This, exactly. Having contingencies upon contingencies is a great idea, like the ability to lead to the woods with your tent if an army of trained soldiers is overrunning your area with ease, and there's no hope. but, otherwise, there is no force on earth that can cut through even some of the small towns in western America, where there is 1-3 guns per household. 400,000 US troops couldn't hold down Iraq, and the number of guns per capita there looks like a daycare compared to America. There are more than 400,000 gun owners within 50 miles of me, and on my way to the gym every day I see no less than three or four trucks with "come and take them" type stickers, and not from teenagers. Make fun of that shit if you want, but those kind of people, who work hard labor jobs every day and have families, people are not posting outwardly hostile stickers to be funny. Project your (not you jalapeño, and not you Mrexreturns, but just the general "you", whoever might read this) pussy push overvalues in your lack of resolve all you want, but, not everybody is just an Internet soy boy e-thot idiot. As for u/Mrexreturns, I think the only reason you project your fear is because you're not here in the US and you want to feel like this is unstoppable everywhere so that you don't have to face the reality, which is that you have a choice, get here before it goes down or stay and regret it later. You know the writing is on the wall, and you know that the only place that has a chance to come out on top is the US. Stop playing games and just get here.
Aside from the fact that there were many false flag posts about this "shooting", as others pointed out, I just don't think it warrants as much attention, in terms of false flag analysis. It wasn't so unrealistic and ridiculous, as some others. Compare this to a scenario where there is no video or physical evidence of any kind that the public gets to see, but we are expected to believe that 26 children were massacred, with a 100% shot:fatality rate, by a scrawny nerd with no training (whose brother happens to look exactly like him), or that some gamblers guy got angry because he wasn't getting proper VIP treatment at his casino, so he went upstairs to his suite and used, for some reason, 8 different copies of basically the same gun, which he brought with him from another state, just to shoot down into a concert taking place below, or that some Muslim ran into a homo nightclub and killed like 50 people in minutes, or that some psychotic teenager went into his high school with a gun and killed a bunch of people, meanwhile multiple witnesses say that they saw people with helmets and body armor carrying guns during the shooting, and at least two witnesses say they were talking with the supposed shooter while walking downstairs with him while the shooting was still going on, etc., and multiple students stated that they witnessed what appeared to be bodies being dragged out of a room into the hallway during the shooting, by guys wearing helmets.
Most of these big "shootings" just have so much about them that is automatically suspect that it's impossible not to dig into them deeper. This situation is pretty basic, by comparison; somebody supposedly goes into a school and kills just a few people and then is killed. Not to mention, the only thing really suspicious that I've seen so far is the shoes, and, as I mentioned in the post that I made about them, while there is some weird digital anomaly going on, the shoes in the hallway footage are definitely not the puma shoes that others have been claiming. Assuming there is a reasonable explanation for the digital anomalies, and assuming there is some valid explanation for why the alarm system was apparently going off immediately upon her entering of the school (this one seems obvious, somebody in the office heard the gunshots and put the alarm), then it's quite possible that this was just an actual shooting. The numbers are realistic (you can't just go into a lockdown place and slaughter hundreds of people instantly).
I had an interesting thought this morning. I was thinking about how, if Trump was working with them to help bring down conservatives. We already know he is not a true conservative, despite the fact there seems to be varying factions within the cabal and some are against him, but I'm wondering if it's even worse, that he is as bad as Liz Cheney, etc. But, imagine a scenario where Trump uses DeSantis to protect him from extradition, and creates a fiasco for DeSantis while also making himself look like an asshole (versus just going to New York to get arrested and making the DA look like an ass), and, in a single moment, destroying Trump's and DeSantis's chances of a 2024 election, while also riling up the most extreme among us, just enough to get a bunch of people arrested, but not enough to actually create real change. Thinking about this like January 6, part 2, bigtime edition.
Absolutely. I think the best defense is to stay away from all of it. I work in the tech industry and I've managed to avoid using and/or supporting most of the things that I am vehemently opposed to. Everybody in this industry thinks they need to be into everything, in order to stay relevant, but they don't realize that, in their vain attempts to stay relevant, they are slowly rendering themselves obsolete.
Interesting, I didn't realize that kind of thing happened over at 4Chan.
BTW, pertaining the "research", I agree, that is a very strange phenomenon, even most of the popular YouTube personalities, in the prepper and/or conspiracy genre, talk about having done research, and I imagine their version of research is exactly the same.
On the contrary... I do think that "research" can be achieved via a set of reasoning skills, rather than a specific set of activities and/or inputs. For example, a priori research might mean simply taking whatever corroborating information you can glean from various sources (all of whom may be simply regurgitating secondhand a posteriori information from the same source), and coming to novel conclusions based on logic. Because each of the sources will have a different understanding of the source information, developed in the abstractions they've built up over the years, in their reticular activating system (the map is not the territory), your own logic system might be able to the still a more correct truth than what can be gleaned from the original source.
An example of this can be described with regards to the Kyle Rittenhouse self-defense shooting:
Original Research (A Posteriori)
If you had access to every camera angle at the highest resolution available from the original sources, and you were being objective about what you saw, and you had decent spatial reasoning capabilities, as well as a pretty good understanding of the relevant self-defense legislation and case law, you would probably come to the conclusion that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self-defense, as commonly defined by courts in the US. This would be an example of actual, original research.
Brainwashing
If, instead, you watched YouTube commentators analyze and comment on the shooting, and you came to your conclusion based on those commentators and the selected clips they played, you would likely determine whether or not Kyle acted in self-defense based on your bias. For example, if you watched The Young Turks, you would likely come away thinking Kyle Rittenhouse was guilty, while, if you watched donut operator, you would likely come away thinking Kyle Rittenhouse was not guilty. This would be an example of basically not doing any actual research or thinking.
Secondary Research (A Priori)
The third scenario, which I'm proposing adds value, involves a bit of both of the above, the former (watching original footage) for the purposes of being able to fact check statements and ideas, and the latter for the purpose of introducing yourself to ideas you wouldn't have, otherwise, come to know (relevant case law, things you may not know about, such as "stand your ground", etc.). Obviously, if you're not very diligent about your understanding of the original footage and/or the analyses that you watch, then, at best, your interpretation is subject to the same shortcomings that you would expect in a "byzantine generals problem" scenario. But if this is what you do, you quote research" by consuming information in thinking critically about the source and the arguments, I think that may well provide just as much, or more, value when compared to only original research.
One might be tempted to leave that a posteriori information (e.g., viewing the original video) is also necessary for this mode of research, but the court system proves that second hand accounts can be just as valuable. Secondarily, once you've established a source that you can trust, or in which you distrust, some trusted information can be gleaned purely from secondhand accounts. For example, if CNN says something is definitively true and seems to be pressing the point and trying to convince the viewer, one can be assured that the inverse of this information is likely true, or at the very least, the information is suspect. Simply using that reasoning, while watching CNN, can, in fact, introduce new, a priori information to your mind.
Yeah I could see a combination of what you're describing and also I could see those same social media avenues being used for a bit of a fusion between what I'm describing and what you're describing (like near-mind-control level signaling over relatively open social media channels, based on psychographic analysis, convincing people to do that kind of chaos).
Exactly man, I just made a full post about this to get more attention on it also:
I agree. However, and I haven't commented on this yet, but last night I spent quite a bit of time analyzing the video further, including taking screenshots and straightening them out to do side-by-side comparisons, and I actually think something even weirder might be happening.
So, while I was looking at the pictures next to each other, the screenshots I took, I noticed that it does in fact look like the same shoe (the flame one) in both cases (the footage that comes right after the initial hallway footage, where there is some terra-cotta colored tile, gives a clearer view). But this is where it gets weird. In most frames there appears to be some kind of artifact on the shoes that is unnatural, including an area that is entirely rectangular that overlaps the rubber outer sole. It's almost as if somebody intentionally made the security footage appear to be a different shoe by modifying the video, which is exactly the kind of nonsense that we saw after 9/11, things that appear to have been inserted into the evidence to send "conspiracy theorists" on a goose-chase.
Here are some screenshots I took:
- https://files.catbox.moe/g2lz4f.jpeg
- https://files.catbox.moe/w3vyq3.jpeg
- https://files.catbox.moe/e4e35g.jpeg
The first shot shows the flame shoes in the shooting scene, but the second shot shows an example of that rectangular area that you can see overlapping the outer rubber sole. I understand video artifacts can come from compression algorithms, etc., but this artifact is too convenient. The artifact seems like somebody added a rectangular white area and then it dipped too low when she was stepping down, like her foot stopped but the rectangle continued for another centimeter (like the nose cone of the airplane coming out the other side of the building, re: 9/11). What's even stranger is that you can see what appears to be a drop shadow below the rectangle. There isn't any object that would be causing this drop shadow in either of the shoe models shown in the OP. It's like a digital object was dragged in place and actually had a shadow.
I don't know what to think exactly, but I definitely don't think that the shoe we are seeing here is the Puma shoe.
1080p Police Activity, including both clips:
Here's a 1080p of both vids:
Skip to 1:00 and 8:10.
I zoomed and scrolled back and forth through each footage, numerous times, and I think there is little chance that these are the same shoes. The soles in the hallway footage taper toward the back, while the soles in the shooting scene are mostly flat, while tapering slightly in the front. The hallway shows some kind of weird lace situation (like lace free shoes or something), while the shooting scene shows a narrow white horizontal-ish stripe on the sides and normal laces.
I definitely think that could be the case (catastrophe/flood). There's quite a bit of evidence supporting some kind of catastrophic "mud flood" scenario, but it's hard to pinpoint the timeframe or how widespread it was. I'm just having a hard time imagining a scenario where such a large landmass could move it so much in such a short period of time. It seems more likely that they just made up map details, cartographer sitting in his quarters the whole time with free license to invent an entire place so that they can go get some Mayan punini and get paid when they get home.
About 80% of the way through he mentions a prediction, which is that the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company will be blown up by the US - I feel like this is going to be another one we look back at and say, "Harry Vox predicted this".
it's a good system
Until either an EMP happens, or the worlds Internet is broken apart into regions, because of war; then, there will be disjointed wallets in different regions, and each region will adopt its own protocols, etc.
The Miami area story (Nikolas Cruz). it's impossible to find most of the original videos of students talking to reporters out in front of the school now, but every one of the things I mentioned or things that those students said during interviews. I think there are still a couple of the videos out there that can be found, but most everything was scrubbed during the great purging of YouTube.