New Orleans terrorist: Why did FBI quickly change its tune about his New Year's Day truck attack?

First he was not a terrorist at all, then he was a terrorist 'not acting alone,' then he was a terrorist but of the 'lone wolf' variety

The FBI has been all over the board when it comes to its description of the New Orleans truck jihadist who killed 15 people and wounded 35 on New Year’s Day.

First, they said it was not an act of terrorism, then they said it was indeed terrorism and the jihadist, Shamsud Din Jabbar, did not act alone but as part of a larger cell. Now they’ve switched back to saying he did act alone.

Which theory should we believe?

Former FBI agent Bobby Chacon told Fox News that he believes Mr. Jabbar was likely part of a sleeper cell that had been activated and included at least three or four other people. This indicates we should expect more terrorist attacks in the final 19 days before Trump’s inauguration, and likely even more after he’s sworn into office.

The more chaos the better, as far as the globalists are concerned. But they will also use law enforcement and the media to continue propping up the matrix, a society where a large segment of the population continues to live in ignorant bliss, for as long as possible.

The reason law enforcement changed their tune and said Jabbar acted alone was because the alternative was too scary and would have caused people to lose business leading up to tonight’s big Sugar Bowl college football game. If there are three or four other terrorists at large in the New Orleans area, that’s bad for business. Too many football fans pack up and go home under that scenario, before emptying their wallets at the city’s restaurants, hotels and bars.

So, the cops changed their story and said Jabbar was a lone-wolf terrorist, not part of a cell.

The truth is, we have many sleeper cells awaiting activation here in the United States of America.

However, if you know anything about how local law enforcement works in American cities, it’s all about the money. And keeping the money flowing into your town means catering to visitors and tourists. That’s where the money comes from and politicians and bureaucrats will go to great lengths to keep that stream of income flowing.

That’s just the reality. Police chiefs don’t work for the people. They work at the pleasure of the mayor and council, offices that are manned by politicians who are sold out to the Chamber of Commerce. Period.

Sheriffs are not much better than police chiefs, although they do have to answer to the public, at least in theory, as they are elected every four years.

I worked as a local newspaper editor for 28 years in suburban markets around Atlanta and Charlotte, N.C. During that stint, it became obvious to me that the most important edorsement any candidate for sheriff could attract was from the Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber-endorsed candidate was almost always the candidate that won. And the Chamber is about one thing, making sure the interests of local businesses were met from a law-enforcement perspective.

If you want to understand law enforcement in America, follow the money.