Oct 24, 2016

Facts VS Conspiracy Theories: How To Define Them Using Maddow Videos On Alex Jones


Is Maddow A Secret CIA Agent? Watch Her Hide The CIA's Connections To Vietnamese Drugs

Al Gore: Hero Or Coward? With Rachel Maddow (Secret Agent?)

Allegations Against Trump, True Or Not, All Share The Structure Of A Conspiracy i.e. They Have Just Enough FACTS To Constitute Being Labeled A "Conspiracy Theory" & Makes This Nothing More Than A Witch Trial

Conspiracy Theory: Is There A Cover-up On Mars Discoveries Going On Right Now? (Very Strong Circumstantial Evidence Littered With Facts That Suggests A Coverup About History In Progress)


A conspiracy theory is to make an allegation by using unrelated facts to the charge being made or by using two separate facts and assuming a connection between those facts that you can't prove. Such as the medias/Maddows 'Women accusing Trump' thing. Having no physical proof and basing the whole story around hearsay is exactly why something like this is called an "allegation". My Mars conspiracy theory is another example of using some facts to sketch a plausible but UNPROVABLE theory. BUT A FACT IS A FACT ESPECIALLY IF YOU CAN PROVE IT WITH SCIENCE USING REAL-TIME IMAGES i.e. using science to describe reality itself accurately. For example; we could calculate the arc of a rock we throw in the sky given it's angle and velocity or force (kinetic energy) put into it. In the same way we can calculate a buildings rate of fall and make every clear scientific conclusions from those calculations.

A fact is something you can prove with science and photographic (& documentary) evidence. Like these facts

Media's Iraq War Cover-Up

So, to say that there was - and still is - a coverup in the media about the Iraq War (no outcry for any crimes committed) IS A FACT. A conspiracy theory would be if I ASSUMED there was a coverup about the Iraq War in the media and COULDN'T prove it. The fact that I can prove it takes it out from the label of "conspiracy theory" and puts it into a fact. A reality that can be proven to exist.

In the following post Maddow makes a segment where she is ridiculously repetitive around the idea of demolition (like she wanted to implant that idea somewhere), so it provides is with a great way to introduce the whole idea of using science to understand architecture;

Maddow Provides Multiple Examples Of What A Demolition Looks Like & What Happens When It Goes Wrong... Proving A Perfect Jump Off Point To Talk About The THREE Buildings That Fell In Free Fall Time On 9/11 Like The Demolitions Maddow Talks About

An even better way is, of course, to listen to the experts (PhDs) of science describe it;

On 9/11 - The Few VS The Many: How A Few Experts Using "Government Authority" Managed To Outweigh The Many On Network News

Now lets take a look at how conspiracy theory mixes with facts in the Maddow segments on - who I think is a paranoid schizophrenic - Alex Jones. Alex Jones approaches information with his mind wide open. Anything a person can conceive of, if said or typed, is instantly accepted as true... provided it's scary and crazy. When Alex Jones says there is a war on for your mind he probably means himself and his non-fact based rants. If news comes out with facts proving him wrong or a TV show comes out with a different view from his on the same topic would probably results in a melt down as he would naturally think it was done specifically to discredit him (paranoid schizophrenics think the world revolves around them and ascribe all events to themselves like a toddler). When Wikipedia calls Alex Jones a conspiracy theorist they are being correct as nothing of his is based in fact, only conspiracy. When I put together a conspiracy theory, such as my mars converup conspiracy, I at least base it in facts Alex Jones won't even do his readers/viewers that courtesy as he messes with their minds in some sort of egotistical tirade against the world. Frankly, Maddow is just a chilled down version of the same phenomenon.

Trump campaign elevates the absurd at expense of serious politics Rachel Maddow reviews the ridiculousness (and sometimes offensiveness) of the fringe conspiracy theories propagated by the Infowars web site and notes that the site's theories are now entertained at the highest level of American politics thanks to credible treatment by Donald Trump and his acolytes.


Any headline without actual proof is a conspiracy... but what if you can't tell the difference between a fact and something you make up in your head? Then you have an Alex Jones conspiracy theory which seems to be based off the fact that 9/11 was real ... and thus ANYTHING can be real (a psychological problem I outlined before);

This is, technically, fear-mongering around a basic fear that seems to have existed even in the Founding Fathers, i.e. the problem of too much control in too few hands (which takes on many names). I even have my own approach to it on LiberalLibertarianism.Org. There is evidence of the rich and powerful meeting together in secret, with complete accountability. Any conclusion can be drawn from that and is.

Now Alex Jones enters lala gossip land the way a tabloid would (i.e he is all over the place). No images of this exist so it's all a conspiracy theory and thus proves he is not a news site.

This is a theory without any sort of fact involved. It's even phrased as a suggestive question, i.e. the goal her seems to specifically start a rumor about Hillary's health being wore than it is (he's a Trump supporter though it's unclear why since Trump no longer pushes 9/11 Truth... on the other hand I have caught Alex Jones following instruction from Judge Napolitano on Fox News (& him helping the GOP) so I know there is definitely something unholy or just plain crazy going on (especially given my theory that Alex Jones is a paranoid schizophrenic).

Now Alex Jones begins to market his "magical cure to everything" which is actually normal for the GOP...

Here is Huckabee doing the same thing;

So I classify this as almost mainstream (Huckabee is still a respected commentator especially on Fox).

This one is so weird I think he may be claiming Sandy Hook was like 9/11 because he believes any story will do to harm the Democrats OR he lives in such a small world that seeing other people in pain just looks like acting to him, to fool him (as per a paranoid schizophrenic). Obama DID take over without indicting Cheney which is part of the problem of how conspiracy theories can become so embedded in culture;

It is this sort of "proof" that makes a conspiracy theory good. You point out something while saying it's bad and people believe it as proof is not required by his audience. (probably the same or similar to the National Enquirer i.e. the type of media Trump learned about politics and society from).

Now, this is an interesting way to put this;

This was said by many people before Alex Jones. Testimony from a Major, a scientist on Hannity (who used the bullying style to silence him - can't find the video but found this) and a bunch of other scientists claiming science doesn't add up (I made a list) are three clear examples that come to mind. This may be Maddow trying to help the CIA again. (keeping in mind this was september 8th)

Maddow actually got this partially correct. Alex Jones DID use other people's research - smeared it with his reputation and psychotic non-fact based rants - and then used the fame he built from that to start a war on scientific fact and reason.

OR he was just shouting on the internet and got picked up by an audience with a tendency towards tabloids and that's where his fame comes from and 9/11 was just something he messed up with his rep of pushing factless stories, but 9/11 was just one story of his amoungst many (btw, given the media's AWFUL job when it comes to reporting facts VS conspiracy theories, he may have been one of the very few outlets for some facts to creep out).

This is confusing since even Maddow has pointed out that the media has covered up facts in it's coverage. UNLESS there is a decoy of some sort.

Media's Iraq War Cover-Up With Rachel Maddow

If the media is not covering facts then obviously there is room for a conspiracy theory and people getting scared. Maddow is probably just doing her 'nothing is going on' rant to cover for the CIA like she did with the drugs thing (taking something accepted as a fact and making a blanket denial is an immediate giveaway that Maddow is up to something).

Streaming fake news on their shows is a problem we have with regular media. As Maddow herself has proven before;

Again, Maddow is just being non-nonsensical.

More than blowing up three buildings and killing millions for it. Frankly, America has yet to face up to it's embarrassing past. Right now it's just busy framing innocents for their leaders crimes and killing em.

Related links;

Jones seems to have gotten this from the imaginings of David Ike or the alien lizard idea from the 80's TV show V (just saying this will probably get me labeled as a lizard);

This is an example of a ridiculously crazy conspiracy theory, based in no fact whatsoever, which Alex Jones specializes in and that's how he manages to smear any real scientists work on 9/11.

Yet, By Comparison: In Maddow's conspiracy theory of  "a bunch of women alleged assault by Trump" she has one fact, i.e. that Trump himself bragged that he could do stuff non-celebrities can't BEFORE the allegations came out. Using that fact and a bunch of women who want some fame (at least there is no evidence to prove otherwise) and the credibility they have as journalists (easily disprovable with anyone aware of history), Maddow sketched her conspiracy theory. With Bill Clinton they found semen (i.e. physical evidence) on ONE person, with Trump nothing.

In Conclusion: I have often argued that the difference between a "conspiracy theory" and a proven fact has to do with evidence linking the event directly to your theory. My post on 'The Mars Coverup' is a conspiracy theory as there is no physical evidence of a coverup or that the theories surrounding certain images aren't optical illusions but with 9/11 we can finally drop the whole idea that certain facts within it are not scientific and thus it cannot be called a conspiracy theory but instead, as one panel of Judges put it, 'a case that needs to be reopened as the facts don't support the official conspiracy theory' (an official theory for which there are no scientific facts... that's what's so fascinating about the 9/11 case. All definitions have been reversed and the GOP has turned into lying behemoths out to destroy America as it's only option for survival).

In other words, calling a conspiracy theory a fact and a fact a conspiracy theory, while great if you are the CIA or like Frank Luntz who likes to put a smoke screen around the meaning of a word, is NOT a reasonable way of organizing reality and can have serious psychological consequences in a society.

Authorities/generals (who haven't arrested Cheney & so lack credibility) have said they have done everything they can to make sure another 9/11 never happens again. They have sewn intelligence agencies together to make it next to impossible for a ... well, I'm guessing they are implying 'a Presidential team to create a group to pull off something like 9/11 again (as per a previous Joint Chiefs plan that got declassified)' ... at least, that's a plausible conspiracy theory based on words and events. In any case, keeping 9/11 a secret and not having accountability for all surviving members of the original plan pretty much guarantees a communist/dictator/fascist type takeover in the future. So it is unclear why these people think they are helping the country.

What's NOT a conspiracy theory are the facts of architecture and lack of debris from the plane crashes that defies the official explanation, which would be better be described as a conspiracy theory, i.e. a theory with no physical facts to back it up.

Maddow removes 9/11 from Alex Jones and puts up another video in the same week emphasizing demolitions repeatedly

Now I get the interesting part. Above I separated conspiracy theory from fact as part of my explanation for why facts shouldn't be labeled conspiracy theories just because you can say the words. i.e. we should have some sort of standard in our analysis which is lacking in media at this time. This next video is from over a month later but from the same week as Maddows repeated emphasis on demolition. Notice how Maddow leaves out the connection between 9/11 and Alex Jones (something she has NEVER done before) in the following video (as if agreeing with a september 8th tweet of mine, or this one, or this one). After reading this she may not ever do this again but, for now, we know she knows about 9/11

Radio jock's t-shirt sales stunt yields Clinton rally disruptions Rachel Maddow explains how conspiracy theorist/entertainer Alex Jones is using a prize money incentive to get people to disrupt Clinton rallies wearing "rapist" t-shirts purchased from Jones' Infowars site.

Turns out Alex Jones offered a bunch of money to go to speeches and market his site. Maddow thinks a decoder is needed, for some reason;

A clear conspiracy theory with an allegation and no facts (in fact, given how many people are around Obama & Hillary at any given time... this theory is actually easily debunkable using numbers i.e. the few people wiling to say such things will be outnumbered by the many who will not use such scandalous lies for fame or gossip... not to mention the fact that anyone can go to a speech and smell them for themselves if they can get close enough to shake hands).

I don't understand what dots there are to connect. A guy is offering money to people to say something at an event and get him some publicity.

Next she insults Christians who fervently believe that Jesus cast demons out of people and into pigs and that with Jesus no longer here there must be demons everywhere (paranoid schizophrenia as derived from religion);

The Demons and the Pigs
11There on the nearby hillside a large herd of pigs was feeding. 12So the demons beggedJesus, “Send us to the pigs, so that we may enter them.” 13He gave them permission, and the unclean spirits came out and went into the pigs, and the herd of about two thousand rushed down the steep bank into the sea and drowned in the water.…

OK. Great contest. Frankly, for a $1000 dollars I would have done that myself.

Other videos the same week as this video are covered in these posts;

Al Gore: Hero Or Coward? With Rachel Maddow (Secret Agent?)

Maddow Provides Multiple Examples Of What A Demolition Looks Like & What Happens When It Goes Wrong... Proving A Perfect Jump Off Point To Talk About The THREE Buildings That Fell In Free Fall Time On 9/11 Like The Demolitions Maddow Talks About

Daily Show on 9/11 & It's Effects

No comments:

Post a Comment