Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby Iamwhomiam » Fri Sep 18, 2015 6:45 pm

And well placed it is, Bryter. Thank you.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby BrandonD » Sat Sep 19, 2015 5:41 am

brainpanhandler » Fri Sep 18, 2015 9:30 am wrote:
BrandonD » Thu Sep 10, 2015 6:50 pm wrote:
brainpanhandler » Tue Sep 08, 2015 10:21 am wrote:"Power tends to be exploited" = "If the powerful CAN do it, then they WILL do it." (only in a hyperbolic and more entertaining way)?

And the people that know me irl would scoff and guffaw at the suggestion that I "tend to be the defender of the status quo". But perhaps you meant that in an entertaining, hyperbolic way.


In general, there are 2 arguments against a conspiracy theory that involves wealthy/powerful people doing terrible things that would benefit them: either they *couldn't* do it or they *wouldn't* do it.

In other words, either they don't have the means or it's just not conceivable that people would do something so immoral.

The second is a great argument for the average man, but IMO it has been thoroughly discredited by anyone who frequents RI.

So really, the only defensible argument against such conspiracy theories is that those in power are simply unable to do it. Or, perhaps it is possible but the risks would outweigh the benefits.


With that "or..." you added the option missing from your earlier false dichotomy. Of course there are more than 2 arguments.

Do we believe that, in events of major social impact, people with power and influence would be unable to insert actors into positions of prominence in news stories, with the intention of directing public discourse in a manner benefiting their goals?


I'm not sure who the royal "we" is, but I believe actors could and have been inserted "into positions of prominence in news stories, with the intention of directing public discourse in a manner benefiting their goals." Wag the Dog was a documentary. I also think that theory has concurrently been disseminated and misapplied to scenarios where it hasn't happened for the purpose of further eroding people's sense of reality and furthering a complete distrust of any information they receive from the msm. Not everything the msm reports on is lies, spin and fabrication.

do the powerful EVER have to answer for their crimes?


Not often.

The actor scenario seems not only completely possible, but fairly easy considering today's media monopoly. Many of us have seen those Conan OBrien sketches where news people from across the country repeat the exact same news story word-for-word, showing clearly that they're all just repeating something that has been passed down from a central source.


I think it's possible in limited situations. The more people that need to know the less likely it is.

So my point here is that 1) powerful people have the means, and 2) it would not be beneath their "morality".

So why exactly wouldn't they do it?


Because, as you have alluded to, the risks would outweigh the benefits. There are risks. Blowing up the twin towers, by whatever means that was accomplished, was a risk. It might after the fact seem that there was no risk because nothing happened to the perpetrators, but they couldn't have been certain before hand that it would play out that way.

This is what I meant by: If they CAN do it, then they WILL do it. The powerful are not above committing massive crimes if they can get away with it.


Of course not. That's how they got powerful. They're opportunistic sociopaths with no regard for the ants they crush. Which doesn't mean they will willy nilly murder thousands of people without the promise of accruing significant benefit. It's a terrible mistake to believe your enemy is stupid simply because they are wrong (or sociopathic).

This doesn't mean that every prominent person in a news story is an actor of course,


Well, that's a bit understated. Don't you think?

I was also assuming that those of us here understand the importance of nuance and discrimination.


And that's a bit overstated. Don't you think?

It was my impression that you've not only dismissed the Sandy Hook crisis actor stuff (which is fine), but the entire concept as a whole (which I consider unfounded).


Not sure where you got that impression. Nuance and discrimination are important.

Maybe I've misjudged you as the "defender of the status quo", and if that's the case then I apologize.


No apology necessary. And you're not the only one that has radically misjudged me in this fashion. All you have to do to get pegged with the "defender of the status quo" label around here is try to apply and little "nuance and discrimination" to somebody's hairbrained theory. All of the sudden you're an msnbc watching, Hillary supporting bot with no ability to see how you are being manipulated.

I consider defenders of the status quo to be those who defend the establishment point of view, and this applies to all social and political spectrums, not just the right-wing psychos. The establishment always has a coke and a pepsi, to give people the illusion of change and progress.


I've been a member here for coming up on 9 years now. Tired of endlessly reestablishing my Ri bona fides. Sigh.


Thanks for the replies, I feel we are pretty much in agreement.

My only possible point of contention would be your comment "but they couldn't have been certain before hand that it would play out that way" - I think this point is a bit finer.

IMO it is true that they couldn't be certain that their plan would work as intended, however they nevertheless *could* be relatively certain that they wouldn't have to personally face any consequences. At worst, there would be scapegoats further down the chain who would take the fall.

This is why I think these sort of things are probable. I might compare it to a guy shooting at an unarmed man on the opposite side of a ravine. Sure it's uncertain that he'll hit them, but what are they going to do about it if he doesn't? So he just keeps on taking shots hoping that one hits.
"One measures a circle, beginning anywhere." -Charles Fort
User avatar
BrandonD
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby Grizzly » Wed Sep 23, 2015 5:18 pm

FTR (for the record), I neither believe nor disbelieve, however this is interesting...

http://thetruthfulone.com/false-flag-crisis-actors/
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby backtoiam » Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:28 am

FTR (for the record), I neither believe nor disbelieve, however this is interesting...


Well, that was interesting.

Karl Rove:
“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”




When Caesar got stabbed and killed he reportedly said "Et tu Brute"
(even you Brutus?)

Evidently Brutus acted his way into a knife distance of Caesar. Old Brutus must have been pretending, or "acting."

With green screen technology and all the new toys we don't have to be at the Coliseum watching the Chariot Races to watch Caesar get stabbed and have a degree of certainty that it indeed happened because we watched the body get drug out to the graveyard.

We can sit on the internet or watch TV and wonder if what we saw was what we thought we actually saw, or not?

While we speculate the paid hecklers will tell us how insensitive we are for doubting that the blood is real and the legs really got blown off. As the actors take a bath, wash off the blood, read the new script, eat a bite of lunch, and practice for the next horrific spectacle that is not what it appeared to be, the grand architects will be writing the next script.

While we watch the new script, the elements of the last script that we finally were able to see, will be history, and we will be living and watching the new one. Which of course we will not be able to fully discern until it has become history as we attempt to discern the newest....

And so it is....
"A mind stretched by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions." Oliver Wendell Holmes
backtoiam
 
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:22 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

.

Postby IanEye » Thu Sep 24, 2015 9:11 am

Image

Here’s Barbara Starr acting as a Pentagon correspondent for CNN and as a crisis actor during the Sandy Hook and Boston Marathon false flag events.

.


Nope.
User avatar
IanEye
 
Posts: 4863
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (29)

Re: .

Postby brainpanhandler » Thu Sep 24, 2015 12:00 pm



Paid heckler.
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 5088
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby slimmouse » Thu Sep 24, 2015 12:55 pm

brainpanhandler wrote:


Paid heckler.


Quick comment from a loaner PC.

Personally speaking I Cant say that I like that last example from the link either.

As for the rest of them..... any thoughts?

As someone who, even myself considered this crisis actor stuff to be a bridge too far, if this actually doesnt make an interesting case, then there are a lot more dopplegangers around in this world than we might think.

As someone who considers himself an expert in the field, Neil Kramer mentioned about a year ago that he knew that some of those photographs of the Sandy Hook victims parents were photoshopped.

Can we make a case for this - namely that the families themselves were too traumatised, and consented to actors for the sake of anonymity ?

Not quite so sure of any justification for the Boston bombing actor though. Assuming of course the photograph was taken from the incident
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby zangtang » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:33 pm

I thought that it had been 'established' that the school at sandy hook wasnt actually a school at the time? (should have saved that one)

by 'nope' i take it you mean you're not convinced?
- how about the Alex Israel /Katie Foley?

it really only takes one for 'proof of concept' methinks.....................
zangtang
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby backtoiam » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:48 pm

brainpanhandler wrote:

IanEye » Thu Sep 24, 2015 8:11 am wrote:
Nope.



Paid heckler.



hmmm....Paid? When i get heckled out on the road I usually like to see an employment card. Are you shady characters Bonafide?
"A mind stretched by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions." Oliver Wendell Holmes
backtoiam
 
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:22 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby Searcher08 » Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:24 pm

zangtang » Thu Sep 24, 2015 6:33 pm wrote:I thought that it had been 'established' that the school at sandy hook wasnt actually a school at the time? (should have saved that one)

by 'nope' i take it you mean you're not convinced?
- how about the Alex Israel /Katie Foley?

it really only takes one for 'proof of concept' methinks.....................


I agree. The only one that leapt out at me was the Alex Israel / Katie Foley one; it gets torpedoed when you have two higher resolution pics side by side or a video:
User avatar
Searcher08
 
Posts: 5887
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby PufPuf93 » Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:32 pm

Grizzly » Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:18 pm wrote:FTR (for the record), I neither believe nor disbelieve, however this is interesting...

http://thetruthfulone.com/false-flag-crisis-actors/


The "uummm girl" video grabbed me. :whisper:
User avatar
PufPuf93
 
Posts: 1884
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 12:29 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby PufPuf93 » Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:44 pm

Searcher08 » Thu Sep 24, 2015 12:24 pm wrote:
zangtang » Thu Sep 24, 2015 6:33 pm wrote:I thought that it had been 'established' that the school at sandy hook wasnt actually a school at the time? (should have saved that one)

by 'nope' i take it you mean you're not convinced?
- how about the Alex Israel /Katie Foley?

it really only takes one for 'proof of concept' methinks.....................


I agree. The only one that leapt out at me was the Alex Israel / Katie Foley one; it gets torpedoed when you have two higher resolution pics side by side or a video:


Had not got to this post yet when commented. :rofl2

Our MSM is propaganda, some quite crude, and opinion more than news compared to the receding past.

Narratives and stories are selected and crafted. Guests and hosts limit the bounds of discourse and acceptable perception.

Witnesses serve a narrative. Think the faux Kuwaiti incubator nurse who actually was the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter bearing false witness.

The step that I cannot wrap my head around is that of a staged passion play. For one, I cannot see the reason to go to that strength of effort.

That psy-ops are the rule rather than the exception. Seems reasonable. :hug1:
User avatar
PufPuf93
 
Posts: 1884
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 12:29 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby backtoiam » Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:54 pm

That psy-ops are the rule rather than the exception. Seems reasonable.



That one right there yields about a 93% success rating for me. I have no idea how to drive it where I want it to go, but it comes out of the same end of the tube pretty often...If I could drive it I would be a demon :twisted:
"A mind stretched by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions." Oliver Wendell Holmes
backtoiam
 
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:22 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby tapitsbo » Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:47 pm

Just slapping the label "psy-op" on something doesn't get you that far, though, in terms of evaluating its significance
tapitsbo
 
Posts: 1824
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Security Theater ("Crisis Actors")

Postby Iamwhomiam » Fri Sep 25, 2015 5:33 pm

I don't buy it. I don't doubt crisis actors exist, but one must ask to what purpose?

What purpose would 'faking' Sandy Hook serve and what purpose did 'faking' Aurora serve? Boston Marathon? We recognize the trauma of such events and feel some strong emotional impact, but for what purpose?

Seriously, what immense or subtle changes took place after any such event?

Folk are quick to point to "crises actors" and claim fakery, but why? Without knowing the "Why?" we, know no more than a "traumatized victim," that a supposedly horrific event took place that leaves us shocked by what we've witnessed. There must be some purpose shocking us so serves, no?

Some will claim they can "prove" the victims of such events are crisis actors, but I've seen no such proof. It goes something like this, a blurb on the web that becomes legend:
As someone who considers himself an expert in the field, Neil Kramer mentioned about a year ago that he knew that some of those photographs of the Sandy Hook victims parents were photoshopped.


No link to their source, but some will only retain they read somewhere on the web that the Sandy Hook parents were photoshopped and they will believe it - and then share it with their circle.

Before our gun toters chime in to share their "Why?" insights, let's remember that after each of these events occurred more laws were passed to lessen restrictions on gun ownership than to tighten it. Indeed. Since Sandy Hook to the end of 2014, there have been more than 100 school shootings. I have no idea how many there have been this year.*

Really, have any of you asked why "they" would have any need for such actors? Real victims have real impact and if dead later cannot screw up remembering whom they are this time (in some claimed cases) of their many chosen artificial personas.

So many of you rightfully condemn the MSM propaganda, but I'll bet most of those doing the damning also digest it nightly.

* on edit, regarding this, I still have no idea how many school shootings have taken place in 2015, but this morning I came across a commentary by Robert J. Gould that was published the other day in my local paper. Although it's behind a paywall, you can circumvent it by googling times union and the commentary's title, which will provide you with a direct link to it. It's a bit off-topic to post in its entirety, but this excerpt is worth repeating here. Please take note of distinction between mass shootings as referred to herein from those recorded by the FBI, in the 2nd paragraph":

Weapons of en masse instruction

The Business Insider reports: "As of Aug. 26, the U.S. has had 247 mass shootings in the first 238 days of 2015. For those keeping track, that's an average of more than one shooting per day." Why?

No doubt there are many reasons—many causes. First, let's be clear on the metrics here. The statistic, above, is for mass shootings, not mass murders. Mass shootings are defined by the Mass Shooting Tracker as a "shooting spree in which four or more people are shot. ... This differs from the FBI definition in which an event only qualifies as a mass shooting if four or more are killed."

What would possess a person to open fire on a group of people? I suppose we can imagine what might make a person so angry, so enraged and so full of hate that they shot one specific person in an inexplicably deep fury. But a whole group of people?
Last edited by Iamwhomiam on Sat Sep 26, 2015 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests