“The New Jussie Smollett?”: Body Language Experts and Security Pros Exposed Shocking ‘Red Flags’ Suggesting Ilhan Omar Town Hall Attack Was Staged
In the world of political theater, a well-timed “attack” can be a powerful tool for shifting a narrative, garnering sympathy, and silencing critics. However, when such events are subjected to the scrutiny of forensic body language and executive protection experts, the cracks in the facade can appear almost instantly. Recently, a town hall event involving U.S. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar became the center of a national firestorm after a man allegedly jumped up and “squirted” an unknown substance on her. While initial headlines hailed her courage for continuing to speak, a deeper dive into the behavior and protocols captured on video has led prominent experts to a much more cynical conclusion: the entire incident appears to have been staged.
Scott Rouse, a renowned body language expert, and Patrick Collis, a specialist in executive protection and investigations, have meticulously analyzed the footage, and their findings are a devastating blow to the official narrative. Their analysis centers on a fundamental principle of human biology: the “fight, flight, or freeze” response. When a human being is subjected to a sudden, violent, or unexpected attack—especially a high-profile political figure—the brain’s limbic system takes over. What Rouse and Collis observed in Omar and her inner circle was the exact opposite of these universal survival instincts.
According to Rouse, the most glaring red flag was Omar’s immediate reaction. “What we’re looking for here is any kind of shock or surprise, even a little bit,” Rouse explained. “She doesn’t show any shock, any surprise, any fear. There’s no freeze, fight, or flight—nothing. She just starts running toward the guy.” In a real attack, a subject almost always attempts to put distance between themselves and the threat, or they stop and wait for their security detail to intervene. Omar’s aggressive forward movement toward an armed or unknown threat is a behavior rarely, if ever, seen in genuine high-stress confrontations.
The “attacker” also displayed behavior that defied the logic of a real assailant. Collis pointed out that at such close range, a person fueled by genuine rage would almost certainly aim for the eyes or face to incapacitate the target. Instead, the individual in the video aimed a syringe-like device directly at Omar’s chest. “His aim is horrible,” Rouse noted. “If that was real anger he was showing, he would have gone for the face.” The “clunky backwards walking” of the subject and the lack of a continued assault further suggested a lack of authentic intent.
The behavior of Omar’s security detail and aides was perhaps the most professional indictment of the event’s legitimacy. Patrick Collis, who has managed protection for high-profile entertainers and politicians, was baffled by the security team’s failure to follow basic evacuation protocols. “You don’t hire security just to tell them, ‘No, I’m going to stay,'” Collis remarked. “Once something happens, you’re in my world now. You’re taking orders, not giving them.”
Standard protocol for a chemical or unknown liquid attack dictates an immediate “evac” of the subject from the scene and a clearing of the entire room to protect bystanders from potential airborne pathogens. Instead, the security team allowed Omar to stay at the podium and continue her speech for another 30 minutes. From a protection standpoint, this was described by Collis as “the dumbest thing” because it endangered not only the Congresswoman but every person in the room. The fact that the security team negotiated with her rather than physically moving her to safety suggests to these experts that they were either grossly incompetent or in on a script where her “courage” was more important than her actual safety.
The aides surrounding Omar also failed the “Strict Necessity Test” for authentic human behavior. One woman in particular was seen walking directly into the “danger zone” with no signs of panic, wide eyes, or the rapid-movement behaviors seen in the actual crowd further back in the room. Those on the outside of the action showed real fear; those at the center showed “the worst acting you’re going to see anywhere,” according to Rouse.
The implications of these findings are profound. If the attack was indeed staged, it places Ilhan Omar in the company of individuals like Jussie Smollett, whose fabricated hate crime became a national embarrassment. Rouse and Collis argue that the event was “shittily planned” by people who don’t understand the nuances of body language and professional security. By trying to execute a “heroic” narrative without accounting for natural survival instincts, the organizers may have created a visual record of their own deception.
As the political fallout continues, the “unholy mess” of this town hall incident serves as a cautionary tale about the limits of political theater in an era of high-definition scrutiny and expert analysis. Whether the public ultimately buys into the “courageous survivor” narrative or the “staged stunt” conclusion, the forensic red flags raised by Rouse and Collis have made it impossible for the event to be viewed with a blank check of trust. In the end, as Scott Rouse noted, when people don’t know how to act during an attack, the truth has a way of leaking out through the very performance they are trying to maintain.