Ottawa Shooting: Evidence of a Staged False Flag Attack

OttawaShootingMedia,jpgBy Dario Di Meo

It only takes one hole to slowly sink a boat. The official Ottawa shooting storyline has more than one such hole. The following suggests the widely-reported October 22, 2014 Ottawa shooting was a staged event.

[Image Credit:]

Exhibit One

CBC reported that a driver with a dashboard camera driving along Wellington Street EB captures a video of the alleged shooter, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, casually walking to his car, a Toyota Corolla, and getting in.

This is in conflict of witnesses stating they saw Bibeau running across the street, suggested by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s timeline of events:

Jan Lugtenborg, a Dutch tourist, was waiting for a tour bus when he heard four shots.

“The guy who shot, he was a small man with long black hair,” Lugtenborg said. The shooter “suddenly crossed the street with his long rifle … running like hell” towards Parliament Hill.

In the dashboard video of Bibeau it is evident that he is not armed, or at least it appears he has nothing in his hands. One would be hard pressed to think he is concealing a gun considering he had it out and opened fire on Corporal Cirillo just moments before. Since the weapon was allegedly a long gun it would be obvious under his coat.

Next, this occurs in between Elgin street which is one-way north on the east side of the Memorial and one-way south on the west side, converging into a two-way street south of the Memorial site. Also, Wellington Street is divided by a concrete curb median.

Keep this in mind, a surveillance video released and narrated by Royal Canadian Mounted Police’s Bob Paulson clearly shows a Toyota making a left hand westbound turn from Elgin moving northbound, which is a one way southbound street. It is difficult to understand how Bibeau went from being on Wellington eastbound at 9:51:51, then at 9:52:15 seen making a left-hand turn onto Ellington westbound from Elgin, which is a one-way street south, with the latter likely involving a very precarious maneuver . It’s approximately 250m to get to the bollards in front of East Block from where he was parked on Wellington street facing east at the Memorial.

The would-be gunman had no choice but to proceed eastbound on Wellington and make a U-turn just up the road to head back towards the Parliament building.

We should have seen the Toyota coming along Wellington from a distance. There is no other way unless he went in reverse against the traffic but there was not a single witness to suggest this possibility. If Bibeau did start driving in reverse on Wellington Street it would have drawn attention from drivers to honk their horns and draw at least one eye-witness. Yet no such commotion is documented.

Instead, we have only this video of Bibeau getting in his car and other witnesses who claim they saw him run across the street towards the Parliament buildings.

What to make of these two videos?

If Bibeau continued eastbound and made a u-turn then who was in the Toyota making a left hand turn as seen on the surveillance video?

It looks to be two separate incidents. Its clear by the dashboard camera that traffic was a bit busy.

RCMP Surveillance Video of the Shooter

Jump to 1m20sec:

The behavior of the “pedestrians” also seems unusual. They do not appear to be frightened people trying to get away from the shooting at the Memorial. Rather, they appear to be anticipating the shooter’s arrival.

To be precise the “pedestrians”, according to RCMP Commission Bob Paulson, were, “…recoiling westward from the incident at the Memorial”. Their recoiling coincidentally matched the exact intention and path the shooter eventually took. What are the chances of this?

The video clearly shows two men on the sidewalk looking back in the direction of the Memorial and another two men in suits crossing the street, walking towards and pausing at the bollards, looking back as if they are waiting for someone/something–quite likely the shooter. The four of them look coordinated. Perhaps they were the shooter’ handlers placed to ensure this false flag would unfold as planned.

In addition there were NO other pedestrians around. It seems to be a strange coincidence that two pedestrians would “recoil” from the incident at the Memorial to the exact same spot where Bibeau finally parks his car before he heads towards Central Block of the Parliament buildings and be met with two to other men with the same body language with no other pedestrians nearby.

Exhibit Two

Finally the irrefutable evidence. The one giant hole that sinks this alleged crazed terrorist rampage in downtown Ottawa of any of its buoyancy.

Evan Solomon of the CBC reveals in, to use his words, details of exactly how the incidents went down in Central Block in the Hall of Honor by the library.

Take a look at Google’s virtual tour of the Parliament building at the exact spot where Evan Solomon conspicuously states the location of the where the shooter was shot and this is what you get — taken on April 2013. The numbers are beside the bullet holes.

These markings on the wall from April 2013 match up exactly to where bullet holes were made when Vickers heroically shot and killed Bibeau on October 22nd 2014.


These markings on the wall from April 2013 match up exactly to where bullet holes were made when Vickers heroically shot and killed Bibeau on October 22nd 2014.

Above: Evan Solomon giving us the exact details of how Kevin Vickers, his security team and RCMP took the shooter down. Nothing dubious here. This is it. This is how and where it happened in the alcove at arm’s length away from Bibeau on the other side of the pillar with Kevin Vickers diving and spinning, falling to the ground simultaneously shooting upwards at Bibeau who then falls to the ground.

Evan Solomon continues, “Vickers continues to fire into Bibeau emptying his entire clip.” This sounds like a 25yr old inexperienced maverick with something to prove. Is this standard protocol with an unknown shooter? Clearly the answer is no. Why would a retired 58yr old RCMP officer who doesn’t look fit, who has been at a desk job for well over 10 years, act in such a risky manner?

This is not standard protocol. The RCMP, Vickers and the security team had Bibeau cornered and should have waited for a clear opportunity to take him down or out. If anything Vickers acted carelessly, especially when one considers no one was in any immediate danger.

2m:38sec of this video:

And here is a picture of the library door that was supposedly closed. Why didn’t Bibeau run and hide in the library? Why was he hiding in the alcove?

And here is the desk:Ottawa5

Leave a Reply

53 thoughts on “Ottawa Shooting: Evidence of a Staged False Flag Attack”

  1. For those who find the April 2013 Google image of bullet holes that were supposedly from a gun fired on Oct. 22, 2014 to be more tinfoil hat crazy, I just checked. It is still posted at,-75.7001496,3a,90y,67.88h,88.9t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sDM19X-jMbXbdKblfKFWm-w!2e0!3e5!6m1!1e1

    I would post the screen grab I just took but can’t; it indeed shows the date of April 2013 at the top of the page and also in a copyright caption in small characters at the bottom right. The bullet holes are clearly there 18 months before the shooting we were just treated to.

    This is worse than I thought. It means terrrrists have unlocked the secrets of time travel. We are so screwed.

      1. clever these so called debunkers are! Finally got to a laptop (iPhone was not showing anything relevant) and checked.

        This article is correct – it is from 2013 april – the debunkers actually LIED about the article on MHB was a lie. Unreal. And they cite MHB and lead the reader to infer James is the fraud. Even on their own screenshot it says april 2013 at the bottom right.

        Now the question is: how are those conclusively bullet holes?

        Wasn’t this a hoax? Nobody shot anybody. We can’t take the medias word for the location of the bullet holes while saying whatever the media says is false.

        And we can’t get mad when the media updates its false info to disagree with our damning interpreation, since we don’t rely on them, RIGHT?

        So I don’t see what the big emergency is, how this proves anything, and I don’t see why James needs to be “all hands on deck.”

        We have bigger fish to fry here in America.

      2. Clever these so called debunkers are! Finally got to a laptop (iPhone was not showing anything relevant) and checked.

        This article is correct – it is from 2013 april – the debunkers actually LIED that this article on MHB was debunked. Unreal. And they cite MHB and lead the reader to infer James is the fraud. Even on their own screenshot it says april 2013 at the bottom right.

        Now the question is: how are those conclusively bullet holes?

        Wasn’t this a hoax? Nobody shot anybody. We can’t take the medias word for the location of the bullet holes while saying whatever the media says is false.

        And we can’t get mad when the media updates its false info to disagree with our damning interpreation, since we don’t rely on it, RIGHT?

        So I don’t see what the big emergency is, how this proves anything, and I don’t see why James needs to be “all hands on deck.”

        We have bigger fish to fry here in America.

      3. well it looks like someone beat me to it – calling out metabunk for their poorly backed claims. The admin appears to be doing some heavy editing now as I type, but hopefully we have all learned a valuable lesson: metabunk needs to put a “g” where the “t” is in their name.

      4. To their credit metabunk are letting me comment with an opposing view. Not much else is to their credit in that thread.

      1. Yes, still with you. The last word is that she did not go through with it. On Oct. 31 or 30, there was a report that she changed her mind, saying, “Now is not the right time.”

        As I’ve told you, the women in the videos and on the cover of People Magazine, as well as elsewhere, are not Brittany. I called the People photographer up at his studio to find out why he represented this model as Brittany, but they would not let me speak to him. I’ve been working to pin down other pieces of information, but can’t post what I’ve done in this blog–I will write an article, and see if James will publish it, when I finish my research.

        I could, in fact, just call her up–I have a cellphone number from 2008, as well as an email address; and I have a friend (my best friend!) who has been castigating me for “not reconciling with [my] dying niece.” Sigh.

      2. I should mention, too, that not only did I publish the info about Brittany’s uncle being a military intelligence analyst on this blog, but on Oct. 30 (I think it was) I did so on Infowars, too, in a comment on the story about the nurse, Kaci-someone, who made a big fuss when she was quarantined for 3 weeks after coming back from Liberia. The story said her lawyer was a White House visitor.

        So I published this comment about Brittany’s uncle having this same kind of connection, and not that long afterwards came the report, “Now is not the right time.” Of course I don’t know if these events are connected.

        Brittany’s uncle (her mother’s brother) is David Q. Ziegler.

      3. In response to Recynd: I watched it; it’s basically a redo of the first video.

        The narrator is not Brittany. Some of the still photos are of Brittany. If you compare a photo of the real Brittany (such as the one of her in the lounge chair with the dog in her lap) with the video narrator, you will see Brittany’s smile is much wider, and not downturned at the edges when she smiles, as the narrator’s is.

        Granted, the narrator is convincing. Even Debbie (her mother) is convincing, to a degree. The takeaway message is actually the opposite of what they wanted to put across, though: Brittany isn’t going through with it, after all. She’s not ready. Where there’s life, there’s hope. (By the way, in the story on cnn, the reporter revealed the astonishing fact that SHE had RECOVERED fully from Stage IV cancer of some type last year!)

        I find it interesting seeing how Brittany dwells on the love of her family, being surrounded by “family and friends” at the end, etc. She doesn’t tell you she is referring only to her mother’s people.

        One comment I made to my friend, looking at the “Love” and “I am Loved” T-shirts worn by mother and daughter in one of the still photos, was, “How very Sandy Hook.”

        1. I just saw the post that Brittany has passed. If it’s true, I am sorry for the family’s loss. Thank you for your insights on this…What a good example how massaged and manipulated “news” stories are. The directors of these stories are clearly all cut from the same cloth.

      4. I responded to you earlier, Recynd, but my comment is in moderation.

        Wanted to add to it that, in the original video, Debbie says she’s going to meet Brittany in Macchu Pichu. However, the photos of Brittany’s travel show she’s already BEEN to Macchu Pichu. (And, as I’ve pointed out before, Brittany herself says she wants to go to the Grand Canyon as her last trip.)

        Brittany also says in the original video that she went to Alaska with her best friend, who is pictured with her: a slim blonde. The best friend does not show up among the attendants at her wedding.

        I have said before that I think the wedding photos are fake. Does anyone get married in a vineyard? Brittany mentions, however, that she and her husband took a trip to the wine country for a New Year’s Eve celebration in 2013.

        In the new video, she says she is her mother’s only child, and that is true. I believe this statement was corrected from the original video, in which I remember Brittany saying she is “her PARENTS’ only child” (although now I can’t find that). I thought to myself, at the time, Brittany appears to have forgotten about her half-brother 11 years younger, who used to adore her.

        Finally, she said she intended to take the pill “upstairs in my bedroom that I share with my husband.” In fact, she and her husband are renting a house in Portland. Did she intend to commit suicide in someone else’s house? As to the house they still own in Contra Costa County, California, that cost almost $1 million. The picture of her bedroom shown in the video has a four-poster bed in a small room with sloping ceilings–an attic–not what you’d expect for the master bedroom in a $1 million home. She probably wouldn’t be doing this legally in California, anyway. She could not avoid the autopsy or doctor’s examination there. 🙂

        1. I know I seem heartless, but I still don’t believe it. For the record, I had called three different law enforcement agencies in Oregon and asked for a (discreet) investigation. So her publicly saying she wasn’t going to do it on Nov. 1, then doing it the next day, may have been to throw them off.

          I still have a question whether she intended to commit suicide in someone else’s house, because she has been renting in Oregon.

          I will have some other stuff to convey on this in a few days, I think.

  2. It getting to the point where psy-ops are just obvious prior to seeing the facts. As soon as the news reports it, one can use logic and a bit of socio-political wherewithal to dissemble most MCEs/shootings/etc. prior to the avalanche of evidence.

    Can you Imagine… the ISIS having a major beef with Canada? WHY? How about a shooter in the Canadian parliment building who is so stupid as to reveal his weapon prior to the encounter of a “High-value” target? What is the shooter’s motive? Cui Bono?

    How about the solutions we’re offered…? Bomb the Middle East to the Stone Age! Ban The Guns (Canada’s ahead of us on that one). Change the Politicians! Baaaa! Baaa!

  3. Well done to Dario Di Meo or whoever busted the ‘bullet-holes’ story.

    It’s certainly irrefutable proof that CBC did not have the details right. So who gave them those details? And have they apologized yet to their audience? And will they do any investigation into why they were given false information?

    If the location of the alleged final shoot-out is still officially correct, the absence of new damage to the wall from the gun fight raises its own questions, of course.

    1. The only part of this hoax that I do believe is that Harper was in the closest when it happened. And you better believe that he hasn’t come out yet!

  4. James, this is Jeff C. from Free Radio Revolution. I can’t thank you enough for posting this! I just made a video on it and you should expect to see a lot more people showing up. This is absolutely ENORMOUS for Canada – they are pushing through bills that will destroy our rights (illegal searches, detainment, spying etc… see bills C13 C36 C44) effectively the Patriot Act + NDAA for Canada. We desperately need Americans on board to help break this one down. I have done tons of work and I’m featuring many others on my different channels. Everyone should see this video (Proof the CPR was faked on Cpr Nathan Cirillo):
    I can’t thank you enough for all the amazing work you’ve done (and all your awesome commenters) on Sandy Hook and Boston Bombing etc… We need all hands on deck for this one!
    Sincerely, Jeff C. Free Radio Revolution
    ps. feel free to contact me anytime

    1. That’s good stuff from TFM, there, Jeff, thanks for calling attention to it.

      Not mentioned but important, the prone Cpl. Cirillo does not appear to move at all in response to the alleged CPR. Compare with this known to be real footage:

      CPR rocks the whole upper body, shoulders and head rhythmically. Of course that requires contact …

    2. I agree. This is ENORMOUS for Canada and I will do what I can to get this information out to other CDNs. Thanks for your 10min video on this topic.

  5. We are organizing an Emergency Round Table for tomorrow on Max Resistance. We have 100% proof that this event is staged – we need to reach the rest of Canada with this. We would like to invite Prof. Tracy to take part. It will be at 8pm eastern on Sunday Nov 2nd. Please send me an email if you can take part. Thank you!

    1. Just a correction – our Emergency Round Table will be at 9pm Eastern. We ask Prof James Tracy that if he can’t make that time, we would be happy to have him on tuesday’s show at 8pm eastern. I believe UpNorthofthe49th will contact you with the details. Thanks!

  6. Yes, this one is particularly badly done. It won’t win an award at the “Hoaxer’s Ball” this year, I’ll wager.

    What I notice is that the reactions of the people in the videos are “over the top”. Why would they all be running away like that? Especially the scene where the car pulls up and he gets out.

    In the previous scene we hear gunshots. What are they supposed to be coming from? It’s a Model 94 Winchester. I have one. Unless you’re “The Rifleman” you can fire that quickly.

    As someone else pointed out, it seems pretty obvious that the plan was to link hunting rifles to “terrorism” This stuff has truly gotten ridiculous. First “the shooting”, then “the legislation”.

    As with all of them, they are concerned with “the impression” that they make. None of them stand scrutiny.

  7. This is Dario….your welcome Nick Dean. I found this out after watching Evan Solomon on YouTube and decided to go for a virtual Google tour of the Parliament buildings. Presto! There it was staring at me. I was in such disbelief to say the least.This became Ottawa’s WTC 7. This became the impetus for me to write my first piece on a false flag. I followed this story right from the get go and after the positive feedback of this piece I am planning on composing a follow-up.

    1. Please Dario help. Canada believes this whole-heartedly without question. It is frightening. The people are so brain-washed. Completely lobotomized. Help.

  8. CBC added an edit to their online posting of the Solomon report:


    This story has been edited from a previous version that stated there were nine bullet holes in the wall near the Parliamentary library, based on information from multiple sources. In fact, upon further investigation, not all the marks were caused by the bullets. The exact number of bullets that hit the wall in the shooting is unclear‎. Also, the pistol used by the sergeant-at-arms is a semi-automatic, not an automatic as reported in an earlier version and in the TV piece attached.

    Oct 25, 2014 5:15 PM ET


    The ‘correction’ raises its own questions.

    CBC was fed a pack of nonsense by multiple officials and ran the story unchecked. Why did CBC not check the claims for themselves? How could multiple officials all come to tell the same false story to the media absent collusion and an intention to mislead? Why would officials invent and seek to propagate the ‘bullet-hole’ story unless they felt the need to add verisimilitude, somehow – and why should they feel the need to do that?

    And is CBC even asking these reasonable questions- especially after they say they were misled into making false claims themselves?

    1. The “correction” is BS. Its pathetic at how many “corrections” media makes after an aware public catches this gross anomalies. How does Evan Solomon, an intelligent guy, use words like “exact” and “details” in a tone of confidence where there is NO doubt about what he is going to say. How can any media outlet put out information in this way and then makes statements like, “….upon further investigation….” Really?? Why the hell didn’t you do your due diligence to begin with? You never put the cart before the horse. CBC and all MSM seem to think this is acceptable. Remember In Living Colour? Homey D. Clown…. “Homey Don’t Play Dat!”

  9. They are Busted BIG time,with this hoax,just like sandy hook,boston marathon,the santa barbara shooting,the houston shooting-cassidy stay,mh17 hoax,ebola hoax…..SO?and nothing is going to stop them,for making other hoaxes in the future..and james tracy is linked to alex jones…1+1=2….jeff.c do you trust james tracy?

    1. Hoaxes:
      I went ahead and researched your alleged link to AJ for you. If you are referring to the month after SHES AJ interview with a fledgling prof shoved into the limelight, then your ability to provide weak links has preceded you.

      Hoax, are you a drive by commenter or can you tell us about who you are?

  10. ippedOff1 second ago…/4TheCirilloDrill.pdf
    Jeff you hopefully will find this interesting. Also I spent alot of time reviewing footage. I believe they had cirillo play bad guy. When you look at the pic of him with gun (zehaf) you can see he has on white dress shirt. (look at cuff on hand holding barrel) Then when he is running into the parliment doors you can see white shirt when his jacket flips up. Then when they show cirillo being put in ambulance you can see Zehaf scarf hanging down from his waist. I know the footage is really grainy but I’m telling ya they have same forhead except they have him wearing wig while playing Zehaf. I don’t know check it out. Cirillo drill.. Vickers Count.. Concealment garment needed…

  11. Heard something interesting on Radio Lab, today, November 1. It was about War of the Worlds and how we are normally told it went down when Orson Welles did his show. It analyzed the alleged public reactions and the stories about people responding to it as though it was real. It raised the possibility that those hyper-reactions, the interviews with “survivors”, and much we have been told about this history of the broadcast, were themselves hoaxes. Then someone shot in a little remark about “seeing the plane hit the building on 9/11”, opining that most people who said they saw it in real time actually saw rebroadcasts later in the day. This of course is a bit of limited hang-out. But the deeper meaning is that no one really saw it except on tv, and it is irrelevant what time they saw it because it could have been a fake.

    But I would recommend the analysis of the probably false history of the War of the Worlds which they were getting at – not just Orson Welles’s version, but the wider aspect of hoaxing history deliberately. Quite a take-down of those history shows about how gullible the public was, with all those just-folks characters reacting to what they thought was a catastrophic event.

  12. As shown in this link “Tourist Megan Underwood stands with Cpl Nathan Cirillo on the same day he was shot dead”

    The fun fact is that Tourist Megan Underwood who calls herself a “British -Canadian Actress” also has a photo with her and the Mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson and states in her Twitter:

    “Glad you’re sticking around, @JimWatsonOttawa! Brunch at the @ManxPub wouldn’t be the same without you.”

    Any statisticians want to work out the odds of this happening?

    1. It’s kind of funny a guard would step so far away from his post in order to be in a picture. I was recently in Canada, at Quebec City’s citadel. The guards there did not have such a casual relationship with members of the public, even though the post itself is not much of what it once was. They are just as solemn outside their post boxes as the guards at Buckingham Palace. This is like one of the gladiators at Rome’s colosseum, dressed up and posing with tourists. Does not hit the right note for me.

      The Twitter account of this woman, after her remarks about Cirillo and her attendance at them, seems totally over it. Like it was an assignment she had completed.

  13. Even without the prior google images I think anyone who doesn’t immediately notice the odd, suspicious, and impossible symmetrical outline of the marks to be lacking. It is if a trick shot artist were shooting around and making an even outline around his subject target.

  14. That’s a good point, Musings. This is what is often wrong with “eye witness testimony”. People are not necessarily lying, they just have such a strong need to “belong” that they want to “me too” whatever someone else says.

    It’s a lot like “Harley Man”. Just like Rivero at “Whatreallyhappened”, he goes ballistic with people who point out that no plane (certainly not an airliner), hit the Pentagon. His stock refrain is “but people SAW a plane”. Did they?

    Maybe there was a “Harley Man” there too. “Did you see that? There was an airliner and it hit the Pentagon”. Despite very good eye witness evidence to the contrary, some believe the “official” tale simply because they said that eye witnesses saw it.

    It is no exaggeration to say that I’ve had to “unlearn” most of what I’ve been taught. The simple fact is that the evidence shows that it can’t be trusted.

    When an event happens is it the job of the media to tell us exactly how something happened down to the suspect and the methods used? In real life, when a actual event happens it takes time to find these things out. In fact, in a real criminal matter, it may not be wise to be insisting on “belief” when the details are unknown.

    When they insist that they have the details it may be wise to ask “where did you get that information?”. To me it is obvious that the real reason for doing this is to condition people to accepting whatever they say as truth. Are you going to argue with Anderson Cooper?

    It is very instructive that later, when people examine the evidence, and it is found that their story couldn’t possibly have happened that way, they get indignant. It’s actually pretty funny. “Hey, ‘reality’ is OUR job. Who do you think you are following up on our proclamations?”.

    I rather think that the “War of the Worlds” story is an urban myth. It was quite a publicity stunt.

    1. I think Orson Welles enjoying spoofing and then double-spoofing. He enjoyed playing Citizen Kane outside the set, if indeed he played with the alleged after-effects of War of the Worlds (the Radio Lab broadcast I listened to recently explained that a very small percentage of radio listeners were actually tuned into his show, and that the publicity afterwards was partly generated by newspapers who were losing readers (then as now) and who wanted to show how the public was being hoodwinked by such broadcasts – although I would imagine that Welles was the one who interviewed all the alleged dupes, using other actors, and then coming forward sheepishly and with an aw-shucks style to remind everyone that this story was already well-known. Radio Lab alleges that other communities have also used the story to generate the effect of an alien invasion, by using local landmarks to reinforce the message.

      When I think about 9/11, I have one startling image from the after show at the Pentagon: a bunch of cafeteria ladies in actual hairnets, smilingly assembling burgers at a steam table for the tired workers at the “tragic” scene. That was an image designed to trigger retro memories in the public, in my opinion, of Cold War duck and cover days, and also even farther back (though that generation was not as targeted as our Boomers) – of Rosie the Riveter – that “can do” working class gal, brave and tough as old boots, smiling in the face of tragedy. I see fake people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *