Truth Frequency Radio

Jul 29, 2015

New Possibilities to Explain What Happened to Michael Cravey & Getting Closer to the Reason for the Benghazi Cover-Up.

Michael Cravey Boxes

July 29, 2015 memoryholeblog   by

If you’re not already familiar with the Michael Cravey conspiracy, you’re in for a doozy. I suspect those already familiar with the strange tale will find this new information as fascinating as I do. Newcomers can get up to speed by reading the background section below. What I’m presenting doesn’t solve any mysteries, ultimately. These are merely theories and information for continued research and speculation. I welcome and encourage people to add their perspectives, to debate the merits of the theories presented and develop those of their own. The goal for many of us has been to understand what happened to Michael. In the process, some of our suspicions may be confirmed and we may learn some unexpected things along the way.

Background: Who Michael Cravey Was

Anyone already familiar with the case can skip this section. You can always return to it once you’re finished reading the new content.

Michael was a normal guy in his mid twenties that appeared to be close to his family and well liked by anyone who cared to express their opinion of him. Most relevant to this article is Michael’s unique interest in conspiracy theories and alternative views about history and other matters. It’s this unique interest that likely drove him to YouTube as a means to learn about the world around him and express his views; a privilege only granted to few by the main-stream media.

I’ve written and compiled a few articles and videos that are great compilations of the larger story and many of the minute details as well. I’ll provide those links and links to other key information below.

I guess the cliff-hanger aspect of Michael’s story would be when, on March 3rd, 2014 he woke up early and drove to the University of Gainesville campus. At around 7 am, while speaking to an older couple in a parking area on campus he suddenly produced a knife and began to attack the male stranger. Chasing the fleeing man down and laughing, he subdued him before ending the attack and fleeing. He fled at high speed in his Jeep Patriot in a chase with police that became so dangerous it had to be called off.

He then drove to the local news station and asked the local TV meteorologist if he knew why Michael was there to see him. When the man confirmed he did not, Michael walked away. His brother then calls his mobile phone to find Michael in the drive-thru at McDonalds, totally oblivious to anything unusual taking place. When he hears of the hurricane he is at the center of, he says to his brother, “I’m being set up. I need to figure this out.” And the phone goes dead.

Soon after, he’s spotted again by police and another high-speed chase begins that ends when Michael looses control and collides with another vehicle. After emerging from the crushed vehicle he quickly heads into the shopping center nearby and goes in and out of a few stores. When he emerges from a BestBuy and a police Lieutenant is there to meet him, gun drawn, Michael charges him with a raised hatchet he had been concealing. All 15 rounds are fired, 9 bullets striking him. He is pronounced dead a short time later at the hospital.

That is either the middle or beginning of the story, depending on your perspective. Many other details come into focus about his life leading up to that day and the aftermath of his death.



What Ultimately Led to Michael’s Death

There are a number of possible reasons why Michael may have been killed. He may have been chosen as the archetypal online “conspiracy theorist” in some plot to demonize online dissent. He may have been the unwitting subject of a program of some kind and his murder was the required means of concluding his participation. He may have gotten too close to a criminal conspiracy and was perceived as a sufficient threat to warrant taking out. It’s also possible that Michael did commit the acts as described resulting from hidden psychological issues or severe, but undiagnosed mental illness.

Assuming that Michael was somehow killed in an organized effort to prevent a threat he may have posed, what was so threatening? Who felt threatened? If what happened to Michael had happened to just about anyone else, we might have been left with almost nothing to go on. In his case, however there’s a virtual library of possibilities in the form of his many YouTube videos. Strangely, his YouTube channel remains online as of this writing.

In past examples of individuals with social media accounts who then went on to be the suspect in high-profile crimes, their accounts have been quickly closed. That was the case with Jared Loughner, James Holmes, the Tsarnaev brothers and others. Granted, Michael’s case isn’t as high-profile as these other examples. But it’s unusual that, even after a year since his death his Facebook account also remains online.

Checking his Facebook account just now I was saddened to see that someone posted birthday wishes to his timeline, apparently unaware that he isn’t there to receive it.

“July 4 at 9:53pm – I hope you had a great birthday buddy!!”

Although I knew Michael and was Facebook friends with him since December 2012, I didn’t know his birthday was July 4th. Aside from a few other birthday wishes from people who did appear to know he had died and a couple comments saying that he was missed, there hasn’t been much posted to his Facebook timeline since his death on March 3rd, 2014.

His Aurora Theater Shooting Conclusions

Michael’s research into the Aurora Theater shooting may have led him into discoveries that were viewed as a threat to some group. If you haven’t closely assessed the media’s portrayal of the Aurora shooting, many independent investigators and researchers consider it to be a staged or an otherwise deceptive event. I recommend viewing this Aurora Shooting Playlist for in-depth analysis, alternative interpretations of the evidence and altogether different conclusions than those deemed reportable by the media. My view at this point and after extensive research is that James Holmes did not shoot anyone. He was likely duped into being at the theater that night and drugged during the event itself.

Some may argue that there’s little to support that theory aside from his broken car window, indicating he may have been found unconscious inside his vehicle with the doors locked. The official report is that he was apprehended while mulling about his vehicle. Few people know about a report that appeared in the New York Daily News on July 22, 2012 that included an account given by a woman claiming that a relative was in jail at the time who witnessed Holmes’ arrival. The report included, “Tasha Taylor, who said a relative of hers is in the jail two cells down from the accused killer, described him when he first came into the lockup restrained to a wheelchair.”

“He was brought in wearing his body armor,” Taylor said. “Once they got his armor off, his body was painted red. They had to shower him right away.”

The only time I’ve heard these details is when Michael presented them in a video he produced back in October, 2012.

Although there are many interesting details to consider here, it’s the statement about his being brought into the jail by wheelchair that I find supports the theory that Holmes was somehow incapacitated at the time.

In Michael’s video, he describes having found the news snippet on a private blog, which then led him to the original Daily News article. He then explains that the article had been edited, removing the aforementioned details. Only by viewing the Google cache of the article was he able to confirm that it did, in fact appear in the original. In an interesting twist, when researching for this article I found that the current version appears to have reverted back to the original. It’s extremely unlikely that Michael was wrong about the article being edited, which he specified took place the day after its original publication.

Is it possible that certain details in the original being found on private blogs led the publisher to revert back to the original? Was the information damaging to the official narrative, or was it considered more damaging if more people were to see it removed from the article?

In early January of 2014, I spoke with Michael about the Aurora case. He seemed sure that he had identified two individuals as being shooters at the scene. Who those individuals were at first wasn’t clear to me, although he said they had both posed as victims. He also suspected that they were both in costume at the time of the shooting. Later on, as we and others collaborated in our research I learned who the individuals were and why he was so sure they were involved. It wouldn’t be appropriate or wise of me to publicly reveal more about his theory. However, from what I have shared you may see it as possible the true perpetrators might have wanted to stop Michael from pursuing it any further.

Terry Jones, the Koran-Burning Pastor

On occasion, sparked by an ongoing interest in this mystery I have re-watched some of Michael’s videos on YouTube. Recently, I had just finished watching a selection and suddenly remembered one of the first I had seen. As I recalled, it was a video documenting his visit to the infamous pastor Terry Jones’ church. He was attempting to secure an interview with him. I scanned through the hundreds of videos on his channel, but it wasn’t there. After double checking, I considered the possibility that either Michael or someone else had removed it.

The Dangerous Benghazi Scandal

This piqued my curiosity for a number of reasons. Terry Jones isn’t making big headlines currently. But when Michael made the trip to visit him it was just after the Benghazi scandal in which on 9/11/2012, what was reported to be a U.S. embassy in Benghazi Libya was overtaken by Islamic militants. In the melee US Ambassador Christopher Stevens had been killed. This may have been a very touchy situation for the US State Department or some other U.S. agency for any number of reasons.

Ultimately the reason for the attack given by U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice as she made a tour of the Sunday morning talk shows was reaction to an inflammatory, anti-Muslim film on YouTube. Rice appeared in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s stead due to Clinton having had a concussion, or dehydration; whatever.

The following is speculation on my part, although I’m not alone in my views. And it’s important to provide further background on the Benghazi scandal playing out at the time. I suspect that the video blamed as the reason for the Benghazi attack wasn’t the actual reason. I don’t have enough to form a complete theory as to what happened in Benghazi, although I’ll present one possibility further on. I do however suspect that the video blamed by Ambassador Rice and others was an elemental part of the ensuing cover-up.

It’s critical to note that the video was said to have spawned a protest in Benghazi that ultimately led to the attack on the compound. We’ve since learned that no evidence for this exists outside of their claim. There is evidence that protests did ignite in other Middle East cities including Cairo, Khartoum, Sanaa and Tunis. But the reason for the protests is hazy and it appears that they may have been spawned by other motivations, staged or otherwise encouraged as part of the cover-up effort. Whether real or not, if the video itself was disseminated and caused these protests to cover up whatever really happened in Benghazi, it’s scandalous and outrageous.

The Reason Given for the Benghazi Attack Was a Ruse

This is where it definitely gets interesting

[ you will have to read it here]

There is also this: