The phenomenon of crisis actors is a mainstay in conspiracy circles. Basically, if you believe that some of these pivotal events that happen are indeed staged by the government and the mainstream media, then it follows that you must also believe that everyone you see commenting on the tragedy must be in on it too. After all, with a massive conspiracy like that, you would want to keep as few people involved as possible to stop the spreading of information, and yet, you gotta have all these people to make it seem legit. Enter crisis actors. Crisis actors, of course, cannot be proven as a theory. The only time you really see anything about them is after a major tragedy (such as last week in Charleston, South Carolina) when someone starts examining every witness’ statement with a fine-tooth comb. The result is usually some people that have striking similarities or people that just don’t seem to be selling their “roles” well enough. All of the above is what we are seeing with Charleston. We have faces that conspiracy theorists claim were also seen on the set of other allegedly staged false-flag operations. We have police officers that seem to be the same person, and yet are in two terrible tragedies in police departments across the nation from each other. Then, we see melodramatic, stoic accounts of events from people that conspiracy theorists often think should be a little more emotional and animated given what they have just been put through.
So what does it all mean? Opponents of the crisis actor theory often point to the resources of puppeteer government as reason enough that it can’t be so. After all, why on Earth would the government use the same actors again and again, leaving a hallmark that someone is bound to notice? Surely they can afford other actors. On the surface, this does seem like a pretty sensible question, but if you really think about it, it actually supports the other side just as well. Of course they can’t just get new actors. That would mean the old ones are not employed and paid off any longer. So they might be out there flapping their gums about what happened. It makes perfect sense to continue using the same crisis actors so as to (as we pointed out above in the introduction) keep as few people involved as possible. It also keeps those actors from going about their business and being out in the world. Presumably, there must be something that keeps these people from talking, and the government can’t allow whatever that is to cease for one second, or then they would have no choice but to off the person to stop the possibility of them talking about what they did for a living. Of course, there are plenty of conspiracy theorists that think that “crisis actors” get the axe in real life when their part in the play is over or if they act out.
While the similarity in appearances is very interesting, other things like the lack of emotion is a very difficult territory to use as evidence either for or against. After all, people are made up differently, and not everyone goes into raging hysterics in the face of tragedy (thankfully). So, it’s not possible to say that just because the young man in the video below isn’t going nuts in the interview that it necessarily means he’s not telling the truth. Also, with Charleston in particular, it is hard to believe that the government would pull such an operation with a prominent politician involved. That kind of person can’t just start over in a new town. Of course, there are people out there that think he really was killed, and the government was going for a two-for-one deal because for whatever reason, they wanted him dead and used this as a perfect opportunity to get the job done.
At the end of the day, no one is ever going to know for sure if there really is such a thing as crisis actors, but it certainly is interesting to debate about, and it is coincidental that so many of those faces seem to show up again and again.