‘Human sacrifice’ staged at CERN's Shiva Statue

[guruilla]

I'm not sure I've ever seen an RI threat at which so many interesting questions & arguments have either been ignored, willfully misunderstood, or stonewalled in favor of endlessly reiterated/parroted responses and/or attempts at yuk yuk humor or out & out trolling. It's actually pretty effective because I started to feel as if the whole video was a trivial & lame joke that I ought not be giving my attention to a few days ago, even tho discussing it has helped clarify quite a few things for me around perception management, mimetic behavior, the power of the "prank," and other stuff.

I feel like something has been missed or lost in the shuffle & the thread (or I) needs a reset. A group of unidentified individuals are seen on the grounds of CERN, late at night, wearing dark robes, standing in a circle under a statue of Shiva, and (mock?) sacrificing a willing (drugged ? hypnotized?) young woman with a knife (to throat or chest, opinions vary). The event is filmed in an apparently off-the-cuff manner and the video appears on YouTube. A CERN official admits the event took place and that it was simply a prank on behalf of authorized CERN personnel, later amended to students. The CERN official does not say whether the alleged pranksters have been identified or how it established beyond doubt that it was a prank. The police are not investigating, and it is considered an internal matter.

I have heard the (endlessly repeating) arguments for how Nothing is Wrong with This Picture, and they seem to come down to CERN Knows Best, and Trust in Authority. They seem to be based above all on individual conviction that the video is unconvincing and basically silly, & hence not worth taking seriously, by CERN, the police, or anyone else besides Satanic-Illuminati-Reptile-chasing conspiratards.

While I am still stumped as to finding any actual "logic" behind this position, it is as I say quite persuasive when repeated over & over again and conjoined with a mix of scorn, superiority, and patronizingly reassuring (almost parental) tones that may cause the questioner to feel like a clueless child unversed in adult matters, misreading all the signs & in need of firm but gentle education.

[MacCruiskeen]

Re: "a fucking YouTube video": Reminds me of the quality newspapers about 10-15 years ago, and their routine superciliousness about anything published on that awful Internet.

[MacCruiskeen]

[...] Or take any one of a thousand other films. "Fucking home movies" of the WTC collapse, for instance - films which can also be found on "fucking YouTube, LOL."

Fucking home movies of WTC7's collapse were posted to fucking Youtube. They were closely examined by thousands of people, under an unceasing barrage of ridicule and obloquy from the corporate media and the officially-approved experts™. "LOL, tinfoil-hatters, nothing to see here, move on." One of those analysts was the high school physics teacher David Chandler, who succeeded in demonstrating that the building had indeed been in free-fall collapse for several seconds, thus eventually forcing an embarrassed climb-down from NIST.

NIST. CERN. IMF. CIA. FBI. NSA. UNO. NYT. USA. As long as the acronym denotes an organisation big, rich and powerful enough, nothing but sweetness, light and truth can reasonably or rationally be expected from it. Anything else is a "conspiracy theory", by definition.

[OP ED]

I'm sorry if my derision affronted your sense of serious investigation.

(Call CERN and ask specific questions if you're so serious, their numbers are public)

As I'm pretty certain I have said, their answers implied the information you feel is lacking in their response. I don't personally consider them "authority" in the sense that some posters seem to be implying, i.e. Extensions of government. I consider them to be what they purportedly are, that is nothing more than a consortium of experimental physicists. Therefore I don't consider it their responsibility to address internet rumors at all.

(the implication that their statements assume obvious answers to "questions" is in fact one of the points being willfully ignored)

To me that is perhaps the strongest point of contention here, that some of you feel their answers are inadequate because they don't give you the information you want. I disagree, they're assuming we're intelligent enough to work out that the details are either a) implied or b) none of our business. Given no evidence of a crime exists, I can accept this, despite human curiosity about the details.

I'm not seeing anyone saying blindly to "trust in authority". Spurious nonsense. But I can admit that I usually do leave it to the police to investigate murder and I have little choice but to place SOME trust in representative authorities to do their job. The alternative is mob "justice".

(Which leads inexorably to lynchings and witchhunts)

Of course it doesn't look like anything other than a prank to me, so I don't feel inclined to distrust the most obvious explanation. Call that what you will. I see lots of videos on YouTube that have no explanation, no cast or credits and I don't feel like I am automatically entitled to that information.

(Unsatisfactory? Perhaps call CERN and ask for specifics if you're worried that someone has been killed, they might even answer your questions)

[MacCruiskeen]

OP ED, you keep advising me to call CERN. I'm not a journalist, not even a blogger. They'll say exactly what you say: "You're not entitled, you know." Or else, much more likely, they'll say nothing at all.

Look at the response Tom Siebert of San Diego City Beat eventually got from them, after they had "stonewalled" him. He is literally the only journalist I know of who even attempted to ask CERN the obvious questions, and their response was as brazenly evasive and as insultingly piss-poor as the original "explanation" on their website. .

[guruilla]

I'm not seeing anyone saying blindly to "trust in authority". Spurious nonsense. But I can admit that I usually do leave it to the police to investigate murder and I have little choice but to place SOME trust in representative authorities to do their job. The alternative is mob "justice".

That's quite a leap, from questioning authority & doubting the official story to . . . mob justice!!

[km artlu]

My interest has passively sustained enthusiastically throughout this thread, and it's a little surprising that so far this hasn't been referenced:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVw_mPvYcDM

That link is to mercifully brief edits from the entire ceremony, which is deeply creepy. It seems the Swiss have interests beyond those cited by Harry Lime > In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.

[stickdog99]

Most, if perhaps not all, of those questions should be directed to either the police or YouTube.

Its not CERNs responsibility perhaps not even their right to reveal the identities of anyone involved. It may not even have been uploaded on their property. Their responsibility doesn't extend beyond satisfying the actual legal authorities, (which was clearly accomplished, rightly or not) which authorities are thereafter responsible for public accountability. Its frankly unsurprising that CERN doesn't take these questions from conspiratainment bloggers seriously..

What about questions from journalists? Oh, I forgot. Contemporary journalists know better than to ask questions. Unless and until there is an official press release issued, there is simply nothing to "report" on.

Thus, those who ask relevant questions about bizarre events are, of course, by definition conspiritards. Right?

So taking the “joke” at face value and accepting CERN’s story, I still think it’s fair to ask...What the fuck? Why are scientists replicating a human sacrifice on the grounds of one of science’s most controversial and mysterious ongoing projects, in front of the Hindu god of destruction to boot? Who filmed this? Who are the participants? Who was the “victim?” What does this say about security at such a revolutionary scientific site?

Even if the most benign explanation of what happened at CERN is accepted, it still raises a slew of unsettling questions that deserve answering. Let’s see who, if anybody, chases them down.

Nothing to see here, of course. It would obviously demean an upstanding and inherently trustworthy institution such as CERN even to address such impudent questions.

[OP ED]

What middle do you suggest?

Are you saying you don't think that the police did their job or simply that it would be wonderful for them to have shared the details of whatever it was that satisfied them?

[OP ED]

Why are journalists even bothering to ask CERN? If I was concerned about real murder I wouldn't ask a spokesperson for a science lab I would ask the police for a statement.

[stickdog99]

But I don't honestly believe that a statement could be issued that satisfies both the conspiracy crowd and the two dozen countries worth of lawyers that are probably required to approve any public statements.

So unknown and undetermined "red tape" both completely explains why CERN cannot address any of the obvious questions about this video and totally insulates CERN from any and all further questioning about this bizarre video filmed on its premises?

But I'm assuming things?

[MacCruiskeen]

Why are journalists even bothering to ask CERN? If I was concerned about real murder I wouldn't ask a spokesperson for a science lab I would ask the police for a statement.

Only one (in figures:1) journalist has even bothered to ask CERN anything. Or can you find another, apart from the brave Tom Siebert?

- I'm going to take a closer look at the Swiss online media and see if I can find out if any of their journalists have asked any serious questions, of CERN or of the cops. Might take a while. (Dammit, i really don't have time for this, and I don't get paid for it either.)

[OP ED]

I thought I said that I felt that most of the questions are implied in the answers already given. But clearly we're reading their statements differently. It's obvious that CERN and the police aren't taking it as seriously as some of you are. Maybe that's because they're evil satanists.

But unless we assume they're intentionally misleading, and this implication is quite apparently present here, we're forced to consider other reasons for their lack of distinguishing plain language and specifc answers any conspiritard could then completely ignore.

(Given lack of evidence that CERN ever committed ANY crime, or even intentionally lied about anything, comparing them to the CIA is possibly stretching the argument a bit)

[backtoiam]

This question is for dada and OP ED and Puf Puf93. What is your opinion of Rudolph Steiner? I ask this question for my own benefit. I have read a lot of his stuff.

[MacCruiskeen]

^^Start another thread about it, pleeeeeeeeeeeease.

(Jeezus, the last thing this thread needs is a digression into anthroposophy.)