The ID on "Operation Blackjack" has a secret message

The people who are defending operation blackjack and the creator have serious mental issues.

Someone writes "bomb" anywhere in public, and they'll get 5 years in prison, and you have a guy depicting terrorist attacks saying it's not entertainment, and it's funny?

Wow, I never thought people will be that dumb, but never underestimate the stupidity of the people.

Originally posted by downtown436 Man, it said it was for entertainment purposes and complete fiction. The guy even made it a cartoon comic, to make a more concrete statement that it was for entertainment.

The original slide shows did say that they were fictional and imaginary, but I don't recall them stating that they were for 'entertainment purposes'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I recall correctly, the only time entertainment was mentioned was when the code said that it was not for entertainment purposes. I do believe this is an important point.

Also, every fictional movie or book I've ever seen that has any obvious relation to real people, and even some that don't, has that standard disclaimer: "Any similarity to persons living or dead is purely coincidental". Is this not required in the UK? Why was it left out? I'm not familiar with laws and regulations regarding this, so it were well could be that it is 'good enough' to just say "This is fake."

It just seems like some people are saying "DUH, It was clearly fake!", using the "Don't believe everything you read on the internet" argument in regards to the slideshow itself, but not to the disclaimer. Should we always trust a news outlet disclaimer from now on?

The thing that worried me the most about this whole ordeal was not the potential of a real threat, nor was it the 'wrongness' of a potential fear-mongering hoaxer.

The thing that worried me, which I believe only one other person mentioned in this entire thread, was that this could have been a setup for the government to have a valid reason to take control of the internet, due to the percieved danger or for future terror hoax prevention. At this point in time, I feel a false flag or planned internet attack/threat is much more likely than anything in the Blackjack slideshows, and there was no way of knowing that this wasn't exactly that.

With the single exception of War of the Worlds, which as somebody already mentioned was far less believable than Blackjack, has anyone ever attempted anything even close to this? It would have been one thing if JW would have confirmed that the story was fictional when people started calling him and asking after the first slideshow, but he didn't. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.

As a few others have mentioned, something still doesn't seem right. There was no clear purpose or result. Has JW published a story about it yet?

reply to post by EverythingYouKnowIsWrong


He said he will post a article tomorrow at 8:03am
if he starts misquoting members or calling us all "nutjobs" i'm gonna be p***ed!

Posted on this forum on: Feb. 17, 2009

------------------------------------------------------------------

As I've already posted on your 'no censorship' site in a reply that you've seen fit not to use, I ain't no Jesuit and I'd be very grateful if you'd stop describing me as such. Neither am I a Freemason, 'Zionist', a member of the security services or a part of the global elite or any other epithet you've given me.

There is not some sinister agenda with Blackjack. It's a piece of fiction. A group of us came up with the idea after seeing that Fallout 3 graphic of DC after a nuclear attack. It was just going to be London but then expanded from there. Nobody told us to do this nor did some secret agent sidle up to us and suggest it.

I'm happy to answer any questions anybody has about Blackjack. For the record, there is some inspiration from Jericho (a great show which is much missed) and, yes, some of us are concerned about the authoritarian tendencies of western governments. But does that mean that I think they're going to set of a load of nukes in a massive false flag attack? Hardly. What I do think is entirely possible is that as the global financial system worsens, we're going to find our liberties further and further eroded. Crisis is always presents a great opportunity for these people to make life more difficult for all of us.

Justin Williams
Assistant Editor
Telegraph Media Group

----------------------------------------------------------------------

If that doesn't lay it out for people, I don't know what will...also following that was a short Q and A session he did.

So if you further believed it, bought into it, followed it, and got duped....it is your own fault, and you have no reason to be upset.

reply to post by jurojin


What would "lay it out" for me would be if the Telegraph.co.uk got shut down for having crap on their site, and they had to pay $10 million dollars in fine.

Then I'd say justice was served.

Is this site fake?
www.jackblack14.info...

There´s another code to break

reply to post by gwydionblack


If you were suffering due to Operation Blackjack, you are the one with a problem.

Originally posted by bobbylove321
The people who are defending operation blackjack and the creator have serious mental issues.

Someone writes "bomb" anywhere in public, and they'll get 5 years in prison, and you have a guy depicting terrorist attacks saying it's not entertainment, and it's funny?

Wow, I never thought people will be that dumb, but never underestimate the stupidity of the people.

Are you talking about me?

C'mon.

Originally posted by bobbylove321
reply to post by jurojin

 

What would "lay it out" for me would be if the Telegraph.co.uk got shut down for having crap on their site, and they had to pay $10 million dollars in fine.

Then I'd say justice was served.

So you think that the Telegraph should pay $10,000,000 because you freaked out, and loaded your car with canned goods and shotgun shells, and ran to the woods in fear?

It said it was fiction.

Originally posted by bobbylove321
reply to post by jurojin

 

What would "lay it out" for me would be if the Telegraph.co.uk got shut down for having crap on their site, and they had to pay $10 million dollars in fine.

Then I'd say justice was served.

Why? Are you going to sue the Director of Jerhico? The writers of X-files? Or how about all those people that give countless speeches at conventions or push their books on you that you know are just plain lying?

No you wouldn't....

You bought in to it, and you were EVEN TOLD TO YOUR FACE that it was a lie. But people refused to believe it...which I'm sure you did. Was it a tasteless piece? Yes, of course it was! But I have no sympathy for the people that are told IN GREAT DETAIL how / why it is a hoax, but yet they refuse to believe, because if it isn't true they have nothing.

reply to post by jurojin


Thank you very much for posting that. I was not aware of his posts in the BJ Part 4 thread. Here are his posts from that thread:

Valente posts

The thing is though, the post you quoted jurojin, while it seemed to be pretty clear that it was really JW, anyone could have written that. The post you should have quoted was this one:

Originally posted by Valente

Originally posted by Piero
okay i have one question for you and it would prove that you really are who you say you are
if u can tell us what one slide in the upcoming blackjack is about or atleast hint something that actually will happen not something like ''civilians will take over USA'' something thats proof
thanks

As I don't know when we're going to run series 2, I'll have to do something to one of the existing slides in Part 5. How about I add something to Image 7 in Part 5? Something that you guys will appreciate. I'll do this at 13.00 GMT today.

There is still the entire issue of if what is did was legal, moral, or entertaining, especially concerning the "this is not entertainment" code. And between then and yesterday, there was no way of knowing whether or not it was a 'false flag' internet threat as I mentioned in my last post.

I've only been following this thread since Friday afternoon, but I do want to send out kudos to fellow ATS'ers for their hard work and excellent job at deciphering the clues. On almost every page in this thread there are those that voiced the opinion that it was a game or some type of advanced promotion for a movie, game or comic book, which turns out to be the case. All in all, more references to the serial graphic novel appearing in The Telegraph reflected here that it was completely fictitious. I think you all deserve a solid round of applause, and hope you will be able to focus on your accomplishments instead of dwelling on the fact that in the end it turned out to be a rather mean spirited game.

Originally posted by EverythingYouKnowIsWrong

Originally posted by downtown436 Man, it said it was for entertainment purposes and complete fiction. The guy even made it a cartoon comic, to make a more concrete statement that it was for entertainment.

The thing that worried me, which I believe only one other person mentioned in this entire thread, was that this could have been a setup for the government to have a valid reason to take control of the internet, due to the percieved danger or for future terror hoax prevention. At this point in time, I feel a false flag or planned internet attack/threat is much more likely than anything in the Blackjack slideshows, and there was no way of knowing that this wasn't exactly that.

Are you serious?

IF you thought that Öperation Blackjack" was an internet flase flag and the government was taking over the internet because of it, you might want to turn your computer off right now, go outside and get some sun. Maybe have a beer or go to a movie.

Get real.

reply to post by jurojin


People refused to believe it because a hidden code said, "This is not simply entertainment." When you find something like that, it's important, and most (read: 95%) of the populace would take it very seriously.

reply to post by downtown436


why DID you start this thread then...to join in the game of laughing at people's justified concern??

reply to post by downtown436


What? The way you paraphrased what I said was quite a bit different than what I actually said.

It didn't worry me enough to do anything more than follow the thread, I was saying that out of all the things it could have been, I thought the internet false flag was a valid thing to consider.

Sorry, I shouldn't have used the word 'worry' because not once was I actually concerned for my safety or internet freedom any more than normal.


edit.. and by the way I happen to currently be drinking a beer and enjoying a movie, thanks (though not at the theater, too expensive IMO)

[edit on 6/21/2009 by EverythingYouKnowIsWrong]

Originally posted by bobbylove321
The people who are defending operation blackjack and the creator have serious mental issues.

Someone writes "bomb" anywhere in public, and they'll get 5 years in prison, and you have a guy depicting terrorist attacks saying it's not entertainment, and it's funny?

Wow, I never thought people will be that dumb, but never underestimate the stupidity of the people.

Didn't you predict a nuke going off two weeks ago? I think you may be recieving a call from the feds. Because you obvioulsy said it on here, only thing is it didn't come to pass. Do we still lock you up?

Originally posted by double_frick
reply to post by downtown436

 

why DID you start this thread then...to join in the game of laughing at people's justified concern??

I didn't know if it was a warning hidden a cartoon by an elite insider or what. That is why I started this thread.

So we could figure out this conspiracy, and we did.

I was one who thought it was very curious indeed, that is it.

And there was an alert on London Telegraph
www.telegraph.co.uk...

By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent
Published: 11:20AM GMT 24 Mar 2009

It was in March and it says that dangerous materials have been stolen and smuggled and that is the reason for the alert.

Maybe this gave Justin Williams the idea to concoct a comic strip mixing reality (theft of dangerous materials, military drills, etc) and fiction.

Some people got really scared. I think all newspapers should use its capacity to reach people in a responsible manner.

I only hope this episode does not serve as an excuse for some sick minds to close internet or diminish privacy or whatever

still? really? whether it was real or fake discussion should be ending. shouldnt give these dudes more attention then we already have