The video circulating of the girl allegedly being choked by a policeman for not wearing a mask is a hoax and it is a part of a psy op. I will explain why.
Let us set aside for a moment whether these events were staged or not. The question is who does the video benefit? It clearly benefits the government, which is why it has been plastered all over the mainstream news.
Firstly it shows that dissenters will be harshly dealt with.
Secondly it benefits the government because it divides people. It evokes a strong emotional response and then splits people based on preconceived notions. Therefore if you are part of a group which believes that the government is encroaching on our rights, you will see a young woman treated poorly simply for not wearing a mask. If you buy into the official narrative of the lockdowns being due to the virus, you will see two young people abusing police officers who are trying to do their jobs under tough circumstances.
This is so because there is no context to the video, it does not show what happened prior to the interaction, therefore viewers must supply their own bias. Was the young woman simply walking by and was assaulted by the police? Did she provoke the police, did she swear at them, perhaps spit at them? There is no way of knowing just by watching.
Undeniably the hero of this story is Senior Constable Chris Scott of Melbourne Police station. Our masked upholder of justice shows off solid jiu jitsu skills in handling a vocal and a rather unsympathetic female protagonist.
This young female and her alleged boyfriend do not come out looking as heroic.
The young male protagonist starts out fairly demurely whilst his alleged girlfriend is being handled by the police, however he then proceeds to work himself up into a lather as the conflict develops. It is as if he needs to maintain a certain level of rage just to hold up his part of the interaction. Indeed it is akin to watching a rap battle where the contestants proceed towards a crescendo. As his rage increases so too does his pacing until he is almost running in concentric circles.
Nothing the alleged boyfriend or the young woman do throughout the interaction de-escalates the situation. Instead they both scream, kick and make inflammatory statements. It is almost as if their goal was to antagonise any potential audience.
So far as the female police officer is concerned, she appears disinterested and almost bored by the incident. She makes no effort at all at controlling the scene, even as the alleged boyfriend and a potential threat is working himself up. At one stage she turns her back and even allows him to come behind Chris Scott to ask him his name. The silver fox does not miss a beat however, calmly stating his name as he simply continues to mount and control the young woman.
The apparent initial video of the incident was taken from across the street and it is presented with no continuity. Once again, a number of scenarios could be inferred from it. This first video hit the internet and social media at approximately 10pm, a time of maximum engagement across social media. The second video was presented about 30 to 40 minutes later.
Was the time of the presentation accidental? If not, why were they presented at this time? Clearly the actions took place during the day, at least some hours earlier. Should the audience assume that these two videos, apparently shot independently, surfaced at a similar time, hours later?
This video does not bear the hallmark of an organic event. In fact it bears the mark of an organised, well structured and a professional mass media campaign. The reasons for such a campaign could be:
Let’s not buy into this narrative.
