If they play this correctly, and I suspect they will, we’ll be told the “shooter” was “radicalized” by Internet “conspiracy theories” which will seal the deal on the new threat of “domestic terrorism” from “conspiracy theorists.” Anyway, the shooting was a fake drill, and a bad one at that.

submitted by Jesus from (self.conspiracy)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]CompleteDoubterII 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Here we go again. I don't follow mass shootings, but prepare for weird coincidences and FBI connections. (Is it possible that instead of never happening, mass shootings were false flags helped along or perpetrated by the authorities? Not that I'm going to investigate this, but it's an idea I've never seen considered, only the official story must be correct or the thing is a hoax.)

To avoid misinformation, check out the thread on Metabunk dedicated to this shooting.

[–]Jesus[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

metabunk is a shill site, that was started in order to push the status quo 9/11 narrative. I was banned there twice and many people are banned there for simply posting things that THEY CAN'T debunk. They only go after the low hanging fruit.

Here, watch this, they fake almsot everything, worldwide, it isn't just in the US, but some multinational intelligence unit doing these things, get some popcorn while you are at it. The video creator and investigator has hundreds of other videos, illustrating the fakery and outright conflicting narratives of these events, all intentional by the way:

https://153news.net/files/videos/2018/04/28/1524953561cb5d5-360.mp4

^ ^ ^ Just wait for it to load... THE high profile shootings in the US will always be table-top exercises. Few are real.

[–]CompleteDoubterII 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Thank you for the documentary. I watched it a few weeks ago, and found it quite interesting. Some of it I agree with, some of it I disagree with.

Yes, that man filming himself screaming 'Alan' or whatever and supposedly claiming that it was for his family to be able to locate him is extremely suspicious. The hearings of a second bomb is also rather suspicious. The picture(s) and video(s) of the Manchester Arena bombing compared to what was supposedly being claimed are in conflict. I also agree that the woman who lied about bringing victims to some hotel (if I remember it correctly) and not facing any supposed consequences for it is suspicious, as well as the fact that just before the supposed bombings, some of the attendees were denied re-entry back into the Arena, suggesting foreknowledge. Furthermore, the lack of CCTV footage released is suspicious (as it is in all terror acts). If U.K. Critical Thinker is correct in stating that the photo of some man with no background was the only photo released purporting to prove that man is the bomber, then he is correct in being suspicious of that.

I don't believe U.K. Critical Thinker raises a valid point when comparing the times the witnesses gave in interviews to the Manchester Police's narrative. If I remember correctly from the clips in the documentary, there was no central clock in the arena, so to get the time, people would look at their own watches and phones, and different watches and phones display somewhat different times. As such it is not suspicious at all that the witnesses gave different times when interviewed, and it's not suspicious that they're different from the police times. In fact, I would find it very suspicious if they all gave the same time for the same event. Furthermore, with regards to the medical staff not being so panicked when seeing the supposedly horrible scene, I do not believe it raises much grounds for suspicion, as they are supposed to be able to handle seeing people in horrible states. Also, supposed victims smiling when being visited and interviewed can possibly be explained by the comfort they felt by other people consoling them. I don't think anyone without serious psychology and neuroscience knowledge would be able to correctly determine an emotion's cause.

By the way, this may just be me failing at basic research, but I'm having issues finding the Manchester Police's narrative/report on this bombing. I can only ever find the Kerslake Report on it. Would you mind sharing it with me please?

[–]Jesus[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There are a few videos of people, now censored filming the closest hospitals during and well after the event. Many whom called as well. Nobody was taken to the two closest hospitals, even the one with triage.

Also, look up kearnsy74's videos now deleted off YouTube depicting clear evidence that most of the individuals were transported to the Marriott Hotel, not the hospital. This was also the case with the alleged London bridge attack. The latter is actually a case closed anomaly as the hospital was 400 feet away, yet all those who were allegedly injured were transported away from the hospital.

I also posted a recent video on the alleged Boston Bombing and have many videos saved two of which provide the clearest evidence of what I like to call "hyper-active drill participants late for work."

Two eyewitnesses who publicized the raw footage of the alleged Boston Bombing were able to walk through the zone in which the pyrotechnic bomb detonated in a controlled fashion. These two individuals were not part of the drill and were quickly excorted away from the scene after they were spotted by agents. Others were also thrown to the ground by plain clothed individuals who have now after 6 years been exposed as undercover FBI agents, Counter-intelligence agents and oddly, air force personal, naval intelligence personal, and ARMY PSYOP division officers. Now, what are they doing there?

There goal was to clear the event of any non-participants, by any means necessary. Even by forcefully throwing a women to the ground. Luckily, raw footage captured two drill participants late for work.

One rather old lady ran towards the bombing a few minutues after it had exploded. She had no signs of injuries, no blood, and was able to walk to the detonation spot and lay down. She then, with the help of a plain clothed agent applies blood around her face and a weird moulage arm strap.

We are talking about a women who was not even near the bombing at the time, completely uninjured, only to walk to the area of detonation, lay down and apply moulage.

It is clear evidence of fakery.

We also have the 2nd bombing where the pyrotechnic device was placed on a small tree.

Interestingly, the tree experienced ABSOLUTELY NO DAMAGE to the bark. Plastic cups remained in their position despite being 8 feet away from detonation. It is preposterous for this to happen, unless we take into account that this was a hyper-active drill conducted on the American people, with Taxpayer money. Clearly, fakery was involved.

So, it is clear they can fake these events with the use of hyper-active drills.

That is why we will never see non-doctored surveillance footage or the full surveillance footage of any of these questionable events. We only are given the basics and highly staged photos. In fact, agents, at the Boston Bombing were able to set up vicsim participants staged photos as the pyrotechnic device exploded. They quickly went to the scene and directed the particpants. Their job was to obtain the needed propaganda photos for the media. A few Reuter photographers were involved who were interestingly able to capture various other alleged terrorist bombings and alleged mass shootings, AS THEY UNFOLDED. Huh. Always in the right place at the right time, coincidence?

You might want to watch UK's other videos on the alleged Fort Lauderdale and Orlando shooting too. Those are also well done and are far more detailed than the manchester overview documentary.

[–]Jesus[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't think anyone without serious psychology and neuroscience knowledge would be able to correctly determine an emotion's cause.

And that is why we must piece together the narrative. Treat every source as it comes in as its own source. We must not twist the injected narratives as evidence of something, rather we carefully investigate all sources as their own. Keep in mind, if in fact what is being conducted is a psychological operation, then we must UNDERSTAND, the use of Perception Management in psychological operations. Why? Because if we were not to, we might go on a trail that leads us to more confusion and conflict, which is exactly what these injected, ambiguous, and especially conflicting narratives and alternative government approved theories entail.

As for the Duping Delight, one either sees it or doesn't. If an unprecedented amount of witnesses and alleged victims are displaying duping delight we must call into question their behavior but we should NOT make it the focal center point in the investigation. Simply, display this behavior for all to see and be done with it.

Instead, we should investogate who these people are, which the media and government have done a wonderful job of hiding the alleged particpants information in sealed police reports and mugshots, or simply a name change/alias, making it quite hard to research VicSims that do not exist in the context of a real person.

[–]Jesus[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As for the manchester police report, you might want to ask UK Critical Thinker that.