Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    24,521

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    The questions, as worded, have a feel of an attempt to bait a trap. The insistence of attempting to force a yes/no to a "Do you believe" scenario, makes the cynic in me wonder what would then be the "then how do you explain" aspect once the yes/no has been obtained.

    But you know what you're doing and I have for many years admired your patience. So I'll leave you to it and go buy some popcorn.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    Because the question itself is not “nonsense.” The belief by some in this thread that his question is founded by belief in government conspiracy theories that have very little evidence to support them is not supported by anything the OP has said and I will not, as others have done, assume what the OP’s beliefs on any conspiracy theory may be. And in any event, those beliefs are not relevant to the questions asked. Even if he/she believes in a conspiracy theory that I and most others might deem wacky that does not mean the underlying question about what is legal for the government to do is itself nonsense. One can surely ask if it would be legal for the government to engage in a particular act even if that person does not believe the government has actually done it. After all, one can ask if rape is illegal without himself being a rapist, right? So I suggest separating out the question being asked from whatever assumptions you have as to the beliefs prompting the question, as the latter isn’t really relevant.
    Thank you for your thoughtful and considered responses.

    The basis of this thread originates with fact-based real world experience in Denial and Deception operations.

    My question could certainly have been worded better.

    In your view, Do you think it acceptable that Domestic Target Audiences (legislators and citizens) are targeted with “Staged Atrocity Propaganda” to further regime political goals?”

    More specifically, do you think it acceptable for a regime to employ staged events in the form of “shootings” to manipulate public opinion and to provide political cover for the passage of more restrictive laws?

    The underlying issue is, of course, the legality of the use of these weapons against Domestic Target audiences.

    The term “conspiracy theory” has been used in this thread, apparently as a type of slur.

    The fact is that persons trained in Deception are taught that most people are unaware of the epistemological basis of their analytic judgments, forecasts, or insights.

    This may account for the knee-jerk reaction of applying the term “conspiracy theory” to situations not fully understood by the commenter.

    Surely, the assertion that the FBI created an entirely fake pseudo-character with a totally fictitious name and orchestrated an entirely fake court case (the David P. Khoury case in Philadelphia) would be met with the slur label “conspiracy theory” … unless numerous news articles appeared that documented some of the details of that Deception operation.

    Knowledge building requires that they understand the basis for what constitutes “Knowledge” since some knowledge is more reliable than others.

    Professional Deception planners leverage unsubstantiated information coming from what are thought to be reliable sources.

    Deceivers manufacture unsubstantiated information conforming to a certain mind-set or bias to further enable the deception.

    Counterdeception is a mirror-image of deception planning and execution. The characteristics of the things hidden and displayed and categories of analysis are the same. The only difference is that the process used by the deceiver follows a different logical path than the process used by the investigator to unravel it.

    Consequently, counterdeception is most effectively performed by people who have experience in planning and executing deceptions.

    Whoever creates a deception simultaneously creates all the clues needed for its solution. Every deception necessarily generates a minimum of two clues. At least one about the real thing being hidden and at least one about the false thing being shown.

    Each clue is an incongruity characteristic that distinguishes the real thing from the fake one.

    The reason I took the time to start this thread is because I know for a fact that these capabilities are presently being used against Domestic Target Audiences to manipulate public opinion and provide political cover for more restrictive laws.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,301

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    There is a HUGE difference between the FBI or any other LEO organization conducting a sting by creating a character to document the wrongdoing of a criminal and some portion of the government or anyone else staging mass shootings at a school, or anywhere else for that matter, to garner support for increased gun control. And there is nobody in the world who would be more happy if such a event were found to be staged than I would be.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    I'm sure that the families and friends of the 17 dead in Parkland would be shocked to find out that it was all a hoax and that those people never existed ... or, are alive and in some sort of Witness Protection program somewhere.

    But, the same falderal was being laid on thick by the fringers after Newtown as well. So, I'm not surprised.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    Quote Quoting PayrolGuy
    View Post
    In this case it did happen and was legal what the FBI did. Now what's your question?
    Public policy issues pertaining to the use of Deception fall into two general categories:

    1. Deception operations to catch persons committing crimes (Stings), and

    2. Deception operations to manufacture consent among an unsuspecting public.

    Stings have a legitimate place in law enforcement. But, It is currently legal for this regime to create scripted scenarios to manufacture consent among an unsuspecting public.

    Our federal courts will only hear “cases and controversies” involving real people and real issues. They will not hear cases involving fake shadow personas and invented issues. They will not issue “advisory opinions” nor will they hear moot cases. I know that some States will render advisory opinions on a law’s meaning or constitutionality inconsistent with Article III limitation that its power extends only to cases and controversies.

    As we all know, the David P. Khoury case in Philadelphia did not involve a real “case or controversy” and involved the creation of a fake person, a fake ID, the filing of a false police report and other resultant paperwork that constituted fraud. However, because it done with the authorization of the Justice Department - they simply gave themselves immunity.

    They also relied on the fact that implementing Faked Scenarios and Staged Atrocities is not “illegal”.

    Imagine if our courts agreed to hear cases and controversies involving invented shadow characters and completely invented issues – not just those involving real people and real issues.

    How about this one: There is a rash of “insanity” among Muslim police officers resulting in random police walking into shopping malls and shooting the places up. Several such events are staged in fairly close temporal proximity amid calls for deporting all Muslims “for our safety”.

    Or how about this one: There is a rash of arrests of Homosexuals for child abuse and child murder involving the production of snuff films. Several such arrests are staged in fairly close temporal proximity amid calls for segregating homosexuals from the general population “for our safety”.

    The Philadelphia Municipal Court did, in fact, hear a case involving and entirely fake scenario. That particular case was not used to manipulate public perception about perceived threats. It was used to take a judge off the bench.

    But the technique of filing a fake case could have been used for public manipulation and this is the reason for this thread.

    Obviously any convenient and useful scenario could be scripted and used to lead the masses in the desired direction. The entire reason for this thread is to disuses the use of Deception as a tool of public manipulation.

    You can remain in denial about these things if you wish. The fact is that certain “events” that you were shown in the news were entirely staged under the supervision of professional Deception planners.

    You may find interesting the fact that FEMA has something called the National Exercise Division. That division has the expertise and infrastructure to create large scale Staged Atrocities including shootings with fake blood and even amputee actors.

    Since you seem to have wanted to discuss the Sandy Hook event that you seem to be so convinced of its veracity, I have something for you and would love to hear your excuse for it.

    On the morning of December 14, 2012 CNN broadcast video footage of CT State Troopers running into the St. Rose of Lima School that is 1 mile away from Sandy Hook School in Newtown. The CNN video shown here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI0rBbLxYLo clearly shows this. I do not endorse that channel and am merely providing a link so you can see the video. But you should understand that Youtube has been actively purging this video. If you look, you may be able to find a version that was not intentionally darkened to make it more difficult to examine the shadows.

    Not only were the troopers filmed running into the wrong school - the troopers were shown running into the school just before SUNDOWN as proven by the angle and direction of all shadows.

    If you investigate further, you will find that the shadows cast from the troopers are about 28 feet long and are coming FROM the south WEST.

    As a reminder: the sun rises in the East and sets in the West and the alleged Sandy Hook event allegedly occurred in the morning. If the video was shot before noon, the shadows would have been coming from a generally Easterly direction. And their exact length would correspond to the time of day at the date and location in question.

    This means that video was shot in the evening the day before the alleged Sandy Hook event occurred (or on another date BEFORE that), just before sunset. Not in the morning as you were told. You were told that the Sandy Hook event occurred on the morning of December 14, 2012.

    No little kids would have even been present either at the St. Rose of Lima School just before sundown or at the Sandy Hook School.

    That video had to have been shot the evening of December 13, 2012 (or before) at an "Active Shooter Drill" at St. Rose of Lima School...and that script was broadcast to the public the next day on December 14, 2012 at the inactive Sandy Hook School.

    I only mention this because this is just one of literally hundreds of factual anomalies that point to the fact that something is very wrong with the official story.

    If you wish to remain in denial – that’s great. But I certainly do not deserve your abuse. In fact, I am a professional and know what I am talking about.

    I was trained to understand that people like that have very strong mental biases that prevent them from questioning anything that a perceived authority tells them.

    Then, predictably, they spew the “conspiracy theory” slur.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,301

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    Quote Quoting haha
    View Post
    Public policy issues pertaining to the use of Deception fall into two general categories:

    1. Deception operations to catch persons committing crimes (Stings), and

    2. Deception operations to manufacture consent among an unsuspecting public.

    Stings have a legitimate place in law enforcement. But, It is currently legal for this regime to create scripted scenarios to manufacture consent among an unsuspecting public.
    Where are you getting that what I bolded above is actually the case.



    Then, predictably, they spew the “conspiracy theory” slur.
    con·spir·a·cy
    kənˈspirəsē
    noun
    a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
    "a conspiracy to destroy the government"
    synonyms: plot, scheme, plan, machination, ploy, trick, ruse, subterfuge; informalracket
    "a conspiracy to manipulate the results"
    the action of plotting or conspiring.
    "they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice"
    synonyms: plotting, collusion, intrigue, connivance, machination, collaboration; treason
    "conspiracy to commit murder"


    the·o·ry
    ˈTHirē
    noun
    noun: theory; plural noun: theories
    a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.
    "Darwin's theory of evolution"
    synonyms: hypothesis, thesis, conjecture, supposition, speculation, postulation, postulate, proposition, premise, surmise, assumption, presupposition; More
    a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based.
    "a theory of education"
    an idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action.
    "my theory would be that the place has been seriously mismanaged"
    MATHEMATICS
    a collection of propositions to illustrate the principles of a subject.


    conspiracy theory isn't a slur.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    So, no one was killed at Sandy Hook. Got it.

    <sigh>

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,006

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    Quote Quoting PayrolGuy
    View Post
    conspiracy theory isn't a slur.

    Most of the time when someone starts talking about another person believing in such theories, it is not a complement.

    Quote Quoting cdwjava
    View Post
    So, no one was killed at Sandy Hook. Got it.

    <sigh>
    Not too mention that all the theories that he spouted regarding it have, to the best of my knowledge, been proven to be completely false or misunderstandings of other events not related to Sandy Hook.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,301

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    Quote Quoting free9man
    View Post
    Most of the time when someone starts talking about another person believing in such theories, it is not a complement.
    The OP is spouting a theory that there is a conspiracy. That isn't a slur. If he or anyone else provides proof it will no longer be a theory.

    Words mean things no matter how any one tries to redefine them.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,006

    Default Re: Legality of Staged Atrocity Propaganda

    Quote Quoting PayrolGuy
    View Post
    Words mean things no matter how any one tries to redefine them.
    Words can take on alternate meanings. The concept of conspiracy theories, not the actual words themselves, has a negative connotation. Those who believe in them don't tend to believe so but know that those who do not tend to attach a negative connotation to it since many, if not most, conspiracy theories are complete codswallop.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Traffic Accidents: How to Prove a Car Accident Was Staged
    By lex_ in forum Accidents and Injuries
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-26-2013, 09:23 AM
  2. Defamation: Business Sells Harmful Propaganda and Destroyed My Organization
    By REV-X in forum Defamation, Slander And Libel
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-24-2011, 02:50 AM
  3. Getting Fired: Terminated for Propaganda - Sexual Discrimination/Retaliation
    By eltonscott in forum Employment and Labor
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-22-2010, 08:23 PM
  4. Defamation: Defamation of Character and hate propaganda
    By caledmab in forum Defamation, Slander And Libel
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-07-2006, 08:39 AM
  5. Traffic Accidents: Staged Accident
    By StagedAccident in forum Accidents and Injuries
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-02-2006, 04:37 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources