By K.I.G – Last Updated July 6, 2018
Understanding what narratives are really saying and what their purposes really are is the key to limiting the chances that you are being used as a gullible asset, directly by those who seek to deceive the public or indirectly by those who lack the skills to get to the bottom of the narratives that also they are exposed to.
A narrative is an event or situation account that is provided by government authorities and/or news media outlets. These accounts should in normal instances be chronological reports that provide detailed information about events or situations. The facts in the narratives are the dots that the audience or public is supposed to connect (or that governments and news media outlets connect in their place), in order to understand the events and situations that have unfolded.
A narrative is supposed to be a truthful chronological representation of facts. It is supposed to be trusted upon when referencing it in the future.
The Need for Narrative Analysis
Regularly, though, narratives that are presented in the news media or by governments are, very often, deliberately only partially factual event or situation accounts. As a result there emerges confusion among the audiences and the public, leaving them guessing about what really happened or what the agenda is of the information providers.
To get a clearer understanding of how this is done and what the impact and results are of deliberately distorted narratives, or even worse false narratives, I will provide you with two examples of narratives that were meant to confuse the public and hide the truths concerning the events that these narratives refer to.
The Case of Abu Sayyaf, ISIS (“Islamic State”) its Oil Man in Syria (2015)
On May 15, 16 and 17 of 2015 the news media “broke” the so-called “news” of ISIS’ oil man having allegedly been murdered by a US Special Forces team that was secretly (and illegally) sent into Syrian territory. The suspect, named by the US government, Abu Sayyaf, allegedly originally a Tunisian national, was claimed to be in charge of ISIS its oil business in Syria.
Within the first 24 hours of the story being fed to the public I was able to track down the various sources of pictures and names that were being used in desperate attempts, by the news media and the US government, to come up with a credible narrative for the alleged event.
It soon became clear that the entire story, of an Abu Sayyaf having been murdered by a US Delta Force team, was false. The murder never took place, at least not the one that continues to be described and referenced by the US government and news media outlets. For this very reason also the Wikipedia page that exists about this case is obviously a false story account.
The reason why I am 99.99% sure that this story is false is because up to this very day the US government and the news media can still not provide more clarity about the real name and real face of the alleged suspect Abu Sayyaf in Syria.
The thing that caught my attention in this case, to begin with, is the fact that Abu Sayyaf is a prominent Philippine entity, not known to operate in Syria. By the media it is often described as a terrorist organization operating in the Philippines.
According to Pix 11 the real name of ISIS its oil man, Abu Sayyaf, was Abd al-Rahman Mustafa al-Qaduli. The man was referred to by the news media outlet as an Iraqi national.
In an other version of the Abu Sayyaf narrative carried by at least Fox News, BBC and Reuters, published within the exact same time frame as Pix 11’s, the suspect’s real name was (Sheikh) Mohammad al-Shalabi. In this narrative version the man was referred to as a Jordanian national.
However, in the two false narratives were also different pictures of different men used. These were not just different pictures of the same man. This is another crucial failure in the whole Abu Sayyaf in Syria fabrication.
Clearly, someone is still lying about what really happened in Syria that day, if anything similar at all, and about who “Abu Sayyaf” actually is. The name itself in reference to ISIS in Syria may, for all we know, simply be a phantom. That would explain why the US government and the news media outlets can’t seem to agree on what the “oil man” really looks like and what his real name is.
I will not speculate about what may have happened on the night of May 16 in 2015, the point is to prove the narrative wrong or false.
The Case of the Las Vegas Mandalay Bay Shooting (2017)
On October 1, 2017, the news media went into overdrive as it launched a barrage of reports that seemed to refer to a shooting that had allegedly just happened in Las Vegas.
Allegedly, a lone gunman, Stephen Paddock, had opened fire on a crowd opposite of the Mandalay Bay, where the gunman allegedly was positioned at one of the upper floors. The news media narrative indicated that the gunman had opened fire from two windows of his hotel room.
The following morning, the news media and local police officials distributed photos of the outside windows of the alleged gunman’s room. Implying that two windows were broken. Implying that those were the exact positions from where the shooter had opened fire on the crowd of the Harvest festival across the street, the night before.
As I was going through the news reports, police statements and alleged witness accounts, within this first-24-hours time frame, I came across a photo that was published by the Daily Egyptian, a student-led newspaper of the Southern Illinois University, established in 1888. The photo showed only one broken window instead of two.
On October 2, 2017, the newspaper had published an article titled “‘We were very much numb’: SIU alumnus was across the street from Las Vegas mass shooting”. That photo was part of the article.
The piece described an account of SIU alumni Steven Berczynski:
“When Steven Berczynski woke up early Monday morning to news that a mass shooting took place Sunday night right across the street from the Las Vegas hotel where he is staying with his wife, he panicked.
Around 9:30 p.m. he said the concert could be clearly heard from their hotel, MGM Grand Las Vegas Hotel & Casino. When Berczynski left the hotel room for the lobby casino around 10 p.m., he said it had gone silent.
He said he went back up to the room shortly thereafter. He and his wife didn’t realize what had happened until about 3 a.m. when their loved ones back in the Midwest started calling and texting them to see if they were OK.”
That specific photo was taken by Steven Berczynski and captioned:
“Photograph courtesy of SIU alumni Steven Byrczyski.
The Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino is pictured Monday, Oct. 2, 2017, the morning after Stephen Paddock, of 64, of Mesquite, Nevada, injured over 500 and killed over 50 at a Jason Aldean concert, causing the deadliest massacre in the United States in Las Vegas, Nevada. The shooter’s room is circled in red.”
Indeed, as the photo proves, no other window of the alleged shooter’s alleged hotel room was damaged or broken. Remember, the photo was taken on the morning of October 2, 2017, long before the media frenzy would get totally out of hand.
However, 7 months later, on May 3, 2018, the news media distributed a copy of police body camera footage that was released by a Las Vegas police department. The footage and transcript would prove my initial assumption, of there being only one broken window in that specific room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay, correct.
Here’s the transcript of that body camera footage, as distributed by the Las Vegas Review Journal in their report titled “Police find guns, gunman’s wallet after Las Vegas shooting – VIDEO”:
Background: We’ve got probably at least 10 high-powered weapons in this room
Background: Sarge, what do you got going there?
Sergeant: “We have this contained. There’s no need for anybody else up here.” If there’s other situations going on then let’s address those. We are code 4 here. We’ve got patrol units that are clearing down the right *inaudible*”
Officer: Jaire, I can’t tell what direction this room is. Let me get to a window and *inaudible*
Background: What do you need Levi?
Background: We do not have a broken window. No there are several rooms in here Corey.
Officer: A broken window *inaudible* right where that curtain is *inaudible*
Officer: Standby, we have the curtains open on a window that is not broken.
Background: It’s us. It’s us. It’s us. Corey, it’s us. Tell them it’s us.
Background: Go ahead Todd.
Background: Copy that. *inaudible* It’s right here.
Background: Is it? OK.
Officer: They have security down at the elevator banks, as well.
Background: Got it?
Background: Copy that. Do you want me to send you a photo or do you want me to do that over here right now? Got his wallet.
Background: Let me contact *inaudible*
Officer: Security’s right here. They’re right outside the door.
Officer: I counted 13 *inaudible*
Background: Oh, yeah, there’s a scope over here.
Officer: This one right here by the window that he was setting up with *inaudible*
Background: *inaudible* information on a potential lead related possibly related to the suspect. We have a player’s card that was out on the countertop next to the wallet. Suspect is *inaudible* It is an M life platinum player’s card with the name of Marilou Danley
The Las Vegas police, in the transcript, describe the situation as they initially find the room. They did find one broken window, as the photo published by the Daily Egyptian shows. One broken window. Not two.
Also in this case, clearly someone is still lying about what really happened that night and the following morning at the Mandalay Bay in Vegas.
I will not speculate about what may have happened, the point is to prove the narrative wrong or false.
Not at Face Value
As is evident by now, it is very dangerous to take any news media report at face value, because, as the two above examples show, wrong conclusions are drawn by the public and this leads to government authorities and news media outlets getting away with deliberately distributing false information and deceiving the public to further entirely different, and hostile, agendas that the public is obviously not aware of.
Thus, always ask yourself:
If they willingly lie about one aspect of a narrative, how much of the narrative is actually true?
And, how come you almost never hear about the real investigative reports that prove the official narratives wrong, false or fraudulent?