Conspiracy theories and Conspiracy theorists


KorbenDallas

Recommended Posts

Where have I heard those words, Sandy Hook, Sandy Hook?

In an age of 'alternative facts,' a massacre of schoolchildren is called a hoax

Quote

At first, Pozner was almost sympathetic to the disbelievers, in part because he had flirted with conspiracy theories himself in the past. “A lot of these people couldn’t fathom that somebody would look a 6-year-old in the face and pump bullets into his head,” he said.

He chatted online with those who thought the shooting had been faked. He fought back with facts. He released Noah’s death certificate, the medical examiner’s report on his death and, for those who insisted Noah didn’t exist, his birth certificate and his kindergarten report card. (“Noah is a sweet, inquisitive boy and I feel very fortunate to have had him in my class this year,” wrote his teacher.)

But it didn’t work. One of the doubters told Pozner he ought to exhume the body to prove he really had a child who died.

Eventually, Pozner gave up. He set up an organization called the HONR Network, devoted to fighting hoaxes. He and volunteers now operate a series of websites that duel with the websites of conspiracy theorists.

He has filed a lawsuit against the most prolific hoaxers and succeeded in getting Florida Atlantic University to fire a professor who had set up a website pushing the hoax theory. Free-speech laws protect much of the online rumor-mongers, but Pozner has had success removing pictures of children.

“My objective is to reduce the footprint of the hatred and the most disgusting content,” he said.

It took nearly a year to remove a video that featured photos of Noah over the soundtrack from a porn movie. He is currently pressing YouTube about a video with maps and directional arrows pointing to an apartment where he used to live, chillingly zooming in on him through a balcony door as though a sniper was aiming a shot. 

Fearful for his safety, he has moved six times since Noah’s death (he now lives in Florida) and has all mail sent to post office boxes.

The conspiracy theorists have shown unflagging energy. The most persistent, Wolfgang Halbig, a 70-year-old Florida man who describes himself as a retired school safety expert, said he had made 22 trips to Connecticut, wiped out his pension and spent more than $100,000, which he raised online.


His theory is that between 500 to 700 people were involved in the “conspiracy” — including the schoolchildren, parents, teachers and police, all the way up to President Obama.

In a telephone interview, he said he was encouraged by Trump’s election and was expecting that the new administration would open an investigation into not only Sandy Hook but also the Boston Marathon bombing and the Sept. 11 attacks.

“You have a president who is open and he wants the truth. He called out CNN for doing fake news,” Halbig said. “This opens up a whole new avenue for these events to be investigated.”

[...]

 

Edited by william.scherk
Removed recursion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Where have I heard those words, Sandy Hook, Sandy Hook?

William,

I don't know that much about the Sandy Hook massacre. I do know the way it was handled and propagandized has caused an enormous amount of cognitive dissonance in the culture.

So while I sympathize and empathize with parental grief as my own spiritual default, I'm not willing to use the victimization stories promoted by lying liars who lie for a living (mainstream media, especially rags like the LA Times) to make me turn off my brain and put a tin foil hat on another person just because that person says he smells a rat.

I'm not impervious to facts, but I am impervious to manipulation from known manipulators. Ummm... How can I say this clearly in a form you can feel, not just think? Maybe the following will convey my state of mind.

It doesn't matter what the LA Times and similar organizations say. I no longer consider them sources of information, but instead, sources of gossip. And gossip qua gossip, not everything a gossiper says is true.

That is my honest credibility appraisal of media vehicle you present as bearers of The Facts.

As to my emotional appraisal, I cannot express in words the intensity of contempt I have for the level of intentional deception and selling out one's integrity that the mainstream media has done. (That extends to the climate change scientists who bully their peers, too. But that is another issue.)

Presenting more The Facts from gossipers will not convince me of anything, nor will it convince me to ostracize people they think should not be part of their approved tribe. I don't believe a fucking thing they say without doing a lot of cross-checking. And I don't want to be like them. I think they are disgusting individuals.

As to the Sandy Hook event, in my own view, I don't know enough to make a judgment call. I want to believe it happened the way the press said, but I don't know where to get unbiased facts about it. And, before you go off and present another data dump, frankly, I'm not all that interested in that particular event. I have a lot of other stuff on my plate right now and digging into this will not resurrect the reputation of the mainstream press in my mind, nor accept as valid the thinking and choices that corrupted them.

Maybe someday I will be more interested in the Sandy Hook story, but not right now.

I prefer to be painted with a tin foil hat of my own to falling sucker to the mainstream press one more time. They are rotten to the core.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WSS, quoting an LA Times article, said:

The conspiracy theorists have shown unflagging energy. The most persistent, Wolfgang Halbig, a 70-year-old Florida man who describes himself as a retired school safety expert, said he had made 22 trips to Connecticut, wiped out his pension and spent more than $100,000, which he raised online.


His theory is that between 500 to 700 people were involved in the “conspiracy” — including the schoolchildren, parents, teachers and police, all the way up to President Obama.

He exists, he is still in the arena.

I believe that the LA Times reporters were not reporting gossip, but quotes of real people, and some undeniable facts. One of those facts is that crazy conspiracy theories can lead to weird outgrowths like the very real Wolfgang Halbig.

In fact-checking and following lines out of the LA Times story I came across the fun but scorching anti-Hoax-promoting site Crisis Actors Guild, which debunks the stupidities of the likes of Halbig in re Sandy Hook -- which likes now include a whole nasty raft of folks convinced that the Quebec mosque attack was fake and that the grieving community is faking. 

I had a run-in with an OL member who was particularly nasty about the Boston Marathon bombing  'actors,' our Dean, back when. 

On 10/1/2014 at 5:34 PM, william.scherk said:

Still, I felt personally disgusted at the upended victimology, at the contempt for the traumatized. It seemed mean and irrational and worth a most spirited reaction ....

It is still what I feel about upended victimology and contempt for the traumatized.  The new Quebec-was-a-hoax kooks are using the same initial tactics as the Sandy Hook truther-nutters, using the persuasive power of conspiracy theories to delegitimize, mock and dismiss real brutal killings and their effects. There is a cognitive pattern in the truther-nutter-hoax-flappers, which they attach to each iteration of brutal killing. At its worst end it becomes abusive and sometimes frightening 'doxxing'** and/or stalking-like harassment of individuals, families, people, like Pozner.

This is one of those things that disgusts me with Alex Jones epistemology. He goes down the least-rational cognitive road in interpreting events, in a sense he is godfather now to a Quebec-hoax contingent, to the degree his influence or persuasiveness keeps alive paranoid reaction to brutal events.

An objective review of the Sandy Hook was-a-hoax activists/authorities reveals speculation edging into delusion.  I remember that when Dean went snaky on the 'obviously fake' injuries photographed in Boston, it made me recall a manic episode years earlier at Rebirth Of Reason.  Delusional reasoning makes sense in a dream-world, and it makes sense during a manic episode insofar as it eludes rational scrutiny.

I ultimately felt sad that Dean had at least momentarily left the hard road of reason in favour of easy bullshit. He had momentarily lived in the nightmare world and it had hampered critical thinking.   It made me feel something in my stomach that stern Objectivish epistemology had been sloughed off as unnecessary, that Dean had claimed the epistemic high ground without showing how he got there.  We could not reason with him.

newnationalist_Quebec.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, william.scherk said:

It is still what I feel about upended victimology and contempt for the traumatized.  The new Quebec-was-a-hoax kooks are using the same initial tactics as the Sandy Hook truther-nutters, using the persuasive power of conspiracy theories to delegitimize, mock and dismiss real brutal killings and their effects.

William,

Are you sure you are attributing the correct motives to the "nutters"?

Do you think they eat babies with catchup and take selfies to send to the parents, too? That they are that indifferent and evil?

:)

These are not monsters, nor is their epistemology all that warped (except the extreme fringe, but that goes for all fringe folks of all persuasions). They see events through a different prism than you, a different set of priorities. They are people who do not want to see their love of humanity used against them by propagandists so they will accept atrocities. Start there--that they really do love humanity--and you will talk to them. You will convince them at times. And so on. There will be a dialog. Ignore that and you will never communicate with them. They've been burned too often by propaganda.

And, believe me, being burned by propaganda is not the same thing as being mentally ill with paranoia.

The evil is not them, but you frame it as if it is. The evil is those atrocious fucks in the government (and corporations who are in collusion with the government) who use the human race as lab rats and livestock. Realize that these white power "nutters" you despise are people who are outraged to their very core by the government's former sterilization of the black race program--that this is sincere outrage and much stronger than even most blacks feel about it--and you will begin to understand them more.

I'm not saying they're right or wrong on any specific issue here. They can be wrong just like any human being can. I'm saying their intentions are not to promote evil, and their epistemology is not so warped they cannot see evil when it is in front of them. But just like I feel about the mainstream press, they need to see the evil, not learn about it from liars.

Any one of them would give the shirt off their backs to a family that lost their child if they saw this was real. Americans are known for being big on charity. Well, which Americans do you think are giving all that money? A huge chunk of it comes from those you despise. On the other hand, progressives (the ones you think occupy the moral high ground) are known for stinginess in giving to the needy--they want to do charity with government money and sometimes force companies to do it, never their own.

Taking morality out of this and just looking at the logic, people cannot be indifferent to the suffering of others and constantly give money, time and effort to suffering folks at the same time.

These folks can be indifferent to propaganda victimization stories, though, if they believe the stories are propaganda promoted by people they have seen do evil in the past. If you want to persuade them, the solution is not to call them evil and search for better propaganda. It's to connect with their love of humanity--connect in all sincerity--and go from there.

Here's the thing about people like this. If you can convince them that something is right, you don't have to convince them to do anything about it. They will do it on their own and they will avoid the wrong. This is different than the mainstream press, for example. When those creeps know something is wrong, when they know the facts they are reporting are false, they do it anyway.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trauma and Guilt.  Mythogenesis. Free trade in memes. And a large helping of "I'm not explaining myself that well, am I?" ...

20 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:
On 2/4/2017 at 1:56 PM, william.scherk said:
On 10/1/2014 at 5:34 PM, william.scherk said:

Still, I felt personally disgusted at the upended victimology, at the contempt for the traumatized. It seemed mean and irrational and worth a most spirited reaction ....

It is still what I feel about upended victimology and contempt for the traumatized. [...] There is a cognitive pattern in the truther-nutter-hoax-flappers, which they attach to each iteration of brutal killing. At its worst end it becomes abusive and sometimes frightening 'doxxing'** and/or stalking-like harassment of individuals, families, people, like Pozner.

The evil is not them, but you frame it as if it is.

We seem to have frames that do not overlap.   I see abuse of the Sandy Hook parents as the fruit of a crippled epistemology. I am sorry that I can't frame my remarks in a way that delivers what I think are my strongest points. 

Trauma and Guilt

My strongest point is admittedly delivered with emotion, with disgust. Ordinarily the products of crippled epistemology are not disgusting in a personal sense. 

See, Michael, I fear that you are on the side of those who attack the Sandy Hook parents as hoaxers and criminals. I know that is not true, but in each reaction to my beliefs and opinions and my reckoning on the unjust targeting of the parents, the false accusations, the frightening effects of harassment and abuse ... it seems to me that your argument disregards these people.

As to motive, I am not a single-shooter kind of guy. Motives are almost always mixed -- and impulses and crazes that involve groups of people are going to be accelerated and slowed by various motivations.

What is a very useful human attribute, paranoid thinking and threat calculations, divining plots and lies and secret machinations -- the attribute is part of the cognitive toolkit we inherit as sapient beings.  

But sometimes, to coin a phrase, what we know just ain't so. What we intuit by connecting dots, sometimes, what we reason out as threat, plot, lie, hidden goals, sometimes we get wrong. 

My point of view is informed by my time in the Memory Wars, remember, when paranoid thinking crazes led to gross injustice. What happened was at its peak an hysterical witch hunt.  Crippled epistemology and a lack of self-correction is dangerous at times where I come from. I never did doubt or demonize motives of the client-victims or the children caught-between nor even the practitioners who so  badly failed their clients, nor even the cops, prosecutors and misguided child advocates who drove the worst cases. Their motives were I think, generally good, with some exceptions.  The rottenness was in the intellectual bases, in group-think, in cultish aversion to corrections, in false beliefs.

Now, the danger in misinterpreting the Quebec attack is from my point of view a repeat of earlier syndromes of behaviour en masse. Whatever crippled paranoid 'facts' make it into a hoax and the actual victims into the perpetrators, previous behaviour suggests more sorrows to come -- by the hands of folks like the craziest Sandy Hook stalkers.

After a nationally-ramifying trauma like the murders at the mosque, a respect for the truth is foremost in my mind. Any ugly tensions in Quebec are not necessarily any deeper or more ugly than any other region, but here in sight of the Citadel a most awful religious murder was perpetrated upon people in prayer.  It was a terrible shock, to me, not a hoax in any sense.

I have no choice then but to stand with the victims and the community so stricken. There is no other option.

There is at once in Canada a tightening of solidarity, a circle of protection drawn around Muslim congregations, neighbours and colleagues -- and a cold-eyed reckoning of guilt. Along with flux and dissension, of course. But the national disgust at an attack on innocent liberty was enough to bring on some remarkable public displays up here -- solemn moments and rituals of community, grave moments of civic and religious unity.

Religious freedom is no token of PC blurt in Canada. From the Mennonites who sponsor today's Syrians to the Vietnamese who sponsor Syrians to the Jewish temples that sponsor Syrians, from every single pulpit and dais was related the same essential message of solidarity and remembrance of senseless communal violence. Some may find that moving, some may find it sickening, but in navigating national tragedy something profound can be forged, a needful unity among citizens.  

This is from a  CBC article that looked up and down the land for signs of solidarity. As bullshit mainstream false-flag stenographers of the Illuminati-Crony-Reptile class they do a good job of hypnotizing citizens like me.  Tears. Narrative. Story. Myth. National mourning. Bzzzzt.

Quote

There really are Little Mosques on the Prairie, and many felt the love of their neighbours of every faith.

Just a few days before the shooting attack in Quebec City, a group of men and women from Our Savior's Lutheran Church in Regina spent an evening at the Madni Islamic Centre learning about Islam. As soon as they learned of Sunday's incident, they sent flowers and a note offering their prayers.

In Yellowknife (OK, north of the Prairies!) the chairman of the ISNA Canada Islamic Centre, Nazim Awan, was deluged with calls and emails from people he didn't know.

One man asked if he could come and visit the centre, and Awan invited him to bring his friends.

Word spread quickly, and that evening more than 300 people came to the vigil, despite the –30 C weather.

"Yellowknifers support for Muslims by visiting YK Islamic Centre was impressive," Awan wrote CBC Montreal. "We feel safe and appreciate our friends' and neighbours' kind actions."

As soon as citizens of Fort McMurray, Alta., learned of the attack, many came by the Markaz-ul-Islam Mosque to drop off sympathy cards and flowers.

Hundreds gathered at the Jubilee Provincial Building in Fort McMurray on Wednesday, walking to the mosque in what they called a "unity walk for diversity and inclusion."

Canadians across the country did the same in their own communities, as the Shah Jalal Mosque in Montreal's Saint-Henri neighbourhood can attest to, below. [...]

I conclude with the point I take from this particular North American mass shooting. Whatever motives may come out or not in court, if a motive was to deepen a gulf between pur laine old-stock French Quebecers and a foreign body within (Muslims), to induce cleavage and more violence, abuse and discriminatory acts, to separate Muslims of Canada from their non-Muslim neighbours, it failed.

I cannot stand with people outside the circle in this instance, with the inverted victimology of the kooks who propound false and fantastic nonsense. Which perhaps explains my revulsion at those who would remove the individual responsibility of the presumed murderer. From their point of view it may be that my acceptance of the facts so far, and my preference for solidarity, is disgusting. We know where we stand.

As you see, Michael, the foregoing leaves at least three millimetres of overlapping agreement between us. 

webRNS-QUEBEC-AFTERMATHa-020317.jpg

98d3dda3d1b042f686a9295d309f1743-1560x10

Edited by william.scherk
Added "I'm not explaining myself that well, am I?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

I see abuse of the Sandy Hook parents as the fruit of a crippled epistemology.

William,

We have two gigantic differences right here.

1. Did you go to Sandy Hook? If not, then you didn't see anything except the mainstream news. And that, in my view, is not seeing anything credible anymore.

2. You talk victimization and so on, yet you classify an entire group of people not with a mistake in perspective, but with a "crippled epistemology." Mental retards. 

I have no common ground with this.

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

See, Michael, I fear that you are on the side of those who attack the Sandy Hook parents as hoaxers and criminals. I know that is not true...

What you know is correct.

What you feel is wrong.

Moreover, from the tenor of you posts, you don't want what you know to be correct. You want your victimization story to be the cognitive priority and it confuses you that this doesn't work in this case. It can't be because people are sick of being manipulated, can it? Noooooooooo... It has to be because of "crippled epistemology" and heartlessness.

This inner conflict allows you to be bigoted against an entire group of people even as you decry bigotry. What's worse, it keeps you from seeing it.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, william.scherk said:

... it seems to me that your argument disregards these people.

William,

If you want to play that, it seems to me you constantly disregard these people:

Image result for throwing gays off of building

I never see your tears, pointing fingers in shame, accusations of "crippled epistemology," self-loathing guilt, etc. etc. etc. in defense of these victims.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

William,

If you want to play that, it seems to me you constantly disregard these people:

Image result for throwing gays off of building

I never see your tears, pointing fingers in shame, accusations of "crippled epistemology," self-loathing guilt, etc. etc. etc. in defense of these victims.

Michael

Good God! What is that!  Is that for real?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No time to comment, but here's some prime conspiracy food for thought.

Rush Limbaugh:

Kurt Schlichter Nails It: The Left Hates You

And the article he mentioned at Townhall:

The Left Hates You. Act Accordingly.

Could it be that the anti-Trump left doesn't hate Trump as much as it hates typical pro-American Trump supporters?

Makes you wonder how bad it gets when they think of Alex Jones at three in the morning and can't sleep.

:evil:  :) 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2017 at 10:21 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

This speaks for itself.

It's one of the reasons I don't find the mainstream news to be credible. They lie on purpose. Hell, they don't even try to justify their lies to themselves, much less believe them. They just lie to their public for political and monetary gain.

Michael

It's for a good cause. If you don't know that, you're not educated.

--Brant

Mother Teresa's life was nothing but a lie, for instance, for the good cause of her sainthood

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another announcement.

Look what happens when conspiracy theories become a massive counter-cultural revolution.

On of the great points of this video is that the new Generation Z teenagers (people born after 2000) are considering the Millennials as control freak grown-ups who want to suck all the joy out of their lives, so they are gravitating toward the new conservatism (more like conservative libertarianism). And the Millennials and left-wing folks in general are having a cow as they lose control of--and get ridiculed by--the young.

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes sense, there had to come a swing back. My generation were the Me generation, the post-war kids who's parents' lives were a struggle and anxiety caused by at least one World War and we then could be released to have a good time and find a good life. Then followed the Me-Me generation, and next, the most cosseted Me-Me-Me gen whom one sees self-righteously massing in streets with conceited demands . My generation looks at them askance. We were a little wild but never so arrogant. Enjoying freedom without self-responsibility had to end, reality comes creeping back in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, anthony said:

That makes sense, there had to come a swing back. My generation were the Me generation, the post-war kids who's parents' lives were a struggle and anxiety caused by at least one World War and we then could be released to have a good time and find a good life. Then followed the Me-Me generation, and next, the most cosseted Me-Me-Me gen whom one sees self-righteously massing in streets with conceited demands . My generation looks at them askance. We were a little wild but never so arrogant. Enjoying freedom without self-responsibility had to end, reality comes creeping back in.

Commentary by Robert Tracinski. 1. Lady Gaga Isn't a Rebel, and Portland Isn't Weird. The most ridiculous part of the Super Bowl's halftime show--more ridiculous than Lady Gaga's actual music or even her choreography, which is saying something--was the Tiffany and Co. ad in which she proclaimed her great creativity and nonconformity. Because nothing says "anti-establishment" like a millionaire pop star shilling for Tiffany.

She says things like, "I am a rebel.... I always want to be challenging the status quo.... I'm too strange, I'm too different, I'm too out there, I'm too artistic. Oh, it's pretentious to talk about, you know, how creative you are. I don't feel that way at all."

You know what? That does seem really pretentious, with an emphasis on the "pretense." She's a pop star performing music that appeals to a broad and undemanding audience, and none of that makes her "out there." It makes her mainstream. Relentlessly, poundingly mainstream.

This is just a symptom of a much wider issue. So much of our popular culture depends on the loudly proclaimed pose of being "rebels," of being outside the mainstream, of being "transgressive"--while repeating clichés that have become deadly boring through decades of repetition. It reminds me of a brilliant little bit in The Onion: "Purchase of Jeans Ushers Man into Exclusive, Ultra-Cool Subculture of Jeans-Wearing Americans." They all want to be nonconformists just like everyone else.

Take the campaign to "Keep Portland Weird." Here's a tip: if a television show just finished mocking your artificial quirkiness for eight solid seasons, you're not strange and new any more. Heck, the slogan isn't even original. Before some Oregonians wanted to "Keep Portland Weird," there were Texans who wanted to "Keep Austin Weird." But how "weird" can you be when there are a dozen small cities--and countless trendy neighborhoods in other cities--that are just exactly like you?

I was on vacation recently at a resort area very far away from Brooklyn or Portland or Austin. Yet every 20-something waiter at every restaurant looked exactly the same. Hipster haircut? Check. Hipster Beard? Check. Hipster glasses? Check. Hipster skinny jeans? Check. Basically, they were all just copies of this guy. Who I found in about five seconds by doing a Google image search for "hipster."

This is part of the overall dilemma of the Left. It's like how they now style themselves as "the Resistance," but they're the ones who built the Death Star of big government, central federal authority, and rule by executive order. The "counterculture" has become the establishment, and I don't know if there's ever been an establishment quite as established as this, enforcing 97% rates of conformity within its enclaves and threatening to shun anyone who is associated in any way with unapproved persons or ideas. Perhaps it's precisely because they're such a rigid, conformist establishment that they cling even harder to the myth that they are free-thinking rebels.

Do you want to be a rebel today? Sing opera, not repetitive, over-produced pop music. I can understand why Miss Germanotta doesn't do this: it's way harder and less profitable. She's certainly free to give the masses what they want, instead. We're just going to call her on it when she tries to style herself a nonconformist.

Or how about this? Study the great books of Western Civilization and get into Aristotle before he's cool. Study science and mathematics--and by "study," I don't just mean liking the right Facebook pages, but actually studying it and understanding its methods. In today's world, this would unfortunately count as strange and different.

Or here's a big rebellious act. Gain even the slightest familiarity with free-market economics. You could start easy, with a little Bastiat--but damn, how "out there" would that be? Or if you really want to be a rebel, become an Objectivist--everybody hates us, even some of the Libertarians.

As for the hair, the beard, the glasses, the clothes--dress however you want. Like me, you might seem to all outward, superficial appearances to be a stuffy middle-aged "normal," indistinguishable but for my copy of Atlas Shrugged--which, more than 50 years later, is still a way more rebellious thing to carry around than an old vinyl disc of Miles Davis.

So no, Lady Gaga, you're not a rebel. No, Portland, you're not weird. You are the status quo now, which I am afraid means that you have to answer for the current state of the world. You won, and you control the big cultural institutions. You shaped this world, and it's yours. If you don't like it, leave the disruption of the status quo to us un-hip rebels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tracinski the Seer said:

So no, Lady Gaga, you're not a rebel. No, Portland, you're not weird.

Somebody doesn't like hipsters!  But that somebody doesn't have anything to say about the Gaga conspiracy.  This guy does ...

Quote

By most accounts, Lady Gaga's Super Bowl halftime show was the inclusive, non-controversial pop spectacle our divided country needed. But conservative conspiracy theorist Alex Jones saw right through the wall of diverse dancers and the welcoming message of "Born This Way" to the real truth: The halftime show was a Satanist ritual foisted upon us by the Illuminati. Sure. Of course. 

 

"Now we hear about Lady Gaga, who was admittedly part of the whole Pizzagate thing, with the Spirit Cooking lady, the Aleister Crowley event," Jones said in a Facebook video before the game.

It's not clear what he means by "admittedly," because Pizzagate is a ridiculous hoax that Lady Gaga hasn't publicly commented on, but let's see where he's going with this. 

"She wears meat suits and does all these rituals—Madonna does it too—and the organizers of the Super Bowl are deciding to defile America and break our will by having us bow down to this."

Hmmm.

Jones claims the implicit message of Gaga's performance, particularly her use of drones, was "I am the goddess of Satan, ruling over you with the rise of the robots, in a ritual of lesser magic."

That's weird, because the explicit message of the performance, the one Gaga literally sang, was "Rejoice and love yourself today /'Cause baby you were born this way." 

Definitely a narrative of political domination from the New World Order. No doubt about it. 

The real Illuminati conspiracy that needs investigating is how the Patriots managed to come back from a 25-point deficit to win the Super Bowl. Do you think it's a coincidence that Tom Brady's magical performance occurred entirely after Lady Gaga's halftime "ritual"? Commissioner Goodell, please look into this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now