Has it been found credible that a woman was thrown out of the concert prior to the shootings for saying "you're gonna die tonight" or was it misinformation?
“The only person who can open your eyes to a genuine conspiracy is someone who either is, or was, a part of the conspiracy. Everything else is either imaginative speculation or truly legitimate information that has been carefully elucidated by the common sense and reason of its purveyor. However, in the latter scenario, you have to serious question whether or not there really is a conspiracy if a non-conspirator has direct access to information that brings the alleged conspiracy to light. In other words, if you can google tons of credible information on the New World Order, at what point do you admit to your audience that there really is no New World Order Conspiracy? At what point do you concede that there is no grand conspiracy and that the REAL problem is that a lot of people are either too stupid or lazy to see what’s really going on in front of their faces? There is no tiny cabal of Freemasons in a smoke-filled rooms hiding the truths of life from you. There is only an over-abundance of apathetic men and women who lack the presence of mind to demand that these truths are formerly acknowledged out in the open.”
@getback Just of curiosity bro, how would you draw the line between something like that and what is reported on the news?
First time ever seeing him, just asking to see what's the constituents for where someone else may draw the line and what they consider a valid source.
I don't watch Fox New or CNN. I rarely read or watch NBC unless someone forwards me a link. I most get my news from NPR, PBS, BBC, the Economist, CQ Researcher and a couple others. I read fact checking websites (Factcheck.org and Pew) and if I am researching a topic I generally read articles from a few reputable sources, and cross reference. Even sometimes against sites I know have a certain bias. And Google is a powerful tool too. If I am going use something as a source, especially if it is the first time I am using that source, I usually Google them first to see what comes up. That avoids embarrassing mistakes like trying to use a dude that believes there is a child slave colony on Mars as legit source of info. Especially when Googling that person name pops not only the Mars nonsense, but that he is famous for pedaling unsubstantiated garbage. Seems like you are so focused on proving that everyone else gets their news from bias sources, that lack real credibility, and people just except whatever is fed to them. And as a result you are making a lot of assumptions about how other people consume news, gather info, and form opinions. Just sayin.
how anyone can watch that alex jones garbage and actually believe some of it is beyond me. it really takes a special kind of idiot.
Ironically, you’ve made a few assumptions yourself. I was genuinely curious what people use as the criteria to evaluate the information they consume. My intentions were not to get in a back and forth about whose process was better. I posted an example of a source and asked a question. Based on that you inferred a lot. I’m about growing and gaining a better understanding of who and why a collective populace behaves a certain way. If you consider that a “embarrassing mistake” I would consider your observation a little short sighted much like you assumed mine was by sharing that link. Simply put, I saw a link and was curious for the average person what would make them more prone to believe in something on CNN etc over IG when both have produced citations that lack the qualifications, consistent integrity that would make me consider them seriously. Ultimately, you made an assumption that I felt I had something to prove, which I don’t. As my stance has always been, im open to learning and keep an open to mind anything. Seems like are you so focused on proving that anyone who is open to entertaining ideas that deviate from your own, lack real credibility and are not structured based upon research with integrity. As a result you are making an assumption that people just consume conspiracy theories not founded in anything and form baseless opinions just to make condescending remarks to be “woke.” Just saying.
It was barely covered by the news no names or anything talk about a terrible place to do it, no one actually ventures outside into the streets in that area bc silver legacy and all the others are connected. That is a crazy occurrence and refuse to accept that as a coincidence and its a shame we will never get the full story in the end glad no one was hurt according to reports
Just your everyday run of the mill coincidence... When I first heard the story there was no mention that the place used to be Paddocks'.