Crisis actress BUSTED? Adriana Victoria Muñoz fully EXPOSED

Same women, in mine and my wife's opinion.

Pirhanna's post is excellent.

Why is it taboo to question the government on a conspiracy site? Someone needs to answer that because it's ridiculous. It's censorship. ATS doesn't want certain topics discussed, so it would seem. I see it time and time again.

a reply to: SensiblyReckless

Because questioning authority is conditional

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: DelMarvel

Doesn't mean you get to lump everyone together. I am a staunch believer that the os is bs when it comes to 911 but you see me refuting the claim of crisis actors above....
And truthers are the people that avoid the no planes, hologram and so on.
Point being don't generalize a movement based on your bad experience with

I didn't say anything about 9/11 truthers or "lump" them in with anyone. The "crisis actors" truthers are the ones trying to lump themselves in with 9/11 truthers.

What I said was that when pressed, advocates of the "crisis actors" theories almost invariably bring up 9/11. The frequent line of reasoning being "everyone knows the government lied about 9/11 so Sandy Hook could be a hoax." This happens in just about every online discussion of this I've ever read.

a reply to: SensiblyReckless
Lol. Yeah, thats it in a nutshell.

originally posted by: SensiblyReckless
Pirhanna's post is excellent.

Why is it taboo to question the government on a conspiracy site? Someone needs to answer that because it's ridiculous. It's censorship. ATS doesn't want certain topics discussed, so it would seem. I see it time and time again.

Yes this one is not about any victims that did or did not exist so I wonder why it is off limits.

originally posted by: SensiblyReckless
Pirhanna's post is excellent.

Why is it taboo to question the government on a conspiracy site? Someone needs to answer that because it's ridiculous. It's censorship. ATS doesn't want certain topics discussed, so it would seem. I see it time and time again.

1)Its not taboo to question the gov't on here. It is taboo to implicate innocent victims.

2)its not censorship, its the T&C of this site, which you agreed to when you signed up.

3)ATS wants all topics to be discussed (outside of illegal ones). The problem is that SOME people cant discuss SOME topics maturely and respectfully.

This is simply another way the overly enthusiastic theorist, and primarily the ones with serious superiority complexes, show said "awesomeness".

Let's say crisis actors existed for use in the way the OP presents them. Obviously, in this day and age of the internet, computers, software, etc., those in control of the faked situation would be smart enough to never use the same crisis actors over and over, as suggested in the OP.

If the government wanted to fake some mass shooting or some such, I can promise you they have smarter than you to work out all of the possible problems. you know, like making the mistake of using the same actors more than once...

Except if was all psyop. Then crisis actors and the doubts raised by using them isolates and fragments the discourse. Cnn has used reprters for crisis actors almost from their beginning. All the networks admit to using blue screens in their parking lots or wherever to show a reporter in a combat zone when he was safe in the usa. Anderson cooper recently got caught doing it. People died in these wars from their vlaims of battle front exposure yet it was all staged. So why is it so hard to believe it is now becoming a standard practice by the likes of homeland security? I never saw anyone prosecute anderson cooper for lying about what he claimed to be witness of and there was no public outcry. He just continued on and people still watch him and listen.

I have been looking for the recent court case where it was stated the government can lie legally in pursuing their agenda. If so, why wouldnt they manufacture events under controlled settings to further the agenda? All msm news is scripted and orchestrated by actors posing as reporters. Where is the great jump in logic everyone says is impossible when crisis actors are discussed? Wow, i just remembered a thread i was involved in years ago....brba reply to: usernameconspiracy

a reply to: SensiblyReckless

Who is censoring?

I see no censorship unless I have missed something....

a reply to: pirhanna

I do not believe it has become taboo. It's more like there needs to be a shred of logic, a bit of evidence that isn't outlandish speculation presented as fact. It needs to be more than a knee jerk response to anything that happens.

I was on the main Boston Bombing thread from the very beginning. Before the smoke had settled from the bombs there were a couple of guys shouting "false flag" as if it were important to be the first to do so. No evidence, no indication and absolutely no logic given what was known at the time. I still don't buy it, but frankly, those early people did nothing to convince me, in fact quite the opposite.

I am not paranoid and when I see what can best be described as a paranoid reaction to an event it does nothing to help the cause. I sincerely believe that people sincerely believe the govt is behind everything. Problem is, that is just plain ridiculous.

I have no doubt that the govt gets it's hands dirty, but claiming everything is a govt conspiracy just muddies the waters and is stupid as hell.

Different jaw lines, chins, noses, and eyebrows from a brief glance. Probably not the same woman. Nice viral youtube video though.

This is so dumb. Whoever invented this crisis actor bull should be punished. Those are obviously not the same women- pause the video during the small window they actually show all 4 women in the same frame- examine a few frames of that- you can see distinctions in their noses, lips, foreheads, shapes of their heads, and one that is an easy giveaway- you can see the earlobes of 2 of the women, one has attached earlobes, the other's hang down. All brunette, middle aged women with glasses are not the same person. If they were actors, don't you think they would hire different actors for different events? Please, this makes anyone who believes in any sort of conspiracy theory look stupid. Enough already!

Because all 4 women have their heads at different angles no one, I repeat, no one can tell that the 4 women are not one & the same.

Take 4 pictures of yourself from different angles & your face shape, features, eyes, nose etc change shape, your skin colour changes.

The only way to check is use the same focus that face recognition software uses:
- measurement between the eyes
- measurement of length and width of earlobe
- measurement of length and width of inner earlobe
- measurement of width of nose

These things when put together are like a fingerprint & are unique to you (unless you're an identical twin).

a reply to: Oneggod

You don't always need facial recognition software- sometimes eyes are good enough. And even if you can't tell the difference in facial features, you can see the outline of two of the women's earlobes- one is attached and one hangs. It is a dead giveaway.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
That is just four different woman who all look alike. Four white women in their 40's with dark hair and glasses, I am sure you could find hundreds of them if you really tried and got the right camera angles, all dead ringers of the eachother

I get really fed up of these silly conspiracies with "actors"

Just makes the rest of us on this site look bad.

I find it in particularly bad taste when people try to associate actors with Sandy Hook.

Why can you people not just let these families grieve with out your stupid theories

Could not agree more. Some of the "theories" on this site over the last few years have been utterly pathetic and shameful.

a reply to: RocksFromSpace

The three women that speak are OBVIOUSLY all different people.

Actually none of the women really looked like any of the others.

Chloe Anderson Aurora Shooting Hoax

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: bbracken677

You've missed something.

I'm not defending the OP in any way. I didn't even watch the video. My point is this thread was moved to LOL straight away without even letting it be discussed properly. That is censorship IMO.

Certain topics like drug use or linking to illegally gained info, like Wikileaks, I can understand that could have legal consequences for the ATS staff, and isn't direct censorship like this is.

originally posted by: SensiblyReckless
I'm not defending the OP in any way. I didn't even watch the video. My point is this thread was moved to LOL straight away without even letting it be discussed properly. That is censorship IMO.

Certain topics like drug use or linking to illegally gained info, like Wikileaks, I can understand that could have legal consequences for the ATS staff, and isn't direct censorship like this is.

Exactly how is moving it to the LOL forum censorship?