Comment: Oh, I see...

(See in situ)


Oh, I see...

One can post what they want, but it must not be worded in such a way as to be misconstrued as final proof. Oh, I see. And one can post what they want, but the "we're afraid of being laughed at" committee says one must provide links, not screen shots (even though a lot of readers appreciate visuals...maybe the requirement is "at least" the links). And one can post what they want, but others are not allowed to share it without qualification that it isn't to be taken seriously b/c it's only screen shots and let's talk about it but no arguing b/c that is chuckleheaded. Maybe the rule is, unless it is vetted by the research commissars, just don't share it. Seriously? One must wonder, can the claim in the title of this post "SPREADING SANDY HOOK DISINFORMATION" stand up to scrutiny of vetting? Who sets the criteria for whether that is a true claim? What are the standards determinative of disinformation and have those standards been objectively and credibly established? Do we just take your word for it? Cuz I don't know who the hell you are since you do not supply your real name. What about labeling people as "stupid" or "imbecile" ... is that chuckleheaded or does chuckleheading only happen when people are trying to debate whether information is "dis" or "mis" or "credible?"

We all know supplying a real name adds weight to credibility. You miss the point. But it does not hold true that anonymity negates credibility. Again, this is for individuals to decide for themselves.

It is naive to believe critics will ever take real evidence and concede to the truth-seekers. Did you look at the example I provided?

It's my belief that the people here you think are "being made fools" are not being made fools. That's a projection of yours, b/c you don't like to be laughed at. Many of us here are unconcerned with the opinions of the "mainstreamers." The DP'ers here are plenty capable of weeding through the mess, even if they (we) get sidetracked in wrong directions sometimes. Few of these fellow truth-seekers missed the DA press release. Many of them saw it. And you should know that the DAs "ooohhh" language is legal boiler used as a standard to give the judge grounds to keep eyes off the evidence for some time to come. It does NOT necessarily mean they are admitting anything more than is already out there. But hold your breath and keep alert.

My overall thrust is that you could encourage your fellow truth-seekers to be careful without coming off as such a know-it-all. Let the hunt happen. Your way is not the only path to truth. Be respectful, even if you think people are being chuckleheads. Else you are guilty of what you protest.