hoi.polloi wrote:I hate to say it MrSinclair after your very worthy contributions, and I believe you believe what you believe, but I think if a psy-op hits close to home, that is exactly when your BS alarm's sensitivity meter should be increased rather than decreased. My guess is one reason the 9/11 psy-op was so successful was because they tapped into the New Yorker - and socially connected to New Yorker - psychology. If something hits close to home, you can be sure they have tapped into and monitored your social network and its psychological responses to a given scenario. It doesn't have to convince the world. You will do that job for them. It just has to convince you - the people closest to the threshold of the lie.
Also, I think it is getting increasingly important to differentiate between the 'no deaths' and 'no real people' scenarios. For example, it has already been stated by a number of people that Barbara Olson, "wife" of spook Ted Olson, must have been at least played by a real person. For lack of a better example (I am not sure Barbara Olson was all that real) let's look at your particular personality involved and pretend he is one of the more "real"-ish personalities in these psy-ops, lately.
Now, with all due sensitivity, we have had numerous cases of people murdering their own children since time immemorial. Some would even say God commanded them to do it. You are welcome to believe that the phenomenon of murder is an age-old psy-op, but then you must contend with the general population believing in such things. It's also true that the parent-child relationship is known to be one of the strongest blood bonds known to humankind - parents actually believe their children are themselves or are even better than themselves in some cases. So when you are talking about what a parent is willing to do to protect a child or defend that aspect of their life, you are also talking about every crazy thing people have done since time immemorial. From the killing of many people to protect their child to the opposite extreme - killing their own child and then burying them in their backyard. Kids make you crazy.
There are countless possibilities besides there being a real murder as it plays on television in an organized, well-planned media spectacle.
One of them is that the child has gone into hiding under the neo-fascists' protection program (what parent wouldn't want such a guarantee if they were told the converse is their child will face any coming instability to the United States without such protection?) Another possibility is that this person really killed their own child. Or if you cannot believe that they are so mad, you might speculate that the child didn't exist. Or the child existed but a person familiar with ex-patriation would also be highly familiar with weighing the values of different governments and different "big picture" scenarios. Perhaps this 'move' of the child to an underground status has something to do with information they know that we do not.
I think it's safe to assume that we don't know just what happened, but that this most assuredly resembles many of the attributes of the usual psychological propaganda of the last decades. My guess is that just how each of the players fits in is probably getting streamlined to the point of simply checking a box and signing a document or two, regarding an 'indefinite military drill' and it's: shake-shake, here's your money, Bob's your uncle. A few slightly stressful news interviews lying to an impersonal camera and you're scott free.
There are many alternatives to going into debt to send your child to college to get a worthless degree that turns their life into wageslavery. Perhaps the government offers a few of them.
I appreciate this reply. It is no great joy to bring doubts to this forum. The fact is that without this one listed death I would be feeling quite certain that this was vic-sims business as usual. You listed several of the questions I asked myself. I find it unlikely that Jimmy Greene or his family are not real. I am willing to consider that for whatever reason the family is complicit and she may be alive and elsewhere. The fact that Jimmy Greene enjoys a longstanding reputation for stability and integrity in a field where both have historically been in short supply does make it all the more difficult to reconcile but the improbable is far from impossible.
I just watched a few interviews with "survivors" and it all rings hollow and false. There is no trauma on display and neither is there the type of calm that indicates some type of shock. I had a friend with ill health and bad habits die recently and in spite of it being expected I was far more shook up than any of these people who are supposedly at the scene where 20 children died. Even Stepford wives would show more pain and anguish than the interviewees display.
This is kind of an interesting perceptual territory to hang out in. I can feel the gravitational and seductive pull of emotions that would use this listed death to succumb to the belief that this was in fact a real and horrible tragedy. At the same time between my obsession with Philip K Dick in my younger days and my recent discovery of this forum I know the great extent to which things are "only apparently real".
It all comes back to your opening comment here Hoi, yes my BS meter should be and IS on high alert as I try to sort this all out. Again, thanks for your reply.
