According to media hoaxed “journalists” at the NY Times: “Frank R. James, who was accused of carrying out the worst attack on the New York subway system in years, pled guilty to terrorism in connection with an April shooting spree on a train in Brooklyn.

James, 63, appeared in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn and read aloud from a short statement confessing to the attack on a Manhattan-bound N train on April 12, for which he faces a maximum sentence of life in prison.

"I got on the subway train that was carrying people," said James, dressed in wrinkled khaki jail overalls and sitting at a table alongside his public defenders. "While I was on the train, I started shooting a firearm."

Judge William Kuntz accepted James' 11 guilty pleas, spoken in a voice that at times cracked. The judge ordered the government's probation department to complete a pre-sentencing report by July 4, but he did not set a date for sentencing.”

According the police/media: Just before 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, April 12, a man wearing a mask and an orange vest threw two smoke bombs and opened fire on a train car in Sunset Park. Images of smoke-filled train cars and subway platforms slick with blood flooded social media.

In the ensuing chaos, the shooter escaped and disappeared into the city, but he left behind an array of belongings on the train — including a gun, ammunition, bank cards and a key for a U-Haul — and a trail of video surveillance footage across Brooklyn, according to court filings.

The authorities soon identified Mr. James, who appeared to have planned an attack for days [did he plan to leave behind “an array of belongings on the train“] . He had reserved and paid for a U-Haul van in Philadelphia the week before and had driven it into Brooklyn before dawn that day. Authorities said he had parked the van in Brooklyn and then entered the subway.

Mr. James has been detained since his arrest at a jail in Brooklyn, just blocks from the subway station where the attack took place. [MORE] Mr. James, 63, faces a possible life sentence. [MORE]

Additionally a day after the incident he confessed to the crimes by calling the police tip line on himself! Yes, he snitched on himself (similar to unauthenticated “manifestos,” diaries, rap books, tweets or ISIS press releases containing admissions to the entire crime immediately found after other false flag ops).

Also, according to the NYPD there are 600 cameras where the attack took place. But all were broken or malfunctioned at the time of the attack according to the NYPD and Black Strawboss Eric Adams. [MORE]

There is a pattern emerging in false flags; if the perpetrator(s) survives the alleged attack, there is never a real trial, and thus no evidence the incident occurred is ever established in any law forum. A real trial never takes place, nor can it – such is the nature of false flags. A real trial necessarily means an adversarial contest between the Government or private party and an accused defendant in which evidence is rigorously tested through the pre-trial and trial process.

Unrepresented trials (where a defendant has no attorney) function as the conclusion of the show in these false flag operations. Court theater helps cement the false event as real in the public mind. In reality, understand that when a non-attorney represents himself in a murder trial, it is an uncontested trial and an uncontested trial is not a meaningful trial at all. Such a contest is like you versus Mike Tyson in his prime at MSG - a slaughter, for those unfamiliar.

In the criminal context, ‘no trial’ means there is no contested, adversarial proceeding where the government must establish facts beyond a reasonable doubt with actual, admissible, authenticated evidence and credible witness testimony that is subject to; rigorous cross -examination, the rules of evidence, pre-trial discovery, pre-trial motions and Brady disclosures. The right to confront witnesses and cross examine them, which is the primary purpose of the 6th Amendment and essential to a meaningful criminal trial, is waived as a practical matter during pro-se trials. Such cross examination (in civil and criminal cases) on issues relevant to establishing guilt or liability frequently produces critical evidence and is the defense's tool to raise doubt and produce an acquittal or dismissal. In contrast to police allegations robotically parroted by the media, during a real trial witnesses and evidence are tested for their authenticity and veracity in an adversarial process.

In the alleged ‘Waukesha Christmas Parade Attack’ and ‘Charleston Church Massacre’ false flags both defendants “Darrell Brooks” and “Dylann Roof” respectively were unrepresented during their trials. As a result, no real pre-trial investigation or discovery by “the defense” took place. No meaningful jury selection occurred. No pre-trial motions were filed to exclude evidence, identification or statements. During “the trials” no skilled cross examination took place, no viable objections to hundreds of government requests and witness questions took place, there were no meaningful challenges to hundreds of government exhibits, foundations for evidence were improperly contested or were uncontested, authentication of social media evidence was unnecessary, any and all hearsay and double hearsay was admissible, no actual defenses were asserted, no witnesses testified on their behalf, no legitimate criminal defense or theory of the case was set forth, no effective closing was submitted and more. Such a performance by an attorney would be immediate grounds for a new trial and disbarment. As a result, no meaningful trial ever took place in either false flag episode.

In other false flags no real trial occurs due to guilty pleas (in criminal cases) and default judgments (in civil cases).

A guilty plea is just a guilty plea - it is not proof that anything happened in any criminal case. A guilty plea is a way to avoid an actual trial or avoid having to prove that a crime took place and that a particular individual committed it. Often, it saves time and tremendous resources. A plea is proof that a plea took place, but nothing more, it is an empty representation. For instance, a DUI plea isn’t the evidence that an individual was drunk driving. Evidence at trial such as field sobriety testing, breath tests, bodycam video, witness observations about demeanor, speech, gait, driving behavior and breath odor would be presented and challenged at a real trial. During a plea such allegations are just words on paper read out loud in court.

The guilty pleas in the Brooklyn Subway Terror Shooting and Parkland Massacre aren’t proof that said incidents actually occurred or that "Frank James" or “Nikolas Cruz” actually committed the crimes. In the Spectacle, the Dependent Media carries on as if “Nikolas Cruz” had a contested trial and was found guilty. In reality, he pled guilty last October to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder in the Parkland shooting. His plea triggered the “sentencing hearing” phase of his case, which only determined his sentence; specifically whether he would be put to death. Similarly, "Frank James" aka GOINTELBRO, pled guilty in the Brooklyn case. Now the court will schedule a sentencing hearing. However, as with the Parkland case if an actual, contested criminal trial took place the Government would have had the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime took place and that Cruz or James respectfully committed it. That is, the Government would have had to show that the Parkland and Brooklyn false flags were real - with actual authenticated, admissible evidence and testimony subject to cross-examination, credibility determinations, investigation and inspection in an adversarial process before a jury who would decide on the merits. That never happened.

Similarly, in civil cases a default judgment may occur where a defendant fails to respond to a court order or respond to a pleading by a deadline. Under such circumstances the defendant would be in default and subject to the entry of a default judgment. Default judgments are a drastic action because they confront the judicial preference for disposition on the merits of the case. Like a guilty plea, a default judgment is a judgment without a trial. Default judgments also don’t prove that something happened - they just mean someone lost a lawsuit because they failed to comply with a court order or deadline.

As with the guilty pleas in the alleged Parkland and Brooklyn Subway incidents, default judgements against Alex Jones don’t prove that “Sandy Hoax” actually occurred or prove that he lied when he said it was a false flag. Jones failed to respond to court orders and deadlines in multiple defamation lawsuits, so he lost by default. Nothing more. If an actual, contested defamation trial had taken place it would have been the plaintiffs burden to actually demonstrate that Jones made false statements; not vice-versa. That means that during contested trial(s) the plaintiffs would have had to prove that Sandy Hook occurred - with actual, authenticated, admissible evidence and testimony subject to cross-examination, credibility determinations and inspection in an adversarial process before a jury who would decide the case on the merits. Once a default judgment was entered by the court in the Jones’ cases the only thing left for the jury to do was to determine the amount of damages for the alleged defamation. Jones only participated in that part of the proceeding - hearings on damages after liability was imposed by default.

Default judgments and guilty pleas don’t provide evidence that things occurred in the real world, rather they are simply court mechanisms to move court dockets along. The fact that there was no trial only strengthens the doubt of persons who don’t blindly believe whatever the media and government say.

Allegations function as allegations and also proof in totalitarian systems - ‘who needs to actually prove a set of facts during an adversarial, contested trial when you have “belief” and dogma? Almost like faith based COVID “vaccines:” they’re “vaccines” and are “safe” because the media said so and they know because the government and big pharma told them so (‘take our word for it and go check our science’). The media simply parrots the government or police version of events. For what reason would you ever question a police report? Anyone who questions the police or government narrative or who seeks actual details is considered a conspiracy theorist in totalitarian systems, such as the one you are confined in.

Due to the contrived nature of the Subway Shooting Massacre narrative, the voluntary confession and the facts that; 600 subway cameras malfunctioned at the precise time of the attack, no one was killed, there is a lack of cell-phone video from people in one of the busiest cities in the country, people on video (crisis actors) are recorded doing unusual things in the midst of the attack, such as taking selfies, looking at their phones, mulling around and multiple persons appear to be pouring blood on the subway platform, persons uninjured suddenly appear to be injured etc, - this microwave terror case open and solved in less than 3 days feels synthetic and should be suspected as a false flag conducted by the government and media until proven otherwise.

Belief isn’t needed to come to such a conclusion- look at the attached videos. In contrast, belief is needed to conclude that an actual massacre occurred on the subway because the evidence has never been seen by the public. We are instructed to believe cops and whatever emotional words the media put before our eyes but it takes no intelligence to believe. An actual, contested trial could resolve any doubt as to whether this fake looking bullshit ever took place - but in false flag productions authorities rely on dogma, belief and emotion.

Why would the government do such a thing? As undeceiver Larken Rose explains, authorities terrorize or create great fear in the citizenry in order convince them to voluntarily give authorities more control, more power over them and their lives. Authorities and their Dependent Media must constantly misrepresent reality so citizens always have a bogey-man or a perceived unsolvable problem to fear. Rose states, elites “must pound into [citizens] heads, day in and day out, that the world is full of horrors and injustices , and that only the government authorities can make their lives bearable and that is necessary for them to have enormous power in order to do so.

ACCORDING TO FUNKTIONARY:

cover-stories – headlines that provide cover (hiding and distraction) for the real untold and undiscussed stories behind the one’s they are really (deliberately) not covering, undressing or addressing at all. 2) planted actors and/or provocateurs providing misinformation immediately after a false flag operation—like 9-11, Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon bombing. The methodology: Sell the lie with authority, then change the subject to something emotional. For example, the cover stories about whether or not “well-intentioned” public officials (on oxymoronic characterization itself) made “mistakes” in not paying attention to obvious warnings of so-called Al-Qaida operations inside the territorial United States posed by the mock 9-11 Commission mockery. The whole thrust behind the cover-story was to specifically avoid treating the World Trade Center towers, the Pentagon, and the fields in Pennsylvania as actual crime scenes—to avoid the contradictions in the official stories with physical evidence to the contrary, to totally ignore the blatant anomalies regarding the well-planned, orchestrated, and executed sophisticated operations (hoax) that happened and didn’t happen on that fateful day. (See: Underlying, MEDIA, Tyrant-Paradigm, Pixelated People, West-Wingers, Oklahoma City Bombing, Nine- Eleven, MEDIA NSA Position, Bush Family Crime Syndicate, Pentagon Murders, Killer-Jet, CIA, Israelians, NSA, King TUT, RUN—GMC & The OCTOCON)

false flag – staged psychological operations by government operatives and shadow elite orchestrated and perpetrated against the civilian population. False flag operations does not necessarily mean that oftentimes real people don’t die.