It is certainly no secret that information in this country is controlled, manipulated, and, well, redacted. When such an action takes place, many quickly begin to ask why, and with good reason. This nation has a very consistent history of controlling important information that the people have a right to see, or at the very least, deserve to see.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch made the mainstream media rounds Sunday with the intention of spreading the message that, on the following day, the Department of Justice (DOJ) would be releasing a partial, edited, text-only transcript of the Orlando 911 calls. This is the information that multiple news agencies, as well as individuals, have requested through the Freedom of Information Act in the last week, yet all requests were swiftly denied. Now a text-only transcript is being given out. The only way a printed transcript can be taken at face value is when the party providing the transcript is trusted, and in this case, the United States government has given the American people every reason to doubt anything handed to the public without a clear benefit to the establishment.

“It’s our goal to be as transparent as possible in this investigation.”

As Ms. Lynch speaks those same flimsy words with their hollow intent that we have become accustomed to hearing, the only thing that should come to mind is that the terms “transparent” and “redacted” do not belong in the same conversation, yet they are no doubt aware of that.







The section of the call where Omar Mateen supposedly pledges his allegiance to ISIS, has been completely removed from the redacted version. This part of the call was the primary reason most wanted the audio released; to either disprove the ISIS connection when it’s discovered that Mateen never made that pledge, or provide the audio in order to finally reveal the ISIS connection as more than just hearsay. Many question whether the phone calls were made at all. It is very important to remember that the CIA has thus far found zero evidence, whatsoever, of a solid connection between Mateen and the terrorist organization, ISIS.

Lynch claimed that if the specific part of Omar’s calls to the police, asserting his actions were done for ISIS, were released for the public to hear, it would “revictimize those who went through this horror.” All can sympathize with one who has endured a violently traumatic event, the intention is not to belittle those who have suffered, but to highlight that the pledge was the least traumatic part of the calls, while simultaneously being the most journalistically relevant. This raises more questions of the transcript’s legitimacy. His claim to be acting on behalf of ISIS can be upsetting to some, but no more than the rest of the call’s content. There is just no logic in cutting that section, other than to hide something about it; as in the possibility that no pledge was made at all. That would be the best way to “prove,” in mainstream fashion, that the pledge was made, when it might not have been.

On the following day, their true plan materialized.

The day after Lynch’s message, stating that only the redacted transcript would be given out, some very suspicious actions took place when considering that the DOJ had just made clear what was about to happen. First, CNN released the unredacted version of the transcript the very next day; how they received the unredacted version when it was being kept out of public view is one glaring question, but the least relevant to this discussion. It has been theorized that CNN mistakenly released the full version, or that they had a sudden surge of journalistic integrity, yet most are aware that the latter is simply no longer a possibility in today’s corporate controlled media.

So despite the DOJ withholding the full transcript and making the clear assertion that it would not be given out to the public, not 24 hours later CNN does just that. This in and of itself seems contrived; to allow for the “conspiracy theorists” (or the honest media, whichever you prefer) to speculate why the transcript would be censored, and allow for them to cover the Internet with theories in regards to how it never took place, or that he never made the claim to support any Islamic extremists, only to release what they consider “proof” that the pledge to ISIS was in fact made.

Let’s say hypothetically that the calls never took place. This would be a devious way of tricking the average public into having no doubt that calls and admissions of ISIS connections were made. “You see, the DOJ tried to keep it secret, but it leaked out anyway, so now we have the truth.”

Using a faked accidental leak, or whatever terminology one wants to use, is a very smart way of making sure an uncertain fact, is now steadily rooted in truth, without the person even realizing that it just happened.







This seems to be a cunningly deceitful way of creating room for speculation about one aspect, while inconspicuously solidifying a potentially contested fact in the subject’s mind: release a fake redacted transcript of a call, allow time for doubt to build, then “accidentally” release the full version; all of which is fake, yet now the idea of the call in general is undisputed.

By making the discussion about whether the pledge to ISIS was actually made, by pretending to redact what the public will see, then releasing the “proof” that shows it was made, indirectly causes a person to assume that the calls took place, even if they did not. The point of contention becomes the pledge itself and the calls become a foregone conclusion.

The full transcript has now been released by many different news organizations as well as the DOJ itself. It should be hard to believe that if the DOJ was intent on keeping certain information secret, that basically everyone would completely disregard that intent. This appears to be one big game of misdirection. There are many factors of the Orlando shooting that are clearly suspect, and many have begun to awaken to that fact. This is just one more measure of control exerted over the public with the intention of focusing our research and objections away from the real question: Who was actually behind Orlando? And as that very question appears to no longer be up for debate, as far as the mainstream media is concerned, any one else questioning Mateen’s motivations is… a conspiracy theorist, right?