How Absurd: 8 Crazy Reactions, Ridiculous Conclusions, and

[barracuda]

All I want is some truth.

Both legs blown off, survived.

Both legs blown off, survived.

Both legs blown off, back broken, survived.

Both legs and an arm blown off, survived.

Both legs and an arm blown off, survived.

Entire lower half of his body blown away, survived.

Both legs and both arms blown off, survived.

...and so on. Here's a shot of Bauman in which you can clearly see two (2) tourniquets on his left leg. FWIW.

relevant:
4:00-7:02

[conniption]

Okay then, one last post before I'm banned.

scf

2 + 2 = 5

George Orwell’s 1984 presents the depressing world of Oceania, a totalitarian state that often resembles a technologically advanced Stalinist Russia. The novel constructs the face of an omniscient government through the briefly subversive life of Winston Smith, an average, outer party (middle class) man. Orwell effectively builds the totalitarian state through various pieces of its collective controlling apparatus, with each piece seen and subsequently experienced by Winston. This apparatus can be divided into memory and knowledge, fear and pain, and language and thought; each piece is specifically devised to ensure the utter domination and molding of mankind.

Memory, knowledge of the past, and knowledge of the present are controlled through The Ministry of Truth, which rewrites history, always to the benefit of the party. The repeated line “Who controls the past […]” “[…] controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.” (35), exemplifies the power of memory control, which is power over knowledge (memory is stored knowledge, knowledge requires memory), an idea that Orwell emphasizes as paramount to totalitarian control. Orwell indicates the significance of this ideology by allotting it an entire ministry, which is singularly devoted to the ignorance and memory control of its people, whose “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” (4) – the strength of the party.

Of course, the party’s control of memory ultimately extends beyond propaganda and the unspoken falsification of history, because the mind can transcend the controls of the material word, which necessitates more invasive techniques for control of not only the physical world, but also the abstract – the memory of the brain. Fear and pain sculpts that which the party cannot physically rewrite, the mind, and attributed to these two controls is another of the four ministries, The Ministry of Love. Through this piece of the apparatus, Big Brother indirectly reprograms the brain of man, which, in the case of the people of Oceania, can only see through lies and contradictions by use of human memory, because the material past (that outside the human mind) is directly controlled. The Ministry of Love physically represents fear, seen in its terrifying description:

“The Ministry of Love was the really frightening one. There were no windows in it at all. Winston had never been inside The Ministry of Love, nor within half a kilometer of it. It was a place impossible to enter except on official business, and then only by penetrating through a maze of barbed-wire entanglements, steel doors, and hidden machine gun nests. Even the streets leading up to its outer barriers were roamed by gorilla-faced guards in black uniforms, armed with jointed truncheons.” (4-5).

In the ministry, torture, which in the case of room 101 comes in the form of fear, is used to rewrite the memory of individuals and, ultimately, to reprogram individuals, forcing “‘Reality Control, ’ […]” (35) or “[…] ‘double think.’” (35). Winston knows, eventually, that “2 + 2 = 5” (290), and he also knows that “[…] they could get inside you.” (290). Big Brother uses the fear of torture and the fear of pain to control more than just memory and knowledge. It is also used to control action.

Largely, the fear instilled by the party prevents rebellion in action. The people of Oceania would be unwilling to write in a diary for fear of ending up in The Ministry of Love, if nothing else, but as the party knows, fear is neither a guarantee of obedience, as indicated by Winston’s treachery, nor a method to stop the abstract, the thoughtcrime. In the event of thoughtcrime, pain in conjunction with fear is the only certain control, and because of pain and fear “He [Winston] loved Big Brother.” (297). Even with the power to stop thoughtcrime, the government of Oceania seeks absolute control of thought, to the point of never needing to treat an incident of thoughtcrime by preventing its inception.

Language, the means to control thought, and thought are the two final bits of the third piece of Oceania’s totalitarian control apparatus. Newspeak, a work in progress, is the party’s attempt at the complete elimination of thoughtcrime by forcing the inability to think it. As Syme puts it, “In the end we shall make thought crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it” (52). Orwell fully understands the importance of language for not only expression, an act which Winston rebelliously takes part in through his diary, but also for control. Necessary to any totalitarian regime is the use and manipulation of language. From the slogan “WAR IS PEACE / FREEDOM IS SLAVERY / IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” (27), to the endless propaganda and falsification of history, the party employs language to control, to properly direct the minds of its subjects.

In 1984 Orwell illuminates the significance of this control by developing an extreme, in the form of Newspeak. In its finished form, Newspeak would clearly make 1984 impossible (an act of expression itself), because Winston would be incapable of subversive expression inside or outside of his head. This last control is incomplete. With the completion of Big Brother’s control of language itself, the totalitarian regime will have absolute power in the form of absolute control, rendering its people into mindless drones incapable of the human ability to think freely, forming the hive-like state sought after by the government. Orwell denounces totalitarianism’s ideal by indicating the importance of language in human individuality and human existence (as opposed to the drone existence cherished by Big Brother).

George Orwell’s 1984 effectively creates and portrays the moving parts of the perfect totalitarian machine, which would logically result in perfect dystopia – the goal of the party of Oceania. Humans would become drones and human expression, which allows for individuality, would become extinct – vaporized. Without memory and knowledge, expression is limited. With the threat of fear and pain, expression is suppressed. But, without language and thought, expression is extinct. Orwell conceived this truth by observation and expression of his own. He closely observed history’s Oceania, Stalinist Russian, and he thoughtfully expressed by creating 1984.

[Burnt Hill]

This is another photo, it doesn't show the bones but you can see the artery:
http://media.salon.com/2013/04/boston-m ... 80x960.jpg

When you go into shock your blood vessels constrict, most of the blood in your body will be trapped in the torso. Think about all of the IED victims from Iraq and Afghanistan who survived despite limited on-site medical care.

If you look closely at the guy in the cowboy hat's right hand, you'll see he is pinching Jeff's femoral artery shut. The tourniquet didn't hold. Jeff's face is extremely pale due to blood loss and shock.

The time it takes a person to bleed out from an injury to the femoral artery is about 5 minutes, but you'll be in critical condition before that due to blood-loss.

Edit: Also, if you're wondering why he isn't screaming it's because he is nearly unconscious. Hypovolemic shock has occurred and he has likely lost more than 20% of the blood in his body. It's normal for a person to have a thousand yard stare when they are in this state as they are nearly dead, organs are starting to shut down and brain damage will occur momentarily unless he can get a transfusion. It's hard to say how much additional bruising his internal organs have because he was so close to the blast.

Yes to all of the above and a wound like that involving flashing heat can actually cauterize blood vessels

[compared2what?]

Okay then, one last post before I'm banned.

scf

2 + 2 = 5

George Orwell’s 1984 presents the depressing world of Oceania, a totalitarian state that often resembles a technologically advanced Stalinist Russia. The novel constructs the face of an omniscient government through the briefly subversive life of Winston Smith, an average, outer party (middle class) man. Orwell effectively builds the totalitarian state through various pieces of its collective controlling apparatus, with each piece seen and subsequently experienced by Winston. This apparatus can be divided into memory and knowledge, fear and pain, and language and thought; each piece is specifically devised to ensure the utter domination and molding of mankind.

You don't see how posting that in support of an organized very manipulative, campaign to persuade people that everything -- thought, questions, evidence, death, reality, falsehood, perception -- is the opposite of itself and that everybody who objects to its immaculate doctrine is an enemy so attack! attack! attack! doesn't really support it?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, conniption. I'm just asking you to consider it. Those videos are using some pretty messed up tactics.

...

Okay. Bear in mind that I mean well.

You know what one of the problems with with looking closely at the images someone is showing you until you undergo the perceptual shift they're guiding you towards is, potentially?

It's that it doesn't make most people more amenable to independent thought. It puts them in a mildly altered state that makes them more suggestible. And that has nothing to do with how savvy they are or how acute their dedication to legitimate-question-asking is. It's a physiological response. The Co$ does something similar though more intense with their initial-stage auditing..

IOW, if anybody cares:

It's possible that there are people posting videos on the internet who are trying to fuck with you by inducing an imperceptibly mild but nevertheless effective trance-like state so that they can introduce their thoughts and suggestions to you in a way that makes them feel like yours without your noticing it.

And it's also possible that after that, stuff that was similar to those videos but not designed to do that would do it anyway, accidentally.

_______________

So take it under advisement using your own thoughts, if you got 'em, everybody..

FWIW, it probably helps some if you're aware that's what's going on. That's why I'm posting. Also, I'm not qualified to say that is what's happening. I'm just saying that I think it's possible.

Forgive me, conniption. It's a real concern. Not addressed to you, specially. Just a concern.
___________

ON EDIT: And about that "before I'm banned" thing.

Did you not notice how almost universally strongly opposed that suggestion was by everyone who's commented on it since it was posted?

I mean, IIRC, that suggestion got retracted. Or maybe semi-retracted.

Anyway. If none of that registered except the threat, that would be disquieting.

[conniption]

Okay then, one last post before I'm banned.

scf

2 + 2 = 5

George Orwell’s 1984 presents the depressing world of Oceania, a totalitarian state that often resembles a technologically advanced Stalinist Russia. The novel constructs the face of an omniscient government through the briefly subversive life of Winston Smith, an average, outer party (middle class) man. Orwell effectively builds the totalitarian state through various pieces of its collective controlling apparatus, with each piece seen and subsequently experienced by Winston. This apparatus can be divided into memory and knowledge, fear and pain, and language and thought; each piece is specifically devised to ensure the utter domination and molding of mankind.

You don't see how posting that in support of an organized very manipulative, campaign to persuade people that everything -- thought, questions, evidence, death, reality, falsehood, perception -- is the opposite of itself and that everybody who objects to its immaculate doctrine is an enemy so attack! attack! attack! doesn't really support it?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, conniption. I'm just asking you to consider it. Those videos are using some pretty messed up tactics.

...

Okay. Bear in mind that I mean well.

You know what one of the problems with with looking closely at the images someone is showing you until you undergo the perceptual shift they're guiding you towards is, potentially?

It's that it doesn't make most people more amenable to independent thought. It puts them in a mildly altered state that makes them more suggestible. And that has nothing to do with how savvy they are or how acute their dedication to legitimate-question-asking is. It's a physiological response. The Co$ does something similar though more intense with their initial-stage auditing..

IOW, if anybody cares:

It's possible that there are people posting videos on the internet who are trying to fuck with you by inducing an imperceptibly mild but nevertheless effective trance-like state so that they can introduce their thoughts and suggestions to you in a way that makes them feel like yours without your noticing it.

And it's also possible that after that, stuff that was similar to those videos but not designed to do that would do it anyway, accidentally.

_______________

So take it under advisement using your own thoughts, if you got 'em, everybody..

FWIW, it probably helps some if you're aware that's what's going on. That's why I'm posting. Also, I'm not qualified to say that is what's happening. I'm just saying that I think it's possible.

Forgive me, conniption. It's a real concern. Not addressed to you, specially. Just a concern.
___________

ON EDIT: And about that "before I'm banned" thing.

Did you not notice how almost universally strongly opposed that suggestion was by everyone who's commented on it since it was posted?

I mean, IIRC, that suggestion got retracted. Or maybe semi-retracted.

Anyway. If none of that registered except the threat, that would be disquieting.

*

C2W? - Are you trying to psychologically manipulate me so I won't be psychologically manipulated?

I didn't understand what you said in the first sentence. Please rephrase it. It sounded important. Also, I'm not sure what videos you're referring to unless it's Lennon's Gimme Some Truth or the one about amputee actors.

I have been over many images, many times of a particular scene at the marathon and it only makes me curious as to why there aren't many many many more pictures to be had, of say.. the other bombing. Anyway, I don't really want to get into it with you. I think the piece I posted (twice now) from the Twelfth Bough sums it up well enough.

It's not my job description to change minds here. Sorry if I've offended anyone.

*

twelfth bough

more stupid questions

UPDATE: 4/26/13

Living very near Boston, we have heard and read many things over the past few days. Things which do not add up. News from people we know about people in the hospital with serious injuries. And yet, we cannot find any videos or photos from the incident -- thus far -- to indicate where these other people were located at the time of the explosions.

Given that the goal of the social engineers is to divide society, we see their hand at work. We understand they don't care about killing and maiming people, as obviously they do that all the time. But dividing society is another issue. They really want to divide the people in America. That's where the social engineers have had to get extra creative. Just killing Americans with Muslim terrorist brothers is more of a uniting thing for many Americans, and they don't want us united. In order to make it a Win Win Divide Bonanza, they have to do something a little different. Maybe throw in some fake perps, shopped photos, real photos, fake victims, real victims, the first bomb, the second bomb... and so on. Mix it all together. Hide things that would clear up confusion. Make it so everyone can see whatever they want to see. Make it chaos.

It is quite diabolical. It allows for half truths, and mistakes, and instances of human error, both genuine and phony, to come into play. It facilitates a lot of disagreements and diversions about technical issues, and moral issues, and logic.

Does it matter if people died and were maimed, or not? How could it not matter? To our mind, it makes all the difference in the world. For one thing it's the difference between life and death -- always important. For another thing it's the difference between truth and lies -- also always important. We don't like being lied to. So it matters to us.

To anyone who thinks it doesn't matter whether people died or not, we suggest you go ahead into the next barroom and announce that you think it was all fake, and see what happens. You'll see that it matters very much to people, and that you are now a social outcast, and probably dangerous and crazy as well.

We understand the nuance that the social engineers don't personally give a shit whether people die or not, but everything they do is to manipulate the audience. It's not important what they think, because we already know what they think. It's more important to understand what they want us to think. And they understand that we are already divided, which they worked very hard at, and now they want to drive the final wedge in there and break off the dangerous piece and send us off to die like a polar bear trapped on a chunk of ice in a global warming sea of doom. And that is why, instead of simply killing people straight out, they make everything lately into an extra-complicated mindfuck, followed in a few days by a fresh one.

So is it worth reviewing the "performance" to tease apart the real from the fake? Well it certainly is not easy, and it may be a waste of time in the end, but yes of course it is worth doing. The truth is always worth pursuing.

We appreciate all the comments to this post, especially from my dear friend James, who has never failed to support me in trying to understand the events around us.


~ Peasant

[FourthBase]

I also want to know why we've only seen what is surely only a fraction of all the closed-circuit and amateur video of Boylston Street between, say, Fairfield and Dartmouth, and between, say, 2;40-3:00pm. I am ripshit at all those citizens, however many did such a thing, who forked over their phone/camcorder/files without first saving a copy for themselves and uploading it to YouTube by now since "the perps have been caught, nothing to see here move along", etc. Apparently, none of them learned a single lesson from Dealey Plaza 50 years ago.

"Are you trying to psychologically manipulate me so I won't be psychologically manipulated?"

How dare anyone do such a thing! Great line, Joe.

[compared2what?]

*

C2W? - Are you trying to psychologically manipulate me so I won't be psychologically manipulated?

No. I wouldn't do that, due to not having the will or any knack for it

You can tell because I didn't use any covertly coercive communication techniques.

(Yes, I know. But it's just the coercion that's covert. The techniques themselves show.) .

I didn't understand what you said in the first sentence. Please rephrase it. It sounded important.

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....

Well. it doesn't look right in all-caps, but basically, they're infinitely more emphatic about saying "Seeing what I'm showing you is seeing for yourself" than the ostensibly oppressive MSM ever is, by a factor of infinity. Unwavering faith in the message is the price of admission and proof of personal value, basically.

They're also very explicitly and aggressively providing demonized all-purpose, categorical hate objects whose fault everything always so very obviously is that nobody ever has to actually say exactly what they did, or show that they did it, or even identify them more than generically, because naming them is its own explanation, a la Emmanuel Goldstein. (FEMA, Masons, the media, the Fed, the CIA, the doctors of America, sheeple, etc.) And inciting fear and hatred against them on those terms -- ie, for existing.

Again: It's true that various outposts of the state, the media and the world of officialdom generally do some of that as well. But it's not all they do, all the time, without any variation, ever. For example, they don't -- in point of fact -- routinely and invariably insist that if people don't make blaming Islamic terrorism for all ills and woes in the world a daily habit and signature lifestyle attribute, they're cowards, sheep and hostiles.

I'm not saying they're fabulous, therefore. I'm just saying they're not nearly as Orwellian as the hoax stuff is. And neither is the opposition to it here on RI, as exemplified by the ban on the subject not having happened; the popular majority opposition to such a ban; the diversity of the arguments against it; and the near-complete absence of fear-and-hate-filled, intimidation- threat- and abuse-laden doctrinally rigid screeds.

That's what I meant.

Also, I'm not sure what videos you're referring to unless it's Lennon's Gimme Some Truth or the one about amputee actors.

I just meant the hoaxer videos. Sorry to have dumped that into a response to you when you weren't talking about them, if that was an unfair imposition. It wasn't aimed at you. I was just pursuing a train of thought

I have been over many images, many times of a particular scene at the marathon and it only makes me curious as to why there aren't many many many more pictures to be had, of say.. the other bombing. Anyway, I don't really want to get into it with you. I think the piece I posted (twice now) from the Twelfth Bough sums it up well enough.

Okay. Your call.

It's not my job description to change minds here.

Mine either. It's all just out there for people to consider. Or not.

Sorry if I've offended anyone.

Ditto.

[compared2what?]

I also want to know why we've only seen what is surely only a fraction of all the closed-circuit and amateur video of Boylston Street between, say, Fairfield and Dartmouth, and between, say, 2;40-3:00pm.

Because there's not a market demand for more than that.

[compared2what?]

C2W? - Are you trying to psychologically manipulate me so I won't be psychologically manipulated?

Just for its own sake, more seriously:

No. I wasn't. Obviously, I understood that both agreeing and disagreeing with what I was saying had pointed psychological implications.

So I tried to phrase it in a way that made it clear that I was offering it for consideration in a good-faith spirit. And I also dialled down all the parts that might suggest dire personal consequences as low as they could go without actually becoming too inconsequential to mean anything. Or tried to, anyway. It's kind of a trickier feat than I really have the chops to pull off, probably.

But anyway. I really wasn't. I was trying to express a real concern in fair, non-alarmist terms. Without obligating you to my alarm about it, more or less.

[compared2what?]

Hey, conniption!

I really am sorry if I offended you. Or anyone.

FWIW, if you don't agree with what I said or see its applicability, your understanding of Orwell and its application to the topic, (or politics, or anything else) is as good as mine. Except from your POV, in which case it's better. So stick with it in whatever way it strikes you as true to do. You're not obligated to my opinion. Okay?
___________

The truth is that the only quibble I really have with the interpretation of Orwell/Nineteen-Eighty-Four in that essay is the same quibble I have with practically all interpretations of Orwell/Nineteen-Eighty-Four, to the point that I think it must just be me. And that goes like this:

Essay says:

Big Brother uses the fear of torture and the fear of pain to control more than just memory and knowledge. It is also used to control action.

I say: True.

Essay says:

From the slogan “WAR IS PEACE / FREEDOM IS SLAVERY / IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” (27), to the endless propaganda and falsification of history, the party employs language to control, to properly direct the minds of its subjects.

I say: Also true.

Essay says:

In the event of thoughtcrime, pain in conjunction with fear is the only certain control, and because of pain and fear “He [Winston] loved Big Brother.”

I say: No! That's wrong! Pain, fear and thought control didn't make him choose that. Knowing that he said "Do it to Julia!" did.

I mean, it's true that fear drove him to say it. But what broke his spirit is that he chose to betray her. So ultimately, it's not what they did but what he did that makes him love Big Brother. That they had the power to make him want to choose it is what makes the book so horrifying. But that he did it is what makes it so tragic. Because anybody would have. At least within the terms of the story.

Which is so grim that I guess I can sort of understand why people tend to leave it out. But, you know. It always seems a little 2 + 2 = 3 to me that it just gets pitched into the memory hole. It's such a key event. And politically, too. Because it's not just a plot point Per my understanding.
_____________

Anyway. No offense intended. Carry on.

[8bitagent]

Not that I'm saying I (fool) heartedly believe that Boston was a black op...
but

Benghazi, the big red herring the right wing asstards are using against Obama was on September 11th 2012, 11 years to the day after Flight 11 hit the 11 shaped towers on 9/11(11 years to the day after Poppy Magog's nwo speech)

It is at the very least an ironic tragedy. The race was dedicated to Sandy Hook, and it ends in another horrible tragedy.

[Joe Hillshoist]

In the event of thoughtcrime, pain in conjunction with fear is the only certain control, and because of pain and fear “He [Winston] loved Big Brother.”

I say: No! That's wrong! Pain, fear and thought control didn't make him choose that. Knowing that he said "Do it to Julia!" did.

I mean, it's true that fear drove him to say it. But what broke his spirit is that he chose to betray her. So ultimately, it's not what they did but what he did that makes him love Big Brother. That they had the power to make him want to choose it is what makes the book so horrifying. But that he did it is what makes it so tragic. Because anybody would have. At least within the terms of the story.

Which is so grim that I guess I can sort of understand why people tend to leave it out. But, you know. It always seems a little 2 + 2 = 3 to me that it just gets pitched into the memory hole. It's such a key event. And politically, too. Because it's not just a plot point Per my understanding.

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.

[8bitagent]

This is another photo, it doesn't show the bones but you can see the artery:
http://media.salon.com/2013/04/boston-m ... 80x960.jpg

When you go into shock your blood vessels constrict, most of the blood in your body will be trapped in the torso. Think about all of the IED victims from Iraq and Afghanistan who survived despite limited on-site medical care.

If you look closely at the guy in the cowboy hat's right hand, you'll see he is pinching Jeff's femoral artery shut. The tourniquet didn't hold. Jeff's face is extremely pale due to blood loss and shock.

The time it takes a person to bleed out from an injury to the femoral artery is about 5 minutes, but you'll be in critical condition before that due to blood-loss.

Edit: Also, if you're wondering why he isn't screaming it's because he is nearly unconscious. Hypovolemic shock has occurred and he has likely lost more than 20% of the blood in his body. It's normal for a person to have a thousand yard stare when they are in this state as they are nearly dead, organs are starting to shut down and brain damage will occur momentarily unless he can get a transfusion. It's hard to say how much additional bruising his internal organs have because he was so close to the blast.

Most people have never seen images like that. I know even from all the horrific Iraq war(both Iraqi and soldier) photos I saw as part of anti war demos, never saw an injury *quite* like that. It's like people who claim
a passenger jet would be intact if it went in the Pentagon. Hell I even question if the WTC was really brought down with "Controlled demolition". We just have never seen this sort of stuff, so who knows.
People found war game drills by the army where yes, they use combat amputees. But see I dont even really buy the "they were having a bomb drill" meme the morning of the Boston attack.
It is shocking and angering to see these images, especially if anyone knows someone with missing limbs. It's a lifetime of pain and difficulty. Im not saying the Boston attack isnt a wider conspiracy, but
it seems like the Tsarnaevs took great pleasure in being willing servants of this horror show.

[8bitagent]

We have seen fakery. The Chinese Olympic fireworks. The Saddam statue toppling. The Bush photo-op on the ground in the wake of Katrina. Operation Northwoods was all about a mix of fakery and real death.
But to me none of that applies to these events. Whoeever is behind these events love death. They love seeing hundreds of Kenyans and Tanzanian innocents carried out on bloody stretchers, or babies pulled from warzones.
Because that is the point of visual shock. The 9/11 fakery, the Sandy Hook "Hoax" crowd, the Boston "hoax" crowd...they truly have not studied history. This isn't the 1997 movie Wag The Dog. These psychopaths(whoever they are) love death. They get off on it.


Let's see...have all sorts of actors pretending to cry and fake death reports in Newton...or have actual carnage?(and ive seen zero evidence Sandy Hook was even a 'black op')

Let's see...have this big budget theatrical fake show on Boylston street, or have people genuinely ripped apart like folks on a battlefield? Again, Ive seen no direct evidence it was a 'black op', but still.

The plans may seem elaborate, but the methods are often crude.

Every time, the "hoax" answer never makes a lick of sense. The ones behind terror love a good horror show. No need to fake anything other than creative a narrative that points where they want it to

[brainpanhandler]

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....

EXACTLY.

I am curious though about: "those videos and websites constitute a very aggressive, focused political propaganda drive"

Who do you think is likely behind that? I'd love to hear you elaborate on this.