Discussion in 'Porky's' started by billy_boatrocker, Jun 16, 2016.
Do your own research.
"A progressive exercise program is a series of exercises tied to a set of common program priorities. Each exercise builds on previous exercises using more sophisticated simulation techniques or requiring morepreparation time, personnel, and planning."
"Simulation is a method of implementing the performance of a model, or combination of models, over time. Modeling and simulation supports decision - making processes by providing human and/or computer feedback to players during exercise play, thus dynamically representing the impact of their decisions. For example, human-based simulation during exercises is often manifested through the SimCell, which represents nonparticipating entities."
"An example of a computer-based simulation could include wind damage and storm surge forecasting models developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which enable simulation of a hurricane’s effects on coastal communities. Modeling and simulation can also be applied in situations where reality cannot be achieved. For example, for safety reasons a bioterrorism exercise cannot be conducted by releasing a deadly virus into the environment. However, it is still important to exercise the capabilities necessary to respond to this type of scenario. The use of modeling and simulation can realistically replicate variables such as disease propagation, radiation, and chemical attacks."
"Exercise program managers should also consider other resources that can support exercises.
Such resources can include:
• Information technology (e.g., modeling and simulation capabilities)
• Exercise tools and resources (e.g., document templates)
• Materials from previous exercises
• Training courses
• Mutual aid agreements, memoranda of understanding, and memoranda of agreement
• Technical assistance"
Some signs of a staged event. A staged or prefabricated event where agents/actors carry out their assigned roles in a storyline that is treated by the media and government as reality. A drill "gone live":
I'm sure there are plenty missing, (in no particular order).
Family members of victims interviewed on the same day at the event.
Family members smiling and/or laughing (no tears or red/swollen eyes);
Family members shilling for gun control within hours or even minutes of their relative being "killed".
Staged photos of people hugging.
Handful of photos and looped video footage (often less than 30 seconds) of parking lots (with numerous parked emergency vehicles) recycled by the news during "Live" coverage.
No actual chaos can be observed (only talk of it).
Shooter/ perp is identified along with his picture and online profile before the end of the day.
Pictures of the shooter posed with props.
Family of victims talking about "community coming together".
Witnesses on the same day discussing scary gun/ bullet/ magazine size details.
Law enforcement dressed in formal official ceremony uniforms.
Reports of tragic ironies (eg. Ballerina gets leg blown off).
Large numbers of emergency vehicles doing absolutely nothing.
Photo-shopped pictures of victims and the shooter.
Very few photo's available of victims and perpetrator, often low resolution or even black & white.
Casualties not included in official crime statistics.
Casualties not included in the SSN Death Index.
Red, yellow, and green triage mats are set up but never used.
The governor and president both speak within hours of the event with the latter shamelessly pimping gun control.
Comments on social media made before the event began.
Memorial/ fund-raiser pages set up either prior to or contemporaneous with the event.
The Kübler-Ross model postulates a series of emotional stages experienced by survivors of an intimates death.
1.Denial — The first reaction is denial. In this stage individuals believe the diagnosis is somehow mistaken, and cling to a false, preferable reality.
2.Anger — When the individual recognizes that denial cannot continue, it becomes frustrated, especially at proximate individuals. Certain psychological responses of a person undergoing this phase would be: "Why me? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to me?"; '"Who is to blame?"; "Why would this happen?".
3.Bargaining — The third stage involves the hope that the individual can avoid a cause of grief. Usually, the negotiation for an extended life is made in exchange for a reformed lifestyle. People facing less serious trauma can bargain or seek compromise.
4.Depression — "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?"; "I'm going to die soon so what's the point?"; "I miss my loved one, why go on?"
During the fourth stage, the individual becomes saddened by the mathematical probability of death. In this state, the individual may become silent, refuse visitors and spend much of the time mournful and sullen.
5.Acceptance — "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it, I may as well prepare for it."; "Nothing is impossible."
In this last stage, individuals embrace mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. People dying may precede the survivors in this state, which typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable condition of emotions."
You know you're being hoaxed when the alleged survivors and families of horribly murdered victims jump straight to STAGE 5 of the 'grief-stakes'.
And immediately start forgiving the simulated killer. But then in later interviews they seem to regress to STAGE 4.
Port Authority Cops Say Surprise Terror Drills Pose Danger to Officers, Public.
I actually don't think they look exactly the same. There is a resemblance for sure, but there actually isn't nasal and jaw-line equivalence.
Particularly with beanie cap lady's facial structure.
#2 and #3 look more similar, and #1 just doesn't fit.
There are plenty more shots out there, just google image search "Crisis Actor."
Just my opinion though and I could definitely be wrong. Though I must admit that the low odds of a woman resembling this one appearing in all CNN coverage of each respective terror event makes it rather suspicious.
Security Background & Alleged Abuse
The 29-year old Mateen, an Afghani-American was located in Port St. Lucie, Florida, about 120 miles outside of Orlando. In 2013, Mateen was placed under a terror watch list for 10 months (interviewed two to three times by the FBI 2013-14) and had worked for one of the largest security firms in the US since 2007, G4S Secure Solutions, headquartered in Jupiter, Florida and formerly part of a CIA-linked government contractor and security firm, Wackenhut Corporation.
G4S, as it turns out, was the very first ‘designated’ and certified Department of Homeland Security (DHS) contractor and recently secured a $234 million dollar contract with the federal cabinet department. In addition to apparently providing security solutions for “90 percent of U.S. nuclear facilities,” G4S, according to border patrol sources has also been tasked with the transportation and release of illegal immigrants inside the interior of the United States.
At least one of Mateen’s roles with G4S, was to transport and provide security for prisoner youths in Florida. In 2012, G4S congratulated Mateen for five years of service according to a company newsletter.
Zero Hedge reported the following concerning G4S:
“And this is where the Mateen-G4S link emerges: as JW reported previously, a security company contracted by the U.S. government is driving the OTMs from the Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector where they were in custody to Phoenix, sources said. The firm is the abovementioned G4S, the world’s leading security solutions group with operations in more than 100 countries and 610,000 employees. G4S has more than 50,000 employees in the U.S. and its domestic headquarters is in Jupiter, Florida.”
Mateen remained on staff to guard prisoners despite media reports that he harassed a co-worker and expressed hateful views in the workplace and was the subject of a federal investigation for terrorism between 2013-14 for some 10 months. According to reports, the FBI dropped the investigation after Mateen admitted to the work place harassment, adding that he was responding to harassment from others over his beliefs.
Mateen is also stated to have previously worked at Martin Correctional Institution from 2006-07, prior to being featured in a short interview (as an actor?) in a major Hollywood designer documentary called The Big Fix in 2012, discussing the BP oil spill at Deep Water Horizon.
Here you can see Mateen at the 36 minute mark, taking what appears to be a quasi-albeit scripted activist type stance, even though he works for the world’s largest security contractor.
What is the public to make of Mateen’s film background as it relates to America’s largest mass shooting – are we again seeing a clear link between Hollywood and military/security services?
Indeed, Mateen has been featured in another documentary from 2013, called Love City Jalalabad, a feature supposedly depicting progressive Afghani youth and a quest for social change.
Also According to Times Union:
“The security company that employed the Orlando nightclub gunman says it has no record of a co-worker’s complaints that the shooter was angry, profane and threatened violence.
The company, G4S, says in a statement Monday that it has no record of any complaint by Daniel Gilroy against Omar Mateen. Mateen died in a gun battle with police after a mass shooting that left 49 people.”
However, Gilroy has maintained that “Mateen began harassing him, sending as many as 20 or 30 text messages a day and more than a dozen phone messages. Gilroy said his employer, G4S, did not intervene.”
After Gilroy left G4S, according to the security firm:
“Gilroy told company officials in June 2015, shortly after he left the firm, that his co-workers were “good men and women that put in an honest day’s work and genuinely like to work as a team and contribute.”
Further adding to confusion surrounding Mateen’s character, Mateen’s ex-wife Sitora Yusufiy, has publicly stated that she was abused during their brief marriage.
Good information, but ultimately it's very difficult for reasonable, detached people to take people who cannot adhere to rigorous and careful standards in their scrutiny of alleged hoaxes and false flags seriously. Then when you discover two or three bogus claims, the entire edifice seems to crumble.
With many of the crisis actor allegations, reasonable minds can certainly differ on the similarity of appearance issues. The "conspiracy theorists" though assert that these are definitely the same people with full certainty as if there cannot be a dispute. When someone disagrees, they are attacked for being "asleep" and for closing ranks with the sheeple. That could be true in some instances but it is by no means universally true. But there probably would be less disagreement if the conspiracy theorists did not present such a poor case in the first place. They clearly overestimate the penetration of their own judgment and the quality of the evidence they present. In reality, it seems to me that many of the people making these arguments have little training and experience, whether it be in an academic, practical, or professional sense, when it comes to scrutinizing the quality of evidence.
A perfect example is this allegation that James Holmes' (the "Joker" Aurora shooter) photographed attorney is one of the crisis actors from Sandy Hook. Just google "James Holmes attorney crisis actor" and you'll see plenty of examples. Here's one image:
So my initial reaction to that was "they can't spoof an attorney with a spook, that would be too difficult and obvious." Then I wondered: can the conspiracy theorists be so lazy that they won't even bother to look up the attorney in question to determine whether or not she exists? It turns out that they are. And it turns out that the alleged "crisis actor" attorney is just an everyday criminal defense attorney in Colorado, Tamara Brady.
I just cannot lend credibility to these people. I think a lot of them truly are paranoiacs who consistently misinterpret evidence because they are searching avidly for any example to fit their preconceived notions. And if you cannot assign them credibility as a general matter, then unfortunately you have to discount their entire argument. No one has the time and energy in this world to sift the "possibly true" from the "obvious bullshit" in the presentations of our freedumb fighters' attempts to awaken us to the "truth."
With all that being said, I won't ever be one to say that spook involvement in any and/or all of these events is impossible, and I'm certainly glad that so many people are willing to question and investigate what they are being offered by the media as 'truth.' But a lot of it is so sloppy that it cannot be taken seriously by serious people, and our glorious freedumb fighters apparently lack the depth and insight to appreciate this. Instead of improving their methods, they just vilify the "sheeple" who make them uncomfortable with usually valid points. Ironically, they essentially adopt the posture, in miniature, of the establishment propagandists they purport to be fighting, e.g., "our truth makes them so uncomfortable that they have to discredit us by saying we're lunatics in tinfoil hats." Unfortunately, a lot of them really are exactly that.
They can spoof anything they want. People are generally too stupid to notice.
I disagree. I find the notion of fake public trials where every witness is an actor/actress and every court filing adheres to some script as hilariously preposterous. It would be impossible to execute such a hoax without hundreds if not thousands of other legal professionals who practice in the same area taking notice. I just don't see how it could even be remotely possible.
When the evidence looks rather flimsy, it starts to appear as if it's all a grand act of projection.. The author feels like the elite is treating him and everyone else like sheep, and insulting everyone's intelligence in an in-your-face fashion, so that must be reality. Then the "u wear a tin-foil hat" "no u a sheepish somnambulist" dialogue commences in the Comments section for the millionth time.
Don't get me wrong, I think there's something to the crisis actor angle. The responses of "witnesses" on news broadcasts look totally fishy, as if the people are acting. It's not something I would have ever noticed, though, as I do not watch mainstream news network broadcasting at all, and now I feel so much better off for it. Crisis actor, false flag attacks or not, there's undeniably a campaign here to foment as much fear, anxiety, and insanity as possible. The emotional plea for gun control from that woman was absolutely gag worthy. Whether she's real or not, that part is completely staged. Some mainstream news affiliate wouldn't allow, say, a victim of interracial violence to have a few uninterrupted moments to express his feelings and pontificate on social policy. It's never a woman crying, "can we do something about NIGGERS with too many guns, please!"
In a lot of cases it's not going to be a case of stupidity, but sheer apathy about all of these troubles in the world. They could be real, they could be completely manufactured, it doesn't even matter at this stage, it's far more healthy to just tune out of the Televitz completely.
it's far more healthy to just tune out of the Televitz completely.
I can agree with you on that.
To identify a person, mentally impose a triangle on the person's face. Each point should cover the outer corner of an eye, and the space below the nose. In my opinion, this space is the hardest to surgically alter and therefore the most reliable place to look for similarities.
Go back and look at the facial photos again, and tell me what you think. Is this a reliable way to identify a person?
I first heard about the Orlando incident while in a roadside hamburger stand/produce market, on the way home from the mountains. They had telescreens up on the walls; one was turned to a sports channel, the other to a "news" channel (I don't remember if it was CNN or not). There were easily one hundred people in this place. Except for myself and one other guy, nobody was looking at the scenes of this "attack." Most of Billy_Boatrocker's staged event indicators were present, especially the ones about the looped footage of a "victim" being carried away from the scene (at least three times in two minutes for one of them), and the emergency vehicles that were merely sitting there with their overhead lights on.
Hiring or even just manipulating an authentic nutjob to shoot up a fag bar/movie theater/school would be WAY cheaper, easier and more effective than hiring hundreds of "crisis actors" to pretend such an incident happened.
There are not hundreds.
I can see you don't quite have the.... whatever, yet. Very few people are "in on it."
It's mostly idiot local govt. agencies responding to a drill, that's the background. Most of the crowd are just hires, people responding to a job advert on CL or whatever. A drill, an exercise, whatever they happen to call it.
The actual crisis actors are few in number.
Here's an oldie but a goodie.
Think about what they mean by that statement.
The addiction to and lust for unrestrained power to create a "reality" to justify any action you care to take without regard to anyone or anything; law, mores, agreement, ethics, right, wrong. That statement can be expanded and applied to far more than excuses for the Iraq war.
It's their operating basis now.
Staged "terror" events are the TPTB creating their own reality. And millions of TV watching dupes just go right along with it.
remember when the MSM got caught on NYE one year using a Coke hologram in a very deceptive way in Times Square?
how is this suspicious or fishy at all? He's a security guard at a checkpoint speaking candidly because he didnt realize he was on camera.
So what's the premise, exactly? That because she worked in Philadelphia for Fox 29, she cannot be a genuine victim of a mass shooting? Or something else?
She's going to eat up this reaction and now use it to grow her own little garden of fame. Now we're going to have to hear an endless recounting of how "ambitious," "courageous," and "intelligent" this young minority news broadcaster is, especially as she must now stand her ground against a horde of neurotic anonymous conspiracy theorists striving to "persecute" her. Grrreeeeaat.
This is one example of why I come down so hard on the stupids, even if they are on the 'same side' as me, politically or ideologically, even though I know it triggers resentment from those who do not adhere to the same standards. This is because the stupidity is only used against us when we are demeaned by association and when the other ramifications of said stupidity boomerangs to adversely affect us in other ways. The stupids aligned with the same so-called "cause" impair the ability of more competent "conspiracy theorists" and "racialists" to do genuine, effective work, and even closes off potentially receptive audiences. If the stupids did not already exist as a weapon to be used against their respective cause by the opposition, they would have to be created (and, in some cases, they are).
Of course, I recognize that there's no potential for quality control when it comes to mass ideological movements on the Internet. For that reason, the 'real' activists of whatever sort have to distance themselves from those mass movements and define themselves to prevent any implicit or explicit association with the stupids.
In this particular case, let's momentarily accept for the sake of argument that the "crisis actor" phenomenon is a real one, albeit one that is utilized in a different manner, or maybe that was utilized in this specific shooting but in a more targeted and limited fashion. If this woman is not a "crisis actor," which it seems that she probably is not (although I do not know myself and cannot really say one way or the other), then the erroneous representation that she is one by various anonymous Internet stupids diminishes the plausibility of the entire concept in the eyes of the reasonable people one presumably intends to open with "the troofs."