Shooting Psyops Explained, part 4 [The Puzzle]

[You can read my brief introduction and earlier installments in this series here: https://steemit.com/@hqz]

I left you last time with a little puzzle.

I am trying to show you how the spooky signatures of these psyops work. We assume that most of the major mass shootings are psyops of one kind or another, and that several of the smaller ones are, as well. We would classify this St. Louis event as minor—we didn’t see Anderson Cooper show up on the scene, for instance. However, there were several reasons why our initial suspicions were raised. The main reason was the timing. Just as Lee Boyd Malvo (the DC sniper from 2002) was in the news again, we have this mass shooting by a Marlo Boyd on June 18.

Boyd Malvo
Marlo Boyd

Coincidences do happen, of course. However, when paired with the strangeness in the photo attached to the event, it is enough for us to go further with our investigation, with our thought-experiment.

We noticed that the difference between this shooter’s name and the infamous sniper was only one letter off—the “r” in one versus the “v” in the other. I also suggested that we might look to the numbers displayed in the photo as a potential code. I pointed out that the numbers were in sharp focus while the officers were a little blurred:

It turns out that these numbers do indicate a spooky signature to this event and are indicative of the little mind games that are built into scripted shooting psyops.

H0343513 & C0847898

While assuming that this is a code of some kind, I asked: how do we go about breaking it?

First let’s look for contextual clues. The two strings in the photo are in the front, in the low-center of the frame. They are printed on different colored trashcans that are placed beside each other. My thought here is that this might mean that we are supposed to think of the two strings together in some way.

H0343513
C0847898

That’s not a lot to go on, yet. However, we might want to begin looking for a pattern or for some rule or operator that we can find within the strings themselves. It turns out that both—pattern and rule—are true in this case.

[H]0343513
[C]0847898

The “H” & “C” are providing information for us about a pattern within the strings themselves. In order to see this clearly, however, we have to use a common method in encoding and decoding: letter-number substitution.

For this, all we need is a simple letter to number chart:

If we look to the chart, we see that H = 8 and C = 3. When we reenter this into our strings, we can better understand the pattern and, ultimately, the message.

See, the H & C (now 8 & 3) are telling us about the simple pattern in the strings: the 3s & 8s that serve as bookends to an interior set of numbers. I take it that these are the numbers that we are supposed to focus on and that we are supposed to understand these numbers in relation to one another (the context from the photo) and that our answer will involve the letter to number chart that brought us here.

Well, what’s the difference between those two numbers, 4789 and 4351? The difference is 438. What could 438 mean within the context of this code?

For that we have to go back to the letter to number chart:

If we have a number larger than 26, and we want to understand it by this chart, then we just keep going around it. So, 27 would go back to “A.” 28 would go back to “B.” 52 would be “Z,” etc.

How about 438? Where does 438 take us?

Remember, we were going down this path because of the timing of this event and the similarity between this shooter’s name and the name of the DC sniper that was back in the news.

Boyd Malvo
Marlo Boyd

And we noted that the main difference in the names is the “R” vs. the “V” in the DC sniper’s name. Let me just say that “R” is a kind of clue in these cases—but I’ll have to tell you about that another time.

So, what is 438 on the chart?

438 = V. This is the “V” we were missing from the DC sniper’s name.

Coincidence? Maybe. Crazy? Probably. But for ghostbusters the message seems to be:

We were here.

We are going to consider this to be the first true indication of a spooky signature in the event. I have two more major indicators to share with you that follow very different methodologies. Nevertheless, these methodologies are also representative of the major cases the ghostbusters have worked on.

I’ll show those to you in Part 5. In Part 5, we are going to learn a little bit about the Roman goddess Diana and the Diana games that the spooks like to play.

Until next time…

--HQZ