Information About Terrorist Attacks Is Kept Secret to Help the Democratic Party at the Expense of National Security

In the Wake of the Las Vegas Terrorist Attack on October 1, 2017 we are hearing more and more about why information about terrorist attacks is often kept secret: To prevent copycat attacks, to deny terrorist organizations recruiting opportunities, to prevent other terrorist cells from receiving instructions, to keep terrorists from learning how much law enforcement and intelligence agencies know about them, etc, etc.

However, there are a couple of significant problem caused by this type of secrecy. When the public is not fully informed, they will not know which policies to support and they will be easer for demagogues to fool. For example, hiding information about Islamist terrorism can prevent the public from understanding why a travel ban from terrorist supporting countries is a good idea. Hiding the fact that a mass shooting is a terrorist attack can prevent the public from understanding why stricter gun control laws will not prevent future attacks. When people do not have full information, they will lack the facts they need to refute lies used by opportunistic politicians who want to fool them and manipulate them.

We are told secrecy is necessary for reasons of national security. However that is not entirely correct. The secrecy exists for partisan political purposes that favor the Democratic party. The secrecy ensures unhindered immigration of people who will vote for the Democratic party, it lends support for stricter gun control laws, and it lends support for other partisan political purposes that favor the Democratic party and its political agenda. Secrecy makes it easier for Democrats to advance these policy objectives because the public lacks information that would show these policies are not in their interest.

Most government employees support the Democratic party because that party supports expanding the scope of the government and that gives government employees job security. When government employees decide what information should be kept secret, their political bias will induce them to withhold or release information in ways that are beneficial to the Democratic party even if those decisions harm the national interests of the United States. For example, sometimes terrorist organizations have goals which Democrats support. Antifa is one such organization, they want President Trump removed from office. Democrats have been saying Antifa's violence was justified. However, if Antifa is involved in a mass shooting like 1 October, the Democrats will no longer be able to portray Antifa's violence as justified and they will lose an ally in their efforts to have President Trump removed from office and they will be embarassed by their previous support for a terrorist organization. This would motivate government employees to keep secret any involvement by Antifa in the 1 October terrorist attack.

Related Articles

• DHS Whistleblower Phil Haney discusses the infiltration of Islamists into the US government.
• Dick Morris:"When Obama took office eight years ago, the first thing he did was to get rid of almost everybody in the FBI and the CIA and convert these institutions to bastions of liberalism."
• The intelligence agencies and the military industrial intelligence complex control the elected government of the US.

Evidence the authorities are not telling everything about the 1 October attack.

There are three independent forms of evidence that contradict what the authorities are saying about the 1 October attack: acoustic analysis of the gunfire, eyewitness accounts, and police radio communications.

The following video provides acoustic proof there were at least two shooters at the 1 October attack on the concert. It confirms what eye witnesses have said and contradicts the authorities' assertions there was only one shooter. According to the video above, in the recordings of the gunfire from the 1 October shooting, higher pitched sounds are bullets hitting the pavement, and lower pitched sounds are the gun firing. By measuring the lag between the two sounds the distance from the shooter can be determined. Analysis of videos from the concert identify shooters at two different distances ie. it confirms what eye witness have said: there were two shooters. One of the shooters is calculated to be at the distance to the hotel which helps to confirm the validity of the calculations. Another is much closer about half the distance. Both are recorded at the same time on some recordings so it cannot be due to recordings at different locations on the ground.

The next video shows an interview with Rene, a woman staying at the Bellagio Hotel in Las Vegas which is about 1.5 miles away from the Mandalay Bay Hotel. Rene describes a shooting at the Bellagio Hotel on 1 October at about 11:15 pm, about an hour after the shooting at the Mandalay Bay Hotel stopped. She says she and her husband were in the lounge when they heard shooting. Her husband was in the Marines and he recognzied the sound of automatic weapons fire. They dived under their table and security guards rushed in ordering everyone to "run". After she posted a video of the aftermath of the shooting at the Bellagio Hotel, other people who were there contacted her to affirm what she was saying. For example, one person said she heard on a taxi's radio that there were shots fired at the Bellagio Hotel. The authorities have said nothing about this second shooting that occurred about an hour after the shooting at the Mandalay Bay Hotel.

Below is her video from the Bellagio Hotel taken after the shooting there on 1 October.

This recording of police radio communications confirms the shooting at the Bellagio Hotel. At 1:19:32 you can hear, "Now we're getting shots fired at Caesars and the Bellagio".

18:51: ... "Confirmed there are at least 2 shooters with fully automtic weapons"

45:05: "Confirming, the Mandalay bay and Alibaba/Giles are the 2 shooting locations!"

The next video was made by a taxi driver at the Mandalay Bay Hotel. At the beginning of the video you can hear shooting. At about 45 seconds, there is more shooting and the driver says, "Now it sounds like its coming from farther away". It sounds to the driver of the car like there are two shooters, not one as the authorities maintain.

Rene's Facebook page

A Post at Rikki Raulerson's face book page.

Aria Hotel, Las Vegas, 1 October, 11 pm.

Cassie Harrison: "We were in Caesars Palace tonight and there was a shooting in there too. For some reason the news hasn't even mentioned this... We were in the food court and all of a sudden you see everyone running for their lives from the casino area right next to the food court. We took off and then I hear about 20 gun shots behind me.

I’ve been in law enforcement nearly 40 years & I’m suspicious about everything. We need to engage the public more. pic.twitter.com/rM63sRDOUf pic.twitter.com/0goEtO8svA

— David A. Clarke, Jr. (@SheriffClarke) October 5, 2017

Laura Loomer Interviews two Las Vegas shooting eyewitnesses who say there were multiple shooters.

Rocky Palermo (below) was shot during the 1 October attack. He is 100% certain there were shooters in the crowd at the concert.

This eyewitness says there was shooting near Planet Hollywood which is also near the Belagio Hotel. She thinks what she heard is probably the same shooting that witnesses at the Belagio heard.

38:01

People who want to try to make this a racial or political situation, it may very well be, but I will tell you this, when I was in that basement with people of all colors of all political parties, races, nationalities, and countries - I was with three Austrialians, 2 Canadians, a guy from Kansas, and two other Americans from elsewhere, and I'm originally from Detroit, okay? - we weren't thinking about any of that. Okay? We were helping each other. We were concerned about one another. And in that moment we were just human beings. And we were just all fighting for the same thing. And to come back out of that situation and see everybody fighting, over what? It's ridiculous. To me it's just utterly ridiculous. Because honestly I know for a fact if any of you were in the same situation and you had to survive and some Democrat or Republican was standing next to you, ... you'd drop all that stuff. So please just try to be a little bit nicer to one another.

Compilation of eyewitness videos by InfoWars:

Air traffic control tapes on the night of the Las Vegas shooting:

"There's active shooters on the runway. They're on the airport property" pic.twitter.com/HZf3LBeAgk

— Mike Tokes (@MikeTokes) October 29, 2017

Las Vegas air traffic control 10/1/17.

2:00

There's active shooters on the runway. The 19s are closed, we are in the process of trying to round them up. They're on the airport property.

---

Intellihub "Las Vegas" search results:
https://www.intellihub.com/?s=las+vegas

Intellihub has many articles you won't see anywhere else. I can't vouch for unreferenced articles but I will say that the author, Shepard Ambellas, seems to present facts and leaves evaluating the implications to the reader.

The intelligence agencies and the military industrial intelligence complex control the elected government of the United States.

The power to classify information has given the intelligence agencies the power to do whatever they want. They can classify anything they choose so no one can find out what they are doing or question the need for their activities or secrecy. They gain influence over defense contractors by awarding government contracts. The money from those contracts, which comes from the tax payers - you and me - is then used to get control over the government through campaign donations by the defense contractors and through job offers to politicians and aides when they leave government service. After the intelligence agencies commit a few crimes they realize they can never give up power or they will be prosecuted and they then commit more crimes protecting themselves (killing, intimidating, financially ruining, smearing the character of whistle blowers and anyone who opposes them or their projects) and because once you are committed to a pattern of crime and have no risk of punishment, there is no incentive to limit yourself to legal means.

What may have started as a justified concern about national security and public order has blown up into an extra-constitutional network that has usurped the power of elected officials and thus the power of the voters, the people, and democracy. It might have seemed like a good idea at the time. In hindsight it was a horrible mistake.






In this video, former CIA officer Kevin Shipp explains the relationship between the shadow government and the deep state.

The shadow government he says consists of the 17 intelligence agencies and is led by the CIA.

The deep state he says is the military industrial intelligence complex which is a group of corporations that receives $1 trillion a year in tax revenues spent by the government on military and intelligence contracts.

The owners of media corporations cooperate with the CIA and publish stories to influence public opinion.

This web of corporations and intelligence agencies controls the elected government in the US.

The shadow government can do whatever it wants because it can hide its activities by classifying any information about its activities it chooses. There is no way for the elected government to control it. Its budget is secret.

 The military industrial intelligence complex controls congress through

• Campaign donations.
• Lobbying.
• Providing jobs when senators and staffers leave congress.​

 The shadow government influences

• The President by

1. Providing false information.
2. Influencing elections​.

• Congress by

1. Manipulating congressional hearings.
2. Withholding clearances from representatives and senators.
3. Classifying documents to conceal illegal activity.

• The judiciary by

1. State secrets privilege - they can shut down any court case against them by classifying any information they choose.

• Everyone

1. Through the cooperation of media corporations that publish stories to influence public opinion.

 ​
There is much much more information in the video above.

Catherine Austin Fitts has written extensively on how the deep state and shadow government have been illegally appropriating money from the US taxpayers.
https://missingmoney.solari.com/

$21 Trillion dollars is missing from the US government. That is $65,000 for every person in America. That is more than our entire national debt!
...
This means the Fed and their member banks are transacting government money outside the law. So are the corporate contractors that run the payment systems. So are the Wall Street firms who are selling government securities without full disclosure.
...
This is the reason that there is such a strong push to change or tear up the US Constitution. This is why members of the establishment say it is 'old,' 'outdated!'

Next is a video from July 2015 of Catherine Austin Fitts describing her own observations of how the deep state controls the elected government with blackmail, threats of violence, or simply threats of false accusations which will ruin a person's life as they try to prove their innocence. The Trump "dossier" is an example of what they do to someone who can't be blackmailed or frightened:

https://solari.com/blog/solari-stories-scandals-control-files-and-blackmail/

In the excerpt below, Catherine Austin Fitts describes how a top level official was blackmailed with "sexual dirt" in 1989, and how she was harassed with fake accusations:

So, it was several days later, I got called into the Secretary's office and he said, "Have you found a way to do this?" And I said, "No. There's no legal way to do this. You can't"

And he was, litterally - I have never seen a man that frightened in my life - he was scared to death. And I was sure just from watching him that he was under extreme political pressure and I believe blackmail. And he just looked scared to death. And I went back up to my office and one of my deputies pulled me aside and he said, "You know you have to be very very careful" he said, "because you know there's real sexual dirt on the Secretary. So you have to be real careful."

...

That was the same time the Franklin scandal hit the Washington Times headlines.

...

Even if you don't have a control file, you know I always encourage all of our subscribers to watch the movie Enemy of the State because it's a perfect example of, you know, Will Smith plays a totally clean lawyer in Washington and so he's got nothing in, his control file is empty, and yet the intellegence agencies are able to persuade his own family that he's corrupt when he's not, his own partners he's corrupt when he's not.

I went through a similar process and so people are not only afraid of what's in their control file, but they're afraid of spending eleven years in litigation proving that there's nothing in their control file.

You have a situation where, I always get very frustrated with citizens who think, oh lets just go talk to our senator. Well your senator is subject to these kinds of powers and controls that are very invisible but are very real.

...

We're literally watching a government that is being run by coercion whether it's the blackmail or control file or physical violence. If you don't do what you're told, there's really issues of physical violence now.​

Catherine Austin Fitts' Blog is here:
https://solari.com/blog/

This video contains an interview with Catherine Austin Fitts by Alex Jones. It starts at 44:55:

Here is another very good video in which the federal bureaucracies are referred to as the deep state:

Senator Chuck Schumer, "If you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you."

Phil Mudd, former CIA agent, "The government is going to kill this guy [President Trump]".

Related Articles

THE CIA AND THE MEDIA: How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up BY CARL BERNSTEIN, October 20, 1977
http://carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php

The Hillary Clinton Scandals Break October 2017
http://higginswar.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-hillary-clinton-scandals-break.html

Carr: Scandal-ridden FBI must be abolished Howie Carr Wednesday, January 24, 2018
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/howie_carr/2018/01/carr_scandal_ridden_fbi_must_be_abolished

Report: Felons, people under foreign influence got national security clearances by JULIA AINSLEY, JAN 24 2018 NBC reports people granted security clearance during the Obama administration are being rejected under Trump for reasons that include pedophilia. This is consistent with the view that only people who can be controlled were given positions of authority under the previous administration.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/report-felons-people-under-foreign-influence-got-national-security-clearances-n840226

FBI’s Unsavory History Casts Shadow Over Debate About Political Meddling: The FBI has a long history of playing at politics, and many of the officials complaining the loudest keep handing the feds more tools to do just that. By J.D. Tuccille, January 30, 2018
http://reason.com/archives/2018/01/30/fbis-unsavory-history-casts-shadow-over

Congressman Took 67 Seconds to Explain the Intelligence Memo — It’s a Jaw-Dropper VICTORIA TAFT | FEB 2, 2018
https://ijr.com/the-declaration/2018/02/1060364-congressman-used-67-seconds-explain-intelligence-memo-jaw-dropper/

Gaetz said:

"Well, Harris, we now know the facts of what happened. The Democratic Party hired the Perkins [Coie] law firm. The Perkins law firm hired Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS hired Christopher Steele to go and dig up the dossier, and then they hired Nelly Ohr, the wife of Bruce Ohr to get the fake dossier from a political environment into the bloodstream of the intelligence community and to convert it into an intelligence document.

And what’s most outrageous to me is that this fake dossier was so unreliable that the way that it was validated to the FISA Court was a Yahoo News article written by Michael Isikoff, planted by Christopher Steele.

So Christopher Steele wrote the fake dossier, and then he went and planted fake news stories to validate the dossier.

The FBI was going to pay Christopher Steele. They had authorized payment, but then when they found out he was talking to the media and that he was unreliable, they canceled payment to him. But even after canceling payment to Christopher Steele, the FBI and the Department of Justice re-authorized the FISA warrant to spy on American citizens based on a political document that had its origins at the Democratic National Committee.

Harris, I’ve been waiting a long time to stitch together that fact pattern for the American people."

Former CIA counterterrorism official Phil Mudd: The FBI people "are ticked" and they'll be saying of Trump, “You’ve been around for 13 months. We've been around since 1908. I know how this game is going to be played. We're going to win" https://t.co/5x39x20g3e pic.twitter.com/fByOLNrh0I

— CNN (@CNN) February 2, 2018

Former CIA counterterrorism official Phil Mudd (2/2/2018): The FBI people, I’m going to tell you, “are ticked” and they’re going to be saying, I guarantee you, “You think you can push this off this?”… You better think again, Mr. President. You’ve been around for 13 months. We’ve been around since 1908. I know how this game is going to be played. We’re going to win. http://cnn.it/2GEPZD3

A 2nd source has now confirmed to me that, in a meeting on January 10, Deputy A-G Rosenstein used the power of his office to threaten to subpoena the calls & texts of the Intel Committee to get it to stop it’s investigation of DOJ and FBI. Likely an Abuse of Power & Obstruction.

— Gregg Jarrett (@GreggJarrett) February 3, 2018

Gregg Jarrett (2/3/2018): A 2nd source has now confirmed to me that, in a meeting on January 10, Deputy A-G Rosenstein used the power of his office to threaten to subpoena the calls & texts of the Intel Committee to get it to stop it’s investigation of DOJ and FBI. Likely an Abuse of Power & Obstruction.

Exceptional Work by Sharyl Attkisson – Did FBI Violate Woods Procedures?… February 4, 2018 by sundance
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/04/exceptional-work-by-sharyl-attkisson-did-fbi-violate-woods-procedures/

Nunes memo raises question: Did FBI violate Woods Procedures? BY SHARYL ATTKISSON, 02/04/18
http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/372233-nunes-memo-raises-question-did-fbi-violate-woods-procedures

The point is: There are strict rules requiring that each and every fact presented in an FBI request to electronically spy on a U.S. citizen be extreme-vetted for accuracy — and presented to the court only if verified.

There’s no dispute that at least some, if not a great deal, of information in the anti-Trump “Steele dossier” was unverified or false. Former FBI director James Comey testified as much himself before a Senate committee in June 2017. Comey repeatedly referred to “salacious” and “unverified” material in the dossier, which turned out to be paid political opposition research against Donald Trump funded first by Republicans, then by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Presentation of any such unverified material to the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to justify a wiretap would appear to violate crucial procedural rules, called “Woods Procedures,” designed to protect U.S. citizens.

Yet Comey allegedly signed three of the FISA applications on behalf of the FBI. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe reportedly signed one and former Attorney General Sally Yates, then-Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein each reportedly signed one or more.

House memo states disputed dossier was key to FBI’s FISA warrant to surveil members of Team Trump By Alex Pappas, Catherine Herridge, and Brooke Singman, February 2nd
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/02/house-memo-states-disputed-dossier-was-key-to-fbi-s-fisa-warrant-to-surveil-members-team-trump.html

Page’s FISA application “cited extensively” a September 23, 2016 Yahoo News article, which focused on Page’s trip to Moscow.

The FISC Judge would know, "I read it on Yahoo News" does not meet the legal standard for verifying facts presented in a FISA application. It seems probable the judge was complicit.

Why We Cannot Trust the FBI By Pamela Geller, October 10, 2017.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/10/why_we_cannot_trust_the_fbi.html

The FBI was in on the planning of the jihad attack against the Garland Muhammad art expo in Garland, Texas. They did nothing to stop it, not even giving us a warning that my event was targeted by devout Muslims who meant to kill us Charlie Hebdo-style. We killed those jihadis. It was the security team I hired to protect my event that saved numerous lives, nothing the FBI did. We survived despite the FBI.

...

It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the Obama FBI wanted me and the other speakers at the event dead. Dutch freedom fighter Geert Wilders was the keynote speaker; he has been living with armed guards for years for supposedly “insulting Islam.” My colleague Robert Spencer has received numerous death threats from Muslims. Cartoon contest winner Bosch Fawstin drew Muhammad. Did Obama’s pro-Islam FBI want us all dead?

Is The FBI A Racketeering Organization? Harvey Silverglate, JUL 31, 2013
https://www.forbes.com/sites/harveysilverglate/2013/07/31/is-the-fbi-a-racketeering-organization/#766e8973f421

There are the historical outrages, like the FBI’s spying on homosexuals to create rap sheets that J. Edgar Hoover could use against his political enemies, or the FBI’s round-the-clock surveillance of the highest levels of the civil rights movement (a Memphis undercover cop who was a regular FBI informant was present during the assassination of the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.). Even earlier in the organization’s history, when it was still known as the Bureau of Investigations, an ascendant Hoover earned his chops overseeing the trumped up prosecutions of leftists, foreigners and other such “undesirables” in cases so egregious that they led concerned citizens to form the ACLU.

...

According to the New York Times, FBI agents fatally shot 70 people and wounded another 80 between 1993 and 2011.

...

like any good racketeering organization, the FBI hates conducting its business on the record. Its official rules ban the recording of interrogations and witness interviews, which are instead typically conducted by two agents, one of whom asks questions and the other of whom takes the notes that will eventually become the official report of the interview. Any witness or defendant who dares contradict this official report is subject to prosecution under a statute that provides for a five-year sentence for lying to a federal agent. This scheme of extorting (or, more politely, creating) testimony that aligns with what the FBI wants to hear largely explains the fact that a staggering 97% of federal cases end in guilty pleas.

FBI admits flaws in hair analysis over decades By Spencer S. Hsu April 18, 2015
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/fbi-overstated-forensic-hair-matches-in-nearly-all-criminal-trials-for-decades/2015/04/18/39c8d8c6-e515-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html

The Justice Department and FBI have formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000.

...

Of 28 examiners with the FBI Laboratory’s microscopic hair comparison unit, 26 overstated forensic matches in ways that favored prosecutors in more than 95 percent of the 268 trials reviewed so far, according to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Innocence Project, which are assisting the government with the country’s largest post-conviction review of questioned forensic evidence.

...

The cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death. Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison, the groups said under an agreement with the government to release results after the review of the first 200 convictions.

...

The admissions mark a watershed in one of the country’s largest forensic scandals, highlighting the failure of the nation’s courts for decades to keep bogus scientific information from juries, legal analysts said. The question now, they said, is how state authorities and the courts will respond to findings that confirm long-suspected problems with subjective, pattern-based forensic techniques — like hair and bite-mark comparisons — that have contributed to wrongful convictions in more than one-quarter of 329 DNA-exoneration cases since 1989.