SEEING IS NOT BELIEVING, IT IS KNOWING. A media hoaxed NYT reporter writes, “To shield heartsick families from the most macabre details of how their loved ones were murdered in a mass school shooting in Parkland, Fla., the court handling the gunman’s sentencing trial has taken an extraordinary step: Graphic videos and photographs are shown only to the jury, so that victims’ relatives and others in the courtroom gallery do not have to endure them." Such is the nature of public, criminal trials- enduring through actual evidence, weighing its value and discarding lies. Here, Like most mass shooting episodes no trial took place - a guilty plea was accepted by the court after facts were read from a document out loud in the courtroom. Nikolas Cruz, plead guilty to 17 murders and 17 attempted murders. Now the case has entered into the sentencing phase where it will be determined whether he gets life or the death penalty. [MORE]

Due to the contrived nature of the Parkland narrative, voluntary confession, many fake looking/sounding media interviews with in-credible witnesses providing inconsistent facts, a lack of corroborating forensic evidence, a lack of cell-phone video from high school students, miraculously quick medical recoveries by kids shot in the chest, books that deflected bullets and more, many consider Parkland a false flag operation or cover story. Belief isn’t needed to come to such a conclusion- go watch the many videos online about it. On the other hand however, belief is needed to conclude that an actual massacre occurred because the evidence has never been seen. We must believe cops and whatever emotional words the media put before our eyes. It takes absolutely no intelligence to believe.

The fact that there was no trial only strengthens the doubt of persons who don’t blindly believe whatever the media says. In all microwave terror episodes the media simply parrot whatever police say from a crime scene closed to the public in an instantly open and shut case. To be clear here, no criminal trial means no contested, adversarial proceeding in which the government would have to establish facts beyond a reasonable doubt with actual, admissible, authenticated evidence and credible witness testimony that is subjected to rigorous cross -examination, rules of evidence, discovery, Brady disclosures and the defendant’s right to face to face confrontation with his accusers. What better way could there be to drop any doubt as to whether this fake looking bullshit ever took place?

instead of a real trial the public continues to get, ‘but wait there’s more’ emotional reaction from the media and probotic authorities. If authorities made all this shit up would they be truthful about it? They make it up because sheeple believe whatever authorities and their media tell them to believe. Let’s be clear about the meaning of “belief” here: According to FUNKTIONARY:

Belief- the psychological calm of imagined certitude safely beyond de-stabilizing doubt and troublesome reality-entanglement. 2) a construction of approximate truths, absolute truths, mass truths and primary myths, based on genetic predisposition, and environmental and socio-psychological conditioning. 3) the institutionalization of the unknowable, i.e., a conviction that is not necessarily based upon any empirical, direct-mind or experiential knowledge. 4) a non-physical surviving thought-form. 5) any conclusion based on a fundamental assumption; the evidence of things not seen, no longer actively sought. 6) an intellectual rationalization surrounded by (based on) "'proofs," reasons and arguments. 7) that which springs out of cultural ideology. 8) the greatest fiction. 9) a trick of the mind to repress doubt. 10) a mental doubt-suppression tactic. A suppressed doubt is neither faith nor even trust. 11) repressed doubt. 12) an explicit or implicit assent to dogmatic propositions (with or without overgrown religious foliage) on someone else's authority. 13) reverential blindness that thwarts fresh perception and intuitive apperception. 14) a prejudice without any experience to support it. 15) a peculiar blend of fatiloquent assertion on one hand and adamant denial on the other. 16) a manic flirtation with the terminally unprovable. 17) certainty based in the unknown. 18) having another "see" it for you while seeing him see it (for you)—in effect being for another. 19) a conclusion without the verification of direct experience—make-believe made real. 20) the inability or unwillingness to master the requisite logic or reason to counterbalance (or overcome) the willingness to be misled. 21) the abnegation of internal authenticity for outside authority. 22) ego-consoling faith. 23) acceptance of a statement, tenet or creed with available verification and substantive evidence to its contrary. [MORE]

Like folks selling invisible hairpins, the NYT reporter explained that actual photos, videos and forensic evidence aren’t available to the public but stories about it are, “But the horrifying particulars, conveyed in emotional witness testimony, chilling audio recordings and dispassionate forensic accounts, are impossible to avoid altogether. How a teacher at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School tied a baby blanket around a wounded student’s arm as a tourniquet. How the gunfire from a semiautomatic rifle boomed inside a classroom under attack. How the high-powered bullets ravaged children’s bodies and so on…” Exactly there was no trial, so we must just believe what we are told.

Sheeple: ‘But I don’t see any hairpins in the box’

Authority/Media: ‘Of course not, they are invisible’

Sheeple: ‘Really?’

Authority/Media: Yes, out of stock for 7 days but we are still selling them. They are absolutely invisible.’

As explained by Osho Rajineesh, “When things are invisible, you can go on selling, promising. There is no need to deliver the goods, because in the first place they are invisible, so nobody can ever detect them.” [MORE]