The Columbine effect

In the discussions below we have described a large herd out there, the unthinking majority of Americans, as “the 95%.” Some think that too generous. Perhaps half of the adults are easily herded into voting booths. They can easily be reduced to ridiculous debates about whether one of two despicable candidates, say Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, offers a better choice.

Half doesn’t bother to vote. Some might take comfort in that, as it is the proper choice. I  doubt, however, that the decision is a result of critical thought. They are just distracted by poverty, football, substance abuse, entertainment and low-paying repetitive jobs that destroy their minds. The sad conclusion is that the 95% are hopelessly under control, so that from the standpoint of those in power, their only task is to isolate them from the minority of people who do learn how to reason and solve problems.

The means by which they have done this is diabolically clever. The 95% are warned not to use their brains, not to question perceived reality, as it leads to “conspiracy theories,” which are always wrong. Most people sincerely believe that critical thinking is a bad thing. So the sheep safely graze.

In our most recent staged event, the Las Vegas massacre, we have had a debate in the comments about whether there are no real casualties or some. I conclude that there are none, and not even any injuries save something entirely accidental.

Tyrone*, in his post below, Controlling the Aftermath, has given us examples of how the medical facilities, “vicsims” and ambulances are controlled as part of the larger play. One commenter noted that four Air Force surgeons were brought in to deal with the large number of casualties, so that the trauma wing was under control. We all know the news media is just a branch of the state, and does everything but report actual news.

*Tyrone has also hit hard in the comments, this one especially useful, in my view.

All the rest of the actors in the aftermath are doing their jobs, from stand-ups switching from comedy to lamentation to talk show hosts going into long impassioned rants. Politicians do somber strolls and flyovers. (Social media are now being used to introduce an old advertising technique, the “endorsement,” or bringing in an authoritative source to recommend a product. This is done by spreading rumors about someone … who knew someone … who had a cousin who … had a son that was killed.) The herd knows not to follow-up on that or question it, as that would be a conspiracy theory. All is normal in Fantasy Land.

The one aspect of a mass fake event that has troubled us is the large crowds that had assembled in Las Vegas, or at the Boston Marathon. They would easily see if the event was real or fake. They would see dead bodies … or not. They would hear gunfire, see flashing lights and ambulances and see blood and chaos. How can they be kept under control?

There are a whole range of possibilities for dealing with large crowds of non-participants. I am opting for the extreme, that no one dies, no one is wounded, no laws are broken. Here are some possibilities:

  • Mass shooting are real events that happen spontaneously. Watch yer back. (This is the 95%, or herd position.)
  • Even though mass shootings are fake, they involve an interface between planners, actors and the general public. Though unintentional, people are sometimes injured and sometimes die.
  • Mass shooting are fake, but planners are blasé about human life, and so waste a few real victims. If people get injured, so much the better to sell the event. They use some real bullets but participants know to duck.
  • Mass shootings are real, but staged. The killers are drugged zombies lured into to committing the crimes. Innocent bystanders are killed and wounded. So what?
  • Mass shootings are sometimes real, sometimes fake, as situations allow. Real mass shooting are spontaneous, while fake ones are merely copycats. Since there is a shortage of real events, they are augmented by fake ones.
  • Mass shootings are fake, no one is killed for real, and no laws are broken. (This is my position except that I am not sure about the law factor. This is where Tyrone’s comments have been useful.)
  • Mass shootings are fake, and no matter how large the crowd, all participants are actors.

Here is a list of recent events that share some common characteristics:

  • Waco (1995)
  • Columbine (1999)
  • The Madrid train bombings (2004)
  • The London subway attack (2005)
  • The Oslo massacre (2011)
  • Sandy Hook (2012)
  • Charlie Hebdo (2015)
  • Westminster Bridge (2017).

I could go on. These events, in my view, are all hermetically sealed. The settings were under control, so that planners need not worry about innocent bystanders or witnesses. Crowd control was not an issue. TV news did its job in making these events come to life, or better said, death. Police, seen by outsiders as trying to protect the public and apprehend evildoers, are in reality paramilitary forces who control the sets and prevent outsiders from wandering on or in.

Here are some recent events of a larger nature:

  • Oklahoma City (1995)
  • 911 (2001)
  • Boston Marathon (2013)
  • Paris (2015)
  • Brussels (2016)
  • Las Vegas (2017)

Witnesses and spectators were everywhere, or so it seemed. (In reality, the witnesses we saw on TV for these events were actors filmed in advance. But there were real witnesses we never heard from.) These events do not appear to have been sealed off, so that there is an intermingling of genuine witnesses and actors.

How to control the witnesses? They are unwittingly made into participants. The tool: Television (and by extension, computer screens).

MMMarshall McLuhan, an oddball Canadian college professor who died in 1980, made his name by breaking down media into its effects on those who use it. “The medium is the massage,” he said with his quirky humor. He broke it down into:

  • Hot” media, where the message is presented in high-definition so that the recipient does not have to use great effort to participate. This would include movies, radio, photos. This is lazy viewing and listening.
  • “Cool” media, where definition is low and the recipient of the message has to dive in, to participate, to become part of it. This would include cartoons (think of such low-definition characters as those in South park, mere walking circles), telephone, speeches, and television. This kind of media takes more work.

In our mass shooting events consider that “witnesses” don’t really see very much. They cannot, as their range of vision is limited. In Las Vegas on a flat terrain the mass of witnesses only had to be given the sound of gunfire, some screaming, and perhaps some actors falling down. This all would have happened as they were making their exit, so that they were possibly in a state of concern and curious about what had happened. They would not find out until later that they had witnessed something horrible, so there was no “stampede,” and no panic.

What did they do? They made their way to the nearest bar or went home to turn on the TV. Smart phones now supplant TV to a degree, so that in very short order after the event they are brought into it. “There’s been a massacre! I was there! I was part of it!”

The phenomenon that follows is critical: The images on the screen become the reality they left behind at the event. They are no longer witnesses. They are participants.

I continually fall back on Columbine, as I spent so much time with it. The two mass murderers, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, were ghosts. They did not exist. But if you talk to Columbine students of that era, they were real. They even knew them. TV did that. I call it the “Columbine Effect,” as even as those kids saw nothing, they went home, turned on the TV, and became participants.

McLuhan  missed high-definition TV and smart phones (still cool media in my view) and the Internet (which for news purposes merely augments TV). But little has changed.

We have all seen images of what dogs might see on a TV screen, a haze of moving lines. In fact, the lines would be a haze to us too had they not been carefully timed to interface with our own internal flicker rates. TV images flow by at a rate of one every 1/30th of a second, a speed which allowed our brains to interpret what is on the screen and to participate in making those images come to life.

But the images are still opaque and two-dimensional, even on high-definition devices. We need to jump into our screens to make them real. And we do. We enter our screens.

It is my contention that no matter the number of spectators at an event like Las Vegas, they didn’t see much. Events move fast. Rumors spread quickly. People were on their way out. This is all by design. What they saw and heard was intended to be seen and heard. It was then up to them to fill in the blanks, and take ownership of the event, to become participants. Mass psychology is so well understood that it is all predictable and manageable.

Staging an event like Las Vegas is not as difficult as it first appears. A certain amount of site preparation is necessary, visual effects like making sure the area is heavily littered had to be done. There had to be simulated gunfire. Shots of dead bodies, filmed in advance, made their way to TV that night. People see video snippets on YouTube of what are said to be small parts of the large event, and again, as participants, fill in the details for themselves. They were there! They saw it all!

Wile EPlaneIt is said that TV (and by extension, the computer screen) is a hypnotic device. Indeed, I have seen young children watching TV, and it does not just entertain them, it absorbs them. It is as if they are in a trance. For adults the result is the same with an exception of degree only. We do not actually go into a trance, but we become more suggestible. If the TV says that jet aircraft can fly through buildings like Wile E. Coyote through a canyon wall, Isaac Newton be damned, it is possible. TV supplants reality, and in mass terror events, supplies it to onlookers who then think they actually witnessed it.

I maintain that small terror events are sealed and under tight management, while large events are equally under control, with herd manipulation used to convince participants of the reality of the event.

About Mark Tokarski

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

54 Responses to The Columbine effect

  1. Inside Baseball says:

    It’s hard to think of any other way they could keep doing these things and not have something blowback on them. At this point they have such momentum in their favor, they could probably make things up from whole cloth and most people would believe it.

    There are plenty of people out there who like to be the center of attention, especially in our social media dominated world, who would be more than happy to invent friendships with imaginary victims just to try and grab a little bit of momentary fame.

    There’s also the fact that most people just hear about an event like this and shove it down, not wanting to “go there” but still buying into it mentally and emotionally. What decent person wants to watch an ISIS beheading video?

    As for what is “legal” we have to remember that the whole basis of our government is arbitrary and not founded on any moral principle. “Legal” and “lawful” are completely different things altogether. Even the most low level interface with the American legal system is enough to see how corrupt it is. It’s as focused on truth and justice as the medical system is on health or the internet and cable providers are on quality of service.

    Lawyers get paid well for insulating the system, and slapped down if they cause problems. Most don’t figure it out until they’re well into it, as with most careers.

    The main hope is that as this whole charade becomes more and more dependant on this sheeplike acquiescence, the controllers get boxed in as well, by their own arrogance and laziness, as well as by the necessity to maintain the status quo. That limits creativity and agility. Who knows what wildcard may emerge in the future to throw a wrench into things?

    Liked by 2 people

  2. steve kelly says:

    Or, rather, does the screen actually enter us?
    “…the viewer, in fact, becomes the screen, whereas in film he becomes the camera.” – McLuhan
    http://www.digitallantern.net/mcluhan/mcluhanplayboy.htm

    I cannot speculate as to the actual virtual environment created by the technology surrounding us today. Who is the contemporary (McLuhan) doing this work?

    Like

    • There is Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death, but the caveat is that both he and McLuhan are on a warning list in MIles Mathis’ paper on Robert Anton Wilson. The whole field, I find from Google, is called Media Ecology, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ecology … If indeed McLuhan is a comprosed source, one way to read him is not as describing a reality of media and communication which is some kind of inevitable state, technologically determined, but how it functions as a result of the manipulations of the puppetmasters. Or more optimistically, how they wish us to interact with their media, if only we could stop ourselves from peeking behind the curtain.

      Like

      • I vaguely remember that paper and knew that McLuhan had been mentioned. As always, take everything with a grain of salt. McLuhan might be compromised (his impact is slight, few remember him), and Mathis could be wrong.

        Like

    • I have McLuhan’s Understanding Media in front of me, but I just did not feel like working my way through 32 pages of his prose, so I went on memory. I defer to your expertise.

      Like

  3. imafakeologist says:

    This is a fantastic post. I’ll be reposting it in its entirety.

    I wish I saw it before today’s family dinner. Las Vegas and the TV show The people vs OJ came up.

    I passed on engaging on these topics, but would have shown them this post in response.

    Well done.

    Like

  4. calgacus says:

    I wonder how many top level agents/actors can they marshal for such events. Top level agents/actors are people that know what is the deal and I assume they come from certain families. These agents can come from many countries and maybe they can involve other family members to do a gig job. For example we have more than 1 million Freemasons in US and Canada http://www.msana.com/msastats.asp . If 1% of these Freemasons belong to the top level agents, we have 10000 people. But in reality the number is probably much bigger. Many religious institutions are probably similar to Freemasonry (all the religions probably have these fraternities), so you can have non-Freemason top agents.
    Are 10000 top agents more than enough agents needed to stage these events (at least in US, Canada,Europe, Australia etc)? These 10000 would focus mostly on these staged events.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. annspinwall4 says:

    I found this video interesting…people being led away from the “shooting”…there is a guy at around 8 minutes that has supposedly been shot in the arm and the dialogue is so fake IMO

    Like

    • I did see some blood on him, but did not see any wounds on his chest or stomach when they lifted his shirt. There was a towel over his arm at that time. That was the only time there was enough light to see anything. I agree, looks fake.

      Like

      • pau says:

        Supposedly all these people were running toward the airport a mile away. According to Fox News, some 300+ of them ran there for safety. The airport was closed due to security reasons. Or was it closed so that these people could secretly be loaded back onto the planes that flew them in to participate in this hoax? A relative of mine worked in hospital management. Said they had to have 3 drills a year & hospital employees were encouraged to participate. Could the Gaming Industry also be required to have drills?

        Like

        • helenn says:

          The fact that the airport was closed because of people were running towards it and onto the tarmac struck me as odd too. That airport like all American airports is heavily defended by fencing and other methods. It’s hard to see how a bunch of country music concertgoers were able to breach it just by running towards it.

          Like

  6. Pingback: The Columbine effect | Piece of Mindful | Fakeologist.com

  7. Becky says:

    Just found this site. So much fascinating dialogue here.

    With this Las Vegas event, I was immediately smelling something rotten. One thing that I haven’t heard anyone comment about was the initial response from Eric Paddock… where he said, “It’s like an asteroid just fell on top of our family…”

    A warning? Just mad musings from a desperate crisis actor?

    Like

  8. fm says:

    If the TV says that jet aircraft can fly through buildings like Wile E. Coyote through a canyon wall, Isaac Newton be damned, it is possible.

    Exactly – cartoon physics for a VR (Virtual Reality) world.
    I’d like to object with one point. It does not matter much if real people died or not. More important is the planning and execution by the hidden hand to attain a certain effect on the population. More than 99.99% are no eye witnesses, so it doesn’t make a difference for them.
    What troubles me, is the audacity of those VR news, and the brain-dead willingness of too many people to accept it against their own better judgement. I still maintain the idea that at least a third of those 95% notices a foul smell, but flinches in horror from the thought that their Dear Leader had a hand in it.
    Cf. the biblical sheep and cognitive dissonance …

    Liked by 1 person

  9. metaOne says:

    Do you look “out there” and see negativity (charged)? Do you see a corrupt world? Congratulations you’ve met your shadow personified in personalized fractal form – do you love me? Or do you hate me? Hate me and you will become me – love me and you might stand a shot at transcending me…otherwise hate me to death when i steal your last breathe…

    Look – Man is corrupt (and Man with Womb aka Woman)…95% of us allow it to collect, without conscious attention to it…we lie to ourselves daily in little ways which feeds the (little ego) image at the personal level which is supported by the big lies collected at the impersonal/institution level (national ego aka nationalism)…

    Anyone who can’t see the higher purpose to the SINGLE REDEEMING FACT that they are NOT KILLING PEOPLE is missing the boat…THINK THAT THROUGH – why are they FAKING THE DEATH if Man is so bloodthirsty ie terrorists around every corner??????

    Why dont they really “kill kill kill” as “Mary-Land Man-sons” new album says? If evil people are running this world, why aren’t they actually killing us? (hint b/c the dark dudes work for the light and what kills those people more than anything is they can’t understand their purpose working with the dark in intelligence circles – aka they have a conscious)

    GET OVER YOUR LITTLE EGO and go love something living, something alive in this world…or read this and shatter that little guy like humpty dumpty and slowly, consciously, piece it back together…

    http://realitysandwich.com/118054/synchronicity_myth_and_new_world_order/

    in lak’ech <–a way…across…an abyss…

    ps – vegas looks like a fast/furious gun deal to move arms into the hands of “isis” terrorists that went sideways when “the good guys/white hats” made it all go hot to expose what the FBI really does to the american people and the dark hats are desperate to maintain the single shooter narrative b/c if the media opens up pandora’s box, ie multiple shooters – then the narrative may begin spinning faster than they can maintain…

    Like

    • fm says:

      Do you look “out there” and see negativity (charged)? Do you see a corrupt world?

      A PKD quote: “Reality is the thing that doesn’t go away when you stop believing in it.”

      Congratulations you’ve met your shadow personified in personalized fractal form – do you love me?

      I don’t know you.

      Like

  10. Gaia says:

    I am sorry to be the dissonant here Mark, but I don’t really like what you’ve written. You’re on the same path as those in power; divide and conquer. The idea that the 95% “sheeple majority” are somehow not critical thinkers and actually dislike critical thinking, even when they decide not to vote anymore it’s just out of laziness, and the idea that the 5% “awake minority” are critical thinkers is completely off. I have seen so many people who call themselves “awake” follow new BS, after the Hollywood movie is thrown out of the window, other directors are embraced. Examples are the Alt Right, Flat or Concave Earth, Dino Hoax, homeopathy, and many more controlled opposition strategies. They run from one snake oil doctor to the other.

    Also consider that you, me and anyone else reading here (who are just a small part of that 5%) were “asleeple” for more than half of our lives? How can we be so harsh towards other people who are not (yet?) in a state of seeing things if we were in that position for so long? How does that work, were we 10, 5, even 2 years ago not critical thinkers and now suddenly we are? Just because we grew into seeing a bigger picture everyday?

    Our closest friends, partners, parents, children, siblings in many cases are “95%”. Would you call them “not critical thinkers” a priori? Don’t they ask good questions, out of curiosity and to keep us sharp?

    It is this “us vs them” that is the whole problem, the method of the Hidden Hand that wants to set up us peers against each other.

    Patience with and understanding for the position the 95% is in, is in my opinion much more wise and insightful. After all, we were there too. They need a helping hand, not a rejecting one.

    Like

    • steve kelly says:

      This critique seems to me to be a bit “fussy.” Capricorn perhaps, naturally, trying to bring us all a little closer to “perfection.” Mark ( born April 19-May 13?) is Mark. “Voracious, relentless and self-indulgent, Aries like fast decisions, bloody battles and complete victory. Like the Spartan view of things, there is only victory, nothing else counts. To the victor, go the spoils.”

      And so, with “patience and understanding” god gave us all (some more than others), may we all, in our own way, try to appreciate uniqueness as individuals — and perfection where it truly exists, in the harmony, ambiguity and asymmetrical balance in Nature.

      Thanks again Clint.

      Like

    • calgacus says:

      The phrase “95% sheeple majority” has indeed a negative connotation. We should be careful not to be smug towards the 95%. In my opinion the greatest difference between me (and similar seekers) and the 95% is not the fact that I know the “truth” but the fact that I question the “truth” provided by higher ups (gurus, government, higher learning institutions etc). Of course to question the gurus you must have certain qualities (innate or acquired). Even the best and most virtuous truth seekers can be far from the “truth” since humans are limited by many things (many limitations are by design). Even if you know many truths it would be a mistake to treat the ignorant people as inferiors.Many people from the 95% have great potential but the system works overtime to make sure that people don’t reach their potential.
      We should not be arrogant but at the same time we must face the reality. I have few hopes that we will have a critical mass of citizens that will push the things towards something better than we currently have. I see more centralization of power and centralization in my opinion is one of the most important characteristics of what we may call evil. And yes, many alternative movements were probably created to goad the “5%”. The people that can handle these new ideas or traps are probably less than 5% (so the situation is probably worse). Nonetheless I understand why the 5% people can be frustrated with the 95%. Many people from the 5% tried to engage people from the 95%, only to be called “cranks” or other names. Seekers that were called “cranks” should be careful not to become smug or antagonistic towards the 95%. A better thing to do is to try to reach the 5-15% first.

      I want to say that I take the Dino hoax as serious matter, but it is not something that interests me right now. It is connected in a way to the biogenic vs abiogenic origins of oil. But this is off-topic.

      Like

    • fm says:

      Agree with you.
      That the 95% just are these “unaware” 95% is the effect of a massive, concerted 24/7 brainwashing effort, including family (parents), school,church, media, and organized leisure activities (clubs, organization, etc.).
      Not everyone is capable of escaping on his own. And some will never escape, surely.
      But can we really claim we are already “there”, to finally judge them ?

      Like

    • You’re probably right. As the LV event went down, I was thinking to myself “Must you fall for everything?” I was a little bit angry at them. What they are really is a large group of people of various abilities who have been born and raised in our propaganda system, and beyond that have been deeply affected by agitprop, which is destructive of thought processes.,

      Like

      • Gaia says:

        Thank you for that nuance, Mark, indeed. As we have been raised in the same system, we know how thick the propaganda is and how many heads need to be chopped off before the monster is contained.

        What I see as counterproductive is to point our anger, frustration or amazement at our peers. I guess I am not the only one who received comments like “in your world nothing ever happens for real” (in response to the many staged events), “nobody dies” (in response to the so many fake deaths of so many “famous” people), etc.

        It is understandable; it takes a lot of work, effort, time and emotional stability to be able to see through these “events”. Most people I think do not care either. They take it for granted, mumbling “yeah yeah, another terrorist attack or mass shooting event” and go on with their lives. If the intended effect is that people get scared I think it is not so productive. But that may be different geographically.

        What also doesn’t help is the frequency of these staged events. That is a step for the 95% to take, with common comments like “this is ALSO fake, you think?”.

        Like

    • annspinwall4 says:

      Gaia, I have found that my friends and family are completely resistant…they don’t ask questions, they just get angry. I have been awake and aware of these things for 6 years…I thought, this can’t be true…but I began researching and was able to start understanding how badly we have been conned and lied to. I was 60 at the time…I don’t know what is is that makes some people curious and others angry and resistant.

      Like

      • Gaia says:

        Ann, that may be an age thing. I can imagine that it is harder to throw away earlier world views at a higher age because you have been used to it for so long. It’s carved in granite. That could explain the anger and resistance you’re seeing around you.

        Resistance I also see around, but my friends do not call me crazy, I think a true friend at least tries to understand your point of view. They are resistant, of course, but not angry or ridiculing.

        As has been discussed here earlier, everyone has an “in”. It can be related to what we see (obvious errors) or what is closest to our living area, or an interest in a certain topic or anything. There are so many topics that it becomes very hard to convince someone that history is full of staged events if you don’t know where to start.

        In my experience there are two ways “in” with a contact (friend or acquaintance):
        1 – be specific – choose a topic you master yourself in and cover all angles, especially also the “debunked” ones; be prepared for questions and able to counter them
        2 – be broad – to be able to tap into the interest of the contact and come up with a staged event that you know something about to pick

        We will always find resistance, but the trick is to stay unmoved about that. If we take the angry road we wouldn’t be any better than those doing that to us.

        And the very first thing to do is ask people to switch off from the propaganda channels; TV, most of the internet, etc. Only after that it is possible to unlearn I think. When you’re confronted daily with Untruth X, it is very hard to understand Truth Y has much more logic.

        That would be another age thing I think, people of 60+ are used to TV, as the main channel of “information” and that is a passive one; the waves are just coming to them. They may use the internet, where you have to look for things actively, but that wouldn’t be their first point.

        Like

      • Alison says:

        Hello Ann, I have the same problem. I have only been gradually aware of our situation for two years or so, although I have realised I have been subconsciously aware for much longer but I think I have supressed the thoughts as it is unsettling, frightening and lonely to accept the all consuming lie of our existence. I have very few people with whom I can discuss the subjects aired on this and similar blogs. My family don’t understand why I want to dig so deeply – they think I should ‘leave it’ and just live my life as they do – accepting what they see and are told. They don’t understand why I would want to believe that what our media tells us is not true. I don’t want to live my life in a fog, but I truly would love to have somebody with whom I can discuss our fabricated history and present day events, the why, the how, the what next, without being labelled crazy. Becoming awake is, in my case, a solitary experience and this blog has become a comfort and convinces me I am not the crazy one!

        Like

    • Vexman says:

      Your dissonance may be attached to reality rather than Mark’s description of it. By saying ‘the emperor is naked’ when the emperor is actually naked, that’s only an honest description of a fact. Whether you may like it or not, is yet another issue. It could be understood as if Mark was arogantly noticing this, but only if you take it completely out of the context. The issue here is to find some comfort in realizing, that you’re not alone in this 5%, and not to suggest that we’re separated because of understanding that as is. It’s a fact, that it’s usually a miserable experience when talking to a member of 95% club and it sucks that I need a differnt set of friends to talk about manufactured reality. So I feel comforted by reading that someone else alike has similar issues and can then relate to this and such reality with more optimism. Something that is rarely seen in these days as much as the balls needed to say it out loud.

      In my opinion, this 5% group is significantly smaller, closer to 1% in reality. One important ingredient of being awake is to have enough time to deal with despinning everything mainstreamed. Not everybody has enough time on their hands, as life in capitalism consumes most of your available time for earning money and when you are able to relax, not everybody chooses mental acrobatics related to faked reality as their preferred way of hanging out 🙂 . And on top of that, being awake demands a sacrifice – you’ll be outed as a ‘crank’ by most of your friends and will forever look differently at this world. I don’t think that majority of people have any desire to deal with all above hence this 95% vs 5% division. I’ve let out some trillion other reasons why this division exists, but I believe I’ve made my point clear enough.

      Like

      • fm says:

        Not everybody has enough time on their hands, as life in capitalism consumes most of your available time for earning money and when you are able to relax, not everybody chooses mental acrobatics related to faked reality as their preferred way of hanging out 🙂 .

        Definitely subscribe to that. Having a family and a day job, I chose the simple way – assuming every news presented by MSM is a lie. Just for a few important one’s I take the time to dive deeper.
        And, you not only become what you eat, you also become what you think. That’s why so many fake AltMedia sites have been created. They consume your time and your soul, and keep you from acting in the real world.

        Like

  11. The feeling of excitement and relief that we can come to this blog and discuss the current or past events with like minded folks, makes dealing with the other 95 percent so much easier for myself. My take away from the blog and comments informs my thinking and actions of the day in subtle or major ways. I find myself calming people down who are upset about the latest false flag and offering to show them links to some different points of view. I have been pleasantly surprised by how many people respond back to me with excitement and thanks for sharing my knowledge and/or links with them.
    I ultimately think that the sharing and pooling of knowledge is the only way we are going to get the deepest understanding of what the fuck we are truly up against.
    It is a comforting thought that if I am going to fight these Monstrous Powers That Be, that I have some damn smart people in the trenches next to me. Thanks for keeping the despair at bay, helping to channel my anger into a forceful tool I can use to keep learning about the world I live in, and the continuing process of sharing ideas and points of view.

    Like

  12. Gaia says:

    “It’s a fact, that it’s usually a miserable experience when talking to a member of 95% club and it sucks that I need a differnt set of friends to talk about manufactured reality. So I feel comforted by reading that someone else alike has similar issues and can then relate to this and such reality with more optimism. Something that is rarely seen in these days as much as the balls needed to say it out loud.”

    But that is the whole problem? Why is it so “miserable” to talk to the 95%? Do you have any illusions or hopes then?

    I don’t read optimism, quite the contrary. I read that somehow someone who doesn’t see the staged events is “not thinking critically”. I think that is a wrong accusation. We have all been bombarded with propaganda, been imprisoned in the “education system” where we were taught to “respect authority”, there is all the emotional terror played on us that somehow “if you not believe in victims you are offending those victims” (a non-sequitur; if there are no victims, there’s nobody to offend)…

    In the end people only learn by themselves, nobody can do that task for them. And if they don’t want to learn and stay comfortable in that Disney world, so what? Does it affect you? Do you suffer from it?

    The point is that it would be unwise to let the 95% think we are the “Jehova witnesses”, trying to “preach”. It is the other way around; the media are preaching, we just don’t believe them. But in order to keep that position, imho we shouldn’t go on such a “conversion spree”. Yes, share information, knowledge, videos, blogs, forums, etc. etc. but if people do not see the same things we do, not getting angry or frustrated or anything. Because that is counterproductive and isolates us even more from the rest of humanity.

    That is also why they use the hoax/staged event as their favorite modus operandi; just because it is “so outlandish”, “so crazy”, it is a perfect tool. Then the label “crazy” can be applied to us, who acquired insights in the craziness of others.

    There’s another aspect in the false flag case. People are more willing to accept a false flag (with real deaths/victims) than a hoax, because there is a human interest in drama. So even in the case a 95% sees some of the inconsistencies in a story, it is more “attractive” to believe a false flag, with multiple shooters and “the deep state” and other dramatic inserted parts of a counter narrative than the idea that it is just a complete lie.

    Also, what we are trained in from a young age is a fixed story. We, as non-believers in the media story, don’t have all the answers. And imho we shouldn’t; there is no shame in not knowing something. But A) that is not how we are trained (school, media, etc.) and B) that is not “comfortable” for most people; they rather have a fixed storyline (true or not) to follow than no storyline.

    I think the only remedy against this situation is to educate our own children, the next generation, to be different. To be critical of what they hear, see and merit as “authority” and to comfort them in the fact that it is ok to not know everything. Yes, that may be a frustratingly slow process, but what is the alternative? Trying to push the ideas we have here to others wouldn’t that be the same mistake the hoaxers are making? So how can we be opposed to them if we apply their same methods?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Vexman says:

      We do agree on many issues, but not all. I should have better explained my opinion in the first place.

      The miserable part would be talking about fake events or faked reality with 95ers. I do socialize with such people and do manage to find pleasure in it and I sincerely like many of them, so don’t get me wrong there. It’s just that I lately don’t spend my precious time on chit-chat, I find it boring and it frustrates me. Why, you may ask? When I began realizing what the hell is going on around me, it was overwhelming. And it still is, I could be talking about it almost all the time, but there is only one friend I can relate to about the fakery. Realizing that makes my contact with 95ers miserable, I just can’t stomach small talk for more than 15m while so much more relevant stuff is going on. And I have little patience left for their lack of desire – to use their own heads properly. That is, to follow the logic and reason, which some refer to as “critical thinking” (I find that as exaggeration, just what is critical in thinking about the right questions? ). I know, I tried approaching many of them with discouraging results. So I don’t do it anymore unless they would bring it up themselves, which is something I’m yet awaiting to happen. Knowing them, it won’t change any time soon unless I switch my company and/or friends first, which is even less likely to happen. At the end of the day, I do care for my friends, the 95ers, and it makes me sad and miserable when I see that they can’t be a part of my hopes for a change. If and when such change for better happens, they will be lead and not leading it. There is actually nothing optimistic in that fact, but I still hope for the better to follow. For the sake of our children, I’d agree.

      You then took my partial statement and asked if “that” is the whole problem. The issue is, I suppose, the miserable feeling that I described above. I don’t have any problem with it, actually, nor with anything else I wrote about. I just chimed in to confirm that the emperor is really naked. We’re discussing the apparent division, 95% vs 5%, and all related stuff, which seem to have upset you in the way Mark has put it. I don’t see it in the way you do, but I don’t have an issue with it. We perceive the essence of his post differently, which seems as the only problem of the moment 🙂 My optimism has absolutely nothing to do it, but since you’ve brought it to this debate, I read his post as positive and I understand your stance about it as less positive than my own. But let’s not make a drama out of it, please, as anyone’s optimism is actually irrelevant to the essence.

      False flag vs hoax debate is fueled with cognitive dissonance, in my opinion. It’s really hard to understand and to accept, that the PTB go that far to fake it all, full 100%. The bigger the lie gets, it becomes less and less likely the people will doubt it. I’m lately convinced it’s always about the hoax (with major wars as exceptions), why would they bother with pleasing us, the 5%? So why kill real people, when few badly done Iphone videos of vicsims can do perfectly well for 95% ? Who cares about it, actually, if we managed to deconstruct any such event as hoax, we’re already tagged as “cranks” by most of our own friends. And whom could we tell the real story, if we got it right, anyway? Not to our friends nor TV, that’s for sure, so they already have us contained. The elephant is already in the room, it just depends whether you are ready to see it.

      We are pushing the truth, while the PTB are pushing exclusively lies. The method may seem the same, but it isn’t. Lies have to be continuously spread, if they’re not, the world as we know would collapse. The need to push the truth is only instant. Yes, we have been formatted and programmed for decades, so I believe that stopping the propaganda machinery is crucial. But that also means that the set of authorities and rulers is replaced. Replaced with what exactly? Can you imagine the world, where no lies are told? Hardly, but when it eventually happens, there will be no need to push anything as the people will evolve from mental slaves into something much more lovable.

      Like

      • Gaia says:

        I asked you the question “do you have any hopes or illusions?”, not prepared to receive so much utopism and naivity back. Mind you, those words are not “attacks” on you, they are observations of what I read in your words, that you consciously wrote yourself.

        For instance:
        “And it still is, I could be talking about it almost all the time, but there is only one friend I can relate to about the fakery. Realizing that makes my contact with 95ers miserable, I just can’t stomach small talk for more than 15m while so much more relevant stuff is going on. And I have little patience left for their lack of desire – to use their own heads properly. ”

        You asked me if I was upset, or rather painted the idea. I am not. I am not upset, not angry, not frustrated. You on the other hand DEMONSTRATE that you are upset, angry and frustrated. And you show a superiority thinking.

        What you shouldn’t forget, Vexman, is everything we do here is HOBBY. Other people gather and play sports, others read the Bible, others go fishing, others solve crossword puzzles together, we do this. That is what this is; a hobby. Our hobby is analyzing stories that are told to us and showing and sharing information that they are wrong; lies, misdirections, etc. And yes, that is a serious thing. But there is no contradiction between a hobby, a pastime, as this is, and being serious about it. If you love skydiving as a hobby, I assume you take your hobby very seriously…

        Now what happens with the Disney crowd, the 95%? They simply do not share our hobby. They are not interested in it, they have other ideas about spending their time, and the whole point of this discussion is; that is FINE?! Or does everybody need the same hobby? Vexman, I understood you grew up under communism and we had a brief exchange about it and I absolutely disagree with you that “communism is not worse than other fake ideologies”. I think it is by far the worst and sickest of them all, as it is so directly opposed to nature. The natural situation is; WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT, not equal. Never have been, never will. Even “identical” twins are not equal. So we have different interests, different choices in life. And as long as we respect those differences we can live happily.

        There lies my whole problem with your attitude; you simply cannot accept that other people (like the 95%) are different and have different hobbies than us. You cannot understand that too much talk about our investigations will only turn them away. And that rejection from their side in turn frustrates you. Something I think you can avoid yourself.

        You said “you have one friend you can relate to about hoaxes”. I don’t know what you mean by “relate to”? Is it the only person you can talk to about hoaxes, or the only one also seeing our point about staged history, a 5%? If it is the latter, then you have even more than me. 100% of my surrounding is 95% (you see I suck at math…), you understand?

        I have two choices: 1) get frustrated, angry, look for new friends, ostracize them, etc., the Vexman approach or 2) stay patient, once in a while let know what I think of certain “events”, understand their decades of pumping propaganda and also do not care that they have a different world view, different hobbies and are still happy.

        Because that is the whole point in this; what difference does it make for us, the 5%, that we see the lies and manipulations? And then the Jehova witness metaphor comes up again; are WE going to heaven and THEY to hell for realizing the lies? No. We are just bound to the same fate as they are, right? So why does it matter that they do not see the world as we do? If we would be passionate about solving crosswords and they do not like crosswords, what difference does that make?

        You say “We are pushing the truth, while the PTB are pushing exclusively lies. The method may seem the same, but it isn’t. Lies have to be continuously spread, if they’re not, the world as we know would collapse. The need to push the truth is only instant. ”

        Don’t you see what you’re doing? Read your own comment again. And again. You talked about reason and logic and I very much liked that and agree wholeheartedly; those tools are essential to understand the world as it (not) is. But you need to apply them consistently otherwise they don’t work. It is exactly the INCONSISTENCY that is what separates the liar, manipulator, hoaxer, Elite, Hidden Hand, PTB, whatever you want to call them, from the honest, logical, straight and critical thinking person.

        I completely disagree with a stance of “pushing truth”. Truth IS, that needs no push. And also; truth will always be unknown, to any of us. Hell, even to those Elites. The fragmentation of their staging makes it impossible. That’s why I speak of truth SEEKING, definitely not “pushing”. Pushing is also pushing away, do you realize that?

        And this whole exercise, this investigation, this hobby of us, is all about UNtruths. Truth is an asymptotically impossible to reach situation. The whole point is to strip away untruths. Only then something remains that has more truth in it than before.

        Think about reality as a pond and we are sieving out the mud to make the water clearer. But we will never ever be able to reach 100% transparency. Both because our sieves are limited and because there is constantly new mud thrown in the pond that partly destroys older work or means new work. Does that mean it’s a useless effort? I don’t think so, if you enjoy the hobby, it’s not useless.

        “At the end of the day, I do care for my friends, the 95ers, and it makes me sad and miserable when I see that they can’t be a part of my hopes for a change.”

        “IT MAKES ME SAD AND MISERABLE”, your words, Vexman, not mine.

        If you do care for your friends, then forget this whole mission thing. Turn the tables around, how would YOU like it if they would go on a mission to “save” you from your “crazy thoughts”? I guess you don’t right? Neither do I. To achieve that we are not getting that, the only reasonable, logic and consistent position is to also not do that against them.

        “But we are right and they are not!!1!!!”
        A) we don’t know that; 3 years ago we thought differently about subject X than now. And in 4 years we think different again. Does that mean we are right now, wrong in the past and wrong in the future again, or how does that work?
        B) that is irrelevant. See it as correcting other people’s spelling. Does it matter we know that you spell ‘horse’ and not ‘hoarse’? Does it change anything? No. Do we need to go around and start and keep correcting other people? I hope not.
        C) that is exactly what they also can claim. Everybody is right from their perspective, otherwise you wouldn’t think like that. If a Jehova witness comes to you and preaches about your salvation and the end time and all, do you listen? Do you start reading the Bible because of what such a person says? Do you embrace that view, spread by that passionate, well-meaning missionary? Or do you think “you have your world view, I have mine, let’s respect those differences between us and we can just grab a beer and have fun”?

        Because reading through so much frustration, misery and sadness I think that would be the much better option. For you and your emotional health. Take care.

        Like

        • Vexman says:

          My goodness, the amount of words in your reply fascinates me. I guess all of this is a bit more than a hobby to you personally. The two of us have come down to breaking apart my alleged personality issues, which is another thing that fascinates me. What’s the purpose of all this? Or is it just the projection of your anger?

          You ask about my hopes and illusions and then tag them as utopia and naivety, while you offer nothing in exchange. You criticize my aleged lack of optimism, yer you convey as a complete pessimist. I wonder what your “illusions” and hope would sound like in connection to the better future you’ve ridiculed. Did you ever think about “what comes next” at all? Or how to actually help achieving it? How to avoid possible chaos and anarchy connected to such change? I did, but you find it utopia-like and naive. For what reason exactly? Did I again rub your fur the wrong way? You admit to know nothing about the communism, yet you are brave enough to claim my statement about it is not accurate. That may be only your opinion, but than again, it’s based on wrong assumption and lack of experience.

          The essence, to solve the riddle and cut it short – being sad and miserable is the feeling behind my thought about most of my friends, ignorant about all intrigues. That does not mean I have only that particular thought in my mind 24/7, right? I believe we can agree about it. That would be logic. By attaching frustration and anger to my statement, which is again taken out of the context, regardless of that fact, means you are only assuming that I demonstrate only one thought and such feelings all the time. Which is not true, in my case. You are right to conclude though, that my feeling of contact with an ignorant 95er is in average miserable and sad. That would be all that can be concluded with certainty about me based on what I’ve actually said, everything else is only your opinion based on wrong assumptions or bad logic, whichever you choose to be an issue here.

          Superiority thinking and hobbies, yet another attempt at analyzing me. Does criticizing me make you feel superior, actually? And then suddenly you pull in communism defining my line of thoughts and many other issues. Is the attack, announced in your disclaimer, your best defense? Are you upset with me for saying something that I shouldn’t have said? What is it exactly that you would like me to say? That I find your initial idea of Mark’s words to ring true for me? I don’t. Period. And I still stick to my statement, that you’ve attached meaning to Mark’s words that only you can understand as such, for whatever reason.

          Then you give me a lesson in logic and reason, where I should read one of my own statements again. And again. What for, exactly? To confirm my belief that you don’t understand what I said with it? Or you assert that I can’t accept people being different, which is my “issue”, according to your words. That would be another major error in your assessment, which again says nothing relevant about the elephant in the room – the point that should have been at least mentioned in your reply. Which is not an attack, but coincidentally full of wrong assumptions, that can be read as some sort of personal analysis. Just which one is it, actually?

          No need to worry about my emotional health, thanks. And please, don’t take any of my statements out the context, I interpret that as conscious attempt of misleading.

          Like

          • steve kelly says:

            Well said, Vexman. Moreover, seeking (verb) is not hobby (noun). More head games for you and Mark. An honor, I suppose.

            Like

          • fm says:

            I agree with steve kelly.
            Seeking is not at all a “hobby” for me.
            Ever since (gradually) waking up, the search for truth defines my live. Besides preventing my children becoming mindless sheep, it is the most important thing. Period.

            Like

  13. fm says:

    But that is the whole problem? Why is it so “miserable” to talk to the 95%? Do you have any illusions or hopes then?

    Look here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppositional_defiant_disorder
    Albeit the worst kind of state propaganda, it contains a small grain of truth. That is, “ODD” is IMHO a individual trait, an ability to resist the pressure of group think, and keep one’s critical thinking ability even under heaviest peer pressure.
    And I believe the absence of this trait in so many people is a result of breeding work, not the natural distribution.

    Like

    • Gaia says:

      Thank you! I think most of us “suffer” from this “disorder”, labeled on us by the authorities, if they got the chance.

      And I agree, the lack of sufficient resistance to “consensus-supported rules” is a big problem. Hence the military, trying to destroy that horrible trait of not (necessarily) agreeing with “the consensus”.

      Or in simple words: “get in line, you fools, and if not, here’s some Risperdal to keep you compliant!”

      Like

      • fm says:

        Paraphrasing the (supposedly) Japanese proverb: “The nail sticking out most will be hammered first.”
        I think there is some kind of negative selection ongoing, for centuries now. One (secondary) purpose of such grand fakeries like LV is detect those people who can look through it, and exterminate them. The legendary “witchunt” might have been such an operation, or at least had such components. Mainstream “history” is one of the biggest lies, BTW.

        Hence the military, …

        It begins much earlier.
        Indoctrination starts as a toddler, either by government sponsored nurseries, or brainwashed parents. At the latest.

        Like

  14. Pingback: Speaking to the majority | Fakeologist.com

  15. Scott C. says:

    Gaia, thank you for so eloquently making the case against the us-vs.-them mentality. It’s something I’m struggling with. I’m aware that I have it, and I’m aware that it is negatively affecting my life. I just quit a job, impulsively, with no back-up job, because I grew so impatient with what I perceived as the idiocy of my co-workers and supervisors. Our petty workaday differences really weren’t worth getting worked up about, but I was compounding it by thinking of them as “sheeple,” people whose minds and intellects were warped by propaganda, etc., etc. Even though I was aware of what I was doing — aware that all my negative thoughts about them were merely pathetic attempts to boost my own ego and sense of rightness — I could not let go of this attitude emotionally, and as a result I behaved in a foolish and self-destructive manner.

    I’ve also been trying to think in less black-and-white terms about the elite forces behind all this dehumanizing propaganda, these pervasive and reality-altering lies. I’ve thought about how, in my own life, I have lied to friends and family and acquaintances because I didn’t think they could handle the truth, or because I thought I knew they would object to my plans or my actions and I didn’t want to hear it, or because I thought they were not smart enough or open-minded enough to understand my intentions, etc., etc. I daresay we’ve all told lies to people we know for reasons like this. The oligarchs may look at the people their lying to in a similar way — except it’s 7-plus BILLION of them, and they come from a long line of families that have enjoyed great success lying to all those people. This doesn’t excuse them for miseducating, poisoning, traumatizing and mind-controlling us into a state of controlled insanity, of course, but it mitigates my hatred of them at least a little bit.

    Also, with regards to the missionary zeal that I’ve certainly felt and acted upon, and that others here clearly have and may or may not struggle against: What would it really accomplish if suddenly everyone in the U.S., or everyone in every developed nation, “woke up” and saw the “truth” of all this deception? What percentage of the population would have anything more useful to contribute to the world conversation than they already do? Than, for that matter, I do? I began “waking up” in earnest about 7 years ago, and while my awareness has enriched my life in some ways, I often feel like I’m just getting crazier and crazier (as my abrupt departure from my job would indicate). As Gaia says, the only useful action to take may be to raise our children with better awareness than we had. I don’t have kids (yet), but even that seems like a daunting and almost cruel task. I think of all the forced immunizations on kids … I wonder how to go about raising kids not to be dependent on personal technology in a world where practically everyone (including me) is … It certainly would be a daunting task, and I don’t know how up to it I would be. So the idea that it’s my job to “wake up” friends, family members, coworkers and acquaintances … well, that’s really just lunacy. In my case, anyway.

    Like

    • Jack33 says:

      I thought it would be easier getting through to my 12 year old daughter whom I assumed, because of her age, would’ve been more open to alternative views but I couldn’t have been more wrong. She wasn’t buying any of it. I guess our children are prapagandized earlier than I originally thought.

      Like

      • Scott C. says:

        I can see how this stuff would be even scarier to a 12-year-old, especially if she’s enrolled in a school instead of being home-schooled. She has to accept and regurgitate propaganda on a daily basis in order to pass her classes. She is surrounded by peers who accept it. The last thing in the world any preadolescent or adolescent wants is to be an outsider, and that’s what accepting “alternative views” would make her. I know a young woman who was convinced by her aunt in grade school that the news is fake and the government perpetuates hoaxes and false flags on its own citizens. She’s a basket case; she’s barely able to function. Her problems go deeper than her aunt’s teachings, of course, but she has prompted me to think about how difficult it would be to raise a child to be “awake” and engage with the world in a healthy, meaningful way.

        Like

        • If you have not, I do suggest you take a look at Ellul’s 1965 book of the same name, “Propaganda.” He is more detailed and breaks the science down into its various elements, one if which is “pre-propaganda.” Kids have to be made a fertile soil for later and more sophisticated propaganda, and so are brought into it at a very young age via schooling, church, entertainment, and social relationships and the resulting groupthink. Once prepared in this manner, more intense applications, such as singing the national anthem at games and military flyovers (which stimulate a sexual response) are more effective. Pre-propaganda is patient and achieves a long-term effect.

          That is as opposed to “agitation propaganda,” which is designed to achieve an immediate effect. It is, says Ellul, a potent weapon, as constant exposure to agitprop destroys the brain due to the constant state of tension it brings about. In essence, the amygdala, or primitive brain, overrides the cerebellum and becomes the primary go-to for reactions to stimuli. Rational thought recedes to become a mere background activity.

          9/11, The Cold War, nuclear terror, and now Las Vegas, are all part of constant and unrelenting agitprop.

          Like

    • Gaia says:

      I think you completely nailed it with this honest response, Scott. Great.

      And Jack33, what is sad is that you cannot even talk to your own daughter about “Vegas”. But why did you send her to such a prison camp (school) in the first place? Why not homeschooling? I think, to succeed in spreading the 5%, the first two things to do are throw away TV/media and do homeschooling instead of putting your blood in such a prison camp.

      And that links back to the title of Mark’s blog post; the two alleged “Columbine shooters” were outcasts, conspiracy theorists. For adults they had McVeigh, Breivik, Tsarnaev and now Paddock, to keep kids “in line” with the mainstream they had those two from Columbine. Spreading the message: “thinking critically about that what is presented as true is dangerous and makes you dangerous”.

      Vexman, I see this is going nowhere. Good luck with your feelings in dealing with the 95%. I hope you’ll eventually take some of my advice seriously.

      Like

  16. Pingback: Don’t be a truth preacher  | Fakeologist.com

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