BUSTED! San Bernadino shooters were three white men dressed in military attire

Watch the interview at Press TV
Watch the interview at Press TV
Watch the interview at Press TV

By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor, with Martin Hill

My frequent radio guest Martin Hill (listen to Friday’s interview) has discovered another bombshell that blows the official story of the San Bernadino shooting to smithereens. In his new post Martin writes:

“Witness Sally Abdelmageed, who works at the Inland Regional Center and witnessed the shooting in San Bernardino, was interviewed live via telephone by CBS Evening News the day the massacre happened.

“The news anchor begins ‘She saw the attackers enter the building, and we spoke to her by phone.’

‘We saw three men dressed in military attire,’ she says. ‘I couldn’t see his face, he had a black hat on… black cargo pants on, the kind with zippers on the side… He had a huge assault rifle a lot of ammo…

She continues, ‘They opened up the door to building then he starts to, you know, shoot all over into the room – that’s the room we have conferences in…

‘I called 911 and I just hid under my desk..

‘As I was talking to the dispatch, we went into my manager’s office and locked the doors..’

‘Mrs. Abdelmageed, can you describe to me in as much details as you can what did the gunman look like?’ the CBS anchor asks.

‘I couldn’t see his face, he had a black hat on. All I could see was a black hat, black long-sleeved shirt… He had extra ammo. He was probably ready for something, to reload – I don’t know know…

‘I just saw three, dressed exactly the same. They looked like they were athletic build, and um, they appeared to be tall…’

‘You’re certain that you saw three men?’ the news anchor asks.

‘Yeah,’ she replies, as she continues to describe the THREE WHITE MEN, their muscular build, etc.

After she leaves the line, the anchor insists ‘and of course we’ve just learned that one of the suspects was actually a woman.'”

[Read Martin Hill’s full report,  Witness to San Bernardino Massacre Describes Shooters As Three White Men “Dressed In Military Attire”]

Watch the CBS News video of the interview with witness Sally Abdelmageed
Watch the CBS News video of the interview with witness Sally Abdelmageed

Now don’t get me wrong, folks. I’m a white man myself. And I am proud, not ashamed, of my Irish-Welsh-Scottish-German ancestry. But I’m sick of seeing paramilitary-type white guys committing massacres designed to be blamed on brown-skinned Muslims.

The same thing happened in Paris on November 13th. The shooters at La Belle Equipe restaurant were not brown-skinned Muslims; they were “white, clean shaven…They looked like soldiers or mercenaries and carried the whole thing out like a military operation.”

The killers in the Charlie Hebdo offices last January were also white men with blue eyes – which rules out the brown-skinned brown-eyed patsies, the Kouachi brothers.

Likewise, the killers of French soldiers in the 2012 shootings falsely blamed on Mohammed Merah  had tattoos worn only by white-power extremists, and therefore were almost certainly white paramilitaries employed by Operation Gladio B. (For details, read the chapter on the Merah case by Dr. Laurent Guyénot in We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo: Free Thinkers Question the French 9/11.)

Western governments and their lapdog corporate media, by refusing to investigate, discover and report the truth about these cases, are pumping out racist, Islamophobic hate propaganda in a manner that would shame Dr. Goebbels. That is the point I made in my latest Press TV interview:

‘Muslim’ shooters make it ‘terrorism’ for US media: Scholar

-Press TV

The US media characterizes a shooting attack as “terrorism” only when there is indication that the perpetrator might be a Muslim but refuses to use the word in other cases, American scholar Dr. Kevin Barrett says.

On Wednesday, Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and Tashfeen Malik, 29, stormed a holiday party in San Bernardino, California, killing at least 14 people and injuring 21 in the deadliest mass shooting in the US in three years. Hours later, the couple died in a fire exchange with police. [According to dubious mainstream reports. -KB]

Only hours after news broke that suspects had Muslim names, American Muslims strongly condemned the incident, but this did not stop the US mainstream media from spewing hate and venom against Muslims and Islam.

Commenting to Press TV on Sunday, Dr. Barrett said, “We had another ‘mass shooting’ in the United States. This is nothing new; we had probably hundreds already in 2015.”

“But this one is getting worldwide headlines because the alleged perpetrators are supposedly ‘radical Muslims’, and that’s led to endless speculation among the media and politicians whether this is a case of ‘terrorism,’” he added.

“The word terrorism apparently means when anybody who is ostensibly Muslim conducts a shooting, and if anybody else does it’s not terrorism,” the editor of Veterans Today noted.  “Well, the problem though is that as with so many other similar cases, it appears that the link between the allegedly Muslim perpetrators and terrorism may have been fabricated.”

See: San Bernardino shooting story full of holes

Dr. Barrett said, “We have some huge questions being raised about what really happened in San Bernardino, and one of the people raising the questions is the lawyer of the family of the two alleged perpetrators.”

“This lawyer has questioned why the suspects were in handcuffs – they were dead in handcuffs. His name is David Chesley. And he should be commended. For once we have a lawyer for people who are being accused for this kind of crime who is actually standing up for his clients,” he added.

“And he has pointed out that the handcuffed bodies could be interpreted as evidence that the people were executed, which is what we have seen in many other similar cases where alleged terrorist suspects – who one would think would be captured and interrogated, you would think that they would stop at nothing to capture these people alive so that they can take down their alleged terror networks – and yet case after case, bin Laden’s supposed execution and throwing him in the ocean with no witnesses to all sorts of other cases where these terror suspects have just been hunted down and executed point-blank, the authorities really don’t act as if they are really trying to stop terrorism; instead they act like they are trying to silence patsies who know too much.

“And we have other indications that that’s what happened. The couple blamed for the San Bernardino shooting was apparently gunned down in cold blood in their car. The police claim that there was a gun battle initiated by the suspects, but the car windows were rolled up and then blown out. Nobody starts a gun battle by shooting through rolled-up car windows from inside of a car. It’s pretty much physically impossible, it wouldn’t work.

So it appears once again that these people may have just been gunned down and silenced.

“There are all sorts of other questions being raised about the shooting. The fact that the facility where the shooting happened, which is a handicapped facility – a very strange place for Muslims to attack! Why would radical Muslims be angry at handicapped people? I don’t know.”

Massive attacks on random civilians are virtually ALWAYS carried out by the government - in order to force the people to run to the authorities for protection
Massive attacks on random civilians are virtually ALWAYS carried out by the government – in order to scare the people into running to the authorities for protection…and handing over their money and their liberty.


Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.

He is host of TRUTH JIHAD RADIO; a hard driving weekly radio show funded by listener donations at Patreon.com and FALSE FLAG WEEKLY NEWS (FFWN); a audio-video show produced by Tony Hall, Allan Reese, and Kevin himself. FFWN is funded through FundRazr.

He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.

Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin; where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.
DISCLOSURES: All content herein is owned by author exclusively.  Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.

About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. This is a worldwide problem, not just for Americans. The majority of the world populace still doesn’t even have a chance for higher education.

  2. Dr. Barrett is clearly overeager to take an opportunistic stance without doing serious research. It’s clear that anyone who says anything contrary to the official position is immediately given credence by the doctor. I posted on his previous piece on another page, and again below, asking he confer with VT’s own staff with regard to whether a 125 pound woman could reasonable handle an A/R style firearm (while in body armor, with other equipment including magazines and bombs). I am quite certain Gordon Duff, by all accounts a firearms expert, would say “yes” (which is the absolutely right answer). He also raises the issue of a deceased suspect on the ground in cuffs. Clearly someone in VT can inform the doctor of how law enforcement ensures a suspect is cuffed and completely immobile. That is job one (and, yes, they do so even if the suspect is strongly believed to be dead). And, yes, it is not only reasonable, but possible if you are being pursued from the rear or are directly facing a target, to fire through the windows of a car from the inside. Does the doctor have firearms training? Again, I am quite sure Gordon or other editors will confirm all three of my assertions here. Certainly anyone with knowledge of firearms and/or police procedures will. Poorly done in this instance, Dr. Barrett.

  3. I would like to add to the obvious mess because I happened to be in the area at the time. About an hour before it happened, I stopped to get gas one exit from the occurrence. The streets were eerily quiet and my empathic feelers detected agitation in the air. I wanted a cup of coffee, and went to 3 different gas stations. All the coffee was gone, no lids, no cream… all emptied out. From the previous day perhaps when they were all in training for the Big event?

    When I was heading back the other direction right after it happened, I saw unmarked white SUV’s all coming up from the south no sirens. 30 or 40 of them… I have never seen all white SUV’s in SoCal. They are all black and white, unless black undercovers. Then a few black and whites went flying down the freeway towards Waterman.

    • I switched on the local radio…
      What I heard was the most ridiculous contradictions imaginable. First, they said it was a shooting during a law enforcement drill, then it was a company Christmas party, then it was a law enforcement Christmas party at the Disability center. They kept describing two towers and a third building trying to make it sound like 9/11. They were stuttering and sounded so nervous trying to read their script. Then they had supposed husbands of the trapped workers who were being told to stay in the hallway on the phone saying “they are like fish in a barrel.” They kept saying key phrases like that. BTW, If it was a Christmas party, why were the workers still in their offices or the hallway? The callers didn’t sound upset even though their wives were in danger. They did say there were 3 shooters though from the very beginning. I think that was about the only truth I heard for the whole hour that I listened to their nonsense.

    • LC That part of town is busy. It is right off the freeway and in the heart of the Inland Empire. All of L.A. is crowded and goes 24/7.

      I know people died because apparently 3 hired mercenaries did the dirty work and so I am sure there were concerned family members. Just the ones I heard on the radio seemed hired…

      but lol re: your x

  4. This is “Veterans” today. So where are the folks who know what it is to hump 40 extra pounds of mags and OH, lest we forget explosives during live ops and FIT an escape window w/o missing a beat, whilste one of these highly trained operators was a new mother, 90 lbs, never killed a fly, and was MEGATON the whole time? Yeah, BS. Oh I seemed to forget, they stopped visiting here…..

  5. The witness is lying so her testimony is of no value. The false flag narrative is a non-starter here, it is not the truth. This was a drill sold as a live event, there were no three shooters, neither men or woman, white or black, Christian or Muslim and having experienced this for several years now it is becoming tiresome the way people play into the narrative of lies by playing along with it . Trying to assert that the event was conducted by someone else is not going to achieve anything, certainly will not help anyone to discern the truth. The hoax assertions can be overdone, but when the evidence is overwhelming, as it is in this case, it deserves to be stated plainly.

    • James, theater or real, or some combination of the two (it sure as shit was real for the patsies), this WAS a false flag. When Kennedy shut down the original Operation Gladio, or actually moved it to Europe, he understood that the Pentagon and CIA planners were mixing up theater and reality, they didn’t care whether people died or not, so long as they got the desired outcome. That is still the case with Operation Gladio B.

      Look for who benefits. That is the mark of a false flag attack.

    • What makes it a false flag? Think about one thing. Broad daylight. Then ask…where are all of the eyewitness accounts. Mugs in front of cameras? Where are they?


    • I completely agree, @James Robertson. I’m not sure here testimony would stand up under scrutiny. She stated she “couldn’t see a face”, hands could have been gloved, yet she states the shooters were white and male, despite all the garb and body armor the assailants reportedly wore. The witness stated she wasn’t sure of the gloves, yet could count the magazines the one shooter had. Any testimony is important, and this witness’s should be given proper investigation, yet on the surface this needs careful discernment, not immediate acceptance. In Dr. Barret’s previous post I raised questions regarding the assertions of the lawyers, one of which was the questioning as to whether a 125 pound woman could handle an A/R style rifle with body armor on. I asked Dr. Barrett to confer with Gordon Duff who, given his knowledge of forearms, I believe would unequivocally state “yes,” a person of that stature with that equipment could train to expertly handle an A/R style rifle. Respectfully, Dr. Barrett should be more discerning. Skepticism is important and necessary, but the case here doesn’t add to false flag yet.

    • Socratic Dog, you are right, it is a false flag event, but in my opinion, based on the available evidence it was not a false flag attack. That is the distinction that I was trying to draw.

  6. Dubious . . . a) Sally Abdelmageed [her name] b) CBS reporting [compromised MSM] c) Only “witness” to report this. Were the two killed in the SUV patsies? Probably. Were there 2 or 3? There was a 3rd reported over and over early on. Authorities acknowledged this person and then the media And the authorities began to conceal the 3rd person “of interest”. The 3rd person was probably the handler and the supplier of the weapons including the dud pipe bombs . . . this event was staged. Same M.O. as the other staged events.

  7. You need more than one witness. Where are all who saw the shootout in progress? Where are those reports?


Comments are closed.