Jacintha Saldanha

This is the forum dedicated to all 'minor' local psyops - phony murders, kidnappings and whatnot. It has now become evident that the news media constantly feeds the public with entirely fake stories - in order to keep us in eternal fear of our next-door neighbours and fellow citizens.

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby bostonterrierowner on Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:11 pm

Reichstag ,

Fake suicide is a sure thing but please provide some research/proof behind Kate's drug abuse . It's not that I don't believe you but I am just curious .
bostonterrierowner
Member
 
Posts: 849
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby JamieK on Tue Dec 18, 2012 5:41 pm

Women also rarely hang themselves when they commit suicide.

So a woman came forward saying that the picture the media was showing was of herself and not of the nurse? I missed that one. It does sound a lot like the 9/11 vicsims. <_<
JamieK
Member
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 4:02 pm

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby resolution on Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:28 am

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/gallery/gallery-e6frewxi-1226538060326?page=3

Image
Image

Jacintha Saldanha goes home: the casket containing the body of the nurse who killed herself after a 2DayFM radio hoax arrives at the airport in Mangalore, India ahead of her funeral. Photo: AP/Rafiq Maqbool

Image

Jacintha Saldanha goes home: Indian labourers dig the grave of Jacintha Saldanha at a church in Shirva, north of Mangalore, India, as the casket containing the body of the nurse who killed herself after a 2DayFM radio hoax arrives home for her funeral. Photo: AP/Rafiq Maqbool
resolution
Member
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 5:15 am

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby herrnimrod on Wed Dec 19, 2012 5:18 pm

The journalist in the first picture must have been awfully tall.
herrnimrod
Member
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby Heiwa on Wed Dec 19, 2012 5:36 pm

Strange big, wrapped (??) coffin. I wonder what is inside. :P And why do you need such big ambulance type car for the transport?
Heiwa
Member
 
Posts: 1064
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:20 pm

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby simonshack on Wed Dec 19, 2012 6:31 pm

herrnimrod wrote:The journalist in the first picture must have been awfully tall.


"Jacintha" must have been awfully tall too - that's a pretty long casket! :o I smell a tall tale.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6576
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby SmokingGunII on Wed Dec 19, 2012 6:57 pm

I'd like to see Reichstag's proof of Kate's drug addiction, too.
SmokingGunII
Member
 
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby resolution on Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:22 pm

herrnimrod wrote:The journalist in the first picture must have been awfully tall.

Or the hole is very deep... My question is why an ambulance and not a climate-controlled hearse? We already 'know' that she was shorter than her son, so not very tall.
resolution
Member
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 5:15 am

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby antipodean on Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:09 pm

SmokingGunII wrote:I'd like to see Reichstag's proof of Kate's drug addiction, too.


So would I. On this forum we have a lot of fun making piss taking comments about the thousands of sims.

Some times a line has to be drawn over what could be seen as defamation, seeing as how like her or loath her, Kate is after all a real person.
The only connection I can think of, is maybe her parents Party Plan business has links to the show biz fraternity and access to various party drugs.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 607
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby hoi.polloi on Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:38 pm

One of our great traditions in history, as a species, is the critique of our leaders. Defaming is exactly what all politicians and wealthy folk get and do to one another in public. It seems to be the very definition of politics. I am astounded that you would call for an unorthodox level of respect of a class of people who show such repulsive dislike for their fellow humans.

On top of that, I fail to see how the increasing ability to deceive and mislead with technology should somehow be a reason to heighten our tolerance of it. Perhaps we need scrutiny, yes. Proofs are necessary, definitely.

Perhaps, also, it's time for us to put aside this whole notion of an untouchable elite that is above suspicion and rumor. We are trying to find the truth; and while I want proofs as much as the next person, erring on the side of distrust is what this forum is generally advocating when it comes to fishy personalities who seem content to use everyone else as their playthings.

I personally cannot vouch for this Kate person, but any connection whatsoever to royalty does tend to put one in the limelight, whether they like it or not (and let's face it, most of them seem to like it quite a lot! Good or bad power of attention is power of attention still.)

Liking or disliking has nothing to do with anything since nobody here actually knows Kate. Unless you want to speak up about a personal connection?
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5055
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby antipodean on Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:53 pm

hoi.polloi wrote:One of our great traditions in history, as a species, is the critique of our leaders. Defaming is exactly what all politicians and wealthy folk get and do to one another in public. It seems to be the very definition of politics. I am astounded that you would call for an unorthodox level of respect of a class of people who show such repulsive dislike for their fellow humans.

On top of that, I fail to see how the increasing ability to deceive and mislead with technology should somehow be a reason to heighten our tolerance of it. Perhaps we need scrutiny, yes. Proofs are necessary, definitely.

Perhaps, also, it's time for us to put aside this whole notion of an untouchable elite that is above suspicion and rumor. We are trying to find the truth; and while I want proofs as much as the next person, erring on the side of distrust is what this forum is generally advocating when it comes to fishy personalities who seem content to use everyone else as their playthings.

I personally cannot vouch for this Kate person, but any connection whatsoever to royalty does tend to put one in the limelight, whether they like it or not (and let's face it, most of them seem to like it quite a lot! Good or bad power of attention is power of attention still.)

Liking or disliking has nothing to do with anything since nobody here actually knows Kate. Unless you want to speak up about a personal connection?


My opinion of Kate Middleton is of some one born with a silver spoon in her mouth, who's now married into one of the most repulsive families on the planet.

I couldn't give a shit if she had a drug habit, I just wouldn't make a detailed posting about it without at least supplying one source of information. After all on here it is truth, that is the bottom line.

My bad if my post came across as wanting to show some respect to the elites

The biggest melt downs on these forums seems to occur when some one starts posting unproven incorrect allegation or identification, about a particular living person.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 607
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby bostonterrierowner on Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:57 pm

hoi.polloi wrote:One of our great traditions in history, as a species, is the critique of our leaders. Defaming is exactly what all politicians and wealthy folk get and do to one another in public. It seems to be the very definition of politics. I am astounded that you would call for an unorthodox level of respect of a class of people who show such repulsive dislike for their fellow humans.

On top of that, I fail to see how the increasing ability to deceive and mislead with technology should somehow be a reason to heighten our tolerance of it. Perhaps we need scrutiny, yes. Proofs are necessary, definitely.

Perhaps, also, it's time for us to put aside this whole notion of an untouchable elite that is above suspicion and rumor. We are trying to find the truth; and while I want proofs as much as the next person, erring on the side of distrust is what this forum is generally advocating when it comes to fishy personalities who seem content to use everyone else as their playthings.

I personally cannot vouch for this Kate person, but any connection whatsoever to royalty does tend to put one in the limelight, whether they like it or not (and let's face it, most of them seem to like it quite a lot! Good or bad power of attention is power of attention still.)

Liking or disliking has nothing to do with anything since nobody here actually knows Kate. Unless you want to speak up about a personal connection?


I agree 100% . Just want to know more about her alleged addiction ,this whole royal drug thing got my attention , given we have seen hints in this direction before . "Harry Potter" etc. :)
Special treatment , respect , untouchable elite , you name it never crossed my mind
bostonterrierowner
Member
 
Posts: 849
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby nonhocapito on Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:37 am

This is one of those stories where I get confirmation to my general idea: that the entity known as the "British Royalty" is today used, and has been for a long time, simply as a lightning rod to divert attention, antipathy, judgment and suspicion from the masses away from realer characters and more crucial entities.

Everything about them is meant to appear corrupt, weak, conspiratorial or if not, childish, entirely superficial, ineffective with no real grasp on society. They are meant as a living representation of inherited, undeserved power, and as a memento of all the negative consequences there would be if they were given real power.

In other words the British royalty and all similar characters are kept alive for the double purpose of showing how Democracy is the only choice we have and we better embrace it, but also to cover up for all the inherited and unmovable power that really thrives and obviously (since it is real power) does not attract any attention from the media, be it for the death of a nurse, of a wife, for embezzlement or for anything else.

In many respects these Royalties are like the Pope and all the cardinals, today simply the living example of how everything about church and religion is doomed to be corrupted and out of touch with reality, and we should all better do without it with no regrets.

I also tend to believe that all these entities are OK to serve as lightning rods, because their real loyalty goes to other organizations that they consider much superior and for which they are happy to sacrifice their public image.
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2547
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby reichstag fireman on Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:44 am

antipodean wrote:The biggest melt downs on these forums seems to occur when some one starts posting unproven incorrect allegation or identification, about a particular living person.


"unproven" and "incorrect" are two separate things. You somehow know that Kate is no drug addict? Do you know her? Are you on the Windsor payroll or compromised by The Firm in some way, Antipodean?

It is "unproven" that the Windsors were behind the whacking of Lady Diana. But "incorrect"? Nope. The Windsor garbage dunnit.

Mohammed Al Fayed is 100% clear. The Windsors apparatus ordered the staged car crash in the Pont de l'Alma Tunnel in Paris and the near two hour ambulance crawl to the hospital while agents of the Crown executed (poisoned) Diana.

"The fuggers murdered my son Dodi, Lady Di and Henri Paul". That is supposedly a joke, courtesy of Her Majesty's MI6 spooky weirdos who scribble in Private Eye magazine to mock Al Fayed or "Chairman Mo" as they like to call him.

So be caution who YOU defame with your "unproven incorrect" allegations, antipodean!

Kate Windsor (nee Middleton) was admitted to hospital as an emergency - she had taken a drug (heroin) overdose.

In the dueness of time, the truth will unravel.
Last edited by reichstag fireman on Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
reichstag fireman
Member
 
Posts: 466
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 1:09 am

Re: Jacintha Saldanha

Postby nonhocapito on Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:48 am

reichstag fireman wrote:
antipodean wrote:The biggest melt downs on these forums seems to occur when some one starts posting unproven incorrect allegation or identification, about a particular living person.


"unproven" and "incorrect" are two separate things. How do you know Kate is not a drug addict? Do you know her?

It's "unproven" that the Windsors were behind the whacking of Lady Diana. But is it "incorrect"? Nope. The Windsor garbage dunnit.

Mohammed Al Fayed is 100% clear that the Windsors ordered the staged car crash in the Pont de l'Alma Tunnel in Paris and the near two hour ambulance crawl to the hospital while agents of the Crown executed (poisoned) her.

"The fuggers murdered my son Dodi, Lady Di and Henri Paul". Those are supposedly the jokey words of Her Majesty's MI6 spooky weirdos scribbling in Private Eye magazine to mock of "Chairman Mo".

So be caution who YOU defame with your "unproven incorrect" allegations, antipodean!


You are blindly repeating and endorsing a bunch of conspiracy theories that aren't any better than saying "9/11 was an inside job" and assuming the towers collapsed with 3000 people in them. Furthermore, there is no need to threaten anyone and use the word "defame" because these are all opinions we are entitled to have. Personally I think you are completely wrong and that your endorsement of these fantasies is misleading.
As I stated in my previous post, the fact that the British royalty is the receiving end of all these conspiracies is good reason to think they are just a lightning rod and a fake target, much like the "illuminati", and that they detain no real power as an entity on the global scenario, but rather they are a tool of confusion: an element of the stage.
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2547
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

PreviousNext

Return to Local psyops - and minor media scams

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests