load with higher quality, but I cannot be sure. There are some spots where horizontal lines can be seen that appear to be block lines. That would explain why the wall-hole image was chosen with block finish. But in this image of men at the small canopy, it appears that a black wall has been plastered over and painted.

None of this is to necessarily say that the authorities didn't knock a hole through the bathroom wall, for it they did not, anyone could prove them false by failing to find such a hole. Yet, the image offered as the true scene doesn't add up, begging the question on why they would use an alternative, false image that is itself problematic in the number and shapes of the wall holes. Apparently, there was something suspicious / damning in the real scene that didn't jibe with the official report. Probably, they didn't use explosives sufficient to knock a hole clear through because they didn't want to be legally responsible for harming a single customer. They may have loosened the blocks with explosives, then done the rest with sledges (very easy to do with blocks). But this all depends on what people were (or weren't) standing around watching it all.

Well, no kidding at all, minutes after finishing to this point, I found a floor-plan at Daily Mail. It shows two front doors under both small canopies, and three bathrooms. See for yourself:

Before getting back to the bathroom discussion, note that the employee's door to the alley appears to be behind a bar. There are two doors (near each other) to exit before one can get to the alley, and the first door is itself behind the bar. It exits into a crammed hallway (about ten feet long) before a second door exits to the alley. Now I understand. However, it's impossible to imagine a curtain in this situation, hung behind the bar, unless it was hung only for the shooting, to hide the first of two doors.

The question now becomes huge: WHY WERE THE 20 PEOPLE STUFFED IN THE SMALL HALLWAY UNABLE TO EXIT THE SECOND DOOR??? Was someone holding that one too? Ahh, now it finally makes sense.

It gets worse for the plotters because there is a large wall dividing the room between front and back, meaning that while a sole shooter was on one side of the wall, everyone on the other side would be able to get up and run out a door without being seen. No kidding at all. However, the floor-plan image leaves out the back door, apparently to make that reality hard to grasp...but at least one witness said that there was a back door. It's now possible to realize that this floor-plan image was released by the plotters, who left out the back door. It seems obvious enough that the back door should be between the two bathrooms (both on the back wall). [The next update finds many other exits on another floor plan, and so treat the floor plan here lightly until then.]

The third bathroom is at the front corner, with one wall being the one at the side parking lot. It's not predicted to have been the original bathroom, for it now sits inside of what looks like a spot for a garage door (since filled in with blocks).

The pipes in the wall-hole picture do not jibe with any of the three bathroom locations, as the pipes do not run to the street, nor do they run toward the drain at the front-bathroom toilet. That image is now clinched as a phony.

As the bathroom at the front is for both sexes, it probably has one toilet, but in any case, it definitely has door-lock capability, making it questionable whether 30 people would ever be able to enter even if they wanted to. Therefore, the report of the 30 persons crammed into toilet stalls needs to be on one of the back-wall bathrooms. In either case, the back door is right beside them, making it ridiculous to think they all went into a bathroom rather than out the door. The front bathroom is beside the door to the patio. There needs to be a door to the patio in order to serve people there. And the reason that the image comes without a back door is likely to make Casiano's story more feasible.

The back bathrooms are shown even smaller than the front one, a testimony that this place cannot hold many people. It's impossible to believe that there were 30 people all in toilet stalls of one bathroom while each bathrooms shows about 10' x 5'. Room is required for at least one sink, and some space for the door to open, leaving no more than enough room but for three toilet stalls, though I think two is more like it. Are we to believe 10-15 people per toilet stall??? Now we know they were lying to us, Casiano included.

The floor plan and its estimated (by me) dimensions appears to seat 50-60 people only, not including the patio. We can assume that people in the patio could hop the fence that surrounds it by standing on tables. It's possible to get 120 customers inside the walls of this place so long as many never sit. But that makes it ever-so-much harder for a sole gunman to not be jumped. We assume the rooms are mainly men, right? Or were they mice? I've come across this: "A law enforcement source close to the investigation who asked not to be named said a crowd of up to 300 people and the complex layout of the dance club may have resulted in some patrons being struck by gunfire from officers" ( That sure sounds exaggerated. I'm willing to measure the distance from front to back of the building to a maximum of 60 feet, with a maximum width of 55 feet.

Casiano portrays 30 mice, but that's a plotter-designed story. In reality, when your life is at stake, you need to take risks. You need to keep an ace up the sleeve for attacking the man. But let's face it, if there were one shooter, he would not have been able to control the other side of the nightclub's middle wall. The rat team was blocking the employees' doors so that it's highly unlikely that the team would just let half the place run out the back or front door. If the numbers of injured is correct, there must have been one gunman per one side of the middle wall, each moving around to get the best killing opportunities, and watching the door out of one eye.

Here's from the Daily Mail article carrying his story:

...[Casiano] had to crawl [in the bathroom] over the bodies of his best female friend and his male friend to get to safety.

When he emerged - through the same hole in the wall which Mateen was then to crawl through and die in a hail of gunfire - he was confronted by armed police.

'He said, 'I'm not the shooter, I'm a victim, I'm a victim' and he put his hands up in the air and then they went to him,' Ventura [reported as a fellow survivor by some] said.

The hole in the wall was crawled through later by Mateen himself as he tried to escape, leaving four or five hostages in it, police said.

Okay, we now have more details to work with, but we are entertaining merely a bluff that the reader is supposed to latch onto. The shooter first kills everyone in the stalls, though, having seen the smallness of the bathrooms, we now need to assume that there were several of the 30 outside the stalls. The shooter then leaves and returns. The Casiano shooting must have been very early because the gunman was haggling with the police for three hours, it was reported, from the bathroom. The earliness is why it was very unlikely for the gunman to enter the bathroom at all, less spend time in there, unless there were other rats managing the spree in the bar.

But, the problem is, we are now reading that the hole in the wall was already there when Casiano needed it. Like I said, this needs to have been very early, within minutes of the beginning. Yet the police said they didn't make the hole until after they started to talk to the shooter in the bathroom. Big problem there. Here is what was reported: "Then Mateen -- whom police said had acted 'cool and calm' during discussions -- talked about killing more people. Alarmed police placed an explosive device against the block walls and detonated them. The breach failed, the hole [singular, not plural] not large enough to allow for a successful rescue. A cop rammed his Bearcat armored vehicle through the club wall. Hostages poured out. So did Mateen, guns blazing.

Casiano says Omar was laughing as he killed, not realistic if Omar wanted to escape. One who wants to kill and escape shoots with determination, and works hard, no second to lose, until he feels the time has come to get out before trouble arrives. But if he's part of the rat team, he has nothing to worry about. His only mission is to get this blamed on ISIS, then let the police take him away.

So, the lone gunman exits the bathroom for as long as it took Casiano to crawl out with four bullets in his back (the CIA and/or FBI have been doing this a long time so that it knows how to feign a guy claiming to have four bullets to his back, and it also knows how to get out of tight jambs if people get suspicious). The lone gunman then returns with 20 people still alive and able to be forced into the bathroom. We have 50 people already in this one scenario. It would have taken some good time for 30 people to first fill the bathroom, then more time to gather the 20 after he has killed 20 others outside the bathroom. Think about it, and ask why this scenario: he kills more in the toilet stalls than in the bar room. Why did the police make that the storyline?

Wait. So far, this is not the official police story; it's Casiano's story as told by Daily Mail (June 13, updated the 14th). But, nonetheless, Casiano is acting as a true witness that police will need to contend with, because he's blowing their story to a contradiction. The story according to Casiano has Omar bringing 20 people into a bathroom with a gaping hole already in it. Oops. That's not right. One way to blow the police story to smithereens is to prove that Casiano is telling the truth, but I'm not even going to try that one. It doesn't have the ring of truth to it.

The question is whether Casiano is an insider rat paid to tell a story on behalf of the elite plotters, yet screwing it up somehow. Let's assume that the plotters exagerrated the 50 killed, 53 injured, as that makes total sense. Therefore, the witnesses who escaped didn't see 50 dead, but maybe more like 20, in which case the rats concocted the story of 30 killed in the toilet stalls, where witnesses could neither prove nor disprove. It's a theory. It could make their job less complicated this way, with 30 phantom dead, yet still ratcheting up the toll figure.

Question: why did Casiano concoct his escape through the hole in the wall that wasn't supposed to be there yet? Or did Ventura quote Casiano wrong on this one? How could she get it so wrong? If he was telling this story on behalf of police, why didn't they have him crawl out the door and spare themselves the contradiction of having the hole in the wall before Omar was in there with the 20? For one possible answer, they decided to ignore / not publicize the back door; otherwise, the story of the 30 falls apart for the reason already given (they wouldn't have went into the bathroom in the first place). Therefore, the elite rats needed to get Omar out the hole in the bathroom wall, as crawled all the way to the front door sounds too far-fetched.

But wait. Why didn't they just make Casiano perfectly healthy rather than having four bullets? That way, he could sprint to the front door. Well, with 29 others killed in the toilet stalls; it's hard to believe that Casiano would be the only survivor without one bullet.

It makes sense that they had the hole in the wall at the back wall to keep witnesses from seeing the goings-on. Look again at the large hole surrounded by bullets. Look at how large it is, making it easy for people to escape. I ask you: how could 30 people be in that bathroom, and not use this hole for their escape? Why would they lock themselves into the toilet stalls instead? Are the rats this stupid as to contradict their own story that much? Or is Casiano lying? If the latter, why? How could anyone concoct such a drastic story if he were not part of the insiders? For all I know, he announced this story on the same day that police announced their version of creating the hole in the first place. Casiano's version was out the day after the shootings.

Here is Casiano's story again in a different version:

He told ABC News, about 20 people were crammed together in one stall where Casiano went. About 10 or 15 more people came after he arrived. As they all hid together, they could hear the shooting getting louder and louder...

...Casiano, being near the front, attempted to pull the [shot-at-the-door] man inside for safety, but the stall was so crammed with people it was not possible to do so [it sound ridiculous].

..."All I heard was a laugh," Casiano told The New York Times [he was making the big-media rounds]...

In a CNN interview, Casiano said [he was making the big-media rounds]...

...Moments later, the man then lifted the gun over the stall and began shooting wildly. Casiano was ultimately shot twice in the back, but luckily for him both bullets passed through his body and did not cause any major damage [sounds ridiculous again].

Casiano was discharged from the hospital on Monday.

Well, lucky for him, four bullets right through his body on both sides (eight holes pouring blood) was not a very serious injury. He was good as new the very next day. I've never seen toilet stalls wider than about four feet. Maybe it was five feet long. Maybe 20 guys standing could fit in there like sardines, each in tight contact, but the ridiculous part about this is that 20 would even try to get themselves into that situation. More ridiculous, Casiano claims he was able to attempt sliding another one in while badly hurt or half dead on the floor. It's as though Casiano is taking the drama to it's highest-possible limit, and the New York Times, and CNN, idiots, entertained the story and gave it legs. The only excuse for being packed in the stalls is that the bullets could penetrate the bathroom walls i.e. they were not concrete walls:

"There were 15 people hiding in the bathroom. Thank god the bathroom door had a lock, that's not usual. And [Hernandez] locked himself in and the gunman started shooting through the bathroom with an AK-15. The bullets went through the walls and he got shot twice..."

Yes, but that may have been the front bathroom, for Casiano says a victim entered the bathroom i.e. it wasn't locked while they were all in the stall.

Casiano's claim continues: "Many of the people who were in that stall with Casiano were immediately killed in the gunfire [impossible]. Casiano dropped to the floor and did not make a sound, and the shooter apparently assumed that everyone in that particular stall must have been dead." Impossible. People shot in that way would be moving and making noise. Besides, the gunman could not point his rifle straight down, and putting a handgun over the doors would allow and compel the men (or mice) to grab his arm and pull it in, trapping him, and not allowing him to use the rifle (can't do it with one hand).

In order to have a rifle point down even a slight amount (toilet-stall doors are about the height of a man), the trigger would need to be higher than the door, and the trigger finger is no longer on the trigger very well in that position. Two or three men grabbing the barrel of a rifle while he has his trigger hand warped around the trigger, and then yanking the barrel straight down across the top of the door to create leverage, would have caused the gunman a serious threat. The story in all its parts reads hokey.

Finally, we read: "He says he had to step over bodies in order to make his way out of the bathroom. He saw flashlights, and when he poked his head out the bathroom door, police had arrived." This was published on the 14th, the day after the Daily Mail had him crawling out the bathroom hole. He's no longer doing that. This time, he's seeing the police inside the bar room before the shooter has brought his 20 hostages into it.

Here's how Daily Mail puts it in case it disappears:

The only person to escape from his hiding place in an Orlando gay club bathroom has revealed how crazed gunman Omar Mateen laughed as he slaughtered his victims.

Norman Casiano, 26, was shot in the back four times by the shooter, but he managed to climb over his friends' dead bodies to safety. Just one day after the attack at Pulse nightclub, Casiano has been released from hospital and has spoken of his terrifying ordeal. When he heard the first two gunshots, he threw himself to the ground and 'military style crawled' to the bathroom. Casiano packed into a bathroom staff with other terrified party-goers, where they huddled together as the gunshots got closer.

"I started crying and at that point a gentleman stumbles into the bathroom, collapses in front of the stall door and he's bleeding everywhere and he's begging to come inside the stall,' he told Local 10 News.

But the man couldn't fit underneath the door and the stall was so packed that they couldn't get it open. Mateen entered and shot the man one last time.

'The scary part was that he didn't say anything, and what's scarier than that when he shot the boy that was already shot, he laughed,' an emotional Casiano said. 'And as he's laughing as he fires through the whole front of the stall. That's when I got my first wound.'

They started pleading for their lives, but this only seemed to spur the gunman on, who put his gun over the top of the stall and sprayed bullets towards them before leaving the room.

Mateen killed as many as 30 people inside the bathroom, but Casiano crawled over his friend's bodies at made it out with four gunshot wounds.

Deyni Ventura, a local pastor, said that Casiano had a miraculous escape.

Is the pastor thrown into this supposed to make it more credible, less questionable?

CNN's version: "Mateen aimed his pistol over the bathroom stall and opened fire." It looks as though Casiano decided not to tell this story with the rifle over the stall. But think of how hard it would be to kill 15-20 people in a stall while shooting blindly with a pistol. All the while, none of the men grabbing hold of it? Come on. In real life, they would have grabbed his wrist and never let go for dear life. The gun would have been leveraged out of his hand in no time with a single man having both hands on it, while one or two men had his arm wrapped around the door. As Casiano confesses to being at the door, he tries to remove his guilt by saying he was too wounded to try to do anything about the gun. Omar would have little pull-power in his arm if it was folded over the top of the door (inner elbow on top of the door). They would have called to the ones in the other stall, telling that they had his arm, and to come out and bust his head with the butt of his own rifle.

It is very unlikely that anyone would die with a single bullet if it's not aimed. Using a pistol to kill that many people to a dead silence would have taken 100 bullets, several re-loads, and many minutes. He would have spent half his bullets on people already good as dead. It would take dozens of bullets to kill the last two or three if he couldn't know where in the heap they were. This story didn't happen, never mind, and Casiano has no way to know whether they were all dead, anyway. We need to know why Casiano was lying, and, more importantly, why the police did not call the big media to tell them that he was lying. There you have the crux of this: silence from the police is admission that Casiano is their tool.

The same CNN article then tells of another event in the handicap bathroom, which may be the front one:

Like so many others, Carter and her friends also took cover in one of the handicap bathroom stalls.

"People are getting hit by bullets, blood was everywhere," she said.

At one point, she said, Mateen stopped shooting to fix his jammed assault rifle. Hours passed. The gunman would not leave the bathroom.

Carter and others hiding in the bathroom heard Mateen dial 911 and say he's "doing this is because he wants America to stop bombing his country." (Mateen's parents are from Afghanistan. He was born in New York.) He also pledged his allegiance to ISIS.

The gunman, as the story goes, didn't shoot this batch entirely because there were black people in the toilet stall. However, it looks rigged because these survivors were to tell his story that he was an ISIS worker. The same account brings us to the holes in the walls, and apparently, the police were claiming that it was this particular one:

Some people were rescued after a window air conditioning unit was removed. Dozens also ran to safety when SWAT officers used explosives and construction equipment to breach walls in the club.

Carter said she heard three blasts [explosives on the bathroom walls]. She could see the gunman's feet and hear officers telling people to move away from the walls. A broken pipe started to flood the bathroom, the water mixing with pools of blood.

Carter heard the gunman shoot someone. He fired another shot and a man in front her took the bullet. One of her friends was on the ground motionless.

"I was begging for god to take the soul out of my body," she said [what's she doing in a queer bar that's worse than Sodom and Gomorrah?]

A SWAT team member lifted Carter [out the large hole, we must assume], who had a bullet wound in her leg, onto the street and dragged her to safety...

One of her friends was wounded but survived. Another was killed.

That is the CNN article's full coverage on that bathroom. [CNN left out an important component to the story that I find later]. We do not read that some 20 people filed out, followed by the gunman blazing. Why not? Was it old news by then? The article is dated the 14th. The guns-blazing, and the image of the wall holes, was out by the 14th. Perhaps the full CNN story on Carter is able to contradict the police report on the wall holes. Here is one dated the 14th that I've only arrived to now:

A SWAT team failed to topple the exterior wall leading to the bathroom that held 15 to 20 people, so Mina made the call to use the Bearcat. Officers wore combat-grade body armor and helmets as they rammed the bathroom wall, creating a small hole -- about 3 feet wide and 2 feet off the ground -- so the captives could escape.

"We were able to rescue dozens and dozens of people who came out of that wall," Mina [Orlando police chief] said. "The suspect came out of that hole himself with a handgun and a long gun and engaged in a gunbattle with officers where he was ultimately killed."

...The last exchange of gunfire Mateen had with Orlando police and Orange County sheriff's deputies occurred at 5 a.m. and ended a three-hour standoff.

Orlando officers walked into the nightclub and found lifeless club patrons strewn about a bar and lounge area. More bodies were found in a nearby bathroom.

a Just as I thought, a complication in the report: "a small hole -- about 3 feet wide and 2 feet off the ground". As you can see, that's bumper height, but the images fed to the world have several vertical-shaped holes with centers well above bumper height. The bottom of the large hole is three block heights = 24 inches off the ground, but if the bumpber is 24 inches off the ground, we expect blocks both above and below the 24-inch height to be knocked away. The third block up looks as good as brand new, not even a cement crack at its joint. I've worked with blocks many times, cut them for bricklayers, and installed them myself. This picture does not look right. Three of the holes have the very same: the third row of block untouched, the fourth row gone, as though someone was commissioned to make the holes with a sledge above the third row.

The two people may have been pasted in to hide things. Why is there tree shadowing on the walls but not on the white pants of either person? There are visible bullet holes around the woman; she is probably covering up more. Either someone was a very poor aim, or this picture doesn't belong to the Orlando shooting. Why not? There is a block out (black area) above the man's butt, and mainly obscured by his waist. Is that why he's there? The alternative image in #5 of the floor-plan image doesn't show this dark area behind the man. In total, the five (or six) holes span 15 blocks = 240 inches = 20 feet. The bathroom is about half that span according to the floor plan.

Here is an alternative version of the holey-wall area (note the lights are turned off inside the building) showing where the FBI highlighted all the bullet fractures to the blocks, and, indeed, the second hole is riddled too. Explain that.

Let's ask again why the pipes are running downhill AWAY from the street. The last time I treated this question, I didn't have the floor-plan image, which includes a photo of the nightclub showing that it's on a street corner, and the second street, which I didn't know of earlier, has electrical wired strung up. It means that the city sewer may be running under this second street, yet, fortunately, this doesn't help the police's case because the image gives a clear view of the outer side of the front bathroom, and there are no pipes upon it. Nor are there any holes. In the image, emergency teams are still on the street, meaning it's after the shooting.

It seems clear enough that the police now have no choice but to claim the holey-wall at the other washroom area. In that case, the pipes on the wall then run away from the second street. Bad, real bad.

In the image of the building in the floor-plan image, there appears to be a man behind the building. In any case, no tire-tread marks can be seen in the dirt or lawn. Nothing to indicate a rescue mission there. I can see an electrical wire strung between a post on the street and the building's side near its back end.

It doesn't appear that this building has a back yard whatsoever, in which case it shouldn't have a back door either. Yet we had read, "McGill and his friends sneaked out the back door and jumped over a fence to flee the site before he saw that he needed to take action. 'I happened to see someone covered in blood stumbling through the parking lot,' McGill said..." If this back door is the employee's exit, the problem is that it had a curtain, and was being blocked. Plus, he and his pals "sneaked out," not the phrase to use for the scenario reported for the employee's door. If the back door is what others call the front door at the side parking lot, then there is the problem of no fence there. What fence did McGill jump? Perhaps there is a back door after all, between the two bathrooms, but it has only a thin walkway (no yard) toward the street and/or around the corner of the building. This theoretical walkway is at a location not in any view of any image I have; the walkway might have a fence along it. If there is such a back door, then customers would be required to pay for drinks and food up-front (because doors near bathrooms make it easier to walk out without paying otherwise).

I've got to say, I was very happy to find the following a few minutes after writing the paragraph above. In the floor-plan image, where you read, "Secondary dance floor," one can see what appears to be a shaded area to indicate a fenced walkway behind the building. Excellent! Plus, I was wrong; I DO have an image showing what looks like a rear walkway, in the roof-view image. That tends to prove a door back there. Excellent! It kills the Casiano story dead.

The following is hard to swallow, and looks rigged, because the undercover cop doesn't hear the gunshots until after some 100 people are hit, by which time many bloody people, and many others from the bar, have escaped outside, creating a scene:

An off-duty police officer working at the club Sunday night was investigating an underage drinker outside when he heard gunshots inside, according to the law enforcement source. The off-duty officer ran inside the club and traded gunfire with Mateen, backed up soon by three other police officers, the source said.

The officers fired at Mateen, who retreated into a bathroom toward the REAR [my caps] of the club.

"Those additional officers made entry while the suspect was shooting," Mina said. "They forced him to stop shooting and retreat to the bathroom where we believe he had several hostages."

Mateen called 911 three times from a bathroom [sounds like CNN's Carter story, but now it's in a rear bathroom] he shared with hostages and pledged his allegiance to the Islamic State, a terrorist group also known as ISIL or ISIS.

..."He was in one bathroom fortified with hostages," Mina said. "There were people in the opposing bathroom, about 15 or 20 people. And the details are unknown, they're part of the investigation.'"

freerepublic page above

I am having a problem with CNN reporting a rear bathroom as a handicap bathroom because the floor plan has the front bathroom labeled for both men and women, which is usually the case for a handicap bathroom (no sense having two bathrooms, one for males and one for females, for the few wheelchair people that need it, because a handicap toilet stall, as large as two or three regular ones, is considered a waste in most cases, especially at a dance club). If we entertain that the rear bathrooms were the handicap bathrooms, then Carter was in one of them, and the "opposing" one with 15-20 victims becomes the one with the Casiano story.

Whatever it takes to clear up the mysteries, we now have bona fide police evidence that their story requires the holey-wall on the back side of the building. Having said all that, let's look at #4 in the floor-plan image, for it says, "SWAT teams blast hole in the wall to help hostages escape and allow them to confront Mateen." It sounds ridiculously dangerous. Where did they put #4? At none of the bathrooms, but near one of the rear ones. Is this where they decided to move their holey-wall scene, or is this some other wall blast? We read above: "they rammed the bathroom wall". Are they prepared to change that too? I don't know.

The #4 hole looks massive, not a series of small holes as in the wall-hole image (has grass). There is no grass showing outside the #4 area, and especially not in the roof-view image. QUESTION: why did they expend themselves creating this destructive, dangerous hole if there is both a rear door and a front door within about 20 feet?? There seems to be no logical answer, except, likely, to make their job easier in carrying out the dead and injured on stretchers. But why would they report that the blast is to help people escape while the shooter is still in there?

The reality may be that they never put one hole through a bathroom wall, hoping witnesses would confuse the #4 explosion with the bathroom explosion they hear on the news, and, finally, they put a tarp over the bathroom wall to make on-lookers / drivers-by believe that there is a hole(s) behind it. Later, when the wall is changed, they will remove the tarp. The purpose in announcing the bathroom hole would be to feign the killing of Omar, a thing that would have been more risky if done at the #4 spot, with many witnesses around. The back of the building, as per the rear door, was a much better place to remove him (alive).

Next, a closer look at Patience Carter, a survivor from the holey-wall bathroom. She was one of the many I've crossed who added God to the picture, not surprising on the one hand, but bothersome for me because these people were at a queer joint. I have been on my best behavior while investigating this event, but I cannot hold back forever my opinion that "gays" are pathetic. The very idea that a man would dance with a man in an open nightclub setting, where others go to seek sex, and lust over one another as they dance and talk at tables, each competing for the best "meat," then engage in male-to-male oral and anal sex, is beastly, pathetic, sick, and punishable by eternal block-out from God's presence. Yet, the world would have us fall in love with queers, accept them, embrace them as any others. I'm a man of truth, and I know how to argue for the truth. Those heterosexuals who accept queers would never get on their knees to allow a penis to his anus because he darn-well knows it's disgusting. But because he's duped by political correctness, he won't publicly admit it. That's the difference between a man of truth and a world-toting, spineless wimp. These queers who died in this event are not going to their eternal destinations much sooner than those still alive. Unless they repent, they will all meet together there. You'd best accept fact as a fact so that you might save them rather than lulling them into a false sense of eternal security by pretending that God hears their prayers.

If you are a queer reading this, know that I happened to befriend a bisexual unknowingly, yet remained his friend over some 18 years while he suffered severe MS, loneliness, hospitalization, and great depression...while I knew he had queer porn in his apartment in roughly his first year of the disease. He asked me once only to remove his urine-related condom, and I think I knew what he was after. I refused. He died probably around 40, and I helped carry his casket to the ground, because his father asked me too, because I would visit him regularly in the hospital, hoping the best. But this doesn't mean I should accept queer sex as anything but disgusting. If you are queer, you are in need of doing battle against those sexual forces. You need to stop, to cure yourself, to be free of it. But if you mock this suggestion, then you for me are a disgusting human being. If I ever catch you near my son, trying to corrupt and snag him, don't blame me if I lose it. Best thing, get yourself a woman, and only a woman.

I have verified that Carter was in the bathroom where Omar held hostages for hours. She seems to be the best advertiser for Omar's ISIS script, and perhaps that was her primary job. However, I am not ready to say that she was an insider. She may also be in use to weld American Blacks, Hispanics and gays together. This plays heavily to the Democrat party. Here is some steadily-developing suspicious testimony from a dramatic Carter:

It all seemed so unreal.

“I was even Snapchatting in the bathroom stall,” she said. And then, the unthinkable [oh really, unthinkable?] the shooter entered the bathroom and sprayed bullets. Blood was everywhere.

“At that point, we knew this wasnt a game [she previously thought it was a game, hearing all the automatic fire outside the bathroom?]. This was very real. It was shock [it only became a shock when he entered the bathroom?]; we just went from having the time of our lives [a Christian in a queer bar???] to the worst time of our lives in a matter of minutes."

Amid the frenzy, she and others ended up in a bathroom stall [why didn't they run out the back door?] As a man in the group tried to lock the door, the shooter entered and fired. Ms Carter was hit in the leg and fell to the floor, partially pinned under another person. “We laid there for hours and hours,” she said. “Throughout that period of hours, the gunman was in there with us.”

..."He said, 'Are there any black people in here?'" Ms Carter [Negro] said. "I was too afraid to answer, but there was an African-American male in the stall...He said, 'Yes, there are about six to seven of us.'"

The gunman replied, “You know, I don’t have a problem with black people,” according to Ms Carter. “You guys suffered enough.”

At one point, he seemed to have trouble with his rifle, Ms Carter said. “He was like, ‘Damn, (it) jammed,’ ” she said. “I could see him put down his machinegun.” She heard him trying to fix it.

The gunman didn't want to hear any phones ringing, Ms Carter said. “Every time a phone rung or every time a text message went off, he would say, "'Where is it? Give it up,'" she said.

Ms Carter said the gunman said: "If the police come in, they’re going to attack. But it’s OK, we've got the snipers outside."

The gunman walked out and they heard more gunshots. Over the next long minutes, people texted loved ones and tried to call 911 themselves.

This is where we have Carter's testimony in a good position for use against the insider rats. She has the gunman in the bathroom for some time, then leaving. But the police said they had at least four officers outside, in the bar room, who watched him go into the bathroom in the first place. In a normal situation, they would not be taking eyes off of that door with a gun or two pointed toward it at all times. Therefore, if the police were truly his enemy, he would not have left the bathroom, and certainly wouldn't have lived to return to it.

Someone might argue that the police didn't run him into the bathroom until after coming out of it (as per Carter's words above). This doesn't fly because he would not have spent time in casual conversation with Carter if he had not yet met police outside. He would have been in a hurry to make an escape. This argument is relevant only in a scenario where he is the police's enemy. Where he's part of the police team, he can come and go as he pleases.

As it now stands, we have him laughing like the devil in the one bathroom, where Casiano says he took minutes, and then we have some 20 people in the opposing bathroom too unconcerned with their getaway to keep tabs on where he was within the building, in case they could make a run for it to the back door. Surely, the shots fired in the bar room near the bathroom sounded much different than bullets fired at the front half of the building, with a wall absorbing the sound, and different again while he was firing in the neighboring bathroom. Surely, anyone there keen on saving his/her life was more concerned with getting out of the bathroom than staying locked in a toilet stall. But you'd never know it from either Casiano's or Carter's testimony.

It can't go unsaid that there was at least one other shooter making the people unable to get out of the bathrooms. When I argue that they could have escaped rather easily, that's under the condition of a sole gunman. I'm trying to point out that a sole gunman is ridiculous for the stories fronted by Casiano and Carter both. While he was firing in one bathroom, someone in the other bathroom had to be concerned and smart enough to say, "okay, let's go." And out like a train they would go to certain freedom while Omar is firing 100 pistol bullets into the toilet cages.

But if there were two gunmen, Omar could indeed be in the one bathroom while the others could not escape so long as the second shooter was near the bathrooms. Yet, the problem is, Carter never says anything about a second man shooting outside the bathroom while Omar is in the bathroom, making her suspicious. The same applies more to Casiano, when Omar was allegedly in his bathroom before the undercover officer arrived. It's not a dumb question to ask whether the second shooter would go silent or otherwise, with his gun, when the undercover officer arrived, but then the latter may have been the second shooter. My position is that everyone in the bathrooms who was not complicit knew that there was more than one shooter, and the ones who were generous with their media testimonies but said nothing of a second shooter -- like Carter, for example -- are not to be fully trusted.

So, after leaving the bathroom with Carter, he then returns:

The man came back into the bathroom and ordered all to silence their phones. [Carter] watched as his feet backed into the stall where she was lying. At that point, the gunman entered the stall and shot three people...

...She heard police shout, "Move away from the wall!"

Then she said she heard explosions, as police blew a hole in the BATHROOM WALL [her words]. They told the gunman to put his weapon down, but he refused. They shot him. Pipes burst and water began to fill the floor where she was lying.

..."I really don't think I'm going to get out of there," she thought. "I made peace with God. Just please take me, I don't want any more. I was just begging God to take the soul out my body." But then, she was free. A SWAT team member picked her up and dragged her by the arms through the grass...

She knows the gunman is dead or maimed, at which point she should be flooded with hope, yet she claims the very opposite, that she wants to die. She should be realizing that the police will be in there momentarily to get her, but she's more interested in adding drama to her story. It argues for her being an insider, but that is not yet clinch-able.

It would be more realistic if, in the other bathroom, he shot up the stall-door's lock in order to open the door. In a handicap stall, the door opens outward. As the washrooms are both about five feet wide, it's now knowable that the handicap stalls were at the very ends of the rooms, taking up the full five feet. The expectation is then a second stall directly beside that one, and, in each case, a doorway (main door to the room) and sink ate the opposite end of the room. We would like to know whether the doorways fronted on the back entryway, making both Casiano's and Carter's stories highly unlikely.

As the bathrooms are marked in the floor-plan image as catering to either sex, it is possible that each bathroom has only one toilet. Usually, a bathroom catering to both sexes has a lock on the door, and need for only one toilet, obviously, but if the bathrooms had locks on their doors, they would have been used in the shooting. Therefore, I do not think the back two washrooms were each for both sexes. The one at the front, however, because it's not with a second bathroom, is likely for either sex, having a lock. One witness said, "thank God the bathroom had a lock.""

Did you notice that one of the wall holes was directly at one of the drain pipes? It explains the claim of a flood in the bathroom (which may never have occurred). But why would they place explosives directly at a sink? Doesn't that complicate the escape of people???

In order to create a flood situation bad enough to give Carter fear of drowning (actually, a flood like that was impossible , with one open pipe), the entire pipe would need to be severed, not merely a small leak at a joint. If the explosive force could accomplish that, it only speaks to the unlikeliness of the claim, for the police were required to play their approach as safe as possible. Besides, blowing a hole into the room wouldn't have done anything to benefit their cause. The claim that all the victims streamed alive out the hole is ridiculous. They may as well have streamed alive out the door. A hole in the wall doesn't make it more safe for the police to nab the shooter than barging in the door. So, the police had to concoct a method for getting the gunman. They couldn't claim to put a guns into the hole and start firing, as that would be more risky for survivors than barging in the door with bullet-proof outfit. The latter at least allows an officer to see what he's shooting at. So, with the hole useless in nabbing the shooter, they concocted his jumping out of the hole in full view. Voila. But I'm not buying it, especially as the rest of the story has portrayed him as kill-happy.

So, the killer has just shot a few people in a stall, when the explosives go off to create five holes. They ram a larger hole with a bumper, and we are supposed to believe that people unlocked their toilet stalls, and walked out the holes to freedom without any resistance from the shooter. Well, you can be gullible if you wish; after all, you believe everything the police says. And this is why you are dangerous to the world, for you allow the insiders to repeat this type of event over and over. You, Snopes, and the rest will be partially responsible for their next scheme. I'm not speaking directly to my readers here, but to random people who land on this page in the future.

All we need to hear now is the testimony of the others in the bathroom with the flood. Will their testimonies agree with Carter's? Will their be any such testimonies? The details in the other bathroom are said to be under investigation, and we would like to know if the two toilet stalls were truly filled to capacity with the dead. It is convenient for the police to have everyone dead but Casiano, as that allows no witnesses for the people.

Look at the floor plan, asking where the most-likely locations would be for the two bathroom doors if the bathrooms were added for the sake of a bar / dance floor. Obviously, to increase usable space for any situation, the doors would be located in the rear entryway. Otherwise, if the doors were on the other walls, nothing (a table, for example) could be placed directly in front of the doors. It would waste several feet of floor space. Besides, if the doors were planned for exit into the main part of the room, they would have placed the bathrooms side-by-side. The fact that they have the entryway between both bathrooms argues for the doors located at the entryway. We very-much want to know whether the doors were at the entryway, as that makes Carter an insider without doubt. As things now stand, no one public person is permitted enter this place, to check to see where the bathroom doors are, and to verify a back door between them. However, there are countless people who have been through the back door, and into the bathrooms. Will they speak out? Better yet, will the big media report any such comments?

Which door did the gunman enter? Or, which room did he begin to fire into, the main dance floor, or the back room with both bathrooms?

Brandon Wolf was another one of the patrons who survived. Wolf told ABC News that he was dancing and "having a great time" before telling friends that he was going to the bathroom. He heard 12 to 20 gunshots fired when they [looks like it should be 'he"] were in the bathroom and so they just ran for the front door. They were able to make it out of the building but they still heard shots firing "for minutes."

It seems clear enough that Wolf was in the main dance floor, and used the front bathroom. The others were probably not in there with him (or maybe just one), and so what apparently happened is the he got out the bathroom, and ran out the front door with his buddies, tending to locate the shooter(s), for the first release of bullets, in the back area with the two bathrooms. It tends to argue for his entry through the back door, but not necessarily. The front room was larger, having more people, so that, if he did walk in the front door, he is predicted to have gone into the dance-floor area. As he didn't, he likely came through the back door. I feel this is a strong argument, thank you Mr. Wolf, and whoever put out the floor plan.

Joshua McGill was at the club with his roommates...McGill and his friends sneaked out the back door and jumped over a fence... The entire crew (at least three) got out, no mention of one of them getting shot. We would like to hear further details from McGill. He should be reporting that the gunman was firstly in the back section along with himself. But he apparently changed his story:

McGill and his two roommates stood near a door leading to an outdoor patio. It all seemed so normal.

And then, "We heard the three initial shots," the nursing student remembered. "You just hear gunshot after gunshot after gunshot and that was very scary. And my main thought was hide."

The 26-year-old and his roommates darted out the patio door...

“We heard people say run. We saw people starting to flee,” he remembered. “We went back outside, hopped the fence. I jumped and ducked behind a car. I hid for a good two to five minutes, which felt like forever.”

McGill then says he left the place in a vehicle with a shot victim. But instead of going out the back door, he's now going into the front patio, it seems. I haven't known this article until as I write here. I've found others besides ABC telling that he went out the back door. For example: "Joshua McGill escaped out of Pulse's back door and came across one of the bartenders, Rodney Sumter, covered in blood." If one studies the floor plan, and compares it with the roof-view as well as the photo in the floor-plan image, one realizes that roughly six or seven feet of the rear-most roof is hanging past the back wall, over what I've assumed is a back walkway, which might act as a rear patio, per-chance. If correct that McGill exited a door with patio, it at least rules out the employee's exit.

Something else to investigate: "Edward Sotomayor, Jr. 34, saved his boyfriend's life. He pushed his boyfriend out ahead of him and through an exit door." Which door? If the shooter and/or Sotomayor was in the rear section at the time, it wasn't likely the front door. Here's of further interest: "Christopher Hansen was inside the club ordering a drink when the shooting occurred. He fell to his arms and knees, crawling to make his way out the backdoor. Along the way, Hansen stopped to check on other club goers. Hansen helped a bartender and made sure she was safe while she searched for her girlfriend in the crowd. Outside, he helped stop the bleeding in victims’ wounds"

Hansen couldn't have been going out the employee's exit, which has been called a back door by some, because it was too early. It still had a curtain over it. He would not have known about that door because the page adds, "The night of the shooting was Hansen's first time at the club"! This is excellent for arguing a back door between the washrooms. The article below has a short list of witnesses, including this one:

A former Marine and a bouncer at Pulse, Yousuf directed terrified clubgoers to safety by getting them out of the club through a back hallway and a rear exit. He was familiar with the sound of the assault rifle from his time in the military, having a good idea where they were coming from, and was able to make his way through the crowd and force the back door open, saving dozens of lives.

Unfortunately, it doesn't give us a clue as to whether this "back door" is a door between the washrooms, or the employee's door being held shut by Luis and/or his accomplice(s). What does "force the back door open" mean? Was it locked, or were there goons blocking it? Why doesn't the page explain? Another article: "As everyone in the packed night club froze in fear, [Yousuf, same man above] jumped up and at personal risk opened a back door allowing many people to escape" If the gunman was in the rear section, Yousuf would have been in personal risk if this was the back door between washrooms. We might conjecture that the shooter walked in this door, to begin with, then closed the latch behind him. After he made his way through the crowd some, people were forced against this door, and the first two or three at the very door were unable to see the latch, perhaps.

[Yousuf] told CBS News television that as panicked people streamed to the back of the hall, "I'm screaming 'Open the door! Open the door!' And no one is moving because they are scared."

"There was only one choice," he added in the interview. "Either we all stay there and we all die, or I could take the chance, and I jumped over to open that latch a we got everyone that we can out of there."

The timing within the event is not given. What does he mean by, "back of the hall"? The rear entryway? It couldn't have been the short hall beyond the employee's door because it's too short to have a "back," and no one would want the back, anyway; they would want the front, nearest the door. But the back of the rear entry is the part nearest the door from the perspective of being in the bar room. Were the people not moving because they were scared, or because the door was locked? He probably didn't know yet, not until arriving, that the "latch" was closed. Why "latch" instead of "lock" or "door knob"? "Yousuf said his quick action saved 60 to 70 lives" That's an enormous story, but I didn't come across it until minutes before this update was due at noon Monday.

As for the employee's door, no one else said that the problem there was a latch. The story was different, anyway, with Luis Burbano making it out the door with some 20 others only, and they crammed up the hall. No one else was permitted into this hall. There was no issue of an interior latch, just this goon forcing the door closed, for a time. After Burbano no longer kept it closed, we expect a flow of people, but we don't expect the latch on the opposite side of him to be closed / locked. Here's Yousuf's story as told in different words, but one needs to sign in to get it:

I found the same Yousuf story on another webpage [page offline already] that required a click to read the rest of it, but when all was done, I arrived to a page that does not allow anyone to read it, saying that the webpage is unsafe. Usually, surfers have the choice on whether to risk loading an unsafe page, only this time Google doesn't offer the choice! Google is trying to hide this story, right? There are only three webpages online (at this time, anyway) supposedly carrying the article, and the one above won't give the rest of the article.

MORE: "Yousuf told CBS that as he stood in the back hallway, sandwiched between clubgoers, he realized there was only one way to make it out of the club alive: a LONE DOOR [caps mine] in the back hallway. There was one problem: The door, which was beyond Yousuf's reach, was latched shut at the time and no one dared open it, he told CBS. And, suddenly, in Orlando, Fla., the veteran found himself in an entirely different combat zone." No one dared open it??? Why not? What kind of phrase is that to use when people are near death?

"Lone door." The employee exit has two doors. And here we find him in the rear section of the building: "But he was at the back of the club when Mateen walked in armed, firing indiscriminately with an AR-15 style assault rifle."

The British page above has a very-stupid statement: "In the panic, no one thought to try a locked door leading out the pack of the club onto the street." People are trying to get outside, but it slipped their mind to try a door??? Utterly, utterly stupid. What was Independent's writer up to? As Yousuf was fresh from the marines in Afghanistan, I did have in mind that he could be an insider trying to change the storyline on Luis Burbano. It's possible, I suppose.

Here is Luis Burbano, apparently at the bar in the back section of the club, saying that the first thing he did when hearing the first shots was to run from the bar (the actual counter) to the employee's door. But that door is shown behind the second bar, or at least what looks like a second bar. He ran there because he was the designated door blocker, right? No one else had yet found that door behind the curtain at that early time, so I assume that he was just getting into position to protect that door. Gonzales reported 50 on one side of the employee door, and Burbano 20 on the other, which adds up to Yousuf's 60-70. In this way, Yousuf resolves nothing until one can identify which door he was referring to.

"No one put two and two together until the fifth and sixth [shot]," said Luis Burbano, who had been at the bar. "Between 10 and 20, that's when everything really started getting real..." Luis Burbano and his best friend ran to an employee access door after they realized the gunshots were "getting closer and louder and louder." He said he didn't turn back to look at the gunman.

That tends to put the gunman in the rear area, otherwise, if the gunman were in the main dance-floor area, Luis would have run into the rear area. The employee's door is at the bar directly beside the dance floor. We therefore find once again that the shooter started in the rear area. I don't yet know whether the rear area was in use as a second dance floor.

Here is from a comments page on June 12, the first day, probably too early for this to be a fabrication by a pro-conspiracy group:

A man was on power 96 this morning. He was in the the Club at the time everything happened. He said more than one shooter and according and to others listing to a police scanner while Omar was being heroically taken down another gunmen was escaping out the back door.

My conclusion is that, because the police has given us a phony image of the washroom wall, the mass murder was an inside job. This is corroborated by an assortment of other less-than-acceptable items such as the testimony of the door blocker, the missing radio data coinciding roughly with the shooting spree, the high numbers of deaths with just one gunman separated by a central wall, the big media entertaining the ridiculous story of Casiano, the wall-hole image, and now, add the fact that there were two bathrooms claimed filled with people when they would have, under normal circumstances, have run out the back door instead.

Continued in the next update.


Especially for new or confused readers
shows where I'm coming from.

For serious investigators:
How to Work with Bloodline Topics

Here's what I did when I had spare time on my hands:
Ladon Gog and the Hebrew Rose

If you have received emails supposedly from me, and they look like advertisements
or anything unflattering and unexpected from me,
they were not from me but by someone using my email box to send it.

Table of Contents

In 2014, the latest Firefox browser no longer gave the option of surfing with javascript turned off.
With javascript turned off, one can copy and cut from the write-ups at houseofnames, but when it's on, one cannot.
Try another browser if you are working with houseofnames.

web site analytic