For some further analysis on the Moscow Train Wreck of a False Flag you can see the following article -
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2010/03/3 ... world-news
One odd thing about that particular story is how the father said he identified his daughter as the second female bomber (the original reports had her age as 20 but now they say she is 28) by her severed head, at the beginning of the story. Then towards the end of the story the emotional tale of her disappearance ends by saying she was last seen by him wearing a red scarf as she left to go visit a friend and that she was wearing that same scarf when she died. Hmmm, that just doesn't add up for some reason.
Here is a Moscow "victim " people can look into - Tatyana Akimova
Just to add about the Holohoax, no one has to spend anytime on researching anything, it's been thoroughly debunked as a hoax. Here's just one amateur's cursory look at it and the ease at which anyone who chooses to go beyond what is told to them and expected of them to believe by peer pressure -
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl= ... nka&view=3
and
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=d ... vil&view=3
I'm not trying to defy your wishes Hoi, but the parallels between this master piece of mass historical denial and injection of falsehoods into what is now historical canon and what we examine on this board are too fundamental to be ignored. The same people, doing the same things, with much the same purpose and with the same effects via the same psychological manipulation tactics, that's like saying we are going to study Classical Piano but ignore all the greats from Mozart to Chopin to Beethoven. If we do that, then we are missing something and coming up empty.
Making the connections between mass deception as used in the Holohoax, primarily by use of emotional anchoring, such as in hypnotism and the deifying of myths and the same operations by the same groups of people today is pretty much a prerequisite. Again I'm not challenging you here, but honestly that would be a fundamental omission that would hollow out a lot of historical context and modus operandi - that would hamper things pretty severely.
If you're concern is too much wrangling with deniers, just get rid of them, because it's not a debate. Anyone who has any mind open to scrutinizing what they are told that looks at the Holohoax gets it pretty quickly. The entire fabrication falls apart once anyone goes beyond the superficial and stops wanting to believe it. Again, the emotional need to want to believe it was paramount to establish in the minds of those targeted by that lie. The psychological and emotional language is the primary vehicle used to deliver all of these kinds of messages, having the listener crave for the lie and self-deceive once the emotional virus has been established in their minds.
The Holohoax is the biggest, most pervasive, and well established of these kinds of psychological warfare operations, all modern psyops is born of it as it's prototype. So there's really no honest way to discuss these things without bringing it up, again if you think someone is going to drag down the discussion of modern affairs with it by creating an opportunity for deniers to smear what's being said - then that process simply smokes out a shill - there is no rational way to defend the Holohoax as an actual historical occurrence, hence the need for emotional anchoring. By including it, it gives historical context to what's happening today with an explanation of how the same people did it before, I don't see how that can be left out of an honest discussion.