Crisis Actors? Post your info & WTF moments here

[Hunter]

It's really not a question of whether individuals deserve to have the shit beaten out of them, it's the reality that that is what would happen to them if they voiced the opinion that Mr. Bauman is a liar out loud on the Boston Common.

But no individual will do that, because they recognize that reality.

Instead they act inappropriately on the internet, where they are safe to act like assholes.

It's boorish and boring, but no longer surprising.

Id do it but I am from New York, we dont run from anyone from Boston of all places.


(Go Knicks!)

[Hunter]

In the weeks following Sandy Hook, I popped in a couple of times, and read literal craziness being promoted by a few voices here, alleging a massive hoax. This thread is a similar embarrassment.

Ever since the "no planes" stupidity began to be promoted after 9/11, this sort of wild-eyed hoax-mongering has turned into a spreading pestilence.

I can understand where you are coming from but I havent seen a single person on this forum suggest that it WAS a hoax, I have seen a few people wondering if it is possible and further, if the govt does employ such tactics and I see no problem with such an inquiry, we live in very strange times and you cant always believe what your eyes tell you anymore, and I think the real embarrassment on this forum, lately, are those who are trying to shout down others opinions that they dont agree with by insulting them and making a mockery of them, that really shouldnt be happening here, there is no need for it. You can defend your point without all that sort of crap. (Not addressing you specifically Simulist, or anyone else, just the general tone of the forum lately from my POV.)


Further, this thread was not started about Boston per se, I believe the OP just wanted to address the issue of crisis actors in general, so she/he should not be blamed that it has taken a different direction than he or she intended and both sides of this argument are at fault for that.

[82_28]

It's really not a question of whether individuals deserve to have the shit beaten out of them, it's the reality that that is what would happen to them if they voiced the opinion that Mr. Bauman is a liar out loud on the Boston Common.

But no individual will do that, because they recognize that reality.

Instead they act inappropriately on the internet, where they are safe to act like assholes.

It's boorish and boring, but no longer surprising.

Id do it but I am from New York, we dont run from anyone from Boston of all places.


(Go Knicks!)

You mean the Knuggets?

[Canadian_watcher]

but what do I know? I don't claim to be a survivor so I guess that means my opinions are worth-less. We're all on this planet, PW, and you ain't got any market cornered on the truth no matter what your background.

The point was C_W, you just insulted not just me, but practically everyone on this board, with this ridiculous over-generalization that has nothing to do with the specific point at hand:

could go on.. and on .. and on... and for any of you to feign ignorance about the MYRIAD times your government has viciously lied to its people leading them into war and recession, division amongst the people, countless deaths and suicides and experiments on all kinds of unsuspecting citizens, lied and deceived for nothing more than money at times, let alone the international power games now afoot - and excuse me but YES it does appear that fascism is knocking on the US's door. If you can't see it, then that's your prerogative, but WHY on earth are any of you so fucking uptight about the mere MENTION of it???

I thinks it's wrong to explore at length the idea the whole event was faked, I think it's harmful, I think it plays into the perps' hands. IOW, I disagree with you. Why is it that your response to disagreement is insult?

It has much to do with the point at hand, which is: would/does the government make things up - fabricate facts and evidence, hide the truth, etc in order to achieve its secret agendas. I believe it was you who asked for incidents of government manipulation that might be at play in this case, wasn't it? If I misunderstood then please, accept my apologies. However, that's how I took this statement:

To go from false flag to fake event is so wrong on so many levels. This could be an 11 page thread on the techniques we actually know that the state uses and that may be in play in the recent tragedy, one of which is creating diversionary inoculation memes..

Secondly.. as to the unbolded part of the above.. To my way of thinking, a false flag event is a 'fake' event. so you seem to be splitting hairs. There is video of some sort of explosive going off, so no one is saying that there was no bomb (no one here, anyway).

[Hunter]

Those promoting the idea that these victims are "crisis actors" are absolutely, sickeningly disgusting.

I dont think it is a matter of promotion as much as simply asking "is it possible?" YES it is possible, however unlikely, and I dont agree it is the case here, the capability exists and therefore so does the possibility and I see nothing wrong with asking if that possibly could have been in play here as long as it is done with a real and sincere attempt to get to the truth as opposed to just grandstanding, trolling and talking out of ones ass, which does seem to be the case in some corners of the internet but I dont see that here on RI yet.

[Hunter]

It's really not a question of whether individuals deserve to have the shit beaten out of them, it's the reality that that is what would happen to them if they voiced the opinion that Mr. Bauman is a liar out loud on the Boston Common.

But no individual will do that, because they recognize that reality.

Instead they act inappropriately on the internet, where they are safe to act like assholes.

It's boorish and boring, but no longer surprising.

Id do it but I am from New York, we dont run from anyone from Boston of all places.


(Go Knicks!)

You mean the Knuggets?

The nugs had a nice helping of hot curry for dinner last week.

[Simulist]

In the weeks following Sandy Hook, I popped in a couple of times, and read literal craziness being promoted by a few voices here, alleging a massive hoax. This thread is a similar embarrassment.

Ever since the "no planes" stupidity began to be promoted after 9/11, this sort of wild-eyed hoax-mongering has turned into a spreading pestilence.

I can understand where you are coming from but I havent seen a single person on this forum suggest that it WAS a hoax, I have seen a few people wondering if it is possible and further, if the govt does employ such tactics and I see no problem such an inquiry and I think the real embarrassment on this forum, lately, are those who are trying to shout down others opinions that they dont agree with by insulting them and making a mockery of them, that really shouldnt be happening here, there is no need for it. You can defend your point without all that sort of crap. (Not addressing you specifically Simulist, or anyone else, just the general tone of the forum lately from my POV.)

Ah yes, the old "Aunt Eloise Tactic."

"Aunt Eloise" because there used to be an old lady everybody called "Aunt Eloise" who used some of the well-worn tactics to great acclaim that happen to be on display in this thread. Aunt Eloise suspected many, many things — things she could never prove... You see, people were plotting against her! (Especially, "the Filipinos!") People were doing all kinds of terrible, terrible things. But she could prove none of this. Not conclusively, anyway. But they were doing them, by God! Things were happening that she didn't understand... And "could they" be having illicit, filthy SEX while doing them? She suggested that they might be. So instead of claiming these things outright (because I think she knew she ultimately couldn't defend her claims), she did the kind of oblique, suggestive stuff as here and with the persistence that's been happening in this thread. Hinting. Winking. Nodding. And then hinting some more. When asked, "Are you actually saying that the Filipinos are all colluding together to steal the bedding right out of your house, and then having sex upon it?!?" She'd feign offense at "The very idea!" that what she had merely been "suggesting" was actually what she was SAYING! Because, ultimately, "Aunt Eloise" wasn't merely paranoid, she was a coward.

And her stuff was all crap.

But old "Aunt Eloise" is dead now. And people wondered for a long time after that if the Filipinos had something to do with it.


[Edited twice for typos.]

[Hunter]

I think we should consider banning the hoax pushers.

we have NOT "seen this before" NEVER EVER

all we've seen before is disingenuous liars spreading the same bullshit lies about Sandy Hook

While I think some of the hoax stuff is part of a cointelpro op to infiltrate and discredit the entire conspiracy community and anyone who questions official stories, I am not sure I see anyone really pushing it here and certainly the question of crisis actors being used in such events is not a question in and of itself that should be left off the table. I dont think the victim in this case was an actor and I do cringe at the suggestion of it, I personally have no problem with a discussion about whether or not this type of tactic has or could be employed to bring about certain ends. I do believe it could be, the question is, has it been, I dont know and I dont think you do either.

[IanEye]

Wait a minute! Which is it?

1. You deserve to get the shit kicked out of you if you suggest that Jeff Bauman maybe didn't get his legs blown off (at the Boston Marathon)?

or (as you suggested in the other thread):

2) You deserve to get the shit kicked out of you if you suggest that Jeff Bauman's miraculous unconcussed 100% identification of the alleged bomber (presumably the one not wearing sunglasses, but let's not quibble ) is perhaps not necessarily 100% reliable and enough to convict Dzhokhar Tsarnaev of a capital crime?

Or is it both?

I think we should be told, Ian. Seriously.

PS Suggesting that Jeff Bauman's memory may possibly be less than 100% reliable is not the same thing as calling him a liar. HTH.

either way, it wouldn't go well for you.

viewtopic.php?p=501788#p501788



Please, come to Boston and call this guy a liar.
You'll get the fucking shit beat out of you.

viewtopic.php?p=501916#p501916
It's really not a question of whether individuals deserve to have the shit beaten out of them, it's the reality that that is what would happen to them if they voiced the opinion that Mr. Bauman is a liar out loud on the Boston Common.

viewtopic.php?p=501924#p501924


two completely boorish assholes
who deserve to get the shit beaten out of them

so far, the only two individuals i have stated deserve to get the shit beaten out of them are Clarence & Ginny Thomas.
feel free to defend them.

but there are all sorts of individuals who i think deserve to get the shit beat out of them, Michael Schofield comes to mind.
feel free to defend him as well.

frankly, i am waiting for you to credit the media for not posting unflattering images of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ala Adam Lanza, but instead posting fairly nice ones.
but perhaps you have moved on from Newtown.

[Canadian_watcher]

Those promoting the idea that these victims are "crisis actors" are absolutely, sickeningly disgusting.

I dont think it is a matter of promotion as much as simply asking "is it possible?" YES it is possible, however unlikely, and I dont agree it is the case here, the capability exists and therefore so does the possibility and I see nothing wrong with asking if that possibly could have been in play here as long as it is done with a real and sincere attempt to get to the truth as opposed to just grandstanding, trolling and talking out of ones ass, which does seem to be the case in some corners of the internet but I dont see that here on RI yet.

and isn't it just plain outrageous to try and silence debate merely by name calling? What types of people do that? It's a different thing to refute an argument, but that hasn't been done - it's a case of attempted intimidation, which is .. well .. it's something either very, very juvenile and the product of an undeveloped mind, or it is something sociopathic and intentionally disruptive. What it isn't, by any stretch, is an answer to any of the questions.

edit: just wanted to add that I don't expect you to answer this, Alchemy. I used the post as a forum, not to single anyone out for anything either good or bad.

[Simulist]

Those promoting the idea that these victims are "crisis actors" are absolutely, sickeningly disgusting.

I dont think it is a matter of promotion as much as simply asking "is it possible?" YES it is possible, however unlikely, and I dont agree it is the case here, the capability exists and therefore so does the possibility and I see nothing wrong with asking if that possibly could have been in play here as long as it is done with a real and sincere attempt to get to the truth as opposed to just grandstanding, trolling and talking out of ones ass, which does seem to be the case in some corners of the internet but I dont see that here on RI yet.

and isn't it just plain outrageous to try and silence debate merely by name calling? What types of people do that? It's a different thing to refute an argument, but that hasn't been done - it's a case of attempted intimidation, which is .. well .. it's something either very, very juvenile and the product of an undeveloped mind, or it is something sociopathic and intentionally disruptive. What it isn't, by any stretch, is an answer to any of the questions.

"Refute an argument?" But there's no real "argument." Just your crap.

[Hunter]

All I am saying is a discussion about crisis actors, in and of itself, and whether or not such a thing could be or has been employed as a tactic to influence perception, is not a discussion that should be avoided or forbidden. While I can ABSOLUTELY understand and sympathize to some extent, with those who take issue with the suggestion Jeff was a crisis actor, I dont think that we should allow those emotions to dictate what can and cannot be discussed. I am the kind of person that believes anything and everything is fair game, let it be said, refute it, argue against it, whatever, but there is absolutely no reason to deny anyone their opinion no matter how much you may disagree with it or how controversial it may be. Worse yet none of these discussions should ever get to the point it becomes personal, people are insulted and called names, I think everyone here is better than that.


I realize not everyone can operate that way, I was trained in law school to consider every possibility no matter how outrageous it may be as a means of raising doubt in juries mind. So for me, I dont have a problem with asking is such a thing possible, sure it is, it may be unlikely in this case BUT IT IS POSSIBLE and therefore it is fair game to ask. What is unfortunate is that some of us are letting our emotions get in the way of the discussion. And that goes for both sides.

[MacCruiskeen]

It is not unthinkable that there was a pre-planned drill being carried out at the Boston Marathon finishing line (as indeed explicitly claimed by university athletics coach Ali Stevenson, who says it was announced repeatedly via loudspeaker to the crowd). It is not unthinkable that crisis actors were involved in that drill, as they are in fact routinely used in such drills. It is not unthinkable that amputees were among those crisis actors, as indeed they sometimes are. It is not unthinkable that they too were surprised by the actual real bombing, and hurt by it, while the drill took place. It is also not unthinkable that the numerous mysterious (why mysterious?) Craft International employees at the finishing-line were playing some part in that pre-planned drill.

Not only is none of this unthinkable, there is nothing remotely offensive about thinking it. It's a simple factual matter that can be settled easily in any free country. It's also an important public-safety issue.

A single phone call to the responsible authorities should clear all this up very quickly. Why will no US citizen make that call? (Dave Lindorff is the only honourable exception I can think of, and he only enquired about Craft, without success.)

- Who are the responsible authorities? What's their phone number? Is there some reason to be afraid of them?

[Canadian_watcher]

From the Project Northwoods document: ( I assume everyone knows about that, right?) http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf

Section 9. b.

On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly...The aircraft would then be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number.... the pilot who had performed the mission under an alias, would resume his proper identity and return to his normal place of business. the pilot and aircraft would have then disappeared

[Hunter]

It is not unthinkable that there was a pre-planned drill being carried out at the Boston Marathon finishing line (as indeed explicitly claimed by university athletics coach Ali Stevenson, who says it was announced repeatedly via loudspeaker to the crowd). It is not unthinkable that crisis actors were involved in that drill, as they are in fact routinely used in such drills. It is not unthinkable that amputees were among those crisis actors, as indeed they sometimes are. It is not unthinkable that they too were surprised by the actual real bombing, and hurt by it, while the drill took place. It is also not unthinkable that the numerous mysterious (why mysterious?) Craft International employees at the finishing-line were playing some part in that pre-planned drill.

Not only is none of this unthinkable, there is nothing remotely offensive about thinking it. It's a simple factual matter that can be settled easily in any free country. It's also an important public-safety issue.

A single phone call to the responsible authorities should clear all this up very quickly. Why will no US citizen make that call? (Dave Lindorff is the only honourable exception I can think of, and he only enquired about Craft, without success.)

- Who are the responsible authorities? What's their phone number? Is there some reason to be afraid of them?

No, I agree with you, such things are indeed not unthinkable, I dont have enough evidence or even gut feeling to suggest it is the case here but certainly it is not unthinkable in the world we live in today, a world of mass media manipulation and perception control.

What most concerns me is how did we, ALL OF US, allow the world to become a place where such things are no longer unthinkable, it happened on our watch, we are all responsible for it, that is what we should really be talking about and addressing and trying to fix.