Crisis Actors? Post your info & WTF moments here

[barracuda]

this was a fascinating comment and i would like to see it expounded upon. i took the liberty of de-fusing the self-destruct mechanism. current rule books overflow an aircraft carrier. the bureaucrats number in the millions. the jails are full. police military and intel get half a trillion a blank check every year. suspicion abounds. more chaos war and violence are looming. so, what is the "Wolf at the door" threatening this liberal arrangement? and the raison-de-etre of the winking dupes?

I'm not certain I understand what you're asking given the context in which you've framed your questions. I mean, "What is... the raison-de-etre of the winking dupes?" Did you mean to ask me to explain how the winking dupes justify their existence? I don't get it, but to satisfy your request for expansion, here's something you might try:

Carefully watch the following videos. They were found via a search on YouTube for "Boston fake actors", and are only several among hundreds of such little films.





You may have to look quite closely and carefully at the videos, as the effects being pointed out can be rather subtle. BUt you are very observant. You have seen behind the curtain. You know the truth.

Have you finished? Now carefully re-read Dave McGowan's essay, the one that was posted three (3) times on this thread by yourself and conniption. Look at the linked images and videos that go along with it.

You have a better grasp of what's really happening than most people.

Have you finished? Now let's review the last paragraph of the essay:

It’s okay though. You can go back to sleep now. I’m sure everything is going to work out just fine. Don’t be surprised though if you wake up one day soon to find the streets lined with armored personnel carriers and the skies filled with military helicopters. Because if you accept the implementation of martial law in Boston as a legitimate response to a patently fake 'terrorist' attack, then you have given your seal of approval for far more wide-reaching and far more permanent states of martial law in the not-so-distant future. And it will happen. The only question is when.

Have you got that? Read the key message silently several times for best effect:

It’s okay though.
You can go back to sleep now.
I’m sure everything is going to work out just fine.
Don’t be surprised though.
It will happen.
Don't be surprised.
The question is when.
It will happen.
It's okay though.
You can go back to sleep now.
But don't be surprised.

You have a better grasp of what's really happening than most people, Elihu. You know the truth.

Have a nice day.

[compared2what?]

they hate anything that doesn't go nicely along with the Big Brother narrative.

Strange that now that everyone knows where the boundaries are from Sandy Hook, They're*** not doing anything to shut down the hoaxer/crisis-actor rumor mill on the Marathon bombings then, isn't it?

From here, where it continues:

I was saying that the hoaxer stuff itself resembled what Orwell was describing much more closely (you could even say "precisely") than the opposition to it here does. Or even than the MSM coverage does, ftm, and by a considerable margin, although that does have most of the same features in a more diffuse and attenuated form.

Because it does. Taken together or separately, those videos and websites constitute a very aggressive, focused political propaganda drive that's relentlessly, explicitly dedicated to redefining broad conceptual categories of thought and experience in a way that's exactly parallel to "WAR IS PEACE," "FREEDOM IS SLAVERY," and "IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH" -- ie, "REALITY IS FAKERY," "DEATH IS LIFE," "DOUBT IS CERTAINTY," and....

And from here

I always thought that was the most important part of 1984. Orwell spends much of the book talking about the way social relationships based on trust had been broken down, to the point where Winston's neighbour is betrayed by his kids (and the impression i got is they probably made up the charges against their father anyway.) Thats the power of the social structure and the state in the story. Of course its the opposite of history too, where people have willing suffered terrible things for others and for the idea of freedom (among other things).

The positive thing about 1984 is the extent they need to go to break those bonds between people.

Great, great points.

Agree.

[snip]

From that point of view -- ie, what psychological state enables totalitarianism -- it's really the unpersoning aspect of declaring others to be crisis actors and the indifference regarding the harassment/distress that follows that are dangerous. And not just for them. Seriously. There's not a whole lot of daylight between Winston's neighbors kids narcing out their dad on a stray, possibly imagined suspicion and calling Robbie Parker a crisis actor.

Citizens don't declare other citizens to be enemies of the state. It's the first rule of freedom-lover's fight club, if you ask me.

______________

ON EDIT: I guess that should be "enemies of the ideal state," since technically, the alleged crisis actors are on the other side. But same difference.

If anything this board has become too rational (does anyone here even know what an egregore is anymore?). As if peering behind the curtain is just too full on.

Quashing is not the answer here. And tolerance and open-mindedness should both be almost without limit. But only almost. The problem isn't just that RI-friendly stuff up there.^^ Someone's going to get killed as a result of this stuff, eventually, if it continues. It's just a matter of time. And thinking it through should be enough to prove it.

Most people care enough about that to stop pitching tantrums and going into prolonged sulks in response to being told it when they're toddlers, IRL. Mine, anyway. But maybe I've just been lucky.
___________

A response to the Orwell part of that by one of the anti-fascist pro-crisis-actor posters here would be great.
___________

***ON EDIT: Meaning "They" with a capital "T", not "they, the posters here who object to the crisis actor hypothesis on the grounds that it's thought-conditioning, dangerous, totalitarian-enabling and/or demonstrably false, but who don't hate anybody and aren't stumping for the Big Brother narrative."

That would include me. I'm a crisis-actor-hypothesis-lover lover. That's why this stuff is such a big deal to me. Sappy and even humiliating to admit, considering. But true.

[FourthBase]

Rules won't fix anything... And we don't really need more. if ideas can't be shown to be crap then we shouldn't be banning them in an attempt to keep our "credibility" cos that is just not the anti fascist thing to do. There's a sort of strange loop there where in the process of trying to keep cred we'd lose it.

This board is always worse than it was in the old days - whether it actually is or not. I'm as guilty of thinking that way as anyone, and we've always had crazy talk here and a vocal shitfight about whether it should be banned or not.

I don't think there is any decrease in the quality of whats being put forward here (check out what stillrobertpaulson and slad are doing on another thread), and the signal to noise ration is the same as it ever was, well close enough anyway. If anything this board has become too rational (does anyone here even know what an egregore is anymore?). As if peering behind the curtain is just too full on. Dealing with the fact that monsters run the world is never easy, and the fact that they don't actually, just try damn hard to isn't necessarily a comfort. Neither is the fact that monsters are nearly always human, well the ones that are truly scary anyway, and most inhuman monsters are actually fish of some sort - if you take the time and effort you could probably catch and eat them.

Where was I?

Thats right - just drink beer and remember the govt/god/the corporation is on your side and will protect you from painful thoughts...What... shit sorry I meant- - when you disagree with someone just remember that really, neither of you are right. You both misinterpret limited information from a nervous system that is only capable of picking up some of whats going on in the first place, and other peoples certainty and your own is just foolish. We have no credibility to lose, cos we're questioning official narratives. We're challenging consensus reality just by asking about any of the things we talk about here. Thats necessarily gonna involve disagreement over whats real and what isn't.

Its never been easy and part of the reason this board still has value is that despite dodgy periods where people disagree or lose it with each other there is still enough good faith thought and consideration here to make it worth while.

[Joe Hillshoist]

If anything this board has become too rational (does anyone here even know what an egregore is anymore?). As if peering behind the curtain is just too full on.

I don't think it's possible to be "too rational". Entertaining the notion of an egregore does not require irrationality. It just requires an open mind. Being rational and being open minded are not mutually exclusive.

yeah good point.

[Joe Hillshoist]

If anything this board has become too rational (does anyone here even know what an egregore is anymore?). As if peering behind the curtain is just too full on.

Quashing is not the answer here. And tolerance and open-mindedness should both be almost without limit. But only almost. The problem isn't just that RI-friendly stuff up there.^^ Someone's going to get killed as a result of this stuff, eventually, if it continues. It's just a matter of time. And thinking it through should be enough to prove it.

Most people care enough about that to stop pitching tantrums and going into prolonged sulks in response to being told it when they're toddlers, IRL. Mine, anyway. But maybe I've just been lucky.
___________

A response to the Orwell part of that by one of the anti-fascist pro-crisis-actor posters here would be great.
___________

***ON EDIT: Meaning "They" with a capital "T", not "they, the posters here who object to the crisis actor hypothesis on the grounds that it's thought-conditioning, dangerous, totalitarian-enabling and/or demonstrably false, but who don't hate anybody and aren't stumping for the Big Brother narrative."

That would include me. I'm a crisis-actor-hypothesis-lover lover. That's why this stuff is such a big deal to me. Sappy and even humiliating to admit, considering. But true.

When i wrote that the idea of the bombings being fake was about as far from my mind as possible. I can't take that idea seriously for a minute even tho I'm on the other side of the world and have no real idea what happened regarding Boston other than what the "media" presented to me, or even if the place actually exists. As far as power and ritual and conditioning go tho, there is something in the idea of "lockdown" and paramilitary police groups in black with insane amounts of weaponry that the Boston bombing has kind of crystalised imo.

But I don't know if this is connected to the event itself or part of a process of controlling the response to it.

The "media" includes RI btw.

[compared2what?]

When i wrote that the idea of the bombings being fake was about as far from my mind as possible. I can't take that idea seriously for a minute even tho I'm on the other side of the world and have no real idea what happened regarding Boston other than what the "media" presented to me, or even if the place actually exists. As far as power and ritual and conditioning go tho, there is something in the idea of "lockdown" and paramilitary police groups in black with insane amounts of weaponry that the Boston bombing has kind of crystalised imo.

But I don't know if this is connected to the event itself or part of a process of controlling the response to it.

There are real depths to that conception of it that can't be plumbed by viewing it straight-on, which is its own justification. To name but one of the ways in which it's a whole other thing.

The "media" includes RI btw.

Hell to the yes. We are the world. Thanks for your wisdom, Joe.

[Canadian_watcher]

but no one wants to answer as to why Barracuda, as of late last week, still had moderator privileges that I and at least two other people here can prove outright?
right?

I've noticed that the 'group' has avoided this completely while simultaneously having the audacity to imply that I've ignored their posts.
hilarious chicanery - juvenile and blatant - except that, when in the tank, you are at the mercy of the fish. Back on land, where there's air, none of this would wash.

I'm not ignoring the accusation.

I just don't understand why the post-editing part of it would have required special privileges.

And the being listed as a mod wrt blocking seems like an admin thing that he isn't responsible for and doesn't gain any powers from, per se.

But maybe I'm missing something.

Have you reported it to the (active-duty) mods?.

yes she did, last week I fixed it. I found that when 'cudda dropped his mod duties his account was removed from that status in one place in the settings, but not in another. There's two places that had to be modified and only one had been. It's not a change that get's made often, whoever did it just missed a step. it's fixed now.

having looked at the moderation log, no moderation actions have been performed by 'cudda as far back as I looked (~9days back).

I can see barracuda's posts again. i thought this was fixed. He still has moderator status, or what?

[justdrew]

no. I don't know, try removing and adding it again.

[barracuda]

I can see barracuda's posts again.

[FourthBase]

I can see barracuda's posts again.

[Canadian_watcher]

I can see barracuda's posts again.

so funny how you can run around the board admonishing people to stay positive, etc but then on the other hand take part in ostracizing me. Do you think that`s helpful and positive?

If this board is operating with two sets of rules - which are underhanded and unpublished - then perhaps that's something you might be interested to know about. You might also ask yourself if it is a pleasant or comfortable experience for a person to put themselves out there the way I am doing in order to bring these things to the awareness of the rest of the users here. It's just a thought, 4B. But I've liked what you've been posting in a couple of threads lately, and this behaviour - the encouragement of barracuda's childishness - seems not to square with what you're up to elsewhere.

[brainpanhandler]

If anything this board has become too rational (does anyone here even know what an egregore is anymore?). As if peering behind the curtain is just too full on.

I don't think it's possible to be "too rational". Entertaining the notion of an egregore does not require irrationality. It just requires an open mind. Being rational and being open minded are not mutually exclusive.

yeah good point.

I do know what you mean though Joe. I just thought there was too high a chance you might be misinterpreted. Non-rational is another thing and something I regularly cultivate, not least of which with the aid of a little (or alot as the circumstances dictate)Kentucky bourbon. Cheers.

[FourthBase]

I can see barracuda's posts again.

so funny how you can run around the board admonishing people to stay positive, etc but then on the other hand take part in ostracizing me. Do you think that`s helpful and positive?

If this board is operating with two sets of rules - which are underhanded and unpublished - then perhaps that's something you might be interested to know about. You might also ask yourself if it is a pleasant or comfortable experience for a person to put themselves out there the way I am doing in order to bring these things to the awareness of the rest of the users here. It's just a thought, 4B. But I've liked what you've been posting in a couple of threads lately, and this behaviour - the encouragement of barracuda's childishness - seems not to square with what you're up to elsewhere.

I know people by their fruit. Barracuda is good fruit. Childish? Who isn't.
Honestly, I don't give a rat's ass if he still has some mod privileges.
I would actually be thrilled if he just became a mod again, full-time.

[Canadian_watcher]

I can see barracuda's posts again.

so funny how you can run around the board admonishing people to stay positive, etc but then on the other hand take part in ostracizing me. Do you think that`s helpful and positive?

If this board is operating with two sets of rules - which are underhanded and unpublished - then perhaps that's something you might be interested to know about. You might also ask yourself if it is a pleasant or comfortable experience for a person to put themselves out there the way I am doing in order to bring these things to the awareness of the rest of the users here. It's just a thought, 4B. But I've liked what you've been posting in a couple of threads lately, and this behaviour - the encouragement of barracuda's childishness - seems not to square with what you're up to elsewhere.

I know people by their fruit. Barracuda is good fruit. Childish? Who isn't.
Honestly, I don't give a rat's ass if he still has some mod privileges.
I would actually be thrilled if he just became a mod again, full-time.

well, his 'fruit' is something that is pretty difficult to see, sometimes. IE you can't see people who aren't here anymore. but to each their own.

[Canadian_watcher]

no. I don't know, try removing and adding it again.

he had been removed from my foes list and not by me, since putting him on there was the last thing I did in my user control panel and I know it had taken effect.

I'll say again: gaslight. super fun.