Alex Jones has been ordered to pay $4.1 million to the parents of a Sandy Hook victim
(www.dailymail.co.uk)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (29)
sorted by:
Yup, it's kind of funny, that's the thing no one wants to talk about; there was some mighty suspicious stuff regarding Sandy Hook. Not saying it didn't happen but...there are certainly some things that make you ask if it actually happened. And some of those alleged parents...I can see why someone would say they were crisis actors, holy shit some of that stuff was fucking bizarre. It's more believable that they were crisis actors than that they were actually real people. What the fuck was that shit?
The only thing Alex Jones did wrong regarding Sandy Hook was capitulate, apologize, and admit guilt. Whether he was factually right or wrong, he had reason to be suspicious, and he had trusted sources telling him it never happened. He should have stuck by his guns.
It's similar to the 'ten year old raped, crosses state lines to get abortion' story. That fucking reeked of bullshit, and anyone who was suspicious of it had every reason to be. Even if it was later "proven correct," no one should be apologizing for doubting; there were tons of red flags, and zero corroborating evidence.
The parent of one of the victims is caught on tape laughing and smiling right before obviously psyching himself up to look pitiable for the camera to give a statement
In its best light there was obvious emotional manipulation going on.
Yup, that's one of the really fucking weird elements.
But how dare you call that grieving parent a crisis actor?!
Not just that moment but then getting back into smiling and chatty, remarking how wonderful the town and everyone there is in a general sense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjjH7APUj14
Being suspicious of this is entirely reasonable. Everyone grieves differently, but he aint grieving to my eyes.
Eh, not sure how much stock I would put in that video since people grieve differently. Plus, it wouldn't make any sense for them to be hanging out in the open instead of being hidden away until they're called.
Personally, I think it makes more sense to consider that the Democrats are just... amoral, if not outright evil. It's basically routine, by this point, that leftoids (including neocons) will use human suffering to tug on heart strings to overstep their boundaries.
Honestly, there isn't any way to look at the situation that isn't... pants shittingly horrific.
The thing that gets me with this suspicious stuff happening these days, whether it's unexplained attacks (Las Vegas shooting, the Nashville bomb), strong evidence of election fraud, media lies, state secrets, suspicious prison suicide, mass vaccination campaigns that don't make any sense, or leaked email chains from politicians using strange code language and hinting at assassinating their enemies - it's that the media and people in charge completely ignore all the claims and honest questions from the public, and (WITHOUT evidence) call them baseless conspiracies. Was reality always like this? Did people just use to be more gullible? I don't think so, because in the past when events happened that got people questioning official stories, like the Holocaust, the Kennedy Assassination, or UFOs, people in power and professional skeptics at least tried to explain away the crazy conspiracies. Even if it was just a coverup. See Project Blue Book - "That wasn't a flying saucer, it was swamp gas. You saw Venus." They don't even do that now. Now it's just "you're wrong and a bad person, stop talking about it."
Even 9-11 had hearings to explain away the inconsistencies. That was only 20 years ago and I truly believe if it happened today, there would be no hearing and Brian Steltzer on CNN would be calling for the arrest of anyone who questioned the FBI narrative as treason.
Maybe they realized having half the population continuing to believe in "dangerous conspiracy theories" is actually more beneficial for them because it's an angle they can use to attack us in the media and in political campaigns.
Well the big thing that's different is the internet.
How it turned out is that instant access to information means a small number of people are highly informed about anything and can't be lied to so there's no point trying, and a large group of people actively seek out only comforting news that makes them feel good and will believe anything they're told (incidentally they're also totally convinced they are the informed and smart ones).
"They're all nazi white supremacists" makes the comfort-seeking people feel good, like standing next to an ugly person to look more attractive in comparison. Actually having a debate of any kind raises doubt because if it's worth responding to maybe it's a legitimate view, and that makes them feel uncertain and that makes them feel bad.
So before the information era they could put on a show trial/hearing, make it seem believable by intentionally putting on a poor case for what actually happened and a strong case for what they want you to believe, and everybody would watch and the propaganda would work on most people. Skeptics would say wow that case was strong, the believers would take some comfort in their beliefs being reassured.
But now the information is out there, the skeptics know the trial/hearing was intentionally thrown and the believers take more comfort if only one side is presented. So you get Jan 6 show trial which is obviously a total farce to anyone who's watched 5 minute of it because they're only playing to one side.
Thr American government has admitted the UFO were real few years ago and no one cared.