Below is an objection posted on Facebook regarding my recent video entitled "Las Vegas (10/01/2017) and the manipulation of history" expressing concern for the victims and families of victims of recent high-profile traumatic events and arguing that my analysis is wrong-headed and harmful (and in fact potentially "Evil" with a capital "E").
For the benefit of those who may not have seen this objection and my reply on Facebook (or for those who choose for good and cogent reasons to stay off of Facebook altogether), the unedited text of the objection to my video is posted below, set apart as a block quotation for ease of identification of what text belongs to the author of that objection. My reply to this objection, along with some further commentary, is published below that:
Okay. We need to talk.
There is a sweet spot between "The Authorized Narrative(TM) must be believed with no deviation" and "Sandy Hook/Las Vegas/Charlottesville are planned events being perpetrated by the Government and actors in order to control the sheeple."
That sweet spot is a place where one can wonder, and question, but still respect the very real pain that very real people experienced.
Because to do otherwise is as bad, **perhaps worse**, as "all official narrative must be believed with no deviation."
Las Vegas was real. It was not acted. Real people got brutally murdered and injured by ammunition designed to disintegrate human flesh. Real people are going to be walking around with PTSD for the rest of their lives. Real people are going to be permanently disfigured or disabled because of their injuries. Real families are shattered, the pieces never to be put back together again.
I *know* this not because I always buy into The Authorized Narrative(TM), but because I KNOW someone who was there. I saw her tweets to her panicking family (with whom I am close) living a night of hell not knowing if their daughter was going to die. I also live in a small town on the East Coast that has two families affected. One couple was there on vacation; didn't get injured, but witnessed the mayhem and the trauma. Another couple who are long-time residents here have a son, also born and raised here and well-known in this town, who was an off-duty police officer. He got shot in the legs.
Of course, I might be a player in The Authorized Narrative(TM) and this family who has lived in New Bern, NC all their lives, as well as their son, might be players in TAM(TM), and the woman in Vegas I know who had to jump over bodies to get away might be bought-and-paid-for. All the families affected around the country whose stories are being told in small-town and regional newspapers might be government plants.
And that's the point where someone who wonders and questions The Authorized Narrative needs to get a hold of themselves. In a universe of infinite probability, the government might have bought off families all over the country and staged a bunch of actors that would fool Jason Aldean and his crew, the other performers, the workers, the first responders, the hospital surgeons and nurses and technicians, and so on including the many attendees who were neither killed nor injured but ended up covered in blood -- and real blood is hard to fake, that smell that hovers between iron and sugar. But at what point does such conjecture become not only completely fantastic (in the old sense of the word) but also downright harmful?
We question the The Authorized Narrative because we feel that Evil is being done to us by the Powers-That-Be. However, we're in a position now where ****the questioning itself creates Evil.****
It's Evil to deny the horror, the trauma, the grief of men and women who lost children in Sandy Hook. It's Evil to deny the horror of people like my acquaintance who had to jump over bleeding bodies and cower in a stranger's apartment.
Question the narrative. Question whether Paddock worked alone or not. Question a lot of it if you feel the need. But when you start challenging people's very real trauma, you've lost me and a lot of others, and I hate to tell you this, but such choices make me question the entire body of work that I have followed and pondered and learned from for several years.
I DARE anyone who thinks Sandy Hook, Charlottesville, or Las Vegas were perpetrated by actors to actually go and talk to some of the victims and the victims; families. Just go there. Go on a train, invest in a plane ticket, crowdfund if you have to. Go and talk to them. See what conclusions you draw.
Below is my reply published this morning to this objection and to some of the points and questions that it raises, also set off as a block quotation. In this version, I have added paragraph breaks for ease of reading which were not present in my Facebook reply, but everything else is unchanged. Following that will be a couple more thoughts about this particular incident:
I appreciate your concern for the families directly affected. One of the very first things that I said in that video was that I was making it on the evening of the day following the incidents in Las Vegas and that it was of course too soon to make any conclusive proclamations about the event itself, which is why it was completely inappropriate for the controlled media to be authoritatively declaring precisely what happened less than twelve hours later.
I did not say in that video that nobody was shot or that nobody was killed. However, I provided abundant evidence to question the official narrative, which was already being declared in somber tones less than twelve hours after the fact -- including the narrative that well over 500 people were shot by a single individual with no military training or experience, acting alone.
You have not addressed any of the evidence provided in that video in your reply. Among that video evidence was a man at the scene saying this: "We can't go yet" (7:27 - 7:35 in the video). I would suggest that if someone is truly in fear for his or her life, experiencing the impact of incoming automatic weapons fire on both the bodies and asphalt around him or her, those words "We can't go yet" would not be among the phrases that would be likely to be heard coming from his or her mouth.
Also included among the evidence presented in that video was visual evidence that the high-resolution photograph published in the NY Times of individuals flying into the air at Charlottesville does not match -- and cannot possibly be made to match -- the video of the car plowing into people at the same incident. If the video and the high-res photo show the same "take" then there is no way that the man who is seen to be completely horizontal at the level of the tail-lights of the challenger in the high-res photo can be sliding off the opposite bumper of the toyota truck as he is seen to do in the video, unless he miraculously hit the ground and then teleported to the opposite side of the truck in less than a second. The other possible explanation, of course, is that the high-res photo was taken at a different "take" than the video that is shown. This is very damning evidence and demonstrates the clear possibility that events are being manipulated.
Does this mean that I am saying that no one was hit when the car plows into the crowd in the video? No, it does not mean that I am saying that -- but the evidence must be addressed, because it clearly demonstrates that something more is going on than the official narrative admits. And if you were a family member of someone who was in fact injured by that car, I would argue that you would be interested to find that out.
Similarly, the video evidence presented from Orlando is equally damning. The procession carrying a casualty, led by a tall woman in a black chicken-vest, is not just suspicious -- it is completely preposterous. No actual casualty would ever be transported in such a fashion. You have not addressed this evidence, or any of the other evidence that I presented, in your response, but this evidence very clearly establishes a pattern of extremely questionable activity surrounding recent traumatic events -- events which may well be deliberately fashioned in order to move the overall sentiment of the public towards greater repression, surveillance, and anti-democratic governance, and I have an interest in pointing that fact out.
It is not "only" the families of those directly affected by these incidents who have an interest in what happened -- it is every single man and woman on this planet. Additionally, the families of those who lost loved ones in a violent incident are typically intensely desirous that the truth of what happened -- and the true identity of those responsible -- be discovered. A member of my own family was violently murdered when I was 15 years old and I can tell you that nobody in that situation says "I don't really care to know who did it, and if they pin the blame on someone else, that doesn't matter."
Finally, I'm sorry if you feel that my analysis of the evidence presented in that video somehow causes you to question the body of evidence I have presented in six books, nearly 1000 blog posts, and dozens of videos showing that the myths of the world are based upon the heavenly cycles. I'm not sure why you would reach that conclusion, but I can assure you that the amount of evidence which shows a connection between the myths and the stars is at this point overwhelming and (in my opinion) will stand on its own in spite of my own personal flaws or human failings. None of us is perfect, least of all me, and fortunately the evidence connecting the myths and the stars is not at all dependent on my being without error in my own judgement and analysis.
I have made plenty of errors of analysis in the past and will make them again. But when there is a pattern of evidence which points to a conclusion other than the official narrative that is being aggressively and incessantly repeated by the controlled media or even the representatives of conventional academia, it behooves us to examine that evidence -- especially if it is forming a compelling pattern that is different from the narrative being offered, and especially if it appears that the narrative of history is being manipulated. It is now over 50 years since JFK was murdered, and over 16 years since over 3000 people were killed on September 11, and the narrative in the controlled media regarding those events continues to defy the overwhelming evidence that committed researchers have discovered and presented to the world.
It is very possible that the same control of the media and control of the "official narrative" which characterizes those incidents demonstrates a continuity of method with these more recent incidents in which the same control of the media and the same control of the official narrative is very much in evidence. And that is something that concerns each and every one of us. It would be irresponsible of me to NOT point it out.
These events are hideous and sickening and it would be much easier to say nothing about them, or to mumble some standard platitudes and just move on, but as Krishna says to Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita, we are supposed to seek to do what is right without expectation of reward or fear of retribution or indeed any attachment whatsoever. Notice he did not say "do whatever you want" without attachment -- he said do what is right. And if someone is using violent incidents and deception in order to usher in police-state measures which no one would normally accept, and in order to otherwise take away the inalienable rights of men and women (including their right to not be shot, which I explicitly mention in that video and in the accompanying blog post), then what is right is to oppose that deception and that violence to the best of our ability, and with the assistance of the invisible realm (with Krishna on their side, the Pandauvas are able to overcome seemingly overwhelming odds, in the Mahabharata of ancient India). ._/\_.
Again, it is very possible that people were shot and some of them even killed during the horrific events in Las Vegas last weekend. I never said that there weren't.
But I did present evidence and analysis -- including analysis based on my own personal experience as an Infantry officer in line battalions, companies, and platoons of the US Regular Army, which included extensive training and employment of automatic weapons of multiple types and many different calibers in many different types of situations and environments -- which should cause us to question the narrative which was being confidently and authoritatively and insistently and repetitively declared by every single outlet of the controlled media within a few hours of the events themselves (without any of the time that would be needed to conduct proper investigation and analysis) and which has continued to be repeated at the top of the news all week long, worldwide.
In light of some of the photographs which have been published (or even, supposedly, "leaked") since the day after the incident (when I made the video attached to the previous post), I would offer the following additional analysis:
- In the photograph below, we do not see the number of expended shell casings (or "brass") that would indicate the volume of fire required to hit well over 500 people, even if every round fired was a hit (which would be highly unlikely). In other words, there should be brass from well over 600 rounds lying on the floor in this image -- probably brass from close to 1,000 expended rounds or even more than that. There is nowhere close to that much expended brass lying around on the floor in this image. There is not even enough brass lying on the floor in this photograph to match up with the length of the bursts of fire which can be heard in the videos from the venue of the concert that I analyzed in my previous post and video.
- In the photograph below, we see small arms with "bump stocks" (which the editors at the NY Times have helpfully labelled for us). We do not see any large-caliber machine guns such as an M60 machinegun or an M240B machinegun. We don't even see any M249 squad automatic weapons. However, in the videos taken from the venue of the concert, we can quite clearly hear a weapon (the first burst of fire in particular) which sounds like an M60 or an M240B and which sounds nothing like an AR-15 with a bump stock. We also hear a second weapon which sounds more like an M249 or other smaller-caliber automatic weapon with a higher cyclic rate of fire. In other words, the weapons shown in this video are inconsistent with the sounds of firing that we can hear in the videos posted on the web taken at the venue of the concert.
- The weapons shown in this image, labeled with "bump stock," are also shown with precision scopes and holographic sights (also helpfully labelled by the NY Times). It should go without saying that use of precision scopes and holographic sights is completely inconsistent with the firing of extended bursts of fully-automatic fire -- especially if using a "bump stock."
- The weapons shown in this image are all magazine fed. The NY Times has helpfully labeled a small stack of "high-capacity magazines" next to the large purple pillar in the photograph. Again, the extended bursts that we can hear in the videos posted to the web taken at the venue sound like M60 or M240B machineguns, which are typically belt-fed, as well as another weapon which could be an M249 SAW (typically drum-fed), and the volume of fire in those videos suggests a belt-fed rather than a magazine-fed weapon, but even if we allow that a magazine-fed weapon was used, we would expect to see dozens of expended magazines lying around on the floor in this video, if indeed this "lone gunman" (whose body apparently can be seen in the composite image) had expended upwards of 600 rounds. There are very few, if any, expended magazines seen lying on the floor in this image.
- No machinegun tripods are visible in this image. The two items labeled "gun stands" by the ever-helpful NY Times are bipods attached to small-caliber automatic rifles. On the first day after the event, I heard on the news that tripods were found in the room. An M60 machinegun or an M240B machinegun is most accurately fired from a heavy (specially-designed) tripod, from which the direction of fire can be more consistently controlled (because the recoil of a weapon fired on fully-automatic is significant, especially a large-caliber weapon such as an M60 machine-gun or an M240B). Bipod fire is far less accurate and far less consistent and much more difficult to control, especially if firing down from a steep angle. The absence of tripods makes the allegation that a single shooter was able to use automatic weapons to inflict well over 500 casualties much less plausible.
- The image contains the strange detail of "two chairs pushed together," which actually resemble a bathtub in the middle of the room, and within which are shown some additional rifles. This detail does not make any tactical sense whatsoever -- the two chairs pushed together do not provide any cover for the shooter, nor do they enhance a shooter's fields of fire in any way. However, the two chairs pushed together do create a shape suggestive of a sarcophagus, which would perhaps be consistent with the symbology of the "harvest festival" held directly across from the Luxor pyramid and sphinx and obelisk.
Below is the image from the NY Times which the above comments address:
Based on the above photographic evidence (and the anomalies discussed above), and based also upon the sounds heard in the videos posted to the web from the venue of the concert (which can be viewed in my previous video analysis created the day following the incident itself), I would suggest that it is very possible that at least some of the sounds of automatic weapons fire heard in the concert video footage could be coming from a pneumatic simulator of the sort that we sometimes used during training events to simulate the sound of machinegun fire. These pneumatic simulators are extremely robust: they never jam, and they are very loud, and they sound just like a machinegun.
At the top of this post is an image of a pneumatic simulator for the M2 (which we called the "Ma Deuce") .50-caliber machinegun, which is a heavy machinegun with which I also have some experience, having had these machineguns in my platoon when I was an anti-tank platoon leader in the 82nd Airborne Division in the 1990s (I was also a line rifle platoon leader in the 82nd Airborne Division, in addition to an anti-tank platoon leader). The pneumatic simulator for the M60 machinegun was similar, but I could not find an image for one of those on the web anywhere.
The sounds heard in the video do not sound like the firing of a .50-cal, but they do sound very much like an M60 machinegun or an M240B machinegun -- or like a pneumatic simulator used in training which sounds very much like those machineguns but which does not jam, and which does not fire actual rounds. As noted in my video analysis, we hear long bursts of automatic weapons fire, but we do not hear the corresponding sounds of impact from those rounds, or the sounds of the crack of the rounds themselves going by, or the hysterical screaming that we would expect to hear if at least some of those rounds were impacting with human beings.
It is very possible that, if people were indeed shot and wounded and even killed in the Las Vegas incident, they were shot with a different weapon (such as a sniper rifle) while pneumatic simulators were used to simulate the sound of fully automatic weapons fire. I am of course open to the possibility that men and women were indeed shot during the horrific events in Las Vegas -- but I believe that there is abundant evidence that these events took place in a way that is completely different from what we have been led to believe (and the same can be said about the events of Charlottesville, Orlando, and many other incidents in recent years).
Additionally, any responsible newspaper which published the above composite image (which was published in the NY Times as well as on CNN and in the Daily Mail) should have had reporters and editors capable of asking the questions addressed in the numerous points of analysis above regarding the missing shell casings ("brass"), the missing expended magazines, the absence of tripods, the absence of any actual machineguns other than "AR-15 style" assault rifles, and the utility of scopes and holographic sights on weapons supposedly fired at cyclic rates of fire using bump-stocks.
The fact that such photographs are being presented to us uncritically as support for the conventional narrative, instead of being analyzed and questioned to see if indeed they might support a different interpretation of events, suggests that the so-called "mainstream media" are being used to reinforce the officially-sanctioned narrative of the incident, rather than to investigate events and try to find out what really took place (the role of a free and independent media). As noted in my Facebook reply above, we can see plenty of evidence that the role of the media in the united states and allied countries has been to reinforce the official narrative -- regardless of physical evidence to the contrary -- since at least the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in November of 1963.
In contrast to some of those who occasionally criticize my work on the web (such as on Facebook or on YouTube), I publish my work under my own full name, David Warner Mathisen, names given to me by my parents and ancestors. Anyone with the desire to do so can readily verify that I am who I say I am, and that I did indeed attend the US Military Academy at West Point, graduate from Ranger School and a host of other infantry training courses, and serve for many years in active duty line infantry battalions of the regular army including the 82nd Airborne Division (where I also graduated from the 82nd Airborne's "Machinegun Leaders Course").
Below is an image published in the newspaper back in the mid-1990s showing a "pass-and-review" during the annual "All-American Week" held every year at Fort Bragg, when I was serving as a company executive officer in a line company of the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment and was acting as the company commander because the actual commanding officer was out of town during that week, and you can easily identify me as the rather tall individual wearing glasses while yelling out the commands of "Eyes right!" and "Ready, front!" as we pass the reviewing stand and salute.
I served in this capacity in order to support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That is the same constitution which contains the Bill of Rights declaring as inalienable human rights (among others) freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, and prohibiting the deprivation of any person's life, liberty or property without due process of law, as well as a host of other rights -- all of which rights are quite obviously under attack today by those who despise the people and democratic forms of government.
Those who knowingly perpetrate violent acts or traumatic events in order to move the world towards greater acceptance of repression, restriction of free movement and travel, mass surveillance, mass incarceration, privatization of resources given by nature (or by the gods), and the perpetration of invasions and wars of aggression -- as well as any in the media who knowingly facilitate the spreading of demonstrably false narratives about these traumatic events -- can be said to be acting in direct opposition to the ideals expressed in the constitution and the Bill of Rights, and arguably to be committing treason against it based upon the constitution's own definition in Article III and section 3.
Not only that, but they can be said to be traitors against humanity itself, as well against the gods themselves, who give life to all men and women.
Exposing such lies, and standing against oppression and violence and deprivation, is part of our duty in this life, according to the ancient wisdom given to humanity and preserved in the world's myths, scriptures and sacred stories found in every culture on every continent and island of this beautiful planet.