The Maybe-Maybe Not Coming Zombie Apocalypse

There’s only one sure way
To bring the giant down

The necessary background.


You could start with magicians being hired by the UK during WWII to try to trick Germán aerial reconnaissance I suppose. Fake planes, etc., designed to make them concentrate forces in the wrong places. Been a lot said about this and is a major plot point in The Eye of the Needle, though that is from the point of view of a German spy who finds out the buildup is fake, so we don’t see who and how the fakery happened.

But that’s stage “magic” being used to trick. Optical illusions, stage sets, and so forth. What we really need here is occult. You could likewise go with, again in order to trick Hitler, Ian Fleming attempting to get an op started in which Aleister Crowley was to write fortunes that would trick Hitler into making some big mistakes because he didn’t trust his generals and was superstitious. That didn’t happen, but apparently they may have done something similar to get Speer, also superstitious, to defect on a particular date later on,

Then there is the lying. CIA’s Sydney Gottlieb, when asked about a program that was cataloging the effects and side-effects of pharmaceuticals, claimed that MKOFTEN was about mind-reading and gypsies fortune telling or similar. And when CIA assets were caught smuggling four, five and six year olds overseas–this is human trafficking by the way–most likely to deliver to House of Saud pedophiles under the longterm FINDERS op, they left some Satanic literature lying around to throw off investigators.

Of course they actually hired hypnotists and magicians as well during MKULTRA. And finally, mostly Gottlieb again, they investigated the science behind various legends. Most notably, LSD-25 is derived from a wheat fungus called Ergot. Ergot, the scientific theory goes, was the basis for werewolf legends. It can cause serious brain issues in animals and humans due to the presence of an alkaloid.

And I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the glut of cable tv shows attempting to reinforce belief in ghosts, intelligent space aliens who come to Earth for human ass-play, etc.


Noted back in my Minneapolis days, this being when the harassment and surreptitious drugging was much more intense than anything since, that there was an interesting pattern developing. We had had at least two strange chimpanzee incidents, one being the one where it ate a woman’s face in New Jersey, if memory serves.

Then, a year or two later, we had a few similar attacks involving humans. In these two or three cases, as I recall, there was someone involved in the investigation or reporting pushing that so-called bath salts, a generic name for several designer drugs with similar structures, were responsible. This seemed to several experts to be nearly impossible. We’re talking synthetic marijuana, as I understand it. Reefer Madness was propaganda and scientifically baseless.

I should probably note, though I’m going to guess that the trend already has or will stop at some point soon, of there being a detail in many covert ops that are ridiculous. I’ve often wondered why this might be. It’s been my assumption that it is a signal to other spies, or possibly FBI law enforcement side, to stay away: This is someone else’s op; do not interfere. Or to make asses out of them if they pursue investigation based on the ridiculous point. Maybe they want to see how many FBI X files they can inspire.

Late-hit alternative thought: Probably or possibly the inside joke thing in ops mentioned in passing above is either to treat things less seriously, so as not to be as traumatized by whatever was done as one might be. Though there we are treading close to cry for help territory or detachment from reality for similar coping reasons.

And/Or, it’s the intelligence community’s version of stand up comedy. The spies all get it because they know how common ops are, while the public just either buys it or states cross-eyed into the horizon wondering if “God” or the like is trolling humanity.

In any case, there is sometimes a would-be-if-it-weren’t-so-sad-also-silly element to cover for ops. This is one of the ways I think that I was able to identity a few.


And so there’s a glut of stories about zombie deer disease and the idea that it might spread to humans. Chronic wasting disease {CWD} they believe involves microorganisms called prions infecting and reproducing in the brain and spinal cord, causing nerve and brain damage.

“Someday.” This is undoubtedly the home of equal time for both “sides” of an issue. Looking forward to the interview to get the parasite point of view. In this case one can appreciate the restraint, however. Because it’s mostly downhill from here.

We’re not saying it will, we’re just asking questions.

Ah. Denial from the smaller outlets. Like it. Kinda. Sorta. Linking the latter below due to not sounding panicked and explaining what’s behind the story {spoilers: they fed a chimp some diseased deer meat and the chimp got the disease}.

But you know, it’s The Post. May as well be…

And of course the desire to be first, because who needs accuracy and calm when there’s zombie deer potentially circling your children?

But they were clearly slow:

Superior Telegram apparently not having gotten the memo to refer to it as Deer Zombie Disease.

Jesse Inman, “Zombie Deer Disease? {No, it’s just CWD},” Ozark First, 19 February 2019:


Regardless of what you might think about the disease, the idea that it hasn’t been weaponized is what you really need to come to grips with. That’s where we almost consistently go wrong. There’s no way it hasn’t been studied, isn’t still being studied, for nefarious purposes, even if the only real purpose is to get you to either a} think that the world is ending or b} be distracted from the other ways that are pointing to world as we know it ending, eg, climate change.

Or, taking the walk on the dark side, given a choice: Force billionaires and large multinational corporations to pay up to deal with climate change OR to murder thousands upon thousands of “peasants” to reduce demand and usage of fossil fuels, etc., which would CIA choose?

If you’re fool enough to believe the former, you need to take a hard look at history and explain why and leave Tom Clancy and James Bond completely out of it, because that is fiction. I mean, who’s the real zombie here?

What do I know? I thought it’d be water fowl.

Viva Las Vegas

Got a whole lot of money that’s ready to burn

Note: Right. So I have some reservations about this whole thing, and also therefore some reservations about posting it at all. But let us just say that I must do so anyway. This post is also longer than I like. And it’s very rushed and therefore likely contains errors. And, of course, I was interrupted definitely somewhere in the double digit, if not triple, times. Hard to say.


I ran across a supposed anonymous post, really just a screen cap of it, by a supposed member of the LVMPD. This person is claiming that what actually happened during the deadliest mass shooting in American history was that FBI was running a Fast and Furious {the DEA operation, not the movie series} operation using Steven Paddock as the arms salesman to ISIS, and that it went awry, ISIS representatives killed Paddock and started shooting. In essence, anyway. Here’s the supposed post:

Note that this was in response to someone else’s explanation of what happened, and that that was in response to FBI’s report that Paddock acted alone and wanted simply to die famously.

A few things to note: This is in part based on Paddock sending himself emails. Sort of. He had, it appears, put draft emails to himself under at least two different email accounts. This, by the way, was supposedly what Al Qaeda had done to communicate with itself: Not actually send the email, just have multiple groups with access to the same account and password. You could draft your message and get a reply in the same draft.

Was this potentially how he communicated with ISIS?

Also, the FBI says Paddock told his girlfriend that he had some medical issue. This could be true. Or it could be exactly what you tell your significant other when they notice some irregularities in your schedule and behavior and FBI or CIA has told you that you cannot tell them that you are working as a confidential informant for them.

Then there’s the fact that he sent her away in the first place. Unfortunately, that’s likely what you might do if you expected a big bust and a crazy terrorist organization might come looking for payback soon after and a media that would want to interview your girlfriend as well.

These points are important later. Would also mention that FBI was, compared to several other mass shootings, much more tightlipped on this one. There was, and likely still is even with some new details, something missing here.


If you think you already have a good handle on that, you can skip this section. It’s long and basic, or should be.

Now, let us pause and discuss a few things about operations and agencies, and misconceptions. Not that I have the clearest view never having been on the inside, but I do try to understand it as best I can based on what little the public gets about how things work and how that is jarringly different from what is depicted in film and TV.

Would also note that I once read an article by a young reporter that referred to FBI and CIA collectively as “law enforcement agencies.” Completely wrong about CIA of course; it is actually a law breaking agency. That’s what it does and what it is supposed to do: Getting people in foreign governments to supply them with secrets is the classic idea. This has of course spread to people in other places in the private sector. We’re talking the intelligence gathering side of CIA. The other side deals in covert operations designed to create particular outcomes, such as overthrowing governments.

{Perhaps something notable is how we know an incredible amount more about how NSA actually operates and its tools. But this is not the point of the post.}

FBI also has two “sides.” To put it simply, it has a side that is intended to pursue federal criminal cases to court and another that is designed to find and interrupt the actions of foreign intelligence services and terrorist organizations.

What theses agencies actually do is a bit different. FBI for example, it has been widely reported and discussed, frequently uses informants posing as terrorists or malcontents to talk others into agreeing to perform terror attacks. As some judges have even noted, there likely would never have been a terror plot if it hadn’t been for the paid {in the thousands of dollars} informant’s actions in the first place. One notes however that FBI almost always supplies the targets with phony bomb parts or at least arrests them when materials are provided.

What is also notable is the CIA–noting here that it has offices in several major US cities–is not supposed to operate on US soil. When it needs something, it is supposed to go through FBI to get it. Sometimes they ask a friendly foreign intelligence service, such as MI6 to spy on Americans for them, but this is not the only workaround.

Of course the rule itself is broken time and time again. CIA employs a lot of lawyers. One gets the impression that their main job is to make Swiss cheese out of the law in order to justify anything they want to do. They also have organizations that don’t even necessarily know they are funded by CIA. They also have individuals who don’t know they actually serve it, though some clearly do.

And we occasionally see FBI operating overseas, though usually related to something domestic.

The point though is we frequently think of these agencies as stopping terrorism first because it’s what we want to think and is what we see on TV. Besides the deviation above where FBI informants have cajoled and entrapped people {probably}, people have to understand that things don’t work that way. There is rarely a ticking timebomb scenario as we think of it though that has long made for good entertainment.

Though you do occasionally see it in movies, sometimes as part of the struggle of the main character, being a field agent spy actually means that you do not simply get to decide to stop a terror attack, or any other act of violence, when it is not part of your orders, not part of whatever assignment or operation you are working on. If you see someone torturing a child or biting the head off of puppies, you are not to do anything much less call the police or step in. You are to leave your empathy at the door.

Stop and think about that mindset and ask yourself if that squares with the “superhero” Hollywood mentality we have applied to these two agencies and the spy profession as a whole. Of course, underneath this is the idea–again, this is because we have to hope what is done in secret, darkness, and compartmented is done in our best interests because of secrecy–that it’s somehow necessary to lose some battles in order to win the war.

In other words, they are going to let people die sometimes.


It was an operation in which DEA sold weapons to drug cartels in order to see what route the weapons took and where they wound up. They wound up being involved in shootings on US soil and is at least cosmetically why Congress is so down on DEA. Really it’s because some of its members profit from the illegal drug trade, but this is also not the point of the post.


Right. So one problem is when the rules don’t apply anyway, is knowing who, if anyone, was attempting to sell arms to ISIS on US soil. Was it, as the anonymous poster suggests, FBI? Or is FBI covering for CIA? Practically impossible to know for certain. And as I’ve mentioned time and time again, back during the earlier portions of the Cold War, there were people like George Hunter White who bounced back and forth between CIA and FBI counterintelligence and even a DEA predecessor. It would make some sense if that this is still sometimes the case.

Regarding next portion, perhaps this is the part that really matters–not whether or not this actually is what happened, but rather that this very well could have happened and therefore almost certainly will happen. And how the public seems oblivious to that.

If the operation was to trace weapons, to better understand ISIS’ financing, and how they move money, people, and physical assets, then they almost certainly would not stop an attack. It’s very difficult to grasp this as a private citizen who thinks that their own safety should trump other concerns, but it is how it actually works.

That this would be a departure from previous ops where FBI did not provide real bomb parts, it becomes difficult to understand what changed. Why sell ISIS the real thing?

Probably first because they would know the difference. Who would they send to buy them? Someone who knows their stuff if possible. Whereas with the previously referenced alleged bombmaking plots, where FBI provides everything except responsibility, the targets are typically ignorant of anything related to actual terror and weapons, these ISIS buyers would probably know their product. They’d know if they were given fakes.

However, there are a number of other problems. Why choose the high floor during a packed concert? Certainly, the number of people would make it more difficult to notice the buyers. Maybe they would only feel comfortable in such a situation, they told Paddock. Note that he had previously been booked at another similar location in Chicago. Maybe ISIS got cold feet and changed it for some reason. Certainly one would expect a lot more federal embedding in Chicago police department than Vegas’.

See? Works either way. Said he was sick. Losing his mind or an excuse to hide his real work from his girlfriend? Father was a bank robber. Not someone FBI would work with or just got him on FBI’s RADAR as someone to watch? Emailed himself. Talking to himself or there’s a precedent for that from 9/11. High building and repetition of Chicago booking. Mad shooter plotting his event or the preference of the buyers? Certainly the latter in several of these cases seem more probable, especially the bank robber one. Remember again, we’re talking counter-terror here, not law enforcement.

Of course once you go with coverup, you face the problem of not knowing what details to believe at all. This is always the problem with lying, secrecy, coverups and too much power. But let’s assume some of this is accurate for the moment.

It would explain why FBI was so tightlipped. It would explain why there wasn’t a letter or manifesto from Paddock. It would explain how he managed to get that arsenal where he got it. And it would explain why someone would want to shoot all those people.


Truth is, I still don’t know. And I’d rather not be posting this because I don’t know. I’m not comfortable with this scenario on several levels. For one, even though it’s unthinkable to the average American that they wouldn’t stop such a massacre under these circumstances, it means to me that they were actually doing their job as described: You don’t defy orders. Orders were to trace the weapons. Kind of a shorter route and report than you expected. But that was the job.

I prefer noting when they aren’t doing their jobs, you see. Or when they think they’re doing their jobs but they are really doing the opposite.

I would much prefer to go where my main thrust has been: CIA, on behalf of the so-wealthy-they-don’t-need-more-money has time and again intentionally arranged terror acts in order to do everything from increasing profits for contractors to preventing a reversal of the Reagan tax cuts. This is who they have always served, and as I’ve said before it is all predicated on trickle down economics; the assurance that if they kiss the asses of billionaires and multinational corporations hard enough, they will share their money with the rest of us.

And how that meant occasionally messing with peoples’ heads and walking them into performing terror acts, similar to the FBI sting operations but where they don’t supply fakes and don’t actually stop them from pulling the trigger.

That’s where I prefer things to be because I know it’s what they have done and tried to do to me. I would prefer that.

But that is not where things are pointing in this case. It appears that either Paddock was a lone shooter or it is as this potential LVMPD person is stating. The problem there, there’s obviously some people who would love to drag FBI into its own Fast and Furious Congressional investigation, or more likely–note how screwed the public at large is given this–to trade this information for letting Russiagate eventually peter out, not be taken to its often-stated conclusion.

And then there are those who would want to exaggerate a threat from ISIS, to again focus us solely on foreign problems and to continue to ignore domestic ones, to use that to beat up on actual left politicians like AOC, to manipulate the millennials who, we really need to watch for this, scare the hell out of the 0.1%.

So this is not what I wanted to post. It just that I’ve no valid choice. You figure it out.

  • Calendar

    • February 2019
      M T W T F S S
      « Jan    
  • Search