Not All Truther Movements Are Created Equal

[RonPaulFanInGA]

http://www.theweeklings.com/golear/2013/01/22/not-all-truther-movements-are-created-equal/


This is simply not the case with Sandy Hook. As Sattin eloquently explains, Hooker theories are founded on things like erroneous initial news reports and false tweets. I’ve seen more compelling evidence for the existence of Santa Claus. There is no Sandy Hook equivalent of the Zapruder film.

[kathy88]

No Zapruder film indeed. But there was security footage which seems to be missing.

[jmdrake]

http://www.theweeklings.com/golear/2013/01/22/not-all-truther-movements-are-created-equal/

Your linked article is a dishonest hit piece. Sorry, but it is. The author tries to fix it with his disclaimer at the top, but he doesn't actually fixed the worst lie in his article. Here it is:

The usual suspects—including InfoWars’ Alex Jones and Florida Atlantic’s James Tracy—have incurred the wrath of many detractors by claiming that the official version of that horrible tragedy is an elaborate fiction, and that Adam Lanza was really a pawn of FEMA, or the Mossad, or the aforementioned shapeshifting reptiles. Some of the statements made by certain “Hookers”, as Samuel Sattin detailed on these pages yesterday, are beyond the pale, and they deserve the opprobrium being heaped upon them.

And what's the source for his lie? Another blogger on the same website:

According to TOTT and other rabid conspiracy theorists such as Alex Jones, who gained exposure on Pierce Morgan, men like Gene Rosen, who sheltered six children from the carnage on the day of the massacre and cried on camera when recalling the tale to reporters, are nothing more than a fraud vetted by a company called Crisis Actors (in league with FEMA) to fool the American public.

Really? So Alex Jones has come out and said definitely that Gene Rosen is a paid actor? Source? If the writers at "theweeklings" weren't either shills or incredibly lazy, they could have done a search of Infowars.com like I did.

http://tinyurl.com/bj7aq2w

I just did and clicked on every search result that brought up Gene Rosen. They were either A) from "planet.infowars.com" which is a facebook like site where anyone can register and post articles or B) comments on articles from www.infowars.com.

So, using this "journalistic standard", Josh Lowery endorses every conspiracy theory or other idea posted here on this forum that he runs and anyone who has a block endorses each and every comment some anonymous person makes to a blog post.

Oh, and lets look at what else the article you posted has to say!

Another criterion, when evaluating conspiracy theories, is the “Cicero test”; we must ask ourseves: Cui bono? It’s not enough to suggest that the official record is wrong; without a motive for the deceit, absent some obvious beneficiary, there can be no conspiracy. To wit: there are any number of reasons any number of people could have benefited from the removal of JFK from office. The attacks of 9/11, similarly, had countless ripple effects, sparking a massive re-investment in the U.S. military, two wars that cost trillions of dollars, and that legislated erosion of our privacy with the Orwellian name, the Patriot Act, to name but three. Many, many organizations, corporations, states, and individuals benefited, directly or indirectly, from the events of that day.

Looked at through this lens, the Sandy Hook theory implodes. Alex Jones believes, if I’m reading it correctly, that FEMA staged the school shooting as a way of demanding popular support for an Obama overthrow of the Second Amendment, which would enrich…who, exactly? Sasha and Malia? The production of firearms is good for the economy; one of the (sane) arguments against the new legislative proposals is that they will eliminate American manufacturing jobs. We’re supposed to believe, what, that gun-safety legislation is like the scene in an action movie where the good guy puts down his weapon and the bad guy proceeds to run amok? That taking away our assault rifles is the last step toward Obama installing himself as a totalitarian dictator, nationalizing the oil companies, and establishing sharia law? Even if any of this were in the realm of the possible (and personally I’d sooner believe in shapeshifting reptiles), a loose affiliation of assault-weapon enthusiasts could never hope to take down the U.S. army. Or so one hopes.

Okay RonPaulFanInGa. I will ask you this because you posted the article. Do you really believe that Barack Obama has no ulterior motive to banning gun control? Forget whether or not you believe Sandy Hook was staged or if Obama is just "taking advantage of a crisis." The author would have you believe that since banning guns means lower gun sales and that's "bad for the economy" and it can't be about the federal government trying to prevent an uprising because "a loose affiliation of assault-weapon enthusiasts could never hope to take down the U.S. army. Or so one hopes." Ummmm....okay. So why is it that guns are banned in North Korea? I mean if dictators aren't worried about "loose affiliations of assault-weapons enthusiast" then what's their motive for banning guns? The safety of their people? :rolleyes:

Regardless of whether Sandy Hook is a conspiracy or not, recognize this article for what it is which is a poorly written hitpiece designed to placate fears that the gun grab is for reasons other than our safety. Sure the author can try to "mollify truthers" by saying "You're okay. It's just the Sandy Hookers that are the problem." The 9/11 truth movement has gotten quieter over the years, and infighting has taken it's toll. Plus since 9/11 happened under Bush's watch you do have leftist truthers who can't fathom Obama doing anything bad and who support gun control. (That's the reason I couldn't vote for Dennis Kucinich even though he called for a new 9/11 investigation. He also called for a total ban on guns). So from a propaganda point of view it's okay to say "9/11 truthers good (or at least scientific)...Sandy Hookers bad."

Note I'm still agnostic about Sandy Hook. But this crappy article has the opposite effect on me than what was intended. I hope as I've pointed out the flaws you'll see through it as well.

[truelies]

Hmmmmm Sandy Hook has just too much in common with the Port Arthur Massacre (an obvious black op) to be the lone nutcase shooter scenario the usual suspects in government & media are ramming down the public's throat.