Is it Wrong to Question the Official Story When Tragedy Strikes?

Via The Daily Bell

The media says, “Jump.” And the public responds in unison, “How high?”

“As high as you ever have jumped before, except maybe after 9/11, or the Kennedy assassination.”

Of course, when there is news, it should be reported. Today it is reported sensationally, as entertainment. Is it meant to inform, or induce?

Which came first, the media’s obsession with violence, or the public demand for violence? In the 1990’s as violent crime in America dropped, the media filled more or more time slots with stories about violence.

By the end of the 90’s the public was clamoring for the government to do somethingabout what they assumed was a rising trend in violent crime.

Was that orchestrated? The government certainly benefits from a hysterical public begging them to help. It certainly gives the government an important role in the daily life of an average citizen. But this alone doesn’t mean that it was a conspiracy. Acknowledging that the government benefitted from the media’s overreporting of crime is not the same as suggesting the government actively pushed the media to do so.

But why not wonder? Exercise those thought processes.

It is a known fact that thousands of journalists were at one time on the payroll of the CIA. It was called Operation Mockingbird, and agents would place false stories in publications like the New York Times, and Time.

So when it comes to the case of the fake 90’s crime wave, it makes sense to wonder if a similar program still exists. The courts have ruled that FBI agents can legally impersonate journalists in the course of an investigation.

Do we need to discover the actual program in order to speculate? Well, I certainly wouldn’t say that it is happening without knowing for sure. But we can acknowledge a historical fact and draw a parallel between that and a similar contemporary trend. In such circumstances, it makes sense to be skeptical.

Either way, we shouldn’t fall prey to the media’s manipulations about such things, regardless of the catalyst. So why not remind people that in the past, lies from the government shaped public opinion?

But there are some cases when questioning, wondering, and speculating is considered downright wrong.

When it is most important to speak freely, you can’t.

How do I walk the line between my inherent mistrust of the government media complex and sincere compassion and empathy for victims of tragedy?

Is it wrong to question official narratives after a tragic event? Is it disrespectful to wonder if there isn’t more to the story? Should I censor myself to avoid appearing insensitive, when I want to talk about inconsistencies in the media tale, or the motives that various groups could have to lie about such events?

I think it is especially important to be able to talk freely when it comes to tragedy. The more potential an event has for exploitation, the more possibilities should be explored.

If we are conditioned to hold our tongues, to suppress our curiosity and skepticism when it comes to tragedy, then the worst actors in any given situation win. Those in power need only create a tragedy, and it becomes impossible to question the official narrative. Otherwise, you are disrespectful and uncaring.

When someone is gravely wounded, you don’t slap a band-aid over it. You’ve got to clean out the wound. And that hurts in the moment. But in the long run, it is necessary to prevent infection.

We should wonder if 9/11 was a false flag attack. I don’t think it is disrespectful to the victims to do so. I think it would be more disrespectful to unquestioningly believe the official story. The official story comes from the people who have the most to gain.

Did the terrorists who carried out the attack on the twin towers have anything to gain? Well maybe if they believed the whole 72 virgins thing. But in real life, they died. Suiciding bombing is a thing that people do, however, so it certainly can’t be ruled out.

Did Osama Bin Laden have a lot to gain? Well again, it is tough to understand the motivation of terrorists. Apparently, they think killing innocent people accomplishes something. But now he is dead.

And what about the official storytellers, the ones who investigated, and revealed the true culprits behind 9/11?

Their gains remain. They gained the power to easily declare wars and conduct military operations. Money was poured into the defense budget. Agencies like Homeland Security and the TSA sprang into existence.

Attention was diverted from missing money at the Pentagon. The PATRIOT Act was passed. Due process was no longer a concern.

“Mission Accomplished” in Iraq; the glory of killing Bin Laden. The public became desensitized to war. America helped toppled regimes in Libya and Egypt, and support a civil war in Syria.

These things alone don’t prove anything. But it looks awfully suspicious. The ones who we rely on for information about what happened had the most to gain from the attack. They are the ones who will “solve” the problems.

It is a conflict of interest even if the official story is true. It just so happens that their recommendations on the best course of action were the very things that would grow their power, expand their budget, and swell their ranks.

Again we have a historical fact to turn to for comparison. The Joint Chiefs of Staff under Kennedy floated the idea of carrying out a false flag against American citizens to get them involved in a war with Cuba. It was called Operation Northwoods. Kennedy told them if they ever mentioned the idea of murdering innocent Americans again, he would have them tried for treason.

Well, we all know what happened to Kennedy, but that is a whole rabbit hole of its own. What we know for sure, is that as early as the 1960’s people in the U.S. government wanted to commit false flag attacks against Americans to provoke war. And the leader most vehemently opposed was assassinated.

Incidentally, the Kennedy Administration approved of Operation Mockingbird.

May I Speak Freely?

I want to wonder, and I want to speculate. I get as angry and sad as anyone else with a properly developed conscience when horrible things happen. I want those responsible held accountable. And it is against my skeptical nature to accept an official story without digging for more evidence. Horror does not paralyze my desire to question the official narrative and wonder about inconsistencies.

One thing that strikes me about all of the mass shootings of the past few years, is the great diversity in location and venue.

A college in Virginia. An elementary school in Connecticut. A mall in Washington. A nightclub in Florida. A church in North Carolina. A movie theater in Colorado. A political meet and greet in Arizona. The streets of California. A concert on the Vegas strip.

If someone wanted to strike fear into the hearts of Americans, they could not have chosen a better range of targets. The message would be whatever place you live, wherever you go in public, whatever your age, job, or social status, you are not safe.

Maybe that is the truth. And maybe it is random.

We are told these were all carried out by lone a lone gunman–or a married couple in one case.

But why are there so often witness reports of a second gunman? Could it be chalked up to confusion?

The victims tragically lost their lives. Their families lost loved ones, which will impact them for the rest of their lives. The American people lose their sense of security and their rights. Relationships deteriorate as bitter disagreements turn personal, blame abounds, fingers point, defenses go up.

And after so many tragedies, the culprit is left dead. Is that justice?

Who benefits? The dead guy on the 32nd floor?

The Democrats who want gun control? The Republicans who want militarized police? The media who get a bump in ratings? The Generals who want war? A government that “never let(s) a good crisis go to waste”?

I want this madness to stop. We know how the media wants it to play out. They will get their ratings with division and bitter disagreement. The government always gets more power, more relevance, more opportunity to insert itself into the everyday lives of Americans.

That is why it is so necessary to look deeper, to ask those tough questions that we don’t even want to consider as a possibility. We can’t sit by silently wondering if we are being told the truth or fed lies. It is not disrespectful to question the official story. It would be a miscarriage of justice to accept it without protest, as we are told is what should be done in times of crisis.

The only other option is to play into the hands of the media and government, whether they be orchestrators or opportunists. When we replay the same old arguments and put forth the same stale solutions, when we look to them for information and solutions, they win.

Question everything. Clean out the wounds. It may hurt to get in there deep. But if we don’t, the infection will grow and fester, as it always has before.


Barney Fife Blue Steel 309 Thu, 10/05/2017 - 05:48 Permalink

Jesus. Going to Iraq, witnessing a buddy getting killed and almost getting killed yourself is one hell of a way to get red-pilled. Ya' know, in other places I still see people get pissed at the grunts for fighting the corporate wars, but folks need to remember that we were ALL blue-pilled at one time and love of country is one hell of an attractor to serve. What they need to realize is that for the vast majority of grunts that fight, they are acting on blue-pilled information and really do think that they are defending the homeland. In other words, their hearts and their intentions are of the noblest degree.In fact for those who were never over in the sand, well ,we had the luxury of swallowing the red pill at our own pace of comfort. You had one jammed down your throat. I salute you. You have to be one tough son of a bitch to go through that and maintain your sanity, and resist the denial. 

In reply to by Blue Steel 309

budd_dwyers_gun Socratic Dog Thu, 10/05/2017 - 13:37 Permalink

Cognitive dissonance hurts.Here's one of my favorites i use to encourage critical thought re: electronic surveillance.Person: No, my iPhone is only listening if I say ''Siri, blah blah blah.'' Not all the time, that's crazy-talk. It only listens when I want it to.Me: Ok, so how is it possible to only be listening on your command, if it isn't always listening to recognize its "name?"Person: ....oh. Um... I didn't think of that.

In reply to by Socratic Dog

IvannaHumpalot Wed, 10/04/2017 - 14:01 Permalink

FFS humans are pattern-seeking mammals and they love to put together "clues" in different ways. But it becomes harmful when police cannot even get on with doing their job and evaluating the evidence for 48 hours after a public massacre without conspiritards running around telling everyone they're being 'lied to' by the authorities because some 4-chan idiot made a mistake. Drudge shouldn't be posting that Alex Jones Infowars "story" about the food receipt -- from a day before Paddock was checked in to the hotel, which does not identify Paddock as the buyer of the food. Could have been whoever was in the room before him! the reservation before! then he has laura loomer saying "a source who worked at the hotel said Paddock checked in on the 25th" -well NO actually, she never talked to a source who worked at the hotel. She had a message from some guy who claimed his girlfriend worked at the hotel. Has she any proof his girlfriend even said it? wasn't mistaken? taken out of context? did she even exist?  this is the callibre of "sourcing" ... poor quality

Gerrilea IvannaHumpalot Thu, 10/05/2017 - 08:18 Permalink

"Conspiritards"...The term, "conspiracy theory" was pushed into the public lexicon by the CIA as a means to shutdown critical rational thought.You've gone a step further and created a new term, to shutdown critical rational thought.AGENT, may I call you agent?  How much do you get paid to peddle this crap?Google, conspiracies theories that were'll find hundreds of examples where our government lied, killed and  did illegal testing on US Citizens.Google the term, "false flag".  Review the events in Australia that led to a total confiscation of firearms there. Google, "Gulf of Tonkin and NSA".Google, "Building 7".Google, Steven Corbett and 911.Google, Wolfgang Halbig and Sandy Hook.MAYBE after you've spent a few hours educating yourself, you'll understand why we don't believe our government or those pushing to shut down critical public examination of the facts.Analyze the facts you find and try to UNDERSTAND this quote:

"You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."Rahm Emanuel

Obviously there is an agenda to disarm the American public whilst creating a standing army through local police departments. 

In reply to by IvannaHumpalot

Bay of Pigs Gerrilea Thu, 10/05/2017 - 10:03 Permalink

Anyone not willing to admit to the facts on JFK, Gulf of Tonkin, 9/11, Iraq and WMD’s, Sandy Hook, Boston Bombing and most likely this event should be dismissed as a brainwashed fool and unenlightened halfwit.

Calling people “conspiritards” in the face of overwhelming evidence shows a complete disregard for seeking the truth and the harsh reality we are now facing.

Cui bono bitchez? People like Sheldon Adelson who own casino’s and the Chertoff Group who will sell them body scanners. Follow the money.

In reply to by Gerrilea

CRM114 Wed, 10/04/2017 - 14:07 Permalink

Yes, the mainstream view needs challenging, especially as the MSM becomes increasingly inaccurate and demonstrably biased.However, any challenge has to be well thought out and justified, as a flood of half-baked conspiracy theories not only clouds the waters of the current investigation, but also does irreparable damage to future challenges to authority. If you have valid, justifiable questions, I'm listening.Otherwise, Foxtrot Oscar.

Dickweed Wang Wed, 10/04/2017 - 14:10 Permalink

It is a known fact that thousands of journalists were at one time on the payroll of the CIA. It was called Operation Mockingbird, and agents would place false stories in publications like the New York Times, and Time . . . "Were at one time"?? "Was"?? "Would"??  That kind of shit is still going on to this day.  They may not have given it a fancy code phrase but the usual suspects are still at it.

Peon14 Wed, 10/04/2017 - 14:15 Permalink

The meticulous planned event even had a dead patsy left behind that would tell no tales. With a shoot and scoot tactical plan that included someone back stage turning on the lights for the shooters. Also a nice touch were plenty of military looking guns left behind. Meat for the gun grabbers to get all mouth foaming worked up about. Where the gunmen had already left the building and were making their getaway at the nearby airport while the police were still trying to figure out what was going on.

cheech_wizard Peon14 Thu, 10/05/2017 - 00:25 Permalink

Let me try to follow the logic here, and since you said shoot and scoot, I'll go with a quick getaway. This is my usual bullshit conspiratorial stream of conciousness trying to look at as many possibilities as I can think of in a short period of time and putting fingers to keyboard.1) Assume there were other (multiple shooters). So what floor were they on? The roof? The 4th floor? How long does it take them to get from where they were shooting from to a "getaway" vehicle? They had to break down their weapons and stow them in something, right? So they could appear as just a hotel guest(s)? And they certainly wouldn't be running away from their positions because that would draw unnecessary attention to themselves. One could also assume that if they didn't follow the above scenario, then they knew a way to 1) bypass any Mandalay Bay security cameras, or 2) already knew a dead zone path where no security cameras would be monitoring their progress.Elapsed time so far after the shooting stopped entirely (10 to 20 minutes?)So now the shooter(s) have exited the hotel and one must presume they need to get to their "getaway" vehicle. How's parking work at the Mandalay Bay? Underground garage or open parking. Or was another party involved waiting to pick them up? (5 minutes say up to 30 minutes? Las Vegas streets are started to get busy with police vehicles...)So having entered their getaway vehicle, which route do they take to the nearest airport? Well, McCarren International Airport is the closet, with a travel time from Mandalay Bay varying between 9 to 12 minutes depending on route. So they get to the airport. Flights out in that time frame that night? Airport parking is a bitch right? Even for picking up and dropping off. So I guess if we are going to track them down we will need to look at flight manifests and see if their were any last minute bookings, or the operation was planned so well that tickets were booked well in advance. Obviously they aren't going to make their escape toting weapons so that would assume the driver of their getaway vehicle will then need to dispose of the weapons after the rest of the shooters escape by airflight. Now there is that pesky airline security, so how long would it take them to pass through that? And these shooters would have to be professionals to keep their "cool" from the time of the shooting all the way until most likely they landed at their destination. Have their been any reports of unusual behavior at the airport that night or on any of the flights that left that night?Doubtful they would be careless enough to abandon the vehicle at the airport, because of eventual discovery, thus ruining the entire narrative of a single shooter.Or did they have a private flight standing by? Again check the flight records out of all airports in Las Vegas that night. If it was a private flight, then yes, that precludes them having the driver of the getaway vehicle having to dispose of any weapons...Time elapsed - another 30 minutes to 2 or more hours?So get back to me when all of the above possibilites have been thoroughly been beaten to death...and all the things I described above have been checked and rechecked.And of course, let the following be your guide. Suppose there exist two explanations for an occurrence. In this case the simpler one is usually better. Another way of saying it is that the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely an explanation is. You will, of course, take note of the many assumptions I made along the way to exit the shooters without being discovered.  

In reply to by Peon14

Gerrilea cheech_wizard Thu, 10/05/2017 - 08:31 Permalink

So many false assumptions. 1. It doesn't matter if they were on the roof or in a room.2. They didn't have to "breakdown their weapons".  How many rooms in the Hotel have been searched?  Ceiling tiles in the hallways make for a good place to leave the weapons. A laundry shoot or garbage shoot is another. Hell, under/in the bed mattress or box springs, there are so many places to hide stuff.  In the bottom of a water cooler...etc, etc, etc.3. They didn't have to leave the area. They could have blended in as one of the victims or a hotel employee or a police officer. Shit, they could still be in the hotel as a guest. 

In reply to by cheech_wizard

44_shooter Umh Wed, 10/04/2017 - 17:36 Permalink

No, ask intelligent questions. The questions here are not intelligent - they are childish, moronic and more often than not filled with broad inaccuracies.

If you want to ask "how did the suspect get 42 guns in the hotel room without being noticed", and you go back and look at MULTIPLE news reports (and I'm being nice by not saying tens of DOZENS), that clearly say (including the press conference with the police) 23 guns were found in the hotel and an additional 19 were found in his home in Mesquite. No sir, that's an asinine question.

When multiple people here demand to know how he had explosives in his car, and the same news reports and press conference clearly said he had explosive making MATERIALS (ammonia nitrate - fertilizer) in his car, no sir it's an asinine question.

When people ask "how did this man buy explosives" and they don't know, or couldn't take the fucking time to look up Tannerite and that you can buy it in a sporting goods store and that IN FACT it is NOT an explosive, no sir it's an asinine question.

To which said people should SHUT THE FUCK UP and not ask questions. Really sorry if you're one of those people, but if you're too stupid to read, digest, research a little then ask - then fuck off.

In reply to by Umh

Bay of Pigs 44_shooter Thu, 10/05/2017 - 10:16 Permalink

Okay. So what about the 23 guns and huge stash of ammo in his room that went completely undetected? What’s the story on the broken windows on the lower floors? And why did it take 72 minutes to locate an active shooter in a hotel full of cameras with security and cops everywhere in and around the hotel?

Do you ask yourself these kinds of questions or just listen to the bullshit spewed CNN like most brain dead Americans?

In reply to by 44_shooter

Cloud9.5 Wed, 10/04/2017 - 14:38 Permalink

I saw a lovely movie the other day about some black women who worked for NASA.  The opening scene began with a stalled car in the middle of the road.  One of the actors who was portraying a woman who reportedly possessed mechanical skills got the car going again when she bypassed the starter.  This is a classic example of a clueless script writer creating a photo op. Boys and girls, we have just witnessed a photo op.  Go back and read about the Phoenix Program in Vietnam.  Once you have grasped the understanding that the CIA murdered and tortured thousands of people for a political end, you may come to realize that there is no limit to what the deep state is capable of or what it will do to gain its political objective.  This is evil incarnate.  Trust no one. Look to yourselves for your personal security.  And, never let them disarm you.

Grandad Grumps Wed, 10/04/2017 - 14:41 Permalink

People who seek the truth appreciate someone honesty seeking the truth, even if it would appear insensitive if the mainstream narrative is not a lie. The mainstream will shout down the truth because they ONLY have an agenda and are truly insensitive to those hurt by their lies.

If we are ever to grow then we need to rid ourselves of the lies and the creators/propagators of lies. We all tell little lies to make people feel better. One wonders if, knowing the little lies are lies they would feel worse or they feel better because we care enough to lie to them to try to make them feel better? Most. but not all, pepole seem to prefer comfortable lies to uncomfortable truths. I believe that someday we will all be reading each others' thoughts and when that happens it is over for the liars and frauds. It is my view that we shold get a head start and stop lying and accepting lies, today.

redmudhooch Wed, 10/04/2017 - 14:48 Permalink

Why isn't anyone blaming the media? They've spent at least the past 9 years begging for this 24/7/365. Who owns our media here in America?((( Jewish Supremacists))) Six Jewish Companies Control 96% of the World’s Media… Meet the Jews that own Hollywood and the media. These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America… The blood is on their hands, why are we talking about gun control? We need "media" control...Americans need an Economic Cleansing, and to send the Jewish Supremacists packing, dual citizens, AIPAC, ADL, SPLC, many more, these are the real hate groups, and 100% of the problem. Its no big secret anymore you assholes, people are fed up with the nonstop bullshit.     

Old Hippie Patriot Wed, 10/04/2017 - 14:53 Permalink

There was a 17 second delay of the "live" coverage of the twin towers, long enough to overlay computer generated images of planes into the supposedly live video coverage. Planes, which are constructed of thin sheets of aluminum, striking the thick, external structural steel of the buildings would have become a cloud of tiny fragments that would have fallen on the streets.  No fragments were found, other than a jet engine that isn't even used on the supposed plane types that "hit" the towers.  There were no 911 planes.