Home Media The Soap Opera Called Television and Crisis Actors

The Soap Opera Called Television and Crisis Actors

54

melbourne-town-hall-portico-room-1-desktopThe Melbourne Town Hall Portico where press conferences are sometimes held. A press conference was being held at 1.15pm on Friday 20 January 2017, when Dimitrious Gargasoulas started doing donuts nearby in a stolen Holden

by Dee McLachlan

I bumped into a lawyer friend in the coffee shop this morning, and asked a simple question. “How do I get the police to answer a few simple questions on a crime that has been committed?” His answer was simple and blunt. “They don’t have to give you anything.”

It seems strange when the salaries of the police bureaucracy are paid by the tax payer, that they have no obligation to answer any hard questions put by said tax payer.

In other words it is a closed shop. “You get what we give you.”

So how else do you get to the bottom of what happened at an incident?

Media reporting? That will provide very little.

Take the Sydney siege for example. So many questions remain unanswered — because they were never asked. And the mainstream media put out only a narrow view of the event, and that view becomes the official narrative.

Or is it rather that the press are in on the narrative in the first instance?

That seems most definitely the case with 9-11. The MSM created the narrative from which the politicians, the commission, and the masses followed. It is the MSM that also then provided a platform to discredit any questioning of their narrative.

And the same goes for witnesses.

The MSM will only broadcast those witnesses that fit the official narrative.

Why have they not provided airtime to, say, Bobby McIlvaine — regarding the murder of his son in the North Tower?

Isn’t it normal to talk to the bereaved – and Bobby wants to talk. But media won’t interview him as he will destroy the official story. Just one 30-minute serious interview with McIlvaine by a high profile MSM staffer would put doubt in the minds of any believer.

And so, with the MSM controlling the narrative, the alternative voices start speculating.

Where does the truth lie?

I was taken by the clarity of a recent article by Jon Rappoport entitled, “Fake News: Actors, Robots, Androids, Television Creations.” The author of the MATRIX movie series writes about Sandy Hook:

“…It’s about the soap opera called television.”

He describes how some believe the whole incident was faked (a hoax); some believe the killings were real, but that Adam Lanza was a patsy; or that the federal government secretly contracted the killings in order to take guns away. Many think that many of those grieving parents were crisis actors.

Peekay claimed that many in the Melbourne car rampage were crisis actors .

John Rappaort’s Excellent View

There are many YouTube clips that analyse witnesses interviewed on television. Rappaport makes some important points.

“You can look for YouTube interview clips featuring “the people of Sandy Hook”: Robbie Parker, the Sotos family, Sally Cox, H Wayne Carver, Gene Rosen, Kaitlin Roig, etc.

“Their reactions, non-reactions, strange behavior, inexplicable attitudes are stunning.

“First of all, you have to realize that only certain people get on television.”

He goes on to classify the groups of people who did NOT get on television:

  • Grief-stricken parents who were incoherent (which is what you would expect): not interviewed.
  • Angry and outraged parents: not interviewed.
  • Parents who demanded answers from a full investigation, who were not satisfied with the media-controlled story line: not interviewed.
  • Then those parents who refused to be engaged in the media spectacle: refused to be interviewed.

You never see these people.

What you see are those few people that are okay with their tragedy being aired to millions.

As Rappaport says:

“We have interviewees who have never been on television before, but have watched thousands of television interviews. They have a strong tendency to “act like people are supposed to act” when they are put on camera.”

They are filling a role they believe a television-watching-society expects of them — and thus play their grief out accordingly. And it is these few interviews that are used by people to extrapolate what is happening.

As I have said before when commenting on interviews where people have been called crisis actors. They are such bad crisis actors, they must be real. They would never have cut mustard in the casting.

So, again, it is our job to look behind the mainstream media — and see what they are doing to distort the narrative.

As with this latest incident in Melbourne. The police are most likely not going to be forthcoming with details. So maybe we need to interrogate the media. It is about time, we started to investigate them.

As Rappaport says (about Sandy Hook),

“…whatever the true operation that was mounted and carried out there—the role of television is central.

“…They plug into a deep cynicism that underlies the robotic behavior and thought of millions of people… Television magnifies and exacerbates that disconnectedness.”

Most likely that is the real core of the problem. The media control the narrative. They are trying to control our reality. So is anything questioning that fake?

Here is my communication to the Victorian Police Commissioner:

“Sir, please arrange a time for me to interview (on camera) the three drivers of the three silver cars that followed Dimitrious Gargasoulas up Swanston Street.”

 

Photo credit: www.epicure.com.au/
SHARE

54 COMMENTS

        • Mary,
          Last 16 years!
          Try at least from before the last 48 years when Dr. Day said in 1969 that it will be necessary to use terrorism (false flag murder!) to make governments (and society!) comply with the fascist agenda he outlined…….. even in America it may be necessary!!!
          Our fake msm (and puss….y politicians) are aiders and abettors to murder and they love being within the exclusive private club of fascist killer control freaks.
          The proof is that the msm fakes will not report to their sucked in financial contributors even a few of the ACKNOWLEDGED ( ref: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ in the index on front page) government admitted false flag murders, such as operation Gladio in Europe, the Israel murders of the crewman of the USS Liberty etc. the latter still being denied by the ABC via fake Faine in his interview with Malcolm Fraser.
          Shhh, don’t mention that interview to Paul Barry of our paid for ABC media watch program. He wants to appear, other than fake with the hypocrites of media watch and continue the fakery paid for by the program”s victims.

          • Ned, dear, you’ve improved on the spelling of pussy, but you’ve forgotten to list Port Arthur.

            And, recall, there were more than a hundred journo’s right there on the spot in Hobart that day, from around the world yet, thanks to a “conference.” Separate and apart from the surgeon’s conference being held that day in Hobart. Separate and apart from the retreat of the managers of PAHS all 2 hours away in Swansea.

            Maybe it’s not Swansea, but one could look it up by touching the green book in the second column of this website, could one noot, Ned?

          • My Mom in US used to like watching a ‘soap’ every day at 1.30pm. It was called “As the World Turns.” Around 1970. Black and white TV of course. So maybe it’s like that.

  2. Sandy Hook is an interesting phenomena. It was the tipping point of many into the murky world of ‘hoaxes’ because of the weight of narrative and interview anomalies. Anyone who has spent time pouring over all the interviews and news converges knows that the official narrative is bunk an.

    But the double or switch play now seems to be the presence of anomalies proves that the event was actually real (children were killed) because even paid actors wouldn’t do such a bad job.

    Now we have such an interesting dilemma. Believe it was real because it was so bad, or believe it was fake because they were so bad.

    But a few can see the mechanations behind the switch play, especially the utterly stupid suggestion that actors were used. Unless of course the media and authorities crafted the coverage of a real event to make it look fake to a handful of people who have a really good look at it all. Layer pon layer.

    But proving it one way or another is up the tilde individual because it’s that IMPLICATIONS of it being a hoax, fake where the real values lay. What are the implications of it being fake? Follow the ripple effects out. Don’t try and use the plausibility of the ripples to prove or disprove whether a pebble has been dropped in the water or not. Once you KNOW the pebble hit the water… FOLLOW THE RIPPLES

    As for your various dicussions and posts about questions being asked or not being asked at the Lindt Cafe enquiry, I refer you directly back to my first point. With events like sandy Hook a hoax, the Lindt Cafe incident being a hoax, where does that place Media, the Police, the Judiciary, the Government!!!!

    There’s your ripples!!!!! And yet there a still so many more to go

  3. All the best getting a reply from Vic Police. I wouldn’t hold my breath though.
    Peekay has already been intimidated, silenced, and slapped with a safety intervention order in court over the Melbourne incident. I guess that’s what happens when you dare to question the official narrative.

    • I am guessing that Peekay took voluntary part in that whole exercise. I haven’t heard what transpired in the Magistrate’s court on Feb 6, 2017.It seems to have been a suit by the hospital saying he had called too many times to inquire after a patient?

      • As far as I know he’s not allowed to talk about it anymore and has decided to pull his videos on it and lay low. It’s either that or a hefty fine and prison time.
        I believe it was the Australian jewish news site that found light of what he was talking about and reported him.

        • How can they send him to prison? There is no crime to charge him with, as far as i know. Maybe “harassing” the telephone operator? He didn’t get close to the victim as did, say, Monis, by writing allegedly horrible letters to parents of fallen Diggers.

          • If he breaches the order given by the court he can get prison time. Especially if he’s ringing up hospitals again.

          • Puffdragon, exactly what order did the magistrate give Peekay?

            A safety intervention order. If you go to “russianvids” channel on youtube he has a copy of it and also an interview with Peekay after his day in court.

  4. Creating a false scenario or personal profile isn’t exactly hard. All you have to do is leave certain facts out and misrepresent others. It doesn’t take much talent to put ideas in the average unguarded mind either.

  5. In regard to ‘whoever’ controlled the silver commodores and the white vehicle.
    Nothing will be disclosed by ‘whoever’.
    But: counsel for the victims at the Coroner’s inquest clearly would want to know their role in their presence etc. It could lead to some finding on how the deaths could have bee avoided.
    In the Monis matter, from recollection the NSW DPP strenously resisted details being revealed to the Coroner as to the granting of bail to Monis. Not sure what the result was.
    Now we may suspect that ‘whoever’ with separate representation may resist exposing details of the donut operation and what followed.
    Btw who shot Jimmy, where did the shooter come from?
    Anyway, putting that aside, if there is a sure sign of a smelly fish, then any attempt to not disclose to the Coroner and to the public the details of the silver brigade in the operation will tell lots.
    If Bryant had a coroner’s inquest we may not now be lumbered with conspiracy thoughts 21 years later.
    We are now more educated and fully aware of possible skullduggery with these type of events from history and must demand full disclosure at the outset.
    So I suppose we must be patient.
    The Lindt cafe decision is pending soon.
    One would hope that the Coroner has the answers. Hopefully, how Monis managed to be granted bail is the first answer. Similarly with Jimmy.
    Recall the smh article I mentioned in comments to a earlier article; the prosecutor was told something. By whom and what?

  6. Dee, you mention that a high profile msm person will not interview Bobby McIlvaine who lost his son in a tower on 911.
    The internet reports on 911 have him consistently addressing on the subject and wanting answers.
    As examples; what about the ABC Faine interviewing him? No doubt Faine will claim that it would be offensive to the victims, as he alleged abainst Kevin Bracken on or about 20th October 2010, supported by that now Turnbul Minister, Josh Frydenberg in question time in Parliament at that time. Talk about fakes, Barry you have them right before you on our ABC.
    What is Mike Willisee doing these days? He may wish to follow his in depth interview with Avery on the Bryant representation.
    Where are the msm producers? Why are they ignoring stories with saucy informative interviews?
    Then there is all the staff at the ABC media watch taxpayer funded program. What about it Paul? Try it, be a cat.
    Alright Paul, leave it to lovely Leigh on the 7.30 report.
    What a joke our ABC and the msm is.

      • At 39 minutes he says he was thrown into the paddy wagon. I don’t get it. This is not a criminal case. It is a request by the plaintiff (who is that?) for a “personal protection Intervention order.”

        He says he agreed to the terms and was told by the judge that if he breaks the terms he could get a fine of $29,000 and be sent to prison. I assume that means for contempt of court, not for “speaking out about the Boston Marathon” or whatever.

        Speaking out is NOT a crime, and contempt of court is not technically a crime either. (It’s an extension of a civil action.) Please correct me if I’m wrong.

        • So what, exactly, is a“personal protection Intervention order.” ? If its just a euphemism for a VRO surely it’s a branch of criminal law? My understanding is that when the State gets involved in any sort of dispute in such a way it’s classified as being a criminal matter.

          • Oh, Berry, I hope u r wrong that when a state gets involved it is a criminal matter. What if you were about to put up a tall fence between your property and mine without my permission and I get an injunction to stop you?

            The VRO Violence Restraining Order is, as far as I know, an injunction — it enjoins the person from coming near me. (Just as I may try to enjoin you from building that fence).

            If some lawyer reading this can tell me how a paddy wagon came into the Peekay story i will be gald to eat my words.

          • My understanding is that an application for mandatory injunction can’t be determined unless the other party’s been given the opportunity to defend it’s position.

            As VROs effectively render a party guilty till proven innocent they’re an affront to the entire concept of criminal justice

          • Berry, I think Peekay said he did have that opportunity. He went to the court, asked a Legal Aid lady for help. She told him one option was to “accept the terms.” I don’t know if she told him any other option, nor do we know if the plaintiff was the hospital.

            He says he had to accept because of his family’s needs. I feel that he is an insider and is trying to convey to his huge audience that the game is up now and we must submit.

            Berry, like you I am not much of a submitter, but after hearing his little lecture I did feel somewhat swayed to the idea. “OK the Gestapo has now arrived and I prefer to shut up rather than to get knocked in the teeth” type thing.

            Eeks!

            I hope he will post on his website the entire correspondence. I also wish he would clearly state how he rode in a paddy wagon. Of course I may be wrong, maybe he was charged with a crime. But if so, he would get an arraignment and later a trial, not be asked “to accept the terms proposed by the other side.”

            For the record, my Grade Point Average in law school was:
            [REDACTED].

        • If those file links don’t work, you can see the news report video missing frames at 6 minutes 40 seconds in the Russianvids youtube film ‘Peekay Silenced Over Melbourne’, video creator either missed it accidently or not.

          After you see the camera pan quickly to the right following the action, you might need to step frames one by one to notice. The maroon car suddenly pops into view further down the street.

        • Dee Dee, look at this large goup pf crisis actors. Zoom in on the one with no shoe.
          A guy in the back row with glasses — I saw him at the Marathon!!!! At 2.32 they are all pointing in the same direction. What are they pointing at?
          .

          • Anyone want to comment about this editded MSM video that is now gone from the internet? Or are my comments being hidden from public view?

  9. Dee, I am referring to the “Russianvids” video called “Peekay truth silenced.”

    I am neutral on the subject as to whether there were any genuine deaths or injuries. In fact I am going to wait a while before taking any further thought.

    But just with respect to that vid, I am asking you to comment as a film-maker. Does that vid satisfactorily tell us that Jimmy did NOT do harm?

    • ABSOLUTELY NOT – Russianvids makes so many assumptions, as does Peekay. They are INFECTING an honest investigation into what happened.

      The claim of crisis actors would require hundreds of actors to participate along the whole street — and include many people passing by willing (and trained) to lie about the whole thing. Remember this street is filled with random Friday lunchtime CBD workers all emerging for lunchtime. Thousands of people.
      And the trail of water along the pavement — possibly from a radiator — that would require a stand by props-man. In my humble opinion, their assumptions are nonsense.

      What really happened? We do not know. CCTV will have to emerge (from the Jeweler for example). Cop cars might have caused harm in trying to stop the car – and that is why it might be kept under wraps at this stage.

      But as an example – the video below is raw and shows more. The camera person stops and casually asks a couple of guys what happened? If they are crisis actors, then lay out the red carpet at the Oscars. (Interestingly the person filming this seems to be affected by what he has seen at the end. You couldn’t script this stuff)

      As I said you only need one player to create this – Gargasoulas.

      • All you need for an event like this is one person high up to not give an order because something “needs to happen”. That said I’m tending to lean towards incompetence/over-cautiousness on the part of the Police as the best explanation, knowing how things are these days in Melbourne, particularly with the voluminous shadow of Christine “I have to eat” Nixon hanging over the Force, making them fearful of anything more than causing a broken nail.

      • I agree Peekay should not make derogaroty comments about various individuals at an event who appear to be injured and hurt. Making such derogarty comments does not in any way add any ‘convincing-ality’ to the basic tenants of his argements.

        However peekays analysis of the event is very good, He was the only one to pick out photographers who just happend to be in the right place at the right time just like the photographers purched on the top of buildings during the Charlie Hebdo event.

        He’s also been very spot on with picking out the lady runner in green at the Boston Marathon as a likely bomber with the ole bloke following her as her back up man.

        Pekay has also been spot on with his anaysis of the so called Nice truck attack where the driving of the truck down beachside road and the scattering of the people are two seperate events. He is also correct with all the evidence being removed from all street security cameras just like they were removed from the Penatgon and nearby service station.

        Somebody should suggest to Peekay there is likely to be an ever growing number of people who would like to see him fall silent.

        • Kevin,
          Lots of people pointed out there were photographers at play… a convenient press conference, and NEWSCorp reporter who photographed the donuts.

          It is great to have people pointing out what might be happening — but he often does it in such a manner — that I have to wonder what his real purpose is.

          • Peekay is a good for a laugh, and I do enjoy some of his rants, but you cannot take him seriously when he say’s he is an investigative reporter and a private detective. He has pointed out some good things but his approach and execution a far from being diplomatic. I did get caught up in the Peekay saga at the time but stepping back I can now see the cracks appearing in his story.

            Even Australian Brendon O’Connell who sought asylum in Iran reached out to him on Youtube to talk and offer help when his court case came up.
            I asked Brendon if Peekay ever got in touch with him, and what he says in the last line of his quote, I find interesting. This is Brendon’s reply:

            ” No. Never. Someone said he was too scared to rock the boat – he might get the Magistrate slapping him on the hand even harder. To be fair, if you don’t know the law it can be very intimidating but he is at the lowest rung. He needs to speak with someone and the police will back off – NO ONE knows what he is even charged with – does that not make people suspicious?”.

  10. 37 people were taken to hospital as a result of the Melbourne Gargasoulas rampage. Police have taken over 400 witness statements, and will be taking a further 400.

  12. anyone care to explain how the car had a tow bar at the time of the doughnuts but when he was apprehended it was missing from said car? i don’t believe it was knocked off as i have seen cars that have been cut in halve by impact and still have the tow bar attached. this along with the dented roof leads me to speculate that this was a different car to the one doing doughnuts at the start of this “incident”. Also how convenient to have 3 silver unmarked cop cars right on the scene, was there a operation going on at the time cohencidently?

    on a side note, for the only time in its history, the tas gov bought a high capacity morgue transport vehicle 6 months before the port arthur “incident” and then proceeded to sell it 6 months later, just good timing i guess….hmmmmmm

  13. i am so glad i found some sensible Aussies aware of whats in the pipe…i think theres a massive strategy of tension being tweaked here, peekay has a lot of followers, so he may be considered worthy to lead some of them somewhere.. . .I heard amongst his truth telling some really offensive, racist and totally cruel comments, so maybe someone really is trying to shut him up, feels to me more like he is being used to make a lot of good citizen journalists look like uncaring monsters (even IF we assume nobody really died and they were all crap actors)

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.