The Nova Scotia shooter case has hallmarks of an undercover operation?

For 1) while the narrative is compelling, it doesn't seem like that much was leaked. Just that he managed to withdraw a lot of money in an unusual fashion. The rest is conjecture. Compelling conjecture but still conjecture (I'm assuming that the way paying CIs works is not a secret, they just needed someone to quote to back it up)

I think 1) is actually a win for the canadian populace. Any democratically elected government that is trying to hide any conduct from it’s constituents is grave affront to democracy, (no matter how loud the people involved scream “national security”.)

I'm curious where all that cash ended up. Did they find it? The preceding article on this matter says

> It is not clear what happened to the money from the moment the killer took it out of the Brink’s location to the time he was shot by RCMP officers during an attempted arrest at a gas station in Enfield, N.S., on April 19. The lawyer for family members of the killer’s victims said Wednesday that the estate filing at probate court lists a large sum of cash, which he believes was recovered by the RCMP. “I assume the public trustee has it,” said Robert Pineo, who is suing the estate.

Would it be better to have it in other countries where the government has tight control over the press and social media though?

Small correction. The money was $475,000.

The important thing to note in the article is this:

> "The RCMP Operations Manual, a copy of which was obtained by Maclean’s, authorizes the force to mislead all but the courts in order to conceal the identity of confidential informants and agent sources. > “The identity of a source must be protected at all times except when the administration of justice requires otherwise, i.e. a member cannot mislead a court in any proceeding in order to protect a source.”

So RCMP isn't even telling the truth to the public quite possibly.

out of curiosity, why do you change the value from $475,000 to $400,000?

Worth noting there's several people, a few even claiming to have worked for Brinks, saying he is mistaken in the further comments.

> Does anyone here have an insight into Brink equovalent in US

Brinks is an armored car company. He drove into a lot used to load and unload armored cars making deliveries to banks and filling ATMs, and walked out with a literal duffel bag full of cash.

For security reasons, private citizens are not allowed to do that. Even bank employees can't do that. The whole point of armored cars is they bring the money to you.

Everything about this screams undercover operation.

Brinks is an American company.

Think of an armored car depot like an Amazon warehouse. You can't just pop in and pick up a bottle of hand soap, no matter how big of a customer you are.

Usually, the only non-employees who are allowed to enter are law enforcement.

I think if anyone else sent him large amounts of money they would immediately be under arrest (at least brought in for questioning) and there would be a big story in the news.

If anyone stumbles across this thread in future...

RCMP have again directly denied the suggestions in this story that he worked for them and said the money was his own;

> "What I can confirm at this point is that it appears that the gunman liquidated personal investments from his own bank accounts and converted them to cash prior to the shootings"

https://www.thestar.com/amp/news/canada/2020/06/21/pandemic-...

This seems nearly as likely, although given that most intelligence ops in a country are operated by said country, I think CA still has to be #1 suspect with the US as a close #2

I guess the question that comes to mind is, what would be the motive? That is if you are implying this was an attack by a foreign government (and not that he was a foreign spy who just coincidentally went nuts).

I suppose if it was spies there could be a lot non obvious going on behind the scenes. At face value though i cant see who would benefit from this.

We don't even know if he's actually dead or not though.

It may cause a "suspicious transaction report" to be submitted to FINTRAC but they receive a multitude of these reports from FIs and financial services companies daily. There is no guarantee that it would be acted on in a timely manner. (most likely not)

The article addresses FINTRAC and how the transaction would have been cleared.

Thank you.

I suppose to give it to someone else. Giving away possesions is a common warning sign for suicide from what i understand.

People who are suicidal can often behave in ways that appear paradoxical to others. This includes things like booking holidays, getting new jobs, buying tools and equipment for a DIY project, etc.

He was killed by the police, and that may not have been part of his plan.

I don't know much about the case. Did he plan to do it that specific day? Maybe he had general plans, but didn't know the month or year he would carry them out until the moment he snapped.

He withdrew a huge amount of money, in a manner that is only used by CIs and agents. From the article:

> A Mountie familiar with the techniques used by the force in undercover operations, but not with the details of the investigation into the shooting, says Wortman could not have collected his own money from Brink’s as a private citizen.

and

> “When you come into my branch and you want a ton of cash, then I say, you gotta give us a couple of days. We put in our Brink’s order, I order the money through Brink’s, then when the money arrives, you come back into the branch, I bring you into a back room and I count the money out for you,” the banking expert said. “Sending someone to Brink’s to get the money? I’ve never heard of that before. The reason is, if I’m the banker, and you’ve deposited your savings in my bank branch, I’m responsible for making sure the money goes to the right person. If you want this money, I’m going to verify your identity and document that. I can’t do that if I’m transferring the money to Brink’s.”

It's solid evidence that this guy is connected to the RCMP in some manner.

That kind of transfers could be also used by the Hells Angels, which is a front for the Drug cartel. It's also very likely that he withdraw his own money, using his cartel connections to get it in cash from Brink.

A government service (FBI eqivalent) using such a loose cannon as informant is likely, but paying him that much unlikely. And the rampage looks very personal, unlike other cases in the US.

What would be the possible reason for conducting this particular false flag (assuming that's what it was)

what are some examples that are thought to be in this category?