Boston Marathon, nodisinfo.com, Dave McGowan and limited hangouts

The website nodisinfo.com is not listed in the blogroll on the right, nor will it be any time soon. I do not know what to make of it. I first ran across it when I began looking into the Boston Marathon Bombing hoax. It was there I first encountered clear color photos of the actors in the Marathon bombing, such as the one below.

Boston

The red arrows point to the back of the head of “Jeff Bauman” as he is being assisted strapping on his prosthetic leg for later photo ops. He is seen below as he is heroically carted off, long after a wound like that should have killed him.  (They had to wait for the camera to be in place.) “Bauman” (it appears there is more than one) was already an amputee prior to the event.

Boston 2

I am not concerned about that here, as it is old, old news. Later these same photos would be used by Dave McGowan in his series on the Boston Bombing. It is quite a comprehensive examination of the event, hours of reading.

McGowan, in my judgment, in his book Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon, was doing a “limited hangout:”

Limited hangout” is intelligence jargon for a form of propaganda in which a selected portion of a scandal, criminal act, sensitive or classified information, etc. is revealed or leaked, without telling the whole story. The intention may be to establish credibility as a critic of something or somebody by engaging in criticism of them while in fact covering up for them by omitting many details; to distance oneself publicly from something using innocuous or vague criticism even when ones own sympathies are privately with them; or to divert public attention away from a more heinous act by leaking information about something less heinous.” (Rational Wiki)

What McGowan did in Laurel Canyon was to take us part way down the road. He described the military connections of rock stars of the 60s and 70s, and described their deaths. What he forgot to tell us was that the deaths were fake. To this day I hear McGowan referred to as some kind of hero for his work, and he is still taken at face value by most researchers, including Jan Irvin at Gnostic Media, to my disappointment.

I am wondering why the Boston Photos, so clear and revealing, were released. We are told that professional photographers happened to be on scene and captured them. That is possible, but if true, and if Intelligence did not want the photos released, they would have disappeared. The scene was covered, agents were looking around making sure only authorized photos were released. Even cell phone photos are oddly absent. Yet we get a full set of clear and polished photos that have enjoyed wide circulation, first with nodisinfo.com, and second with McGowan.

It cannot be an accident.

Since I suspect McGowan to be a still-living spook, it seems logical that he would have access to approved photographs. Working backwards, this would make nodisinfo spooky too.  They are each receiving their material from a common source, which I judge to be Intelligence, the people behind the event.

So what is up with the Boston Marathon photos? If they are part of a limited hangout, we are meant to see them. If that is the case, it is done to reveal part of a hoax, but leave the important stuff hidden. It is meant to absorb our attention. We are supposed to publish and republish them, pointing out again and again how the blood is fake, the victims waiting around to be blooded up, the wounds mere moulage.

But we are missing something. The photos expose and hide at once. What could it be?

I don’t know, but also want to add that with limited hangouts, there is nothing wrong with going along with them. They don’t tell us everything by any means, but we should take what they do tell us, and use it as a starting post for more and better research. We should put limited hangouts to our own use, as Straight and I did with Weird Scenes.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in Public hoaxes and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

56 Responses to Boston Marathon, nodisinfo.com, Dave McGowan and limited hangouts

  1. tyronemccloskey says:

    I will post more later unless others make the same points first, but the initial suspicion regarding the availability of these photos was to counter the lack of photographic evidence from Sandy Hook. Cue Michael Moore who demanded to see autopsy photos of the Sandy Hook victims, thus publicizing the problem and making the Boston pics seem legit, at first glance anyway.

    Like

  2. tyronemccloskey says:

    Looking at the picture that leads this post, I thought of the great propagandists of the past who sold wall length falsehoods in paint. Here is an article on one such artist, John Trumbull, a blood-liner talent with all the spook trimmings, presenting the absurdities that sold the American Revolution. Of course his career began in Boston and it looks to me like the photos of the Boston bombing used these kinds of familiar images as an emotional template.
    https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/art-americas/british-colonies/early-republic/a/trumbull-declaration-of-independence

    Like

  3. Boston

    Similarities are striking.

    Like

  4. steve kelly says:

    Why Boston Marathon? According to George Webb, maybe to cover up killing their own “kill team” brought in from Chechnya. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTNzjbFK0Ao (@17:00 through18:00 min.)

    Like

  5. bmseattle says:

    I don’t find it suspicious that there were professional photographers there; apparently to film the finish line at the Boston Marathon. I agree, however, that we are only ever allowed to see what we are meant to see.
    I am extremely curious as to what theories the group here can come up with as to why we are allowed to view these scenes, and what, if anything, we are missing.
    One thing to consider is, that despite how apparent the “fakeness” of the whole event is to those at POM, and others who have taken to time to study the photos, it doesn’t matter. The mainstream story is and will always be the truth for most people.
    Why are we allowed to see/study the JFK autopsy photos? Or the Columbine tapes/photos?
    Why are we allowed to see a video of Paul McCartney “caretaking” his childhood residence?
    Because most people wont see what we see.
    And “History” cannot be re-written by us.

    Liked by 1 person

    • The two sets of photos that nodisino and McGowan used are “amateur” and taken by a guy named Thorndike and another, Aaron Tang, each perfectly positioned in upper floor windows to capture the carnage. The photos are deep and rich in color and texture, which is why Ty’s Trumbull painting resonates. The Boston Marathon itself has cameras positioned so that every participant can get a still of him or her crossing the finish line. In addition, the networks were there at the finish line too. So Thorndike and Tang are, in my view, plants, and their cameras were capable of capturing colorful and highly defined photos through glass. Lucky us!

      The JFK autopsy photos were released in the late 1980s by David Lifton in his book Best Evidence to heighten interest in the assassination. Shortly after would come the movie JFK. It was a continuing psyop. It took that long to make really good fake photos, I suppose. The autopsy photos were extremely well done.

      The McCartney childhood video, very good question. There they are just taunting us?

      The Columbine tapes … it was essential to place Klebold and Harris in the building, and nothing from that day, 4/20/99, could do that outside looking in. I am suspicious why they had surveillance footage in the cafeteria and nowhere else. You would think they woudl want them in the library too, in case anyone farted. Wiki said they wanted to catch perps in food fights and other malicious activity. I am starting to think that the cameras were installed for the event. The footage was obviously shot before then, which is why the blurred faces, as these were extras. I don’t know, in 1999, how common surveillance cameras were in high schools.

      You seem to understand that we are but spectators in a parade. Still, given the choice, I would rather be a smart spectator than a dumb one.

      Liked by 1 person

      • bmseattle says:

        Mark,
        I guess I was asking those questions in more of a general way, not asking for a literal response.
        Basically, how/why does it serve TPTB to give us “evidence” that we can then use to prove their events are fake?
        Do they want us to figure it out? Or is it just a matter of them not caring if a handful of people know the truth?
        Or is it all a LH, and the real truth of things is deeper than we can even imagine?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Excellent, well put, the question I was asking. You rewrote my whole post in three sentences. Wish I could do that.

          On looking at the Boston photos, i realize they were meant to be taken as real. People 1) avert their eyes, and 2) believe news, and so turn off critical thinking faculties anyway.

          Like

          • Jack says:

            These are indeed excellent questions. One thing I remember in David Icke’s earlier work (before he was derailed/turned, I believe) is he wrote that on an energy/spritual level TPTB need our consent to rule. I know I’ve just dissed the New Age in the other thread but I still believe in deeper truths that you find by going back to the early and ancient spiritual sources, and this did strike a chord with me. According to this theory, if 99% of the people blindly believe what is put before them, even if their subconscious minds is screaming that the info before them is clearly suspect, the consent to rule is given by the 99%. I’m paraphrasing here, I hope I’ve done so clearly!

            Like

  6. Mick says:

    I find nodisinfo.com to be incredibly stimulating. It is at the nexus of funny and creepy.
    It is often unintentionally hilarious and I have cried tears of laughter at it, no exaggeration.

    The aesthetics of its presentation and the content are very creepy, imho.

    Liked by 1 person

    • That is a really interesting observation. Maybe you do, but I don’t know who is behind it. I find their presentation to be highly sophisticated, and they seem to have instant access to inside information. They use the word “Zionists” far too much. This is why I don’t trust them. As a limited hangout, of you know they are that, then they can be useful.

      Like

      • Inside Baseball says:

        The character behind nodisinfo purports to be Muslim, so is “naturally” focused on the Zionist elements behind these events. But we have to question how much of the Zionist/Muslim divide is real, and how much is a diversion. The “religion of peace” multiculturalism juxtaposed with the Fox news “terrist ragheads” rhetoric makes for some mind-bending pretzel logic for sure…

        Liked by 1 person

  7. Mick says:

    I’m curious as to what people here make of Jay Dyer?

    Like

  8. Bryan M says:

    The way to understand Dave McGowan is through the secrets he protected. The big ones IMO were:

    9/11 featured no airplanes
    Spectacular deaths of famous people are usually faked
    High-ranking officials are largely actors

    Like all “limited hangouts” he exposed smaller secrets in the service of protecting the big secrets he was assigned to. What’s interesting to me about McGowan is that – unlike most of these guys I’ve seen – he was cleared to talk about Apollo. He avoided talking about its fake deaths, but they were never a big part of the story IMO.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mick says:

      “9/11 featured no airplanes
      Spectacular deaths of famous people are usually faked
      High-ranking officials are largely actors”

      911 featured no deaths.
      911 featured fake deaths of real people + fake deaths of fake people.
      The 911 victims’ families were actors.

      Agree with your assessment of McGowan BTW.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Bryan M says:

        I have not looked into it very deeply but it seems highly unlikely that when those buildings were demolished without any safety precautions that nobody died as a result. The death toll may be greatly exaggerated and the famous pictures and videos may all be fake but it doesn’t seem reasonable that nobody got hurt, given that such giant buildings unexpectedly collapsed into dust in the middle of a highly populated area.

        Like

        • I wrestle with this too. I just don’t want to get involved in 9/11 research, as it would quickly overwhelm. I just follow the work of others. The working premise is that after the 1993 “bombing” the buildings were slowly abandoned, and tenants moving to new locations using WTC as a mail drop. By 2001 the only things left in service were the viewing platforms and restaurants, the rest of the building stripped of furnishings, hardware, toilets, wiring, etc. The area was evacuated that morning after the first explosion, later said to be a jet aircraft hitting the north tower. Then three long-planned detonations set off controlled demolition of three buildings. Pictures of people in windows were staged months in advance.

          Like

          • Bryan M says:

            I hadn’t heard that story before. It seems theoretically possible but a much larger hoax than I imagine it was. I went through the World Trade Center subway station after the 93 incident and it was quite crowded then. So you’re saying that for 8 years all the people going into and out of the building were actors?

            Like

          • Working theory, only, and the assumption would be that the only people going in and out were tourists and restaurant patrons. Of course, one could also speculate that the buildings were never occupied, and were shells built to be destroyed 33 years after construction. I do not know. I just follow along.

            Liked by 1 person

          • mswinkle says:

            I agree with Bryan. I lived in battery park city and WTC was a busy place. I do think people died, and I don’t think they have a problem with that. 9/11 happened, and people died. It is the Why, Who and How that is BS

            Like

          • Interesting number of people lived close there. Battery Park has come up before, people claiming to have inside knowledge of the events of that day.

            I ahve only one connection from that day, an ex-brother-in-law who worked for Morgan Stanley. I immediately called my ex that morning to check on him, and was told he was fine, did not go into work that morning.

            Like

          • John in Texas says:

            Agree completely. Nobody had to die. It was a pro job from top to bottom (literally). When people die it gets complicated. But Americans love death and when you tell them nobody died, they just can’t stand it, because of their deep seated bloodlust.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Paul says:

            I remember reading somewhere that the buildings were condemned because of the asbestos in the walls. The price for just the scaffolding was around 2 billion dollars.

            Like

          • They were poorly designed, ventilation a problem. The asbestos problem, as I understood it, was retroactively solved during construction. They were money losers, and completed in 1968, destroyed in 2001, stood for 33 years.

            Like

        • Natwurst says:

          Much like the cafeteria/library “footage” from Columbine, the “collapse” of the towers was recorded/digitally rendered beforehand. That was what we were meant to see on t.v. What took place in NYC that day was alot of smoke, loud noises, and most likely that’s all anyone saw that was in the city yet OUTSIDE the cordoned-off area. I was at the WTC center a year before 9/11 and was struck by what a ghost town it seemed like. I thought “this is the epicenter of world commerce (as the name implies)?” It would not have been difficult to clear that area.

          Like

          • Mark says:

            I heard that it wasn’t that busy the weekend before 9/11 either. And the bus tour couldn’t go everywhere…

            Like

    • mswinkle says:

      I understand the argument behind McGowan being a LH – revealing X in order to conceal Y. I am not sure the theory is correct. First, by revealing X, his work created more insight into how those in power were creating and controlling the opposition, and through them dividing, diverting and dumbing the masses. However, once it started to become clear that the ‘stars’ and those pushing drugs etc were fake, I think it was only a matter of time before others would questions Y – are the events etc also fake?

      Yes, these fake events could have been exposed without McGowen, but I think his work might have shifted some in their thinking, and at the very least his work – exposing Intel along with its own production studios – certainly made it easier for many to open up to the possibility of staged events.

      I am just not sure McGowan as a LH works, because they must of known it could potentially open a whole new can of worms. Assuming he was working for them could there be anither reason besides LH?

      Like

      • Here is something to consider: Straight and I without much aforethought knew on the Weird Scenes deaths to check them against the Social Security Death Index, then easily accessible. McGowan is a smart cookie, and surely knew to do that as well, and did not. Also, when asked if he interviewed any of the people he wrote about, his answer was no. Everything was second hand sources. That is just poor research techniques but fits well if he was not writing to expose anything new, just what was already known.

        The tale of the death of Gram Parsons stretches credulity to the limit, dying at Joshua Tree, friends stealing his body from LA Airport and taking it to the desert and incinerating it. That screams for some investigation. He did nothing, accepted it at face.

        Like

    • Remember what Miles said about gurus further up the mountain? McGowan was a good writer but he had to spill too many beans to fulfill the cred cup. There was a tipping point where the cred has to be balanced against the misdirection. At this point, it would appear, they discovered this fine line. I hope he is sitting on a beach somewhere and enjoying all this. He is ( not was ) a cut above their usual riff -raff.

      Like

  9. Cassandra Hollingsworth says:

    A few possibilities for why we’re allowed to see these photos.

    1) Sloppiness and arrogance. The photos are evidence for the mainstream, and indeed most normies look at these damning photos and don’t see fakery but rather evidence of tragedy. But truth researchers have gotten better at what they do, partly because of the internet enabling a wisdom of crowds approach. So we can pick these photos apart, and they let us do it because we’re on the fringe. But it doesn’t affect 90% of people’s opinions.

    2) A battle between competing factions of Intelligence. Maybe it’s NSA vs. CIA. Or maybe it’s competing power nodes above Intelligence. But some people who really understand how the game is played are “outing” their competitors to gain advantage.

    3) It’s all part of the “nothing is real” psy-op. From these hoaxes down to the current pro-Trump, anti-Trump fake news battle, Americans are increasingly saying “I don’t know what to believe any more.” Which may serve the controllers in some way. Everyone is discombobulated.

    The “nothing is real” notion, as discussed on this site, is kind of a relief in some ways. I agree with Mark that it’s nice not to have to worry about nukes, for example. And it’s possible that much ISN’T real. The controllers at the very top and even the lower-down propagandists in government employ can limit unnecessary effort and unnecessary messiness and unnecessary liability by just focusing on (now legal) propaganda to scare people, rather than actually killing them. On the other hand, some REAL killings probably get obscured by the “nothing is real” psyop. Was Seth Rich murdered? Probably not–he’s probably part of a hoax. But if he WAS murdered, it helps TPTB to have truth researchers always second guessing themselves.

    4) It’s a way of mocking truth researchers. They let us catch them in the act, and then they laugh at us because not even hard evidence can convince normies to consider the evidence instead of taking CNN at face value.

    5) As mentioned in other comments, it may just all be a limited hangout and a distraction. For the normies/believers, spending weeks worrying about the Boston marathon bombing is an emotional distraction from bigger things. I mean, seriously. A few deaths and few limbs lost. There’s more carnage than that on the highways every HOUR. And for the truth researchers, it’s an even bigger distraction. Weeks of work on photo analysis, etc. A high burden of proof needed to support an unpopular fringe opinion. But all focused on a smoke bomb in a very small crowd. While we focus on that, we’re not focused on the trillions in looting via big pharma, the military industrial complex, etc. etc.

    What do you guys think of these options 1 thru 5? Do any of these resonate more than others? Am I missing any?

    Like

    • mswinkle says:

      Cassendra, I think you make a lot of good points. I agree exposing the hoax is just another way for Intel to keep truth seekers really busy, with little upside as most people will still believe what msm tells them, and maybe for the hoax creators it provides fun as they take bets on how much will be uncovered, etc. I am not sure it is to distract us from all the looting as many of us know they are looting night and day.

      I think, “nothing is real” psy-op might be the goal. Once you start to uncover that the lies and fake events are centuries old, it certainly makes you question everything and wonder if anything, of any significants, is real? Yes, I get the upside, but it is also unsettling and exhausting having to run everything through your relatively new understanding. So now we are not only questioning event X or person Y, but now we are wondering if event X happened? Is Y “in on it”? It certainly adds to the chaos which is something those running the show love.

      Like

  10. Cassandra Hollingsworth says:

    Semi-related: I think it was on this site or in the comments here that some people were talking about North Korea as not just a fake threat but essentially a fake country. I think I saw satellite images posted somewhere suggesting that there are almost no lights in North Korea (vs. South Korea). The spin is that it’s due to a poor economy. But the truth (in this theory) could be that no-one’s there. It’s just a big sound stage to make videos about a fake “Axis of Evil” enemy. If you think about it, they are a ridiculous enemy. As shown in South Park (Intelligence) move Team America. They mock the utter ridiculousness of the mincing leaders of North Korea. They are like incredibly bad actors–a cross between plump effeminate inbreds and James Bond/Austin Powers comic villains.

    After I saw that (here I think), I noticed that in search results, I started to see some limited hangout/distraction/cover for this theory. Military experts officially say that some of the weapons in North Korean military parades look fake. And again the spin is that the country is so poor that they have to fake it. Which may be cover for the fact that the whole thing is a hoax run by OUR Intelligence agencies. If a normie heard the idea, they’d google it up and find establishment experts agreeing with the fakery theory but explaining it away. And they’d find no links to alternative research because the search for N. Korea fake hoax weapons would pull up all these establishment sources. Interesting technique.

    Like

    • Inside Baseball says:

      The supposed darkness of N. Korea could also be fraudulent, and it could be a giant military base, or even a “normal” country going about its own business. Hard to know what is true anymore.

      Liked by 1 person

    • mswinkle says:

      NK might be a fake country, although I do think it has a large slave labor population, but in any case it is a fake enemy with fake weapons, and a fake evil leader.

      Like

    • Wendy Carroll says:

      I’ve checked photos from N. Korea’s parades and they are all phony. These photos were on the media news channels naturally. Certainly we have to have a boogeyman and since Russia won’t oblige, N. Korea fills the bill. Just look at that ham actor playing the dictator. He’s even more “out there” than Hitler. Change of subject: Melania Trump appears to be pasted into some of her travel events.

      Like

  11. Bryan M says:

    Cassandra: I think you hit the nail on the head there with your Boston Bombing post. I would have said much the same, had I wanted to go into detail about the bombing. As for North Korea, if I recall correctly, the story was that they were industrial until the collapse of the Soviet Union cut off fossil fuel imports. If you’re interested in exploring the idea that North Korea is a “fake country” you might wish to look at evidence (or the lack thereof) of North Korea’s former industrialism during that era.

    Like

  12. Inside Baseball says:

    Anne posted a link to this site in an earlier comment, and it merits a look and possible inclusion in the blogroll.

    https://calcifiedlies.wordpress.com/

    Some pretty involved reading, but thought provoking insights into the methods being employed by Intelligence, as well as their reasons for pushing so many “alternative” shills and limited hangouts.

    Seemingly in opposition, they actually serve to focus the “hive” mind along the lines that TPTB want us to stay within. It’s part of a larger application of systems theory to maintain an artificial equilibrium by taking us away from our natural relationships with life and the world.

    This brief synopsis doesn’t do it justice, hopefully it will spur some others to take a look and share their thoughts…

    Like

  13. Cassandra Hollingsworth says:

    And finally for today, I just wanted to share a thought based on the reference above to “high-ranking officials are largely actors” and that this is one of the big secrets that limited hangouts try to distract from.

    The actor theory may or may not be true, and the theory that actor-leaders are one of the truths limited hangouts are hiding may or may not be true, but they are interesting questions. One thing that strikes me, though, is that actor-leaders aren’t that well-hidden a secret. Or, to put it differently, it’s a secret hiding in plain sight.

    People mocked Reagan for being a former B-movie actor without realizing that his experience had something to do with his being chosen. Trump’s experience as a reality tv-star and Wrestlemania character is similarly mocked without being considered as the basis for his selection by TPTB or indeed, part of the training they put him through with the Presidency in mind as a possibility.

    This site’s work on all the former rock stars who ghosted and in some cases reappeared makes a lot of sense in the context of actor-officials.

    And indeed, the concept of a “front man” is well-understood: “a person who represents an organization and works to make its image more appealing to the public.”

    And finally, this reminds me of something that people have said before, which is that Orwell’s 1984 and Huxley’s Brave New World were not “dystopian visions” but descriptions of the contemporary and future state of the art of power and control. And Big Brother is clearly a larger-than-life but actually non-existent front man.

    Similarly, the Wizard of Oz movie was quite explicit about the fact that the “Great and Terrible Oz” is controlled by “the little man behind the curtain.”

    We’re all in Plato’s cave, watching the shadows flickering on the wall. And, just like with Wrestlemania, we WANT to suspend our disbelief. We want to believe that our cheerleading and voting and outrage in the Clinton-Trump show somehow mattered, in spite of the obvious fact that 1 vote out of 120 million is meaningless (and the count is rigged anyway). So we don’t want to think of these people as actors.

    But why wouldn’t they be? It would be silly for the controllers insist on being the stars of the show all the time. Sure, they get tempted sometimes, and sometimes do it. But certainly there are some powers behind the scenes. If there aren’t, then the world of power is more chaotic than competent controllers would want it to be. Think of it like a movie. The producer wants to tell a story, make some money, mesmerize the audience, and maybe influence their thinking a little. And it’s probably easier to do that with a glamorous front man actor. Sure, the producer might cast his cousin in a main part, and he might even give himself a cameo, but the important thing is for the movie to WORK on the audience, to not flop, to make money.

    The most powerful people in the world would rather CONTROL things than campaign and make speeches all day and draw the ire of half the country. The most powerful people in the world didn’t get BEATEN by community organizer Barack Obama in a power competition, they HIRED him for a pageant.

    We all know all this and don’t know it at the same time, in different proportions. Even among truth seekers like ourselves, who among us has no emotions about Trump and Hillary? It was a hell of a movie!

    Like

    • mswinkle says:

      Inside Baseball linked to this blog. Just started to skim the site and maybe this is what is going on. TPTB are not that powerful and have not been plotying and running it all behind the scenes. However, that is what they want us to think, andoncethis thinking becomes more mainstream it wil be easier to accept top down control, as after all that is thesystem we have always been living in. here is a snippit from the site

      While this collective state of affairs tends to induce rage, as it will become more clear as we delve into cybernetics and relate it to this system and its limits to growth, taking an adversarial approach against the “new world order” is pointless because to fight new world order agents is to fight ghosts in the machine. In this connection the intelligence orchestrating our perception of this reality has intentionally leaked information about the organization of its network of mercenaries as a necessary precondition to achieving its ultimate gambit, using the internet to strategically proliferate the mysterious rhetoric behind nebulous labels like the Illuminati and New World Order. On the simplest level providing a controlled disclosure of the occult truth that the system has always been orchestrated by an infrastructure of secret societies and its mystery religion makes sense if you are going to phase out the industrial age of the constitutional nation-state in favor of the singular fascist regulatory structure of the information age, as subconsciously this weakens resistance to the idea of the system dissolving the previously necessary delusion that its participants were entitled to freedom, self-determination, and individual rights. Moreover in publicizing your mystery religion via its new age spin, the younger generations set to inherit the updated version of your system can be indoctrinated into a bastardized version of “oneness”, such that they never think that they needed any of those individual “rights” to begin with (those rights are like totally coming from the ego, man).

      Like

  14. Just FYI, I spoke to a retired school teacher, and memories are often faulty. However, he said that in 1999 security cameras were not widely used in schools, but as he recalled, when they came on the scene, they were usually placed at school entrances to record comings and goings. That makes far more sense than placing them in four corners of a cafeteria to record potential horseplay.

    This feeds my suspicion that the security cameras were installed in the Columbine cafeteria specifically for this event. This would allow for all the manipulations we saw, advance recording, control of the date stamp, and turning them off (we are told) when the duffle bags were brought in. The security tape was presented as raw evidence. It appears that it was manufactured and controlled by the planners.

    Like

    • Bryan M says:

      It’s safe to assume that all mass shootings are hoaxes, whether carried out by the government or by individuals. There are many to unravel, and Columbine has already received much attention from many angles.

      One that I sometimes look at is the “original” active shooter incident, the University of Texas tower shooting:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_tower_shooting

      You’d figure that since the MO was brand-new, they probably screwed up a few of the details and left big clues lying around.

      Like

      • It is ripe. If you would want to do that sort of work, we could allow you to post here as a guest writer. We would of course have to submit the material to us. We’re not draconian, but we would like to see it before we publish it.

        Like

      • Mick says:

        From this vantage point – temporally speaking – that shooting looks fake.

        Like

  15. Calvin says:

    Dave McGowan looks to have contracted fast acting cancer before his passing. Food for thought or?

    Like

    • I hear you – but don’t think it is. They long ago planted the idea that they can inject people with fast-acting cancer with Jack Ruby, whose death was faked, Bill Hicks in the 90s too. With McGowan they did a little predictive programming, showing him chain smoking in interviews. I doubt the guy even smoked at all, but they were setting the stage for his exit via fake death.

      It was not that much different with others – Janis Joplin, drugs and drinking, was (still is) clean and sober. But they made her look like a lush so that when she supposedly OD’d, we’d think “Yeah, saw that coming.”

      Like

      • calvin says:

        I seen a photo of him and he looked in very bad shape. He looked damn normal on his videos some time before that. As a former smoker I will watch his video simulcasts and try to determine if he was a fake smoker.

        Like

  16. The everything is fake meme is merely a continuation of the ” Chaff ” tactic. What is chaff? tiny strips of aluminum foil dropped to confuse enemy missiles and to make the enemy waste more of the same. When a secret is uncovered simply drop bales of chaff around it. Works like a charm. That being said, most if not all of it is fake. Not my rabbits, not my rabbit hole, I am simply looking down it and reporting my observations. FWIW.

    Like

  17. calgacus says:

    Maybe they have a show planned, where the evil western NWO is finally exposed and defeated. The MSM will finally accept many events as fake. But I don’t really believe in this scenario. It can create a slippery slope scenario. But it is interesting that so many people that expose these hoaxes are pro China, Russia or BRICS. They push the BRICS vs Evil West paradigm. These hoaxes are good enough to engineer the masses and at the same time good enoug to push most of the more inquisitive minds into fake paradigms. We also have to take in consideration the scenario where the conservative and nationalist ideas (especially pro white nationalist ideas) are made the scapegoat for some big event in the very near future (2017/2018). A few days ago we had Charlottesville. We also had that guy with a gun connected to Pizzagate (I don’t know the story since I avoided it, but people mentioned it in various podcasts). So we have these white dudes believing in conspiracy theories and they act in a dangerous manner. These white terrorists are pro-Trump, believe in conspiracies, they say that the MSM is fake, post dank Pepe memes on social media, they act in a dangerous manner etc. These hoaxes as a trap may play a very important role in the near future. Of course people here made other interesting points that probably play at least a minor role.
    Related to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-06KSTWlZU (I also made a few comments)

    Like

    • Inside Baseball says:

      I think Charlottesville is signaling the beginning of such a campaign, or an escalation. It was clearly a setup, and the counter-demonstrations ready made to fan the flames. At the least, they’re testing the waters, looking for some calculated “tipping point” for the next phase of the operation.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s