Wednesday, August 23, 2017

False Flags = Deceptions

Today’s discussion is offered at the risk of being labelled a conspiracy theorist. However, it should be noted that being called a conspiracy theorist is a compliment; so absorbing the “risk” is calculatedly easy. Who doesn’t enjoy being genuinely complimented?

Merriam-Webster defines a conspiracy theorist as: “a person who holds a theory that explains an event or situation as the result of a secret plan by usually powerful people or groups.” And that’s an unfortunately narrow description. Conspiracy theorists will question an explanation as a matter of critical thinking, but not necessarily explain anything. Questioning what you’re told to believe is critical thinking.

Merriam-Webster has no definition for a critical thinker: “Result Not Found”. But they bother to publish an entry for conspiracy theorist. That’s cute.

Forming an opinion based on objective analysis of data or information is critical thinking. Mass media doesn’t take into account our capacity for critical thought. Mainstream media would rather you just believe what you’re told.

Merriam-Webster also fails to offer a description of a false flag. Thankfully, Wikipedia fills the gap with a tidy description. But I already know what a false flag is…do you?

Wikipedia describes false flags as: “covert operations that are designed to deceive in such a way that activities appear as though they are being carried out by entities, groups, or nations other than those who actually planned and executed them.” Isn’t that festive?

Personally speaking, I couldn’t possibly care any less what you believe; the truth is greater than any belief, even in the arena of public opinion. But sometimes the public is very, very naïve. Sometimes the public is dead wrong.

In a horse race, the betting public wagers on their opinion of which horse in a given race will arrive at the finish line first; this mathematically determines the payout odds. The public will cast their opinions, resulting in the posted odds. The odds are therefore fluid descriptions of the public’s opinion. If the betting favorite wins, the public got it right. And the favorite wins a lot of races. Restated, oftentimes the public gets it right by wagering the most money on the horse that wins. But other times, the favorite isn’t even a factor in the outcome, thus demonstrating that the public did not get it right. Those who did correctly wager in these cases make relatively greater profits. Greater profits are more fun that lesser profits. And if the betting favorites always won, horse racing wouldn’t be much fun. In other words, if the public were always right, society would be far more cohesive. Society is pretty far from cohesive. And the public is easy to fool.

The nature of today’s discussion is not to tell you what events are or are not false flags. And I certainly don't wish to try to tell you what to believe. I merely had the desire to offer up an alternative to believing whatever the TV says you should believe. Mainstream media thinks you’re naïve. I think you just forgot that you’re allowed to think (critically). Your homework is to think, if you’re willing, about some events that might not be, in actuality, steeped in reality, but have been packaged falsehoods for you to just accept as fact. Enjoy.


Anonymous said...

Damn this covers everything that the major news media post about the President....and all of A$$BURROW'S SBYspewNEWS!!!!!! FAKE is the label for them all.....

Anonymous said...

blahblahblah I feel like I clicked on Monoblogue by assident

Anonymous said...

3:44 these are great....try to stay awake on a CROWE/GRANGER ARTICLE.....would rather watch wet paint dry!!!!!

Anonymous said...

The NYFD at WTC knew the truth about those buildings coming down. 911 was a monster false flag.