Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Discussing the most relevant "sequels" or "reminders" of 9/11. The so-called "War On Terror" is a global scam finalized to manipulate this world's population with crass fear-mongering tactics designed to scare you shitless.

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby simonshack on Sun Oct 21, 2018 8:27 am

(In answer to a post by SCS over at this other thread: viewtopic.php?p=2406634#p2406634 )
SacredCowSlayer wrote:I recommend skipping straight to the 11:21 mark for the absurd reference to “the real skull,” which is naturally stored in the freezer.


I can't help but cringe at the sick & crude "sense of humor" pervading the ongoing storyboard for this particular 'couple of crisis actors'. Very unfunny, if you ask me.

Yet, you can hear the TED audience laughing heartily at [13:45] of this clip https://youtu.be/M6TMSQWI9m4?t=1003 when "Gabby" replies to the Navy seal holding her from behind. The Navy seal goes: "Everything good"? Gabby replies : "Good! Good stuff!" Or wait...does she say "stuff"? Or am I hearing something else? :mellow:

Edit to correct : Whoops - I meant to type 16:45, sorry!
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6595
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby HonestlyNow on Sun Oct 21, 2018 2:27 pm

The Gabby and Mark Show as per previous post

The comments starting with "Newest First" are quite heartening.
(Yes, it sounds to me like she's saying "stuff" at that point.)
HonestlyNow
Member
 
Posts: 405
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby Kham on Sun Oct 21, 2018 4:27 pm

A Heal on a Heal

Notice that Gabby has about a 2 to 3 inch heal only on her right shoe while her left shoe heal remains flat. Did the shooting elongate her left leg or shorten her right leg? Or perhaps having a heal on only one shoe and not the other gives Gabby an artificial limp when she walks.

Also, concerning aphasia which is a communication disorder caused by brain trauma and apparently gives Gabby her particularly peculiar speech impediment is not like any other aphasia known to mankind. The Gabby Giffords Aphasia Challenge: Google ‘aphasia patient video’ and compare the speech patterns. There were so many good real life examples I hesitated to provide links. Viewing many examples assists in recognizing the pattern of many aphasia patients. As in myself, after seeing the speech pattern in patients that aphasia causes I didn’t have to feel guilty of accusing Gabby of over acting, hand gestures and all, and thus faking it. I clearly saw how the communication disorder Gabby is displaying is as artificial as her limp.
Kham
Member
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:30 am

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby SacredCowSlayer on Sun Oct 21, 2018 5:02 pm

Kham » October 21st, 2018, 11:27 am wrote:A Heal on a Heal

Notice that Gabby has about a 2 to 3 inch heal only on her right shoe while her left shoe heal remains flat. Did the shooting elongate her left leg or shorten her right leg? Or perhaps having a heal on only one shoe and not the other gives Gabby an artificial limp when she walks.
. . .



That’s an excellent catch dear Kham. I love it. Here is what I think you must be referring to.
Please correct me if I’m wrong.

SCS :)

Image

And Simon,

Yes, indeed, this is a profoundly disturbing display . . . on so many levels. I genuinely feel bad for all the people (who have actual disabilities and/or loved ones afflicted as such) who may be psychologically or emotionally damaged by this long over-cooked Mass Deception. Disgusting.

SCS
SCS
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby Dani on Tue Nov 06, 2018 11:18 pm

SacredCowSlayer » October 21st, 2018, 6:02 pm wrote:
Kham » October 21st, 2018, 11:27 am wrote:A Heal on a Heal

Notice that Gabby has about a 2 to 3 inch heal only on her right shoe while her left shoe heal remains flat. Did the shooting elongate her left leg or shorten her right leg? Or perhaps having a heal on only one shoe and not the other gives Gabby an artificial limp when she walks.
. . .



That’s an excellent catch dear Kham. I love it. Here is what I think you must be referring to.
Please correct me if I’m wrong.

SCS :)

Image

And Simon,

Yes, indeed, this is a profoundly disturbing display . . . on so many levels. I genuinely feel bad for all the people (who have actual disabilities and/or loved ones afflicted as such) who may be psychologically or emotionally damaged by this long over-cooked Mass Deception. Disgusting.

SCS


Image

I must say it looks as though someone shoved a pillow down her pant leg. :wacko:
Dani
Moderator
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:49 pm

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby Observer on Wed Nov 07, 2018 10:13 am

Kham wrote:A Heel on a Heal
Notice that Gabby has about a 2 to 3 inch heel only on her right shoe while her left shoe heel remains flat. Did the shooting elongate her left leg or shorten her right leg? Or perhaps having a heel on only one shoe and not the other gives Gabby an artificial limp when she walks.


Dani wrote:Image
I must say it looks as though someone shoved a pillow down her pant leg. :wacko:


Wow, Kham noticed the "heal's heel", and yet none of us had noticed that "pants pillow". Excellent catch Dani! :)

Probably this pants-problem is an easter-egg they are waiting for us to bring up, so they can reply with their pre-preprared documentary video showing the poor "victim" putting on some kind of "support pad" for her "leg muscles damaged" by "the brain damage" or something.

Let's also remember, that just as the Boston-"Bombing" hoax used actors who were already PRE-damaged by some actual previous event. That is, the "Boston victims" who "lost legs in the Boston-Bombing" probably had already actually lost legs as soldiers in Iraq or somewhere, so too there is a possibility here of actual-injury yet hoaxed-reason.

For example: maybe her own actor husband drunkenly accidentally/purposefully (Dick-Cheney-Shotgun-Style) shot/hammered/damaged her and their bosses decided, "OK, we don't want to admit the embarrassing truth about how she actually was simply damaged by her drunk husband, the 'astronaut hero', haha, so let's USE this actual sudden injury to our advantage, by quickly making a 'shooting by some crazy person' fake-video accompanied with a fake-story which advances our various goals."

Whether she has absolutely zero injury, or whether she received an actual injury immediately before they created the fake "shot by some crazy stranger" movie + story, either way, it matters not, since we KNOW that the movie is proven fake since it has been well dissected by CluesForum. And let's remember to remind people of this very important fact: in ALL of the officially-pushed narratives, anytime even ONE FRAME of the official 'footage' contains evidence of fakery, the official story is proven faked.

The "shot by some crazy stranger" movie + story is of course a multi-layered psyop with goals such as fooling people into accepting beliefs such as "governments should take away self-defense abilities of all citizens, normal people should be fearful of anyone speaking or writing 'far-out' ideas critical of the government-military-media, we all should believe this 'victimized' politician's husband has really been to space, etc."

So, whether or not they have prepared a rational-seeming story about her strange heel and strange pillow, the main point is: Kham & Dani are doing what we should always be doing: remaining vigilant about observing details. Let's all remember to keep doing the same: keep looking closely & making such good real-roots-of-CluesForum observations! :)
Observer
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby SacredCowSlayer on Wed Nov 07, 2018 4:39 pm

Dani » November 6th, 2018, 5:18 pm wrote:
SacredCowSlayer » October 21st, 2018, 6:02 pm wrote:
Kham » October 21st, 2018, 11:27 am wrote:A Heal on a Heal

Notice that Gabby has about a 2 to 3 inch heal only on her right shoe while her left shoe heal remains flat. Did the shooting elongate her left leg or shorten her right leg? Or perhaps having a heal on only one shoe and not the other gives Gabby an artificial limp when she walks.
. . .



That’s an excellent catch dear Kham. I love it. Here is what I think you must be referring to.
Please correct me if I’m wrong.

SCS :)

Image


I must say it looks as though someone shoved a pillow down her pant leg. :wacko:


Dear Dani,

Your comment nearly had me spitting coffee on my screen when I read it earlier.

“[S]hoved a pillow down her pant leg.” :lol:

Your sense of humor and apt succinctness will take you far in life. That much I am sure of.

Thank you for that observation. I was so fixated on that huge (and never moving) shoe that the enormous leg puffery was almost lost on me completely. Wowsers! “ :wacko: “-indeed.

SCS
SCS
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby patrix on Thu Nov 08, 2018 5:53 am

SacredCowSlayer » November 7th, 2018, 5:39 pm wrote:Dear Dani,

Your comment nearly had me spitting coffee on my screen when I read it earlier.

“[S]hoved a pillow down her pant leg.” :lol:



Of course this woman and her astronot are complete frauds but what has a thick leg got to do with anything? She's probably wearing leg braces.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby Observer on Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:40 am

patrix wrote:Of course this woman and her astronot are complete frauds but what has a thick leg got to do with anything? She's probably wearing leg braces.


Yes Patrix, none of us (Kham, Dani, SCS, me, you) seemed to care about this minor "shot by a stranger" psyop enough to actually DEEPLY check the official story before posting on this recently-revived old thread.

Looking deeper now, Wikipedia doesn't talk about the leg at all, it only mentions the brain damage: "Doctors who first treated Giffords said the bullet entered the back of her head and exited through the front of her skull, but physicians later concluded that it had traveled in the opposite direction." http://archive.is/9YQJD

But CNN does explain her right arm and right leg are paralyzed: "The right-handed Giffords still has no use of that hand and that arm is paralyzed. She generally wears a sling to keep it from flopping around. Her right leg is also paralyzed. She wears a large brace and literally drags her right leg with her good, left leg to walk. Still, she walks remarkably well." http://archive.is/cw856

So my knowledge-less quick guess in my post above happened by chance to be correct: "Probably ... they can reply with their pre-preprared documentary video showing the poor "victim" putting on some kind of "support pad" for her "leg muscles damaged" by "the brain damage" or something."

So yes, we could scold Kham, Dani, SCS, me, and patrix, for posting comments on this thread without diligently reading all 51 pages of this thread first, since this thread has probably already discussed in detail the official "right leg (and right arm) paralyzed" claim.

But for positive reasons (i.e. liking & loving) somehow I felt it would be nicer to look on the bright side and find something to honestly praise and give positive encouragement for pointing out some visual things in that video which most watchers didn't notice.

Imagine for a moment that Kham, Dani, SCS, me, and patrix simply watched that TedTalk video without any previous reading on this particular psyop (which, let's admit, is probably the case, since admittedly most of us specialized more in the major "9-11 'planes' terror" psyop, not this minor "Arizona shooting" psyop). Well, then leaving aside the task of diligently reading all the past story details, if this week's "test" was simply watching that one TedTalk video and doing the ever-important task of LOOKING CLOSELY at the video presented, I think Kham & Dani get points for pointing out 2 things which other viewers here didn't notice, the big heel and the puffy pants. Simon & SCS zoomed in on the bad acting, Kham & Dani zoomed in on the heel and leg.

And I give myself some points for realizing that just as we don't NEED to claim Gabby is totally a CGI Avatar, she's probably an actual living actor, so too we don't NEED to claim Gabby is totally faking her injury. It's possible her husband drunkenly bashed her in the head with a hammer or something, causing real damage, and then they just laid the bullsh*t "shot by a stranger" pysop story on top of that actual injury.

As I wrote yesterday (and seriously, I don't think anyone else has written this idea before, please let me know if anyone has come up with this theory before) :

Observer » November 7th, 2018, 7:13 pm wrote:Let's also remember, that just as the Boston-"Bombing" hoax used actors who were already PRE-damaged by some actual previous event, (that is, the "Boston victims" who "lost legs in the Boston-Bombing" probably had already actually lost legs as soldiers in Iraq or somewhere), so too there is a possibility here of actual-injury yet hoaxed-reason.

For example: maybe her own actor husband drunkenly accidentally/purposefully (Dick-Cheney-Shotgun-Style) shot/hammered/damaged her and their bosses decided, "OK, we don't want to admit the embarrassing truth about how she actually was simply damaged by her drunk husband, the 'astronaut hero', haha, so let's USE this actual sudden injury to our advantage, by quickly making a 'shooting by some crazy person' fake-video accompanied with a fake-story which advances our various goals."


And I think the other sentences I wrote yesterday also still stand as good reminders (which again, happened to have been sparked thanks to Kham & Dani's comments, so praise still goes to them for having the courage to post their observations, regardless of the fact what they observed happens to be already explained by the official story) :

Observer » November 7th, 2018, 7:13 pm wrote:Whether she has absolutely zero injury, or whether she received an actual injury immediately before they created the fake "shot by some crazy stranger" movie + story, either way, it matters not, since we KNOW that the movie is proven fake since it [the 'arizona shooting' video/image collection] has been well dissected by CluesForum. And let's remember to remind people of this very important fact: in ALL of the officially-pushed narratives [9/11, moon landing, minor terror/shooting, whatever], anytime even ONE FRAME of the official 'footage' contains evidence of fakery, the official story is proven faked.

The "shot by some crazy stranger" movie + story is of course a multi-layered psyop with goals such as fooling people into accepting beliefs such as "governments should take away self-defense abilities of all citizens, normal people should be fearful of anyone speaking or writing 'far-out' ideas critical of the government-military-media, we all should believe this 'victimized' politician's husband has really been to space, etc."

So, whether or not they have prepared a rational-seeming story about her strange heel and strange pillow, the main point is: Kham & Dani are doing what we should always be doing: remaining vigilant about observing details. Let's all remember to keep doing the same: keep looking closely & making such good real-roots-of-CluesForum observations! :)
Observer
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby SacredCowSlayer on Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:42 pm

patrix » November 7th, 2018, 11:53 pm wrote:


Of course this woman and her astronot are complete frauds. . .


Well dear Patrix, given that they are frauds, the props (and other tactics in perpetuating said fraud) are rightly pointed out on this topic dealing with a particular mass deception, albeit a silly one.

For that matter, such a question as yours could be applied to countless posts on any given topic. Think of the nearly incalculable time spent on analysis of cartoons passing through one another on this forum.

What did all that have to do with anything? I’ll tell you. It helped other researchers and our readers understand a method of deception through fabricated imagery. I think the 9/11 Sim City topics are fascinating, and well worth reading through.

And frankly it’s nice to have a new (and young) member here adding scrutiny to imagery, and thus prompting our otherwise (perhaps) tired eyes to review and consider things we may have overlooked. I’m sure as hell not going to discourage such contributions and observations.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

And dear Observer,

There are other videos that show her using the right arm with no trouble. She can’t even be consistent with her feigned injury symptoms. When I get a chance I’ll post them here for comparison sake.

And this aptly named Gabby (who won’t shut up) has been on the speaking tour way too long for a person with some genuine brain injury in my opinion. As Kham has pointed out, her speech patterns are remarkably different from those with an actual injury of the kind she is said to have.

So no, I don’t think she’s an authentic victim of some traumatic brain injury. She appears to be a working girl (Congresswoman and astronut wife, turned shooting victim, turned awkward “activist”) who is merely an operative of the Nutwork. No more, no less.

That said, I think the kind of method you describe is always one to be on the lookout for. There are numerous ways to engage in covering up undesirable “real world” things that may otherwise damage the value of what are considered to be human assets. I have little doubt about that.

Sincerely,
SCS
SCS
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby Observer on Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:56 pm

SacredCowSlayer wrote:And dear Observer,

There are other videos that show her using the right arm with no trouble. She can’t even be consistent with her feigned injury symptoms. When I get a chance I’ll post them here for comparison sake.

And this aptly named Gabby (who won’t shut up) has been on the speaking tour way too long for a person with some genuine brain injury in my opinion. As Kham has pointed out, her speech patterns are remarkably different from those with an actual injury of the kind she is said to have.

So no, I don’t think she’s an authentic victim of some traumatic brain injury. She appears to be a working girl (Congresswoman and astronut wife, turned shooting victim, turned awkward “activist”) who is merely an operative of the Nutwork. No more, no less.

That said, I think the kind of method you describe is always one to be on the lookout for. There are numerous ways to engage in covering up undesirable “real world” things that may otherwise damage the value of what are considered to be human assets. I have little doubt about that.

Sincerely,
SCS


Agreed: I never looked into this pysop at all, if she indeed has been caught using her "paralyzed" right arm, and since her speech patterns (and amounts) don't match what we would expect from someone with an authentic traumatic brain injury, then my sudden "perhaps she really was injured" theory was wrong in this case. I blame the fact that I didn't diligently look into this pysyop before throwing out that theory.

Hmm, my ego desperately wants to try to find a way to still make my theory work. Hey, here's an idea, maybe I can combine two theories: perhaps the ORIGINAL Gabby [on the left, below] did indeed get damaged somehow, ala my drunken-husband theory, and then after they built the "shooting" movie+story they decided the actual original Gabby couldn't talk as much as they wanted (or actually died a few days/weeks/months later), so THEN they introduced the quite-different-appearing different actress, the NEW "Gabby2" [on the right, below] ?

In which case one pysop killed 3 birds: #1 covered-up the initial Dick-Cheney-Shotgun-Style actual injury reason, #2 changed actors from the original damaged Gabby to the new undamaged Gabby2, and then #3 sent new undamaged talkative Gabby2 around to prop up all the previously-mentioned goals of the "shooting" story: taking away self-defense tools (while of course as a bonus increasing self-defense tool sales until the eventual takeaway day arrives, haha), making folks scared of conspiracy-theorists as the (CGI-avatar) "shooter" is painted to be, pushing the "this is my real husband, he is a real astronaut, astronauts actually fly in space" lies, etc.

simonshack wrote:
BEFORE_______________________________________AFTER

ImageImage


Anyway, thanks for agreeing with my point that (even though it is probably not the case here) they do sometimes use actually injured folks (like Jeff Bauman, etc) in their "shooting/terror" psyops.

Although I never really was interested in investigating this particular "Arizona shooting" psyop, now that I think about it, I DO remember reading through the final posts of the CluesForum banned-member "Fred", who either was a long-time paid-shill who accidentally revealed his long-hidden-badness at the end, or a long-time intelligent innocent contributor who allowed a disagreement about whether Gabby was a CGI avatar or a real living actress turn into a shill accusation departure.

The fact that Fred happened to have been exposed to various bits of evidence of actors (Gabby, Sheriffs, Mourners, etc) over at a shill's site (Goldbug), combined with the fact that folks here at the time were leaning more towards the "all CGI avatars all the time, Gabby's not a real person, she's just a CGI avatar" vibe, combined with the fact that when Fred's logical "actors are involved here as well" posts were labelled shillery, ended up resulting in Fred calling the top folks here shills in return, and thus Fred himself got labelled a shill and banned. It seems to me the shill Goldbug included a tiny bit of truth in his mainly wrong site, and thus that particular bad (Goldbug) SOURCE of the actor evidence tarnished Fred's attempts at bringing up the actor evidence here at CluesForum.

If only Fred had found the actor evidence ELSEWHERE, at some non-shill (non-Goldbug) site, then all the shill accusations wouldn't have occurred in the first place.

Anyway, Fred's final posts on this particular "Gabby" topic, and actually all his posts in general, seem to me, looking back, to have been quite logical. I'm posting the "best of" Fred's usable contributions from his final "Arizona" posts in chronological order just in case anyone is interested:

Probably they have some actors who sign up for this and then agree to allow them to use derivative works forever for any fake interviews down the road. It's not a big deal to cut-and-paste one of these actors into some scene years down the road for a "five year tribute" or whatever. It wouldn't surprise me if Mr Pink Hair wrestler gets paid $5000 for the day and signs a contract to keep his mouth shut. The characters themselves are all fictitious, of course, just like in a Broadway play.

If Mr Pink Hair starts telling tales years later is anybody going to believe him? It's not like he was ever held out to be a credible person in the first place. Suppose he says Loughner never existed. He'll just be written off as some nutcase. If the flaky ex-girlfriend someday claims that she didn't date Loughner after all, nobody really cares either. So she's a liar. No harm done.

It may be more important for them to use sims for the higher investment characters like Gabby Giffords. They are most obviously building her up in a big way for something they plan to do down the road. If one of the actresses dies for some reason or another they probably still want to keep Gabby around for whatever they have planned. After all, we already know she's immortal.


fred wrote:This could use a lot of refinement:

Columbine
Shooter: Angry Teenagers
Environment: School, Closed to public
Media presence: Reporting from outside while event occurs
Video of event: b/w security camera without sound
Victims: Children ~33
Difficulty level: Easy
A star is born: Michael Moore "Bowling for Columbine"
Target audience: Parents, students?
Message: Troubled youth with guns and bombs are a menace, and you're not safe anywhere.
Desired action: Install metal detectors in schools. Support gun control and security state.

DC Sniper
Shooter: Mentally unstable Muslim terrorist and Violent Video Game Playing Adopted Son of Muslim Terrorist
Environment: City, open to public
Video of event: None
Victims: Random people, FBI agent
Difficulty level: Easy
No star or hero.
Message: Muslims are dangerous murderers. You're not safe anywhere.
Desired action: Continue to support the war against terror

Ft Hood
Shooter: Muslim terrorist
Environment: Army Base, Closed to the public at all times
Media presence: None
Video of event: None
Victims: Soldiers (~11)
Difficulty level: Easy
Story size: Small
No star or hero.
Target audience: International news media
Message: USA is multicultural (Muslim psychiatrist in Army), Muslims are dangerous murderers.
Desired action: Continue to support the war against terror

Operation Safeway
Shooter: Lone-wolf Nutcase
Environment: Grocery store, Closed to public for special event
Media presence: Cover aftermath
Video of event: None, only "aftermath" footage of taking victim to hospital
Victims: Children, Politician, Judge (~9)
Difficulty level: Easy to Moderate
Story size: Medium
A star is born: Gabby Giffords
Hero: Izunza/Menedez
Target audience: Voting public
Message: One crazy White Man can ruin your whole day, and female politicians will save the world.
Desired action: Vote Gabby Giffords for President [Note by SCS: Say what? :blink: ]

Nobody is saying America will never be the same again because of Loughner or Ft Hood. The Norway operation seems to be considerably larger. As far as horror movies go it's sort of Jason vs. Son of Jason. It's the same formulaic crap.

The Arizona shooting has a more interesting plot element in the Gabby Giffords character. She should be dead, but then she's reborn as a different person with short dark hair instead of being a blond. And her husband is a Rocket Man. So clearly there's a sequel in the making.

fred wrote:I do actually think that they hire actors for these [direct actors, and indirect actors who allow parts of their faces to be used when creating CGI avatar animation] roles.

I have personally seen military simulation work (not PSYOP work) contracted out to small independent developers. So I know from personal knowledge that it happens. I've spent enough time around these developers to know that doing something like "Let's give him your first name and my middle name and her last name" is exactly the sort of thing these guys do for kicks. It's stupid, it's bad form, and they do it all the time. They don't take this stuff too seriously. Maybe they don't know that it's going to be used for something so big. 99% of the time this stuff never sees the light of day. Maybe it ends up in some training film somewhere. They don't need to know exactly where this stuff they work on is going to end up, and they sign confidentiality agreements--NDA's--agreeing never to talk about it.


At some point there's a nexus between the "sim" and the real world, and they need ACTORS or PARTICIPANTS to lie to the real people in order to maintain that illusion.

I would argue that to limit the number of players it's worthwhile for them to have a couple of "live action Gabby's" played by actors that are not the same as the "Sim Gabby" that you see on TV. Just like in the 9/11 operation they need some actual "real world explosive devices" to bring down the WTC that are different from the "simulated explosions and collapse footage" that you see on TV.

I would say that "that part of the operation" that interfaces with the "real world" is the weak link.

We see a Sim WTC in the videos. You're almost taking the position that because it was simmed that the real WTC doesn't exist. Gabby has been simmed therefore we don't need an actress to play Gabby? Is that logical? We don't need a live-action Gabby for her TV Appearances. Well what about everywhere else Gabby is supposed to be? I think they still need actors and actresses because there are plenty of "live roles" required to maintain the illusion.

But then again maybe that's just "paranoid". If they do use live-actors there's still a need to shop them and sim them to help disguise the actor-participants and let them lead their double lives outside of "working hours."

Think of a Hollywood movie. Spiderman can be CGI on a screen and he usually is. But they still need some guys to stand around in Spiderman suits from time to time for publicity purposes. There's still a job out there for people to dress up in Spiderman costumes. Is it so different for the fictional character of "Gabby Giffords"?

Continuing the analogy a little further, if you see someone dressed up as Spiderman and the shopping mall and you confront him with "Dude, you're not really Spiderman", everyone knows that already. But I suspect that there is a need for some real-life Public Appearances with Congresswoman Gabby Giffords which creates some interesting challenges for a "pure sim" operation. Did they really get all 535 members of Congress to go along with the act? Maybe they did. Or maybe they bring in an actress for a few minutes to "vote" and then they do a lot of post-production on that shot to disguise the actress a little better.

I think it's a valid line of inquiry. And I still remain convinced that you need some real-life actors to handle the sticky situations that arise from a sim's not having any physical presence at all.


fred wrote:I think it's an important point, because while I agree they are relying very heavily on sims (as has been amply demonstrated time and again on this forum) I believe there is a significant actor-presence that is also worthy of our full consideration.


OK, back to the main point relevant to this thread:

Looking at the 2 photos Simon posted, do we agree that the "pre-shooting" Gabby appears different than the "post-shooting" Gabby?

If so, are the 2 different-appearing characters actresses? Or are the 2 both merely CGI animations?
Or, was the "pre-shooting" politician an actress, and the "post-shooting" character a CGI animation?

Actually, I guess it doesn't matter. As long as folks realize this was a hoaxed-shooting psyop, that's all that matters.

Too bad this half-actors half-CGI Arizona psyop, combined with the "Goldbug: all actors, always actors, never CGI" psyop, combined in a bad way to unfortunately have caused Simon & Fred to have a falling out.

As a neutral observer reading Fred's posts (search.php?&author=Fred) on this thread, on 9/11 threads, all around CluesForum in general, it seemed to me Fred made logical posts. Oh well. viewtopic.php?p=2359800#p2359800
Observer
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby Observer on Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:15 am

Oops, just wanted to slightly edit the above post but accidentally pressed the "quote" button, thus created this post here. Deletion possible?
Observer
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby pov603 on Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:21 pm

I doubt it’s a problem Observer, but the post before may need some “trimming” if you don’t mind me saying...
pov603
Member
 
Posts: 796
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby Observer on Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:41 pm

You're right pov603, I should cut the paragraph which says, "Anyway, Fred's final posts..." together with the immediately following Fred quotes (all 14 of them) and throw that all into the derailing room.

Unfortunately the system doesn't allow me to edit that post at all now, so perhaps SCS or another admin here might be so kind as to do that for me. Sorry for the trouble, folks. I'll shut up now. Thank you. :)
Observer
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am

Re: Arizona Mass Shooting PSYOP

Postby SacredCowSlayer on Sat Nov 10, 2018 3:55 pm

Observer » November 10th, 2018, 6:41 am wrote:You're right pov603, I should cut the paragraph which says, "Anyway, Fred's final posts..." together with the immediately following Fred quotes (all 14 of them) and throw that all into the derailing room.

Unfortunately the system doesn't allow me to edit that post at all now, so perhaps SCS or another admin here might be so kind as to do that for me. Sorry for the trouble, folks. I'll shut up now. Thank you. :)


I trimmed it WAY back, and tried to leave in the (perhaps) more useful points made by “Fred.”
Hopefully that is satisfactory dear Observer.

SCS
SCS
SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

PreviousNext

Return to London, Madrid, Oslo and other faked terror events: the psyops are everywhere

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests