2015 – A Conspiracy by The Media, and Rebuttable Presumptions

The Age wraps up 2015

by Dee McLachlan

When I started Gumshoe in late 2013, I had no idea where it would lead. Frustrated with the constant stream of propaganda churned out by the mainstream media (MSM) and Australia’s ABC, I just started posting. And it has snow-balled from there.

Gumshoe has now published over 560 articles, and in just over two years we have gathered a gaggle of exceptionally talented, sharp-minded and analytical thinkers along the way.

Plus, we have a community of commenters — and few troublemakers! This year (2015) there were just over 4,800 comments, many of which are very valuable and could stand as articles themselves. 

As I have spent the last two days reviewing Gumshoe’s 2015 articles, it struck me that my reports are a counterweight to what Australia’s ABC furnishes.

The Media are Spooked by Shadows

Here, please have a quick look at this MSM story of two Japanese journalists that were to be beheaded. (I don’t know where the two men are today or what really happened.) As I said on Gumshoe, the shadows under the two men’s chins are going in opposite directions.

Thus we can say it is either a photoshopped picture or it took place in a studio with double lighting, It is NOT what government claims it to be.

Then in July, we did a report on a green screen studio. In the video you can see an “execution” being rehearsed in a lit studio with a production crew.  Why don’t MSM journalists investigate this, and why doesn’t any one complain?

Charlie Hebdo

Now let me take you back to the January 2015 Paris event. It was so important that it had tens of thousand of people marching, plus many heads of state claiming “Je suis Charlie.”  We were all made to believe that because the Charlie Hebdo magazine had published cartoons offensive to Muslims, that this office (plus a kosher deli) had become the object of terrorist attacks.

The shocking and brazen attack occurred on the 7th of January when, after killing 11 people, the expert assassins miraculously evaded capture and disappeared.

Right from the get-go it was an “odd” affair. The MSM reported what one witness had said:

“…the gunmen were so methodical he at first mistook them for an elite anti-terrorism squad. Then they fired on a police officer.” [This hardly gets a mention thereafter]

The authorities quickly announced that Said Kouachi and his brother Cherif were the villains, and that the killers had fortuitously, and “carelessly” discarded Said’s ID card in the car they had “abandoned”.

The alleged Kouachi assassins (L) on the 7th of january, and the alleged Kouachi brothers stealing from the petrol station (R) on the 8th.

Twenty two hours later, the brothers reappeared. Now, WITHOUT their hoods, and heavily armed with Kalashnikovs and rocket-propelled grenade launchers, they rob water, snacks and petrol. As I wrote here, this makes absolutely no sense.

Yet, all the mainstream newspapers across the globe print more or less the same “story” — unquestioningly. The MSM seem unable to inquire whether the narrative is true or even makes sense.

What Collision?

We were told to believe that the brothers crashed their car (leaving the ID) and thus had to hijack another. For example:

“…the attackers collided with another vehicle, then hijacked another car before disappearing in broad daylight…” (from Belfast Telegraph)

“After a crash, they were forced to abandon their car, which gave investigators crucial information such as Said’s identity card.” (Times of Israel)

“…Shortly after fleeing the scene, the gunmen had a violent crash with another vehicle, injuring the driver. They tried to continue but were forced to abandon their damaged vehicle about 2.5 kilometres from the Charlie Hebdo office. (Our own ABC report) [Australians ought to call out the ABC for this false coverage]

The alleged abandoned Kouachi vehicle

I don’t see another vehicle at the scene, although it may have driven away. And I don’t see ANY “collision” damage to the vehicle. In fact, the car appears to not have a scratch.

Yet the mainstream media (and the ABC) recite the “official” story without question — even though there is clear photographic evidence to the contrary.

I also did not see a single MSM source ponder how Said’s ID came to be in the car. (I have written before on “magical” passports.) And then the driver of the alleged hijacked car was told by the brothers to “tell media they were affiliated with al-Qaeda in Yemen.”

Should we laugh or cry?

Cherif’s Nose

The MSM have lost all ability of analysis. Take, for example, the CCTV image of the alleged Kouachi brothers stealing water (below). This CCTV image is what the MSM claims clinches the case.

The man on the right is allegedly Cherif.

In writing this wrap-up I found this picture of Cherif Kouachi (below L), and compared it to the photo captured from the CCTV footage. Cherif (L) has a Roman nose, whereas the man in the CCTV image has a turned up nose.

We need the French police to supply another frame from the CCTV footage to confirm the shape of this man’s nose and face. Cherif could have broken his nose, but this man caught in the CCTV footage does not match.

Cherif (before on the left) and then allegedly stealing water on the 8th January 2015.  

Why do tens of thousands of mainstream journalists not point to this as a problem?

Rebuttable Presumption

Mary Maxwell has spoken to me about a legal term: “rebuttable presumption.” It means something that the court takes to be true unless someone comes forward to contest it and prove otherwise. For example, a defendant in a criminal case is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

The same could apply to these false flag events — in reverse. If a pattern of evidence points to foul play, then we, the public, should consider it a Rebuttable Presumption that there HAS BEEN foul play by the government.

Therefore it is up to the government to PROVE otherwise. (When I say ‘government’, this can include shadow government. You know what I mean.)

A simple example is Flight 77 smashing into the Pentagon. Based on the fact that the government is withholding the footage of the NUMEROUS CCTV cameras to prevent us seeing what hit the building, we can make the Rebuttable Presumption that the government is guilty of that specific crime. If the footage was released (not just a few frames) and it revealed something other than Flight 77, then the 9-11 debate and the “war on terrorism” would be over. And the arrests of Cheney, Rumsfeld et al could begin.

The “suicide” of Helric Fredou in Paris

And so it should be with a convenient “suicide” of someone who is of crucial importance.

Helric Fredou, the Police Commissioner tasked with preparing a report on the Charlie Hebdo event, was found dead with a bullet in the head just hours after the attack. The official story claims he committed suicide. Case closed.

When Helric Fredou’s mother asked for the autopsy report, she was told, “Vous ne l’aurez pas.” [“You won’t get it.”]

Fredou’s mother (R)

Again the MSM don’t ask why.

But we should, based on Rebuttable Presumption, claim that Fredou was possibly going to expose a false flag. And it should be for government to prove otherwise.

Just let’s pause to say that again. A man conducting a police investigation dies suddenly. His family doesn’t believe he was suicidal. There is NOTHING to indicate suicide, as such. Any reasonable person would make it a first guess that there was foul play. For example, that he was killed because “he knew too much.” So, if government and/or media rushes right in there and says ‘suicide,’ we can claim THEY are guilty.

Indeed there is something else that is recognized in law: “guilty knowledge.” Say I provide an accused drug dealer with an alibi “She was at my house for a birthday party at the time.” If it is later proved that she was instead at the scene of the crime, what does that say about me? That I had guilty knowledge. Of course I can be charged with perjury for my false testimony but I can also be charged with obstruction of justice, and maybe of being an accomplice.

How about a “Media Conspiracy”?

All such talk of possible government cover-ups is labelled a “conspiracy” by the MSM.

I note that the maestro of “talking down” a conspiracy is Jon Faine of ABC 774 radio, a show with high ratings. When a well-spoken man from the Trade Unions, Kevin Bracken, attempted to engage Jon Faine in a debate about some aspects of the 9-11 evidence (or non-evidence, if you prefer), he was rudely put down. Faine said this was like “debating whether the earth is flat.” (Gumshoe article here)

Well, lets try a different approach. What is a conspiracy theory anyway. Wikipedia says:

“A conspiracy theory is an explanatory or speculative hypothesis that suggests that two or more persons, a group, or an organization of having caused and/or covered up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an event or situation which is typically taken to be illegal or harmful.” (Wikipedia)

And Dictionary.com says:

“A Conspiracy is “a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.”

Well, I believe we can for certain claim that the media has conspired to hide the criminal actions of elite power groups.

Here I turn to my most-repeated report of this year. Yes, I am about to mention again the interview that a retired US Army general (and presidential candidate in 2006) gave to Amy Goodman in 2007. Gen Wesley Clark revealed that the Neocons in Washington had planned to “take out” seven countries (described in a memo in 2001).

This NEVER gets a mention on MSM (in Australia). And this is an extract from Clark’s interview:

“…’I just got this down from upstairs’ — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, ‘This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.'”

The relevant  Rebuttable Presumption is that “refusal by media to convey such information to us indicates they are in a conspiracy to hide the criminal actions of government” — unless it be proven otherwise.

There are so many examples where the MSM do not publish anything that opposes the “official” narrative. I cited two in my article, entitled: Report These Two Excellent Sources or just “Bugger Off”

Main picture – the Federal Parliamentary Press Gallery in 2011, and the inset is from the Herald Sun telling President Putin to “Bugger Off”

But what is worse, seemingly honourable journalists get vacuumed up by the mainstream media — and (maybe unknowingly) become mouthpieces in the conspiracy.

Please see the recent article by our Christopher Brooks challenging Derryn Hinch. The article was called:  The Dairy Farmer vs The Shameful Australian Media.

Who are the Australian media? Well let’s name the big one — the giant octopus that has tentacles everywhere.

Rupert Murdoch

I wrote a Gumshoe article in February, entitled: Rupert Murdoch – This Could Be Your Greatest Hour. I said:

“Mr Murdoch we are DROWNING in political lies and deception – and YOU have the power, the influence, and the reach to change this world forever. Over the last several decades, your carefully chosen editors have been withholding vital evidence from your readers and viewers. Unfortunately it has become the ‘norm’ to push unquestioningly the ‘government line’ (and lie).”

One thing we can be absolutely certain of, is that the MSM do not report the facts. They cannot be trusted on anything. And this is why Gumshoe exists.

The Birth of the Book

By the middle of 2015, Mary and I were able to get our book into print, Truth in Journalism. The first 100 copies had a photo of Murdoch on the cover sprouting angel wings.

But Rupert could never grow wings

Then we decided that our market for the book might be the 26 schools of journalism in Australia, so we gave it a more conservative cover. You can order it on Amazon for $14.95 USD, or write to Gumshoe for a copy to save the overseas postage.

It is now proudly on the shelves in the National Library of Australia.

Gratitude in Spades

I want to thank the many article contributors: James O’Neill, G5, Greg Maybury, Matt Campbell, Christopher Brooks, X R Barra, Cheryl Dean, and I send a big thanks to Mary Maxwell for being so prolific of late (to fill in for me while I’m usually going out of my mind at a day job).

I also want to thank certain individuals for their ‘intel’, plus those who contributed in the comments.

We could do more, to compete with MSM but our resources are threadbare. If you can think of new writers to send to us, or new treasure chests discoverable somewhere, just get in touch with Gumshoe. And thank you for your warm support this year which has left me (and Mary) flabbergasted.