James Tracy helps establish new “paranoid style,” writes cultural critic

Emily Elizabeth Brown
The New Inquiry

What crisis actor conspiracy theorists believe to be fake implies a much more generous view of the real

During the Sandy Hook shooting, a 69 year-old retired psychologist named Gene Rosen opened his home to six terrified children immediately after the massacre. A month later, Salon magazine published an article on the kind neighbor and his continued harassment by conspiracy theorists. Members of a forum hosted on David Icke’s website (the former broadcaster who birthed the iconic “reptilian conspiracy theory”), had mixed reactions. “Some conspiracy maniacs genuinely believe that they can treat anyone as pawns on the basis that they ‘see the big picture,’” wrote one member. “He is an actor,” wrote another member. “And not a very good one at that.”

Teenaged children in Florida “play dead” in an active shooter drill at their school. image credit: Robert Kuzina

The idea of “crisis actors” rose to popularity within conspiracy theory circles after the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting on December 14, 2012. The idea appears to have originated in a post by Dr. James Tracy on his website memoryholeblog.org, “a forum for news, criticism and commentary on sociopolitical issues and phenomena overlooked or misreported by mainstream media.” In “The Sandy Hook Massacre: Unanswered Questions and Missing Information”—written ten days after the Sandy Hook shooting—Tracy voices his suspicions about the official narrative, specifically focusing on the “bizarre performance” of medical examiner H. Wayne Carver.

Tracy compares Carver’s “apprehensive and uncertain” behavior at a December 15 press conference to his public reputation of being “extremely self-assured” with a “swaggering presence in Connecticut state administration.” His demeanor at the conference, and apparent uncertainty when speaking about certain details of the shooting (the shooting that, at this point, only happened one day ago) are evidence, for Tracy, that the H. Wayne Carver at the podium of the press conference is not the same H. Wayne Carver who made himself known as the Connecticut chief state medical examiner.

It is true that professional actors are sometimes hired to simulate disasters; their purpose is to help large organizations run through emergency response drills in preparation for possible catastrophic events. In conspiracy theory world, crisis actors are stans and stand-ins employed by the government to carry out affective labor during false flag operations. Websites claim that the Sandy Hook shooting, along with virtually every major tragedy involving human beings on American soil since 9/11, was a false flag drill that the government decided to take live.

Tracy does not claim to have discovered the existence of crisis actors, but his status as professor did give the theory some publicity as well as the appearance of legitimacy. He is careful not to say directly that he believes the shootings never took place. He does, however, derisively mention the “alleged father” of one of the victims, whose televised reactions he calls “unusual and apparently contrived.” As his theory gained traction he began giving interviews with outlets like Infowars in which he claims that “something” did occur at Sandy Hook: children were actually killed, he says. The post received over 1,000 comments in a little over a month.

In an interview, the political scientist Michael Barkun explained that conspiracy theorists try to make sense of a confusing world by “dividing the world sharply between the forces of light and the forces of darkness.” By imagining the evil forces as plants in the general public—the people with whom we’re supposed to sympathize—crisis actor believers erase the lines between good and evil that are usually clearly defined in conspiracy theories. There are no clear lines to separate the people who are ‘in on it’ and the people who aren’t.

An oft-repeated psychological explanation is that conspiracy theories arise as a reaction of disbelief in the face of a tragedy. It is (arguably) more reassuring to believe that a tragedy like Sandy Hook was staged by the government, instead of trying to make sense of the narrative in which somebody decided to walk into an elementary school and shoot 20 children. Then nobody would have died; there was no horrific act of violence. From this perspective, evil is not perpetrated by ordinary people, and the people the government wants us to think are evil are really harmless puppets. The crisis actor conspiracy theory exists in a worldview that is both paranoid and idealistic. Since crisis actor theorists maintain that these acts couldn’t have been carried out by people of their own accord, their view of the common man is much more positive than most people’s. To the believer, evil is primarily created by tangible, external forces. This combination of idealism and paranoia disrupts the real world in a way that other conspiracy theories don’t.

Unlike the typical 9/11 truther, who may hold that the whole event was a hoax but will keep their anger directed at the government, the crisis actor theorist directs their anger and disbelief at the victim. The government is acknowledged as the mastermind, but in the classic conspiracy trope of Us versus Them, each new tragedy brings forth new actors, and nobody is sure which of Them lives among Us.

While James Tracy did not outright dismiss the notion that an actual shooting occurred at Sandy Hook, that didn’t stop others from accusing its victims of being actors. The Facebook page “Crisis Actors and the News,” currently at 1,628 likes, posted a picture of a brown haired boy with blue eyes next to a picture of another brown haired boy with blue eyes, the implication being that these images both depict Dylan Hockley, killed in Sandy Hook. “Looks like Dylan is still alive,” the caption sneers. “The media won’t explain anomalies like the above pic.”

Most accusations made by crisis actor conspiracy theorists are based on the assumption that there is a correct way to react in a crisis. In searching for and collecting evidence of preferred or alternative narratives, the conspiracy theory subculture doesn’t greatly differ from fandom. Crisis actor theorists analyze their subjects down to the most minute details—the way they shift their eyes, the way they pause before answering certain questions—and use their findings to support whatever theories they have invented about their object of focus. Both communities view their inside knowledge as a form of status, and derisively scoff at the masses for not having the capacity to see what they do. “Its so obvious how this was staged. it’s so fucked up. everything about this interview is bizarre,” insists a member of Reddit’s conspiracy subreddit: “The shitty crisis actor, the men in black dudes making sure the script is followed, and the spineless reporter who let’s himself be dragged around like a little bitch.”

A sense of community is important to a conspiracy theorist. Without the community of believers, the theory loses its reality; only the most virtuosic conspiracy theorists can maintain their intricacies and weight on their own. New networks have brought about new ways for conspiracy theorists to connect to each other; after message boards fell out of popularity, many people moved on to Facebook, where there are hundreds of conspiracy theory groups with thousands of members. The move to Facebook makes learning about and spreading conspiracy theories even easier. Posts by conspiracy group members appear on your newsfeed instantly, sandwiched between mundane posts from your Facebook friends. Reading about conspiracy theories becomes integrated into your daily routine. It also ended the exclusivity of discussion forums, and now, nobody needs to search for a secluded place to discuss their conspiracy theory of choice. Instead, anyone with a Facebook account can stumble upon group discussions that were previously limited to the fringes.

But for all the solidarity a shared belief in the malevolent world can bring, the crisis actor subculture suffers the same kinds of internal drama found in every online community. Ed Chiarini of WellAware1.com is one of the more radical and controversial proponents of the crisis actor theory. On his website and YouTube account, dallasgoldbug, you will find hundreds of graphics and videos that illustrate how two different famous people who share vaguely similar facial features (one example from his website is Ted Bundy and Bryan Cranston) are actually played by a different third person, an actor. Sometimes the same actor might play multiple celebrities and hold a gig as a crisis actor on the side. Chiarini claims to be able to demonstrate this by using “ear biometrics.” Ear biometrics is a legitimate, scientifically recognized method of identification, but Chiarini’s ear biometrics system involves juxtaposing two different photographs of ears and declaring these as proof that both ears belong to the same person, even if the ears look completely different.

Ed’s wacky universe is too much for many crisis actor theorists, who are too much for many other conspiracy theorists. If nothing else, posting a link to WellAware1 in a conspiracy theory group demonstrates to other members that you’re fairly new to the game. Someone else, a more enlightened member, might respond with a link to a video about why Ed Chiarini is a fraud, and they might get a reply similar to one I saw recently: “Hey Man Thanks For Doing and Saying What Millions of Intelligent People all over Earth have been Yelling at the top of their lungs for quite some time—DallasGoldCrap is a DOUCHE Period.”

The Facebook group “HERE IT COMES !!!!!” has 7,824 members. In the sidebar, they describe themselves as “a positive place where free speech lives.” Everyone in the group is regarded as part of a family, they say, and there is no official membership hierarchy. One regular poster shares a video of a baby playing guitar. Another member shares a video claiming to demonstrate how the Boston Marathon bombing was a hoax staged by crisis actors. HERE IT COMES !!!!! is the kind of Facebook group that you can imagine an elderly relative somehow finding their way into.

Communities of crisis actor believers are necessarily insular, even more so than other conspiracy theory communities. Since their enemy appears to be the so-called ordinary person, the community is crucial in order to provide reassurance that not everybody is in on it. Richard Hofstadter, in his 1964 essay The Paranoid Style in American Politics, asserts that the enemy “seems to be on many counts a projection of the self.” The conspiracy theorist, says Hofstadter, projects both the positive and negative aspects of the self. Crisis actor believers are a very literal manifestation of Hofstadter’s claim. For them, the enemy is the self, or at least the parts that are capable of committing evil.

Crisis actor conspiracy theorists are allowed to attribute every part of someone’s behavior to “acting,” which sends the conspiracy theory into a validation loop. A person acts too sad? This one’s a good actor, notes the conspiracy theorist sarcastically. A person doesn’t act sad enough? The cracks in the government’s plan are starting to show. On a plane of existence in which crisis actors are real, all these points are irrefutable.

The power dynamics essential to maintaining the crisis actor theory are what separate it from other conspiracy theories. The crisis actor theory focuses on the smallest details of the people with the least power. When the effects of their beliefs are felt in the real world, in behavior like harassing the alleged actors, it’s easily justified because the world of the crisis actor is one in which nobody has agency. They don’t see themselves as harming any real people. To them, the people they harass aren’t even people at all, only nefarious government stooges. This is also why they taunt nonbelievers using the same mocking tone as playground bullies: they have it all figured out, and you don’t.

Leave a Reply

117 thought on ““Crisis Actor Conspiracy Theory”: Security Theater”
  1. I struggled to read this psychobabble. When facts contradict the narrative, it raises obvious questions in the thinking person. Appararently , it can all be explained away as a subconscious attempt to ‘deal’ with tragedy. Lessons in PR (aka propaganda), marketing theory and practice, and the evolution of technology might help this ‘author’ with her armchair psychologist POV.

  2. An oft-repeated psychological explanation is that those, such as a writer named Emily Elizabeth Brown, who deride conspiracy theories arise as a reaction of what psychologists identify as denial in the face of reality. It is (arguably) more reassuring to believe that governments do not conspire to carry out false flags like the well-documented Operation Northwoods of the Kennedy Administration or the more recent Watergate conspiracy of the Nixon Administration, instead of having to shed their determined childlike innocence, which psychologists would call determined naivete or outright denial of human beings’ disposition toward deception. And so, the deniers like Emily Elizabeth Brown could remain cocooned in their comfortable worldview — a world of rainbows and unicorns where there are no conspiracies except in the minds of “conspiracy theorists,” and where human nature and government are unfailingly benign and well-intentioned, the only exceptions being those malignant “conspiracy theorists” who would dare question the integrity of persons holding and wielding great power over the little people. From this perspective, evil is not perpetrated by government — notwithstanding the record of the hundreds of millions killed by Nazi and Communist regimes in the 20th century. From this peculiar perspective held by deniers like Emily Elizabeth Brown, evil is perpetrated by those “conspiracy theorists” who would dare imagine that governments could actually plan and undertake conspiracies. To the believer, such as Emily Elizabeth Brown, evil is primarily created by powerless “conspiracy theorists” who actually dare to disrupt the believer’s fantasy of the real world.

    See, I can write armchair dime-store psycho-analysis as good as Emily Elizabeth Brown!

    1. Unfortunately, you could not keep yourself from bringing the “Nazis” into the discussion, a subject you obviously know nothing about, beyond the post WWII propaganda fed to the public. The German people were not “controlled” by the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei abbreviated NSDAP, they adored Hitler and the Party, which fulfilled every hope for the future of Germany, including ending the Depression, until the War was started in March 24, 1933 by those people who decided to boycott all of German goods internationally (which is, in fact, an act of war).


      You also fail to recognize the millions of civilians killed by Allied bombers and soldiers as well as the murder of 1.7 unarmed, captured German soldiers via starvation, exposure and disease by Eisenhower himself.


      How do these facts affect your world view?

      Simply knowing that a handful of incidents in recent history are frauds and hoaxes does not cleanse anyone of false beLIEf, until all hoaxes and frauds throughout history are discovered and understood, and removed from influencing the public mind. There are a myriad of them.

      1. Anne, a quick look at their archives shows it to be anti-man, leftist, and angry. It is down on fathers, men in general, even female “consent” is pronounced to be invalid because men (and capitalism) cause relationships to be imbalanced in favor of men (of course).

        About the only constant in the old issues is anger. I’m pretty sure that the editor of this rag when asked on a form “sex?”, answered “yeah, but there’s a lot of resentment”.

        1. lophatt, the illustrations above each editorial board member’s name caught my attention. Directly in your face psyop. There are 26 names and illustrations – there is that number again.

        2. Yes, it definitely looks contrived. Good catch on the number. The “old editions” consist of one short “article” apiece.

          Even Wolfgang H., in a recent rant posted to Rense, mentioned the Government’s announcement that they would be doing psychological operations against the citizenry.

          Apparently this is now a “growth industry”.

      1. THAT, “Maryaha”, is the Visual Numeric rendering of E.E. Brown’s countdown into the world of Croissant-fueld Anesthesia she dwells in. I think that it is peculiarly suspicious that E.E. Brown was careful to avoid any personal photographs. I NEED new disgusting harridan pics for my Halloween decorations. I think she is conspiring to deprive children of the joy of her horrible, hideous visage as an obstacle to “Treats”. Mean Bitch.

      2. You can’t ask ’em over at the New Inquiry. They don’t have a comment section.

        Convenient for them. I’d like to know who the money backers are for that site.

        1. Hmmm? ADL, JDL, Socialist Worker’s Party…., Gloria Steinem Foundation….., Victims of Chromosome Deficiency…, their archives make for some pretty depressing reading.

          In fact, the articles all sound like they were written by E.E.Brown. But, of course, that can’t be. I didn’t know that depression was contagious.

    1. Now THAT’s a poser. Let’s see, hmmmm, descending whole numbers from fifteen, and then, ASCENDING numbers from sixteen! Let me think, I’ve got it. “Men suck and so does capitalism”.

      1. “Men suck and so does capitalism”.

        Heh. You cracked the code!

        I read some those articles at the New Inquiry like you did, and I totally agree with you that the writing is disconcertingly uniform among the writers.

        Another thing is that the New Inquiry website itself is so sophisticated, way over the head of the writing. Did you notice this? It’s like the whole thing was art-directed by Madison Ave, mounted whole-hog at the beginning, and filled with propaganda.

        It doesn’t seem like the organic product of “struggling New York writers eager to engage the world by starting a website,” which is the way it’s pitched in the press.

        1. Toni, exactly. It’s like “The New Yorker” meets “Avantgarde”. It has that yuppie-chic quality.

          Probably got a contract with DHS.

    2. Your analysis of doublespeak and psychobabble above is spot on. This number sequence, in my opinion, reeks of the deceptive use of depth psychology. It suggests that we understand the concepts indicated by “numbers”, but there is something disordered in our thinking process that results in a subtle by erroneous view. It is like math, in that, as proficient as a person could be one wrong number in a formula and the result is erroneous. It suggests that the government concedes there are clever conspiracy theorists (with a majority of the population believing in government conspiracies like JFK), however, there is something wrong with this line of thinking. An elite will internalize the lies, but the rest of us who are awakweand don’t go along with the program- political rehabilitation, eugenics?

      1. PeaceFrog,
        I love this.

        As you observe, the graphic means to say, “there is something disordered in our thinking process.” But it says it to our unconscious.


      2. Yeah, its self-congratulatory. They (or the designer’s intent) is to say “we, the intelligent ones, get it when others do not”. In other words, it’s an artsy Huffington Post.

        Those who frequent “New Inquiry” are “Super Kool Kidz”. My guess is that this is a totally concocted psyop done under contract. The graphics department is professional. The “writers” not so much.

    1. Maryaha, that question will be ignored. By Ms. Brown and the entire MSM. ( said in a computerized voice with the sarcastic tone of a schoolyard bully)

      1. And let’s not forget Wolfgang Halbig. He is still waiting for answers to a list of simple questions that the MSM and Sandy Hook officials have ignored also.

  3. I read about every other paragraph in the above article. “Emily” is completely off track. She is obviously clueless in understanding how the government with the willing partnership of the media can more easily than not, pull off anything it wants and make it appear real.

      1. Brown abides by the same omissions as others of her ilk. She conveniently “forgets” to mention the myriad of acute foci that point to skulduggery in these false flag events. Just like the twit Keith Johnson. He visited this website over and over some while ago on a particular cluster of issues, then disappeared, his job apparently done.
        The most obvious of these creatures of the night appeared when the schlub from New London, Conn. appeared with his trillion dollar lawsuit against media and other agencies of mendacity. Once done with these tasks, he was “arrested on a DUI compounded with an “attack” on the police and a stint in the hoosegow for his bad behavior”. I have not heard of his whereabouts at present, has anyone any idea where he is currently vegetating? His name was Shanley, I believe.
        We see this repeated interaction from different people at various times during the pre- and post- “event” time periods. These people all give the modestly aware individual that they are hired guns and not award winning actors and actresses.
        If there’s one thing we must ALL do, it is to put our undivided support to help preclude election of the Mad Witch. She gets into the presidency, kiss your glutes bye bye.
        We need a slogan, we need our own fanatic to lead the charge against what can only be described as total immolation of this nation.

        Hilly gets in, we all end up in Helly.

        1. Gil Loves Hillary !!!

          I know, We are Screwed if she gets elected thru the new Electronic Voting Booths that were put in place after the Hanging Chads from Gore and Bush !!!!

          That was the biggest false flag no one got and has destroyed the entire voting system that put O’Boy in the Presidency Twice.

          It doesn’t matter anymore who Votes.

          It’s WHO counts the votes and America bought it.

          Didn’t some Commie say something like that?

        2. Precisely, nobody votes for anything any more. They install whoever they like. They even install unknown characters with dubious background from Kenya of all places and laugh at you knowing you can do nothing about it. The bowlegged guy from Kenya is just another in your face insult. You are to know now you are helpless in the course of the vaunted new world order.

        3. Carroll Quigley, I believe, copped to the fact that the CFR has been putting people into the presidency since before the 1960s. I think it goes back to the early 1900s. I think they purposefully allowed JFK in specifically so they could blow his brains out in public as a warning to others who might get uppity and as a warning to the remnant Catholics (laity and hierarchy) who still believed in the fight against freemasonry within the Church. It was definitely a freemasonic job through and through. Michael Hoffman did some writing on this a few years ago using some of James Shelby Downard’s work. Check out revisionist history dot org king kill 33.

        4. Professor Doom 1 did an interview with Shandley a few mos. ago. What a nasty, rotten piece of work that one is.

        5. Hey Elfmom,
          I’m just glad to see someone awake at 8pm PST. This blog shuts down at 8pm EST every night.

          I told you this before, your Cat may need some SSRI’s. Not Looking Very Happy…LOL

  4. I find this piece amusing. it’s pretty obvious the writer hasn’t watched these interviews or if she did… the girl must be blind. Go watch ron goldman’s outrage over his son’s murder during the oj simpson circus. You can see hear and feel his tragic sense of devastating loss. I got no sense of that from any of the relatives of sandy hook victims. Less than zero from the charleston victims families. After about the 5th time I watched the Carver press conference… I noticed things in the background like the cop that could barely contain his laughter at one point. These cops would suck at poker. they were placed in the frame like props. Their expressions did nothing to enhance Carver’s credibility as someone officially in the know; they detracted any meager sense of it. My take on carver… he was no where near an autopsy… let alone many of them.

  5. It appears that “The New Inquiry” magazine was started by 3 woemyn.
    There are 2 ‘sponsors’ listed on their “About” page. One is “INT.” an “Online Publication about Architecture and Film.” The other is “Spectacle” in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, NY, billing itself as a ‘collectively-run screening place’ exclusively run by volunteers.

    Below is a sample ‘Editor’s Note’ posted on The New Inquiry site, accompanying a recent edition of the magazine which was titled: “Daddy” (August 15, 2015 volume 43):

    “The knowledge of paternity is said to be the origin of human society as we know it: that is, born of women’s labor but held in men’s name. In the world before, there could be no such thing as a father, only children, mothers, and sexual partners and childrearers. In this telling, the tree of knowledge and the tree of life were one and the same, and kept a secret amongst mothers and daughters.

    Fathers are haunted by this prehistory: they are always the last to know. The father invents a whole new meaning for himself based on the knowledge of paternity. Their anxiety manifests in many ways, sometimes violent, often tedious, always grasping for control. As that drama plays out over the course of children’s lives, it’s never clear when Father will be found out.

    In this issue, a duo of sex workers share what they’ve learned from their professional family obligations. Alana Massey addresses the young sugar baby as she would a junior trainee, reminding them that a sugar daddy is simply a crude kind of boss, getting away with wage theft and unpaid overtime by keeping his babies in the dark about the work they are actually doing. It’s only a matter of time before the veil slips and the sugar baby is revealed to have been mommying all along. In another essay, Caspar explores how getting paid for sex by men who share his background helps him experience his ultimate fantasy: that in a world where love is distributed along race and class lines he could ever deserve what he receives.”

    If anyone is able to decipher this “Editor’s Note”, please advise.

    But, as a matter of prudence, I would say, let us not give very much time to this ragazine. These purveyors of the newest in ‘avant-garde’ ask for only $3 per month for a subscription, which leads me to think they have some deep pockets of their own and/or grants from friends in high places. We don’t want to give them too many new, impressionable subscribers with too much time on their hands and too few firing synapses.

    1. Yeah, I did the same thing. I went to the “archive” and read some of their back issues. Ugh!

      I’ll say one thing, while the authorship seems to change the writing doesn’t.

    2. Womyn

      plural noun
      women (used chiefly in feminist literature as an alternative spelling to avoid the suggestion of sexism perceived in the sequence m-e-n).

      Thanks, I wasn’t aware of this twist in language being perpetrated.

        1. You men should just get defiant and take up the myn spelling yourselves.

          Hollow out their little feminist power play, and reclaim your birthright, dammit.

          Myn power!

  6. The person who wrote this article doesn’t deny that crisis actors exist. She denies that anyone should question their motives and the results of their actions and uses the buzz word, “bullies” to describe anyone who dares to question whether crisis actors are used by the government in anything other than (non-live) drills.

    I think she gives herself away by the insertion of the last line: “This is also why they taunt nonbelievers using the same mocking tone as playground bullies: they have it all figured out, and you don’t.”
    She refers to herself.

    1. Aha! But, then again, is she saying that crisis actors have a “legitimate” job in assisting with the drills and it’s us nutty CT’s who unjustly accuse them of misdirection?

      I may be old-fashioned but, I was taught that the last thing an essay writer wants is for everyone to say “what did she mean?” at the end of a reading.

      It could be that this is just so bad that everyone is over-reaching to come up with a profound meaning for it. It makes my head hurt. Mainly because she’s wrong no matter HOW one chooses to read it.

  7. There are a lot of ways to disassemble this essay in the New Inquiry, but I’m not going to get too deep.

    The most obvious misconception is that crisis actors really do exist, therefore belief in crisis actors cannot be paranoid. “Crisis Actor Believers” is a doublespeak phrase.

    But the most glaring misconstruction of information in the article is that Brown gathers together disparate voices from all corners of the internet, and lays them at Tracy’s door, blanketed with Hofstadter’s tired formula.

    Hofstadter’s “paranoid political personality” was fabricated for the same reasons that “conspiracy theory” was coined by the CIA, that is, to disrupt independent inquiry.

    But this is the NEW Inquiry.

  8. The author seems to believe that conspiracy theorists are mentally ill people who confuse the world in order to displace their horror of what is onto somethinng easier to believe, something easier to digest than what has “actually happened”. However, it seems ridiculous to say that accepting that the government, the elite, or the media conglomerations are conspiring against the populace for surreptitious and devious ends is somehow easier to accept than that someone would murder children. I, for one, would MUCH rather believe that there are simply people who kill children. In fact, I do believe that, it is obvious. What a fallacious argument…

  9. All these reports sound very possible given the availability of software and the levels of corruption and depravity in society. However, I suspect that there is also an ever-present connection to the police and the medical community that does not get publicity. Look for conections to senior citizens w/ desirable assets “suddenly ” overnight becoming Targets.

    1. I would offer this exists sociologically in decades of making boomers even more selfish and enticing them to dump the elderly off in warehouses, stripping them of resources that apparently the families are too dense to see happening [even to them!] Their interests.

  10. Emily is typical. But “alternative news” is rehashing fake events too.. as real. The laws of physics in this nation were suspended a long time ago. If “alternative news” stopped repeating mainline news their ability to scare people into a walking coma would wane. Don’t look for it. These supposed left-wingers still go around blaming Muslims for 2001 like Chomsky. (I think they’re all a bunch of phonies.)

    1. Chomsky is “old”. What does he have to gain from going around distorting reality like that? And the weaponization of conspiracy theorist and JFK’s utter horror over Operation Northwoods.. Never a peep. Only an impression left he wished he’d had a gun in his hand on 11/22/63. How sick it that? Andre Vltchek uttered that Chomsky knows the truth about 2001 and JFK on noliesradio? So why is he lying publicly?

      1. I think what they do is take these guys into a room, with an old-time 8 mm film projector, and start it up. On the screen is projected the murder of JFK shown from 3 never before seen angles. They then ask the character, “Any questions?” I think that’s all it takes for these gobblists to swear a blood oath to their dying day that they will support and never betray the cabal.

        1. I don’t. That’s cartoonish. They are corrupt. Andre not so much. Chomsky another question. I think he may have killed any real movements by his lying.

  11. The article’s sub-title says:
    “What crisis actor conspiracy theorists believe to be fake implies a much more generous view of the real”

    I’m not sure about this statement. It sounds like a compliment, that people who question crisis actors performances when they’re presented as actual, have a much more generous view of the real.

    Does Emily Elizabeth Brown, cultural critic, subscribe to this summary? She addresses neither it nor it’s opposite in the essay itself.

        1. Ric slurping up some butt, brown nose ric is slurping up some more butt. Again, it really is rather revolting, must you lap so loudly, ric, the brown noser, get a life already you little ass kisser, yeah great mind ya got dare ric, ya smelly brat

        2. What the hell is this?

          First of all, the real John Wayne would never talk this way.

          Second, do you have any point to your comment at all? You make none, other than Ric admires lophatt. So what? Lots of us do.

          Ric is valued for his sincerity and Christian charity. You are valued for…? Nothing I can name.

          From now on, please remember, only his friends call Ric a smelly brat.

        3. Haha, Thx Toni..

          Jonny should consider going back to troll school.

          And I was really just kidding….

        4. I’ve got to go, My Furry Grandchildren are on their way.

          Kudo’s to all of you who have actual “Skin” Grand Babies.

          Anyways, This John Wayne Troll has been cracking me up all day.

          I think I’m Flattered. Only Folk has gone after me to date.

          I don’t know if I’ve made the grade and TPTB see me as a threat and sicked John Boy after me.

          I would have gone for higher hanger fruit if I was Jonny straight out of Troll School trying to impress his masters and disrupt the conversation…Haha

          I’m sincere and want to help Jonny to be a good troll.

          First, Turn to page 101 on your Troll Manual…”.Never call someone a “Butt Licker” who may be over 13 years old”. Odds are they will think your a stupid Troll as Mr. Allen has.

          Good Luck Jonny !

        5. John called Ric a “butt-shark”, neener, neener. That’s what I like about this site, adult commentary.

          Frankly Ric, I appreciate the compliment, if that’s what it was. I believe I’ve complimented you a time or two. Does this mean we’re both butt-sharks? Just askin’.

      1. I’m glad you brought my attention back to this. It seems for cultural critic Emily Elizabeth Brown has defined a new personality, “the crisis actor conspiracy theorist…(who) is both paranoid and idealistic” and therefore has a better view of the world. The conspiracy theorist is just paranoid, I guess.

        Brown says that a crisis actor conspiracy theorist, or “believer,” sees evil as external. I think regular conspiracy theorists do, too.

        She says that while garden-variety conspiracy theorists keep their anger focused on “the government,” crisis actor conspiracy theorists direct their “anger and disbelief” at the victim.

        She flies right over the fact that crisis actors are actually playing “victims.”

        Brown vacillates between the relative pathologies of the two personalities. Conspiracy theorists are more realistic in blaming the government, rather than the victim. But crisis actor conspiracy theorists are more generous in their view of the world, because they don’t believe evil acts could have been carried out by people of their own accord.

        Get it? Me, neither.

        To me, she doesn’t convincingly make the case that there’s a difference between the two, or that it matters.

        I think the real intent of this essay is to bring the “crisis actor” under the umbrella of “conspiracy theory,” hoping, thereby, to preemptively discredit this line of inquiry.

        1. It seems to me that I see many of these attempts to squash opinion contrary to the system mantra, including global warming (or “climate change”, whatever), even those seeking to “debunk” new scientific discoveries which contradict the entire mantra of “scientific” theory, and, of course these dramas fraudulently presented to the public as real, is having a blowback effect on those trying to defend the established order.

          I think they are entangling themselves in their own nets. And I am happy to see them do so, as opposed to Carver:

          “I hope, uhh, I hope they and I hope uhh the people of Newtown, uhh don’t have it crash on their head later”. H Wayne Carver”

          Well, at least some comfort can be gleaned from the thought: “If you’re not catching flak you’re not over the target!”

        2. Thanks, folktruther. I couldn’t tell if you were rolling your eyes or not the first time! lol

          “yeah, right” (rolls eyes)

        3. Brown is “heavy” (not!). It is all so “Spingola-ish”. It sounds as if she is referring to “conspiracy theorists who are crisis actors”. I’m assuming, she’s referring to “conspiracy theorists who believe that crisis actors are used”. Those are not the same thing.

          One would be; “what do you, as a crisis actor, think about conspiracies?”. The other would be; “do you, as a conspiracy theorist, think crisis actors are used?”.

          From there she is assuming that there are only two possible schools of thought. One blames the government, the others the “victims”. As you so correctly said, the actors often PLAY the victims.

          This is sort of circular masturbation but a lot less exciting. I think her icon is the one with all the legs. “Pass the martini, dahling. Shaken, not stirred”.

  12. One important implicit teaching of this hit piece by New Inquiry is that it is possible to nurture public ignorance of crisis acts. The collective level of hysteria is high enough for much of the general public to blindly accept this and similar articles at face value and program their brains with the mantra that conspiracy theories of crisis acting are to be summarily rejected.

    Hence the challenge–or calling–to people who want to promote awareness of organized disinformation to seek some conspiracy, or perhaps some entry point into some conspiracy, that the New Inquiry staff, their colleagues in other opinion-making establishments, and the elusive Master obfuscators they answer to, could not contradict without pushing the collective hysteria beyond the level they have achieved.


  13. I love her first sentence, “a 69 year-old retired psychologist named Gene Rosen opened his home to six terrified children immediately after the massacre”. For a lot of people, it was Gene Rosen’s abysmal performance on the evening news on 12/14/12 that convinced them the cheese had done fell out of somebody’s sandwich. Gene was so rotten I told my husband he acts like an old perv. And he was not a psychologist by any means, just an old FEMA Flunky.

    1. I don’t why she put such an effort in writing such a long rant.

      I will translate it down to One Sentence:

      Your all a Bunch of Kook’s and SHE and the rest were All Real !

      Now wasn’t that a little easier?

        1. I’ve got a simple Joke about that superior race/religion O’King and left love so much cooking to in the “oven”.

          It will never see the light of the Kitchen Table

        2. While we’re here can I ask a question?

          where I’m wong?
          You go to Harvard, which is ran by the “Universal Church” and they teach to hate America,
          Capitalism is to be exploited via Crony Wall Street, The Constitution hinders our goals, Multiculturism is the only way to destroy the white races of the world that threats our power.

          Then you go to Yale, Same as above but they offer 322 Skull and Bones for some Devil mysticism.

          Then you go to Columbia, Same as above but it has a Radical Saul Alinski Twist to further the Goals of the previous said Colleges.

          The other Low Level Colleges are there to find the Devils worthy of the Big Ones Above.

          I’m just asking?

        3. I Knew it.
          No One Can Answer My Question and it will get lost in the MemoryHole…

          So, Your All Lizards hiding in the 4th Dimension Infrared Light?

          I thought, just maybe some here would be human…..


        4. Ric
          Obviously you are correct. And may I say it is becoming the norm that most families cannot afford to send their children to colleges which in turn brain wash the children into oblivion and foster the NWO order concept upon them.

          If that does not work, there is MTV, mass teevee and cohesion with an Amercan populace that is becoming little more than zombies. There is a great amount of money being spent on dumbing down the population and calling it education.

          The curricula of most colleges has been a joke for 200 years. The constitution gave control of the American Corporation to Britain. King George is on record as stating America will always be his enemy. They still print our money, still control the Diebold voting machines.

          In fact they still employ vatican assassins to kill anyone they deem troublesome.

          What is pathetic is you see vast number of American zombies still ready to take to the streets screaming USA USA when it comes to any country the satanists wish to attack next. In Boston they cheered wildly for the false flag and home invasions by the military.

          We are a country of idiots, dumbed down intentionally for decades. We have no hope.

          Once again I will leave a link however from one of the few people who have made me proud to be an American.



        5. I very much enjoyed the article dublinsmick and your excellent comments were informative. Thanks

    1. This wasn’t a cultural criticism, it was a fairly well-designed hit-piece, using many of the key words and phrases to sooth its audience, saying “Don’t worry, your beLIEf is the one and only true beLIEf. Pay no attention to those ignorant and deluded heretics.”

      It is a magick spell to keep those susceptible in line, and fortify them against the onslaught of realism and truth.

      1. Thank you T for additional input and I assure you that I am fully aware this article is a hit piece. It is the author who feels it is a critical analysis so running on that claim I wished to point out to any unaware viewers that the word ‘conspiracy’ is a loaded and weaponized word with a nefarious intention behind it. I do believe every accusation of conspiracy theory should be integrated with that particular link. The information in the link enables a thinker to take their thoughts to a much more critical level of thought and consideration as to meaning and use of the word when an attack is accusatory in nature.

    2. Possum,as I read her/his poorly researched list of accusations,a phrase comes to mind as to “Emily’s” attempt to discredit our findings: “Contempt Prior to Examination” is a poor method of research. I agree with you.

  14. That piece was just more psycho babble by the 1%, usual suspects, I stopped paying attention to long ago.

    Anytime you see the word conspiracy theorists, over and over and over again, that is your first clue. They are basically inferring that anyone they are not capable of mesmerizing with their babble is a conspiracy theorist. Only they know the difference between conspiracy and reality. What this is saying that outside any information they demand you accept, is a conspiracy.

    The good news is, tripe like this highlights their desperation. They are losing their gripe on the minds of the masses. If millions had not already come to the conclusion they are watching a gigantic clown show, there would be no articles such as the above. They would not even mention the fact that doubt may exist among the herd.

    As I am fond of saying, the matrix is unraveling and this upsets them greatly. If it were a conspiracy, we would not have found out about it.

    When the conspiracy card is played for me it is the sine qua non that things need further investigation. It is used many times as a defection to mask the shallow intellectual depth of the user. Many times this is just a cliche to mask the user’s knowledge of complex subjects beyond his grasp. The conspiracy is often times born out by facts rendering it a truth and verifiable by things that were yet to be known.

    The Borderline idiot will always see the world as some sort of gigantic conspiracy. They say the dumber you are the more conspiratorial things may seem, so in many cases the participants may be asked to step outside their intellectual comfort zone. Generally speaking a conspiracy is a theory not substantiated by facts, not to be confused with a concept one disagrees with and worse yet one in which he is too unmotivated to explore for himself. Conspiracy unfortunately is an over used cliche many hide behind to mask their unfamiliarity with sometimes complex subjects or dodge a weighty issue they feel uncomfortable discussing.

    The Borderline idiot will always see the world as some sort of gigantic conspiracy. They say the dumber you are the more conspiratorial things may seem, so in many cases the participants may be asked to step outside their intellectual comfort zone. Generally speaking a conspiracy is a theory not substantiated by facts, not to be confused with a concept one disagrees with and worse yet one in which he is too unmotivated to explore for himself. Conspiracy unfortunately is an over used cliche many hide behind to mask their unfamiliarity with sometimes complex subjects or dodge a weighty issue they feel uncomfortable discussing.

    I have heard many use the term well that is just your opinion, everybody has one. It is obvious that such a person has little or no exposure to Logic 101. It is really quite simple, some may hold the view that 1 plus 1 equals 5, some may feel that 2 plus 2 equals 5, etc etc. However one may feel that 2 plus 3 equals 5. In this particular instance it is not an opinion it is a fact. This is what we are looking for.

  15. Who is the author of this piece? Her bio link goes nowhere, and she shares her name with a number of people who…aren’t her.

    Interesting to note that another publication to run this piece is an online UFO journal. Huh.

  16. Still waiting to see my post from earlier today. I assume that it was either not posted because I dared to use B.S. spelled out (in referring to my B.S. meter in regard to Sandy Hook), or for some reason we now must provide actual email addresses and not anonymous ones. Either way, I’ve posted under this name on this site for some time, periodically, but it disappeared twice. Very frustrating, so I guess I won’t be commenting any more.

  17. There are 2 types of disclaimers. Those who are naive and not awake, who sincerely believe that most authorities have our best interest at heart and those who know the truth, but believe their mission is to mislead the masses and redirect their attention to the crazy CT’s. What kind of warped brain does the 2nd type have? I guess if I understood it completely, I might become one of them….

  18. The “substance” of the article itself is largely unimportant for the average sleepwalkers. All that is really germane is the reinforcement of the memes “conspiracy theorists”, “tin foil hats”, “government is your friend”, and the other broad strokes used to paint into obscurity anyone asking the wrong questions.
    It’s ‘teaching” through incessant repetition on every public platform, and it’s somewhat effective. At the very least, it’s disruptive to getting the actual facts.
    IMHO, It doesn’t help that on many sites asking legitimate questions, we now see hordes of ‘flat-earthers’, ufo and lizard-people proponents, and truly outlandish religious mumbo-jumbo of every conceivable type, none of which have ANYTHING to do with getting to the bottom of who funds and organizes these hoaxes. You should see the leeches sent to Jim Fetzer’s comment boards on occasion…
    I suspect a lot of these commenters are sent to truth sites at the behest of the Deep Pockets funding these hoax and false flag operations. But I also suspect that they are deathly afraid the tipping point in our favor will soon be reached, and their game will be up.
    In any case, EEB works for a propaganda organization, which is plain to see.
    We live in interesting times. I hope we can all work towards making them far less ‘interesting’.

  19. A well written article, and a search for the writer leads nowhere. So it must have come from the bowels of the power system, the CIA, Homeland Security, or whoever handles stuff like this. And that is very interesting, because they seem to be worried about crisis actors. they have reason to be worried, because the existence of crisis actors can be documented, and therefore the notion of a staged operation is less farfetched to the naïve.

    The military cannot go to war to practice, so they have drills. In order to have drills against Terrorists, they hire crisis actors to play the role of Terrorists, civilians, casualties, etc. This is now done with police departments as well since they have been militarized. In order to acclimatize the squads to reality, fake blood, gore, etc is used. Amputee crisis actors are used to accustom warsters to absence of limbs in explosions, etc.

    There is nothing conspiratorial about this, and there is, or was, a school in Denver training crisis actors, and perhaps other schools as well. They would have to be at least partially public.

    Now if drills are conducted using crises actors, is it not possible that operations could be faked using crisis actors? A question that American power does not want Mr and Ms USA to ask themselves. Because then the American people would be more reluctant to believe what they ‘see with their own eyes.’ Making it more difficult to manipulate them in false flag operations.

    1. Do you really think the extreme simulation of reality in these crisis actors/drills is intended to acclimate police, military, etc. to gore and the like? I’m more in the camp that thinks most of it is intended for psy ops, as more of that part of ‘reality’ can’t be practiced, really.

  20. ‘Most accusations made by crisis actor conspiracy theorists are based on the assumption that there is a correct way to react in a crisis.’ I guess that’s why they have CRISIS DRILLS, or why there are forms by The DHS to fill out for a CRISIS DRILL, or why certain events are eerily similar to crisis drills that happen the exact same day…or in the case of Boston Marathon: one such drill was happening in the midst of the actual marathon. What a joke; this obviously wasn’t written for the more informed. Here’s a fun exercise: how many logical fallacies can you spot?

  21. Who is likely to be more paranoid, someone who thinks that there is a growing chance there will be a mass shooting at his child’s school, or someone who thinks that the event was staged and that no one was hurt? Who is likely to be the more fearful and irrational? Which opinion is the more violent and bloody? In terms of mental balance, which person would be more panicked and desperate?

    At the core of this ‘conspiracy theorist’ label is one question: Will we believe everything the news says is true? If we say no, we are lampooned as madmen – in spite of the fact that there are countless cases of media bias, media errors and events staged in collaboration with the media to achieve some goal. When we claim the right to thoughtfully consider the content of a news story before believing it we declare ourselves independent of the mainstream media message.

    This is why the media demonizes conspiracy theorists: it takes mental effort to perceive a conspiracy. Media corporations want us to *consume* their propaganda, and not to discuss how the propaganda is produced, disseminated and to what end. Media skeptics frustrate the main goal of the mass media: political control.

Leave a Reply