Comment: taking the arguments of those of *us* who do believe . . .

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: More (see in situ)

taking the arguments of those of *us* who do believe . . .

in political and social engineering (not going to use the "c" word now)--

and talking about them in a way that makes *us* look very stupid. The man with white hair who had such a look of "sadness" through the entire interview used the word "idiotic" and other words to describe those of *us* who question the official story and the MSM.

Why are *they* bothering to do this if *we* are not a threat to *their* plan somehow? Why bother? Most 'crazy' people are dismissed. So why is the MSM taking *us* seriously enough to work SO hard to make *us* look stupid?

I'm going to add, IF anyone gets this far in reading what I am saying, that I really don't have a concrete opinion on what happened in Connecticut. I wasn't there. I don't know anyone who was there. I don't have MSM (voluntarily), and I have NO way of finding out the truth.

I have a lot of questions. Any "serious" person would. Why? Because even people who don't believe in political/social/economic engineering--

are questioning:

--the motivations behind U.S. involvement in WWII

--what happened in Viet Nam

--what happened to JFK


Critical thinking is what is under fire here, my friends.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--