# The mathematics of media psy-ops

0Shares
Written by: Miri
March 28, 2023

As I've mentioned on several past occasions, I'm very bad at maths, so please forgive me if I don't get the answer to the following equation exactly accurate to the nearest decimal point, but I think there's an important bit of number crunching we need to do in relation to the latest media circus...

Imagine you have an event (murder) that is very rare, and only happens to 6.1 people per 100,000 of the population. A further subdivision of that event (serial murder) is even rarer, happening in less than one percent of all instances (so that's less than one percent of 0.061%). A certain demographic (transgender) comprises just 0.5% of the population.

Therefore, the statistical chances of a transgendered person (0.5% of the population) committing a serial murder (less than 1% of all murders, the overall murder rate being 0.061%) are approximately... uh... "you are more likely to see a unicorn whilst being hit by lightning holding onto the winning lottery ticket" (or, if anyone can work out the exact percentage and the precise number of zeroes involved, please do...).

Obviously, that's not to say transgender serial murder can't happen - anything can, as the last three years have so indubitably illustrated to us - it's just to highlight that it's so staggeringly statistically unlikely, it's almost as if the big, bombastic "transgender school shooter" event splashed across all the world's papers was confected by intelligence agencies to further inflame the two most provocative and divisive political issues in the USA right now - gender wars and guns.

A "transgender school shooter" gives incredible ammunition to both sides of the political divide to further entrench themselves in their positions (one side blames guns, the other transgenders), and, consequently, further turns these warring factions against each other, in a lead up to a brutal, bloody civil war where they will ultimately tear the country to pieces, in preparation for it to be '6uilt 6ack 6etter'. That's what the point of this event is.

For all those tiresome individuals (mercifully few of whom read my site...) who are tempted to respond, "OMG r u sayin people didn't die, dont u care about the children U MONSTER!" - no, I am not saying that. Governments are quite happy to sacrifice their own people, including children, for political purposes, and they do it all the time (see: "routine" vaccination schedule). Of course it's reprehensible when the government or anyone else kills children, and that should really go without saying, hence I haven't (well, I guess I sort of have now).

What I am saying is that this event - if it actually happened and wasn't staged, which is certainly a big if - was almost certainly set up by intelligence agencies using programmed assassins to push a political agenda. If you want to know both why we now have frequent school shootings, yet no more 'conventional' serial killers (never hear about them any more, do you, whereas in the '70s and '80s there was virtually a new one every week), the answer to both questions is the same: "serial killers" and "school shooters" are not organic phenomena - they are government/military dark ops: their purpose being to stoke up fear in order to terrorise and control a population, which is something the ruling classes have been doing since the year dot - they've just got a lot more ruthless and convincing more recently.

An excellent tome that details this situation further - how the ruling classes do this, and why - is the late, great David McGowan's book. 'Programmed To Kill: The Politics of Serial Murder'. Written nearly twenty years ago, the book's description reads:

"The specter of the marauding serial killer has become a relatively common feature on the American landscape. Reactions to these modern-day monsters range from revulsion to morbid fascination-fascination that is either fed by, or a product of, the saturation coverage provided by print and broadcast media, along with a dizzying array of books, documentary films, websites, and "Movies of the Week". The prevalence in Western culture of images of serial killers (and mass murderers) has created in the public mind a consensus view of what a serial killer is. Most people are aware, to some degree, of the classic serial killer 'profile.' But what if there is a much different 'profile'-one that has not received much media attention? In Programmed to Kill, acclaimed and always controversial author David McGowan takes a fresh look at the lives of many of America's most notorious accused murderers, focusing on the largely hidden patterns that suggest that there may be more to the average serial killer story than meets the eye. Think you know everything there is to know about serial killers? Or is it possible that sometimes what everyone 'knows' to be true isn't really true at all?"

I won't spoil the whole tome for you (which really is essential reading for any discerning conspiracist, its veracity further underlined by the fact McGowan died prematurely, aged just 55, not long after writing it), but, suffice to say, you will come away from it with no doubt as to what 'serial killers' (and their successors, 'school shooters') really are.

We know from 'Covid' that the ruling classes and their puppets (the government) and propaganda organs (the mainstream media) make extensive use of continually whipped up fear and hysteria in order to control us - they intentionally make us fearful of something so we will start clamouring for it to be abolished - and one thing they are definitely aiming for abolishing is conventional schooling, in favour of moving the syllabus entirely online. So now, across the USA, families are going to be terrified of sending their children to schools (thus, one key agenda item is moved further forward), and viewing either gun-owners or transgenders with deep hostility and contempt (turning people further against each other - another agenda item advanced).

For full disclosure, I'm pro-gun - because guns exist, and "gun control" laws don't stop guns existing, they simply concentrate them in the hands of criminals and the government (but I repeat myself...). If there was a magic wand I could wave to disappear all guns, I'd use it, but as there isn't, the next best thing - by far - is that law-abiding "good guys" have the same access to guns as criminal, corrupt bad guys. And that is literally why the second amendment exists: not simply for hunting, not merely to protect yourself from burglars - but as a mechanism to protect the American people from a tyrannical government.

I'm also "anti-trans", insofar as I believe the current iteration of the trans movement is a devious and disfiguring cult hellbent on brainwashing the youth into mutilating and sterilising themselves, and I oppose that. As any remotely sane person should. I'm not, however, anti any individual who wants to cross-dress or adopt a name more commonly used by the opposite sex (I'll call you by whatever name you like, but I won't use "your pronouns", since there is never any need to - if I need to refer to you, I will just use your name).

Nevertheless, despite being "pro-gun" and "anti-trans", I don't think this alleged school shooting gives us any useful insight into either the gun or the transgender issue, because I think the whole situation has been confected by the government to bait and manipulate the populace into the desired responses, just like all those famous "serial killers" were (who are, let's face it, just as famous as any Hollywood star).

You are supposed to react to this latest gory crime-drama-thriller by either condemning guns, or condemning transgenders, and then start fighting furiously with anyone who holds the opposing view. That's the whole point of the event.

It's interesting also that it's a female-to-male transgender who did this, which further reduces the statistical likelihood that it actually happened, as female serial murderers are even more vanishingly rare than male ones. This female, however, was pumped full of synthetic testosterone, so the story being woven is that giving females testosterone causes them to commit despicable crimes (women being so much more emotionally unstable than men, you see, so they lack the restraint testosterone-heavy men have - yes, this is really being said), so - we might conclude - this is now too dangerous to do.

Turning males into "females" suits the overlords, because castrating men and dousing them with girly hormones, neutralises them and makes them less of a threat - but a female jacked up on testosterone could get too combative and the ruling classes don't want that, so, potentially, this is another psy-op within a psy-op: that "trans women" are safe, because female hormones make these biological men less dangerous. But "trans men" - e.g., women on a form of HRT - are a real threat, because women are too crazy and emotionally volatile to be put on an aggression-promoting hormone like "T", and just go mad and kill a load of children when they are. That seems to be the takeaway we're supposed to get from this.

So this could, ultimately, be yet another way of disenfranchising biological women, especially considering, in the younger generation, the large majority of "trans" youths are female. I've made the point previously that women are being so categorically erased from public life, it's understandable that many are responding to this by concluding the only remaining option is to become a "trans man" instead (and this is certainly nothing new: women have been disguising themselves as men in order to participate in public life since there's been a public life).

Yet if we prohibit women from even trying to mimic men, as (the story will go) the required hormonal dosing is "too dangerous", then that's yet another option erased for biological females.

So ultimately, this "transgender shooter" event - like literally any event which gets sensationalist, international media coverage - is about pushing an agenda, and, it would appear, several agendas.

I'm not saying it definitely didn't happen or trying to detract from the magnitude of mass slaughter, which is always a tragedy, especially when it involves children. What I am saying is that it is always our obligation to remain vigilant and discerning, and not fall for the obvious media mind traps set to bait us into certain responses. Just looking at the fantastical statistical unlikelihood of this event really happening is enough to make us seriously question it.

And you know, I'd never have thought, when I was in the process of failing GCSE Maths, that the subject could end up being a good defence against military-grade mind control operations in the future. I might actually have occasionally done my Maths homework had I known...

Thanks for reading! This site is 100% reader-funded, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, meaning your support is what powers this site to keep going. If you would like to make a contribution of any size, please do so through...

1. BuyMeACoffee for one-off or monthly donations
2. Patreon, for monthly pledges
3. Direct bank transfer, for either monthly or one-off donations, to Nat West, a/c 30835984, s/c 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA

Your support is what enables this site to continue to exist, and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.

If you enjoyed reading this, please consider supporting the site via donation:
[wpedon id=278]

### 15 comments on “The mathematics of media psy-ops”

1. Nicholas Bunn says:

Agree totally đ
Do you think they make up the persona of the shooter and commit the crime themselves ?

2. Susanne Waters says:

As one American commentator said, the Highland Park survivor woman who randomly showed up at the Nashville trans shooting calling for gun reform just happens to be friends with Nancy Pelosi. Usual sort of curious numbers showing up as well. 3 students and 3 adults = 33 on 3.27.2023.

3. Ann says:

Miri, beautifully 'argued'. Thank you.

4. Ross Hendry says:

Makes sense to me. (Although there may be another explanation: itâs reported in the U.S. that the Covid jabs can âunmask psychosisâ in some individuals. I wonder if we are seeing manifestations of this in the outbreaks of school shootings, transgender protests, unexplained suicides, paedophilia, etc?)

Nevertheless, it's certainly not beyond the wit of the intelligence agencies to use mentally affected jab victims for their purposes.

Re: 'Therefore, the statistical chances of a transgendered person (0.5% of the population) committing a serial murder (less than 1% of all murders, the overall murder rate being 0.061%) are approximately... uh... "you are more likely to see a unicorn whilst being hit by lightning holding onto the winning lottery ticket"'

As a semi-retired statistician I would just say that the figure needed is not the percentage of transgendered persons in the general population but their percentage amongst identified murderers/serial murderers that you quote figures for. (No doubt as transgenderism is a relatively new phenomena this figure hasn't been established yet.) It would probably result in a larger (but still tiny) chance.

5. Paul King says:

Quite a rough and ready calculation, but here's my quick go at it:

USA population in 2021, 332,000,000
Murder victims in a year, at 6.1 per 100,000, would be in the vicinity of 20252.
If 1% of those were victims of serial murder, that's 202 per year.
If 0.5% of the population is transgender, then the expected annual number of victims of transgender serial murder in the USA would be 0.005 x 202, i.e. one: which would mean a transgender mass murderer once every few years. Not so unlikely as all that, then, without attempting to weigh what effect the peculiar stresses of transgender life might have on the likelihood of an individual going on a killing rampage.

6. Jo B says:

Thank you Miri. Agree totally. I bought and read Dave McGowan's book you mention a few years ago. I started reading about 'serial killers' in my mid teens (UK ones especially), mainly to try and understand why a human being would do such a thing to another. Miles Mathis (not sure if you've heard of him or read his papers) wrote this back in 2014 within his first paper on Ted Bundy:

"The government has been manufacturing tragedies year by year for decades, and we are now up to several a month, just to keep the patient properly traumatized. It used to be that one fake serial killer every couple of years would do the job, but in this as in everything else, the patient develops a tolerance. After 9/11, the audience became more difficult to startle. In addition to your daily dose of shootings, maulings, rapes, suicides, crashes and molestations (most of them also manufactured for your viewing pleasure by the Intelligence agencies), you are now privy to at least one mass shooting or
bombing every two or three months. It was found that the serial killer story took too long to unwind, so they ditched that. You don't get serial killers much anymore. It is mass shootings instead, since they happen all at once. The American public no longer has the attention span required to follow a serial killer. Think about that, please. Don't you think it is convenient that crazy murderers decided to quit the serial thing and go in for the mass thing instead? So nice of them to change with the times, scripting their madness to fit the demands of the media!

*For an interesting cloaked exposĂ© of this phenomenon, I recommend you to M. Night Shyamalan's film The Village. He is telling you that your bogeymen are faked."

7. Jane says:

The purpose of propaganda is always to weave narratives around alleged âfactsâ â (which may or may not be actual facts, ie, they may be true or false, but in a sense, thatâs not the point) - the propaganda interprets those facts for us, tells us what we should make of them, gives us their meaning, lays out their implications.
The narratives woven around serial killers, school shooters, 9/11 and successor terrorists, were always somewhat unconvincing on the point of what motivated the perps â in the end, you were left to plug this gap with âwell, they were just crazy peopleâ â you just had to accept that this was the way it was, and ask no further questions.
The kind of account you and the rest of the âconspiracyâ community give is much more richly textured, leaving no niggling gaps needing to be passed over â it all makes much more sense, it hangs together so much better - for example, by revealing how these perps came to be so crazy (intelligence assets, trauma based mind control) and by providing a clear answer to the âcui bonoâ question âwe are no longer required to assume ultimate senselessness and meaninglessness and random coincidences: there is a clear plan and agenda and clear steps being taken to implement it.

8. Is there a word or term for a script that reads different ways to different audiences? I feel there was but I've lost it.

9. Miri says:

Thank you all for the interesting comments as ever (and the maths!).

To Leo - I'm not sure - maybe some other commentators know?

10. Mike S Panther Paw says:

Just saw a meme on telegram showing two photos of the nashville shooter - from two different cams - wearing different trainers in each one ---- moments later. Lets just agree there wasnt a vans vs puma moment mid-spree and that the footage is clearly faked and/or from a training event? It really is just like 1984 where the govs bomb their own citizens to maintain an illusion of war...

11. Mari says:

I watched the video on Bitchute of this attack. It showed a car driving up then cut to camera facing entrance where shots fired at glass doors. I am sure at the sound of breaking glass there would be at least one person who would have come out to see what the cause is but not one person in corridoors. No classrooms or children shown. It did not appear natural. I read a bit about the Dunblane school shooting. The author claimed the shooter was a gay rent boy used by the authorities pervs, along with others from boys homes. The author's conclusions were the shootings helped to change gun laws and to protect huge pedo rings run by those who should serve and protect the people. What a sick world.

12. rangiman says:

Subjective truth ?

13. rangiman says:

Sadly , is this not just another staged trauma-based psy-op ?
Compare with the CoCoNutz-1984 FukSin vampire script global screenplay .

14. Mandy says:

Sent you a little donation. Thanks for all you do.

15. Chief Bromden says:

All the maths assume that 0.5% of the population in the US is transgender. I believe this figure is a massive deception, just like the percentages of homosexuals and lesbians, and not just in the US.

[wpedon id=278]