07-17-2024, 03:05 PM
The latest observations and deductions are troubling.
I'm still at a loss as to how exactly we can justify that we "shouldn't" be 'arm-chair quarterbacking' in light of what is being shared?
The public (of whom we are all part) decides for themselves what to focus on (although the 'public' media does whatever it can to manipulate that focus.) The "narrative crafters" designated as "official" are granted some latitude in a timely explanation for good reason. But it is not THEY who "define" what happened, only to 'describe what they record.' We should have learned that decades ago as we strained against the JFK-assassination conspiracy. How long are we to 'pretend' that the official (read media) narrative is 'absolute' and 'sufficient?'
Perhaps it is a lost cause, but I don't think the public dialogue should be squelched or sidelined over the loss of hope for answers from authority. Answers always come along... eventually.
I have now heard the shooter called a "patsy," a "troubled" young man, a groomed operative, a paid killer, a militant malcontent, a lost ideologue, even a 'trained' psyop-operative... clearly the font of 'maybe' is flowing full open. Some may be easy to reject, other simply strain credulity, but regardless I maintain that whatever the facts are, in this context of "political extremism," the public should know them. It is part of the face of the present political world... In my opinion, we would be foolish to ignore it.
I'm still at a loss as to how exactly we can justify that we "shouldn't" be 'arm-chair quarterbacking' in light of what is being shared?
The public (of whom we are all part) decides for themselves what to focus on (although the 'public' media does whatever it can to manipulate that focus.) The "narrative crafters" designated as "official" are granted some latitude in a timely explanation for good reason. But it is not THEY who "define" what happened, only to 'describe what they record.' We should have learned that decades ago as we strained against the JFK-assassination conspiracy. How long are we to 'pretend' that the official (read media) narrative is 'absolute' and 'sufficient?'
Perhaps it is a lost cause, but I don't think the public dialogue should be squelched or sidelined over the loss of hope for answers from authority. Answers always come along... eventually.
I have now heard the shooter called a "patsy," a "troubled" young man, a groomed operative, a paid killer, a militant malcontent, a lost ideologue, even a 'trained' psyop-operative... clearly the font of 'maybe' is flowing full open. Some may be easy to reject, other simply strain credulity, but regardless I maintain that whatever the facts are, in this context of "political extremism," the public should know them. It is part of the face of the present political world... In my opinion, we would be foolish to ignore it.
