I’m still a firm believer in some cryptids, UFO encounters, and JEFFREY EPSTEIN DIDN’T KILL HIMSELF
this is a fucking mess
UFOs are real, unless they think that we know exactly what every notable flying object is
Epstein definitely didn't kill himself, i would argue that thinking the opposite is completely disconnected with reality
Messaging serving the ruling class is definitely in children's tv, and adults tv too
Governments definitely have "made" diseases, that's the idea behind biological warfare
and Area 51 is an actual physical location you can drive to, it's on google maps for christ's sake, they test planes and shit thereI don't think they mean to suggest, for example, that Area 51 flat-out doesn't exist. I think the meaning of "Area 51" in this context is something to the effect of "Area 51 houses alien tech the government has been hiding from us since the 1950s and who knows what other fantastical stuff."
I've seen the video as well, and it really breaks down "we have questions" a lot more clearly. Like, if I meet someone who holds opinions on those things, but manage not to tie them to something in the top tier, I'm not concerned. But if they go from "Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself" to "because the Jooo mafia did it at Hillary Clinton's orders" I'm gonna move along.
And the middle tier feels like it could just be somewhere in a circle off to the side, like "harmless lunacy to spice up your life with".
the caption thing for part 7, "a small group of elites rule the world and hurt children for fun" is kinda real though, the ultra-rich have "world leaders" dancing to their tune, and most of them are literal child molesters
bit weird that this is catching downbears on a communist website, but okfair point, but it always pisses me off when you say "the rich are exploiting everyone and are responsible for most of the evil in the world" and the immediate response is "why do you hate the Jews?" as if those things are in any way related
Yes, she's lib poisoned, and the videos quite painful, because she switches styles between the different parts and in the last one she seems to have added a fifth one that she never mentioned before. This is still kind of nice. First time I've seen someone support my long held belief that flat-earth people aren't insane in and of themselves, but have caught a lot of real lies from people in power and just sort of drifted towards "it's all lies". It doesn't make sense to anyone with a framework, but imagine discovering all the lies without even having a concept of class or the idea that maybe the money is being taken by the people that have all the money. If you discover that they lie about EVERYTHING while still being immersed in the propaganda that we grow up with, of course you'll believe that they lied about the shape of the earth. You have no WHY to their lies.
I've heard of it before, but never watched it. I'll just stop myself from watching it right now, because I have work tomorrow and it's getting late where I am, but I think I'll probably check it out tomorrow.
It wasn't them inflicting a disease, it was them offering treatment that did nothing so they could learn about the disease's progression.
its near impossible that some other alien civilization has visited earth theyd have to be extemely advanced and if they had (assuming they have transcended the physical limitations of space and time) thats probably why we have no evidence of them
i highly doubt that any aliens have visited here either, we're a single grain of sand in an unfathomably huge desert after all, and the reasons i have seen people state for why we would be a tourist trap for the ayylmaos tends to be based on a weird human-centric idea of being INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT for some reason, usually some weird mystical woo like orgone energy or some shit
Aliens is such a broad category. It ranges from believing that aliens are here all the time, kidnapping people and performing cattle mutilations to just thinking that Oumuamua may have been an alien probe because it was extrasolar and oblong as fuck. In the first case I would worry that you may be ignoring some real kidnappings and cattle mutilations that should probably be taken a bit more seriously, but in the second case, go nuts. I mean that extrasolar object truly was balls-to-the-wall oblong.
It's a very unusual shape for an extraterrestrial object to have. They tend towards the spherical, because of gravity. The more elongated something that "small" gets in space, the more likely it is to break apart under the gravitational forces of its own spin and nearby bodies. Oumuamua was remarkably oblong, but not impossibly so. Like a four-leaf clover that also exhibited some weird reflective qualities that could, but do not necessarily mean, that it was made out of metal. It was on the extreme end of the spectrum for both shape and reflectivity, but to bring myself back to earth a bit it wasn't actually impossible in either spectrum.
It's just incredibly unlikely. Space objects, especially space objects that travel, tend toward spheroid shapes.
i highly doubt that any aliens have visited here either, we’re a single grain of sand in an unfathomably huge desert after all
This is science denial. Astronomical research points to the Earth being rather unique in the universe. If spare-faring aliens exist, Earth is in the 99.99999th percentile of places to observe. There are millions of "Earth-like" planets, but it is still an unfathomably small percentage of the universe.
UFOs are real. We either are fundamentally lack an understanding of what's happening on Earth & the atmosphere, or extra-terrestrial beings observe Earth. The former is very unlikely. There has been decades of failed research attempting to prove this thesis. The latter is an unknown probability.
it isn't "science denial", the universe is fucking huge. that we are an interesting place to visit is irrelevant if no one knows we exist in the first place
There are methods to determine where Earth-like planets exist. And if a civilization crashing towards extinction can pull that off, I presume a spare-faring species may do that better.
Given that every other explanation for UFOs falls flat, that presumption is more likely to be correct.
those methods depend on being able to observe the star that the planet is orbiting around, if they are too far away to even detect our sun (which is the vast majority of the universe), there is no way at all that they would know the earth exists, let alone all the things on it that they would like to study/poke/laugh at or whatever
Then the question becomes "what is the probability that space-faring life has detected the Sun, or has a method to predict the presence of a Sun-like star through more observable phenomenon?"
These are priors we have no way to prove. But we have been unable to produce any sort of explanation for the UFO phenomenon in 70 years.
If you deny the possibility of extra-terrestrial life, then you are extremely confident that we fundamentally do not understand what is happening on Earth and in our atmosphere. That's fine. I just find the discovery of Earth by extra-terrestrial life possible. And if it was discovered, it would be a high priority for observation.
I'd recommend reading UFOs and Government by Michael Swords for a comprehensive history of explaining the UFO phenomenon. It avoids the extra-terrestrial question, and focusing solely on failed attempts to explain the phenomenon.
I meant to say "if you deny the possibility of extra-terrestrial life discovering Earth."
i mean, i doubt it's aliens, but i'm not denying the possibility.
what always puts me off with ufo researchers is how much they tend to devolve into bad fanfiction, and occasionally weird white-supremacy shit. Like the classification of alien species stuff for example, with the "Tall Whites" and the "Majestic Twelve"Yeah, esotericists love Ufology. That hits the same as "the Nazis were socialist" to me.
(Copied from a reply I made a long time ago) Just statistically I believe it’s impossible life in the universe doesn’t exist. We already knew about the possibility of bacteria on mars and there’s like millions of other planets that could support life like earth. There must be life out there, no matter how simple, and that’s just evidenced by this Venus stuff. However it also seems unlikely that aliens have contacted us. Most habitable planets are way too far away to the point where it would take uncountable light years to get there and Light speed travel Is obviously impossible. Plus, the odds are most species aren’t in the stage of development to contact us. Humans have only existed for like 100k years and only had the potential to make contact with aliens for 100 years. Our civilization probably won’t last more than 10 thousand years. And if all the other planets have similar life cycles of billions of years the odds of aliens being as advanced or more than we are at this exact moment are literally minuscule in the grand scheme of things. That said I do think that bacteria certainly exists and I wouldn’t be surprised if simple life forms also exist on other planets.
Plus, the odds are most species aren’t in the stage of development to contact us.
The Big Bang happened ~14 billion years ago. The solar system & Earth formed ~4 billion years. There are millions of Sun-like systems that formed in the billions of years before Earth formed. There are regions of the universe have had life developing billions of years later than Earth. I don't understand this prior.
About half the stars in the universe are older than the Sun. We are not on the vanguard of species development.
If that’s the case though what are the odds of an alien species surviving this long and not somehow reaching us? Thinking about the Fermi paradox there’s a lot of reasons working against humanity. I am a firm believer in extraterrestrial life, for sure, as there’s even proof of bacteria on Venus now, but there’s so many odds stacked up against hyper intelligent aliens visiting us specifically and just abducting random farmers that it really has little basis in reality
If that’s the case though what are the odds of an alien species surviving this long and not somehow reaching us?
That is where the proven reality of the UFO phenomenon comes into play.
aliens visiting us specifically and just abducting random farmers that it really has little basis in reality
That is infantilizing the history of the UFO phenomenon. Personal accounts of abduction are not used as evidence.
I am a firm believer in the known and the scientifically proven. It just seems way more likely to me that specifically UFO sightings can be explained by low probability weather phenomena or the government doing something experimental, then covering it up. Just statistically, the odds of ball lightning sightings for example are tiny of course, but it’s infinitely higher than the odds of a planet within distance of earth being developed enough to support life, then that life being hyper intelligent, then that life choosing to travel to earth, and that life flying around in their spaceship in the right spot so it can be seen. I mean the earth is massive itself and 2/3rds are covered by water so why do most crazy sightings seem to happen in rural America? I mean, the size of the universe is incomprehensible as it is. Statistically all these things lining up are minuscule compared to the odds of a simple weather phenomenon or a mistake in sighting, like seeing the shadow of a barn owl as a gray alien or something.
It just seems way more likely to me that specifically UFO sightings can be explained by low probability weather phenomena or the government doing something experimental, then covering it up.
I'd recommend reading UFOs and Government by Michael Swords. There are UFO sightings that absolutely can not be explained away with "weather phenomena" or "experimental government projects."
I don't think you actually know anything about the documented history of UFO sightings. Is that correct?
but it’s infinitely higher than the odds of a planet within distance of earth being developed enough to support life
What do you mean by "within distance"? That phrase is carrying a lot of weight. It is guaranteed that life in parts of the universe started developing billions of years ahead of us. Given that, distances of thousands, maybe even millions of light years possible given our current understanding of physics (matter must move STL). But even then, there are FTL theories that have not been disproved. There are likely FTL theories yet to be theorized.
I mean the earth is massive itself and 2/3rds are covered by water so why do most crazy sightings seem to happen in rural America
They don't. Most sightings occur in aircrafts. Again, I do not think you know much about UFO sightings lol
Also, most people don't live on the ocean. It is unlikely people would look up from their ocean home and see a UFO, right?
if they had (assuming they have transcended the physical limitations of space and time) thats probably why we have no evidence of them
wellllll, depending on how much you want to believe from or read into Tom DeLonge's To the Stars disclosure efforts/Pentagon UFO vids (since they are the most "credible" ufo dudes out there at the moment) this may actually be the case. If you're at all interested, I suggest looking up NY Post's Basement Office series on youtube and going to other mostly reputable sources from there (NYT and stuff).
It's really hard for me to buy into some of the more outlandish claims associated with this group, but their ideas are interesting to think about.
Foreskins are used in the cosmetics and biomedical industries, but in a lab setting (for studying the structure and behavior of skin), or for growing graft tissue, and not "ground up and put in makeup". So that one's a lie based on real things.
And soy does contain xenoestrogens, they're just not effective endocrine disruptors at any concentration you'd get from consuming soy. I think BPA is more hazardous, and BPA is mostly OK. Neither is as dangerous as DDT.
The distinction between the pink and blue sections seems kinda arbitrary.
There is no codified way to analyze "conspiracy theories."
Everything in the "confirmed" category was, for the vast majority of the relevance of the theory, firmly in crackpot territory. You had to aggressively believe it anyway, in spite of the lack of (official) evidence and all the consent manufacturing going on.
This image has one foot in the door in liberalism, in the idea that there is a trustworthy consensus hegemony that's just rooted in "the facts" and has no agenda.
A better tool is just to accept that everyone has an agenda, implicit or explicit, conscious or unconscious, individual or institutional. You have to just analyze those and make a judgment call.
At the end of the day, you just have to pick who you trust, and see how much explanatory power the theory has.
You'll still be wrong all the time, but you'll at least be empowered to make decisions without being crippled by some phony fucking consensus.
I saw the creator of this chart present it a TikTok video (posted on Twitter, naturally). She was not intending to create a consensus about any particular conspiracy theories, she was writing a paper on conspiracy theories and wanted to come up with some kind of reasonably coherent system to do so. And this is what she came up with. So whether you agree or disagree with her illustrative examples, the taxonomy she is presenting is, in my opinion, quite clever.
The idea would be, if you should find yourself wanting to categorize conspiracy theories, here is a way you could do it. Create your own chart and put the conspiracies where you subjectively think they belong.
But I as far as I can tell, these are all categorized exactly where I would have put them. Except maybe Hollow Earth. The old Agartha legends probably belongs in the pink zone, but I reckon she means "Nazis Underground in Antarctica" variant of the of Hollow Earth.
How is "Finland doesn't exist" dangerous to yourself and others?
yes if you think that there is a world wide conspiracy to hide the non-finland from us
Maybee they're thinking of "Finland shouldn't exist"?
9/11 was so fishy I can forgive almost any level of brain worms, "can't melt steel beams" belongs under "we have questions" imho
Definitely. The US knew a plot was possible and coming soon and didn’t do much to stop it, but I don’t think it was a deliberate act with controlled demolition. It sure did make a lot of people rich though...🤔
The controlled demolition shit has never been of much interest to me because the other evidence - the connections between Bushes and the Bin Ladens, alphabet boys knowing about the hijackers, the Iraq War lol - is more compelling and relevant to our lives
That's ridiculous, the United States would never shoot down a civilian airliner
Usually, soldier in jet shoot down at civilian. Not soldier shoot up at civilian in jet.
I also think it’s likely we shot the plane down and kept that part tightly under wraps.
100% agree. The government (Air Force, NORAD, whatever) probably knew that the passengers were attempting to take control, rolled the dice and said fuck it, shoot it down to be safe. That’s 100 people versus an additional 1000 dead. Make them out to be heroes, threaten the shit out of anyone involved in the order and you have some top tier propaganda for the war to come. Well never know for sure, but Flight 93 was probably shot down.
New conspiracy theory: John Mccain was on that flight and told everyone he had flying experience. Afterwards he was replaced by a holographic body double.
9/11 was fishy but controlled demolition makes no sense.
Why go to the bother of letting the hijackers do their thing if you were just going to blow it up anyway? The building had already been bombed before, it's not like people wouldn't have accepted that as an explanation. It probably would have caused an even bigger freakout.
The assertion was never that jet fuel melted steel beams. It was that a giant fucking plane going full speed knocked out all the support structures, and that the ensuing inferno super heated and therefore weakened the remaining metal, badly fucking up all the weight distribution, causing it to collapse in on itself. It was kind of a shitty made building, with very little concrete reinforcement and completely inadequate fire protection.
People sometimes bring up the bomber crash into the Empire State, but that was a much smaller plane going much slower crashing into a far better piece of construction.
a giant fucking plane going full speed knocked out all the support structures
This is even more improbable than jet fuel melting steel beams IMO. Steel is much stronger than thin aluminum aircraft. Newton's third law means that a steel beam traveling at 500 mph into an aircraft at rest will do the same damage as a plane traveling into a steel beam at rest: in both cases, the aircraft would be obliterated and the steel would be relatively undamaged.
https://911planeshoax.com/
https://newspunch.com/cia-pilot-presents-evidence-that-no-planes-hit-towers-on-911/
https://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds
Really? Because you can fucking see the plane break right the fuck through it. Did they fake that too?
Back of the napkin math says a plane that big hits with the force of 18 kilotons of TNT. That's a lot of force.
Steel isn't fucking magic. WTC was welded together at weak structural points designed only to maintain its own structural weight plus a safety factor. And it was built pretty shitty even by those standards.
You do not need to literally snap a steel beam in half to puncture the building. It will break along its weld points, which are much weaker.
I hate to tell you this, but physics and engineering are a lot more complicated than Newton's 3rd.
Did they fake that too?
There were eye witnesses who were looking up the whole time and swore they saw no plane. As for the video of the impact, the third video demonstrates that it's not very difficult to fabricate, even in real time.
They laughed at Jesus because he told them the truth. Just like they did when Jesus told them the CIA was smuggling drugs.
The existence of real conspiracies does not prove your lizard people, crackpot shit.
The idea that holographic planes and controlled demolition make more sense than just they let a terrorist attack happen is interdimensional, multiverse brain level shit.
Like, yes, there was a conspiracy. They funded and trained Al-Qaeda to fight the Soviets. They let a bunch of insanely suspicious terrorists go to American flight schools and ignored all civilian warnings about it. Then made sure NORAD would be in a state of panic and confusion during planned exercises so the planes wouldn't be shot down. Then immediately started doing Anthrax and other shit to spin up support for their PFNAC shit so they could start manufacturing consent for Iraq.
You're saying all of that was actually another conspiracy to cover up an even dumber conspiracy which would accomplish the same thing, but was much more difficult to do?
Is it possible, conceivable for you at all, to think that maybe you might be wrong?
Why is the first conspiracy too boring for you?
The idea that holographic planes
I don't believe in the holographic plane stuff; I also think that stuff is "multiverse brain". I realize that one of my links mentioned holograms, but if you are aware of the concept of modified limited hangouts, then you realize that all pieces of evidence and claims must be analyzed critically and independently of its source, because sometimes disinformation or loony stuff is mixed in with the truth to throw you off.
Is it possible, conceivable for you at all, to think that maybe you might be wrong?
Yes, of course.
but was much more difficult to do?
I think it's debatable which destruction conspiracy is more difficult. Rigging a skyscraper for demolition in secret is difficult but there is precedent for it, and most theorists believe the WTC owner was in on it.
On the other hand, to successfully bring down a building with a plane requires:
- A successful hijacking
- Bullseye accuracy hitting a slim tower at 500 mph
- The hit causing damage sufficient to cause collapse
Yes, each of these things is possible, but they are each, at the very least, a gamble. And doing all of them in succession successfully, twice, is slightly more difficult. Comparable to the difficulty of rigging a building using spooky contractors, IMHO.
Why is the first conspiracy too boring for you?
No, it's a matter of the physical evidence. And the uncanny video of the collision. And the fact that the planes were not physically capable of the speeds the exhibited in the video. Those pieces of evidence make me lean towards the no planes theory.
you can fucking see the plane break right the fuck through it.
Watch Well There’s Your Problem’s 3 hour episode on it if you’re interested. Better on YouTube then a podcast app because it has slides.
Yeah as a teen I feel far into that conspiracy theory but I realize now it was because I was too innocent to realize the extent of U.S insidiousness.
Stuff I'd add:
-
Green should also include Exxon's et al.'s astroturfing of climate change denial alongside the big tobacco lying about cancer. Green also needs multiple references to CIA-sponsored coups and "color revolutions".
-
Blue: Needs some plausible variations or substantiated parts of some of the unhinged shit in the yellow and orange tiers. Most of what comes up in pods like TrueAnon belong here, including but not limited to: Gates and other billionaires using philanthropy to dodge taxes and to influence government policy in ex-colonial countries; Ghislaine Maxwell/Victoria's Secret; Epstein's Black Book and private island; Dershowitz; the bizarre euphemisms in the Podesta emails (e.g. "walnut sauce"); and Kubrick's suspicious death after Eyes Wide Shut was released.
-
Pink/violet: The "birds aren't real [since they went extinct in the 1970s], and have been replaced with surveillance drones" joke conspiracy (move to yellow if people literally start believing it and using it to argue against wildlife conservation). Maybe also something about us living inside a Matrix-like computer simulation should go here.
Hardly an unbiased source but might be a useful starting point. https://exxonknew.org/#footnote1-ref
-
I was at a party one summer night in 2015 (maybe 2014) out in a rural area. There were probably seven of us out on the back deck drinking and smoking, when I started to see these orange orbs in the sky. Every forty seconds or so, an orange ball wayyyy up would be moving across the sky, and then suddenly change direction and zip out of sight at a speed that I can’t imagine is physically possible. I saw maybe 5 or 6 of these objects do that.
I’m still convinced they were UFOs
u sure it wasn’t just the sickest football throw/kick (depending on which kind u mean) ever
Yes, that’s a theory I’ve been thinking about! I’m starting to think that aliens come from another dimension or reality, and not necessarily from outer space. And their tech and whatever we’ve “witnessed” in encounters are supernatural, and not technological.
That’s another thing I’ve been thinking for about ten years or so. I think a lot of the descriptions of encounters with angels and God’s supernatural feats might have been supernatural aliens. Elijah’s chariot, following the pillar of fire and cloud, shit maybe even parting the red sea.
Ball lightning is incredibly weird. It's been known to drift around slowly, change direction suddenly, etc. My mother swears ball lightning phased through the walls of our house and wrecked our PC in the 90's, but she also reads David Icke, so take that account with a grain of salt.
You sure they weren't just those giant spotlights that car dealerships use to advertise? Because I fell for that one all the time as a kid.
I’m sure, these objects were so far away, I think they were either in space or up in the outer rim of our atmosphere
I'm convinced it's an air force psyop. Considering the insanity Dr. Jolly West was able to inflict Jack Ruby with in the sixties, I think it's possible that abduction stories are based on kidnappings by unsavory human beings. Regardless of any wild brainwashing speculation, you can imagine why UFOs are a useful diversion for aircraft testing.
Every year since those UFO vids were released by the DoD, we've gotten some periods of weird news regarding them. I don't want to be all "the reptiles are among us" and shit, but I would not be surprised at all if the topic gets blown wide open in the near future or if the fucking ayyys themselves show up. Hope it goes well, lol.
I literally don’t get that one. I thought soy boys were just white dudes that get excited over funko pops
I think it is the belief that estrogenic agents are being introduced into the environment, particularly in the form of soy products in the diet, in order to feminize and emasculate men and especially children who are believed to be particularly vulnerable to the feminizing effects.
It's objectively true that soy does contain phytoestrogens that can have a have weak estrogenic activity, that is far cry from conspiracy to effectuate mass feminization in order to lower fertility rates, make men "low-testosterone", more feminine, and in the minds of the chuds, naturally more disposed, then to left-wing ideologies like Postmodern Neo-Marxism.
https://www.salon.com/2018/11/14/the-soy-boy-conspiracy-theory-alt-right-thinks-left-wing-has-it-out-for-them-with-soybeans_partner/
goddammit not all charts need more than one axis. there is only one axis, and that is how weird you are with your politics
what if I want to be multiple kinds of weird simultaneously
edit: kids -> kinds
you want to be multiple kids???? what a weird fantasy is that
Some of the things at the bottom were literally done by one of the things at the top, unless I'm the idiot who doesn't know what "deep state" means
The fucking cryptofash misappropriated the term "deep state" when it was introduced to them by people who were familiar with the term as it should actually be used: similar to the original Turkish context, the true US deep state would likely be defined to include mostly-unelected bureaucrats and military brass unaccountable to any changes in the democratic will of the people, especially those in federal natsec-blob agencies like the CIA, DHS, and Pentagon which overwhelmingly dictate the actual grisly execution of US foreign policy, but arguably also including unelected leaders of the Federal Reserve who dictate monetary policy based on market signals and mostly independently from democratic pressure, and the corporate-funded talking heads influencing public opinion through the AP, NPR, NYT, WaPo, WSJ, etc.
There is a real US deep state, but the MAGA chuds and Qanon rubes decided to selectively redefine it to only include the deep state members they don't like and introduced false positives like Democrats in Congress and the White House so as to make the term almost fucking useless for political analysis or discourse. The only part they consistently get right is identifying the MSM "fifth columnists" (esp. CIA-adjacent ones like CNN's Jake Tapper) as members or extensions of the deep state.
So now when people try to point out the real deep state, they sound like delusional chuds to most liberals at first glance. It's very annoying.
Thanks for clarifying this. I was originally only familiar with the Turkish context of the term and it has irked me for a while to see chuds appropriate it.
The thing is while the Trukp people appropriated the term for their own delusional purposes, there's a kernel of truth to these claims because the national security apparatus has been trying to soft coup him via Russiagate and other constant leaking since his term began
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4827052/user-clip-god-deep-state
Well said. What's definitely an interesting proposition (changing the bureaucracy is incredibly hard and the bureaucracy resists) becomes "Obama built GLADIO in the FBI!1!".
And it's a good debate to have, because "how responsive should the bureaucracy be to successive governments?" is a perfectly fair question. Do we really want one that whiplashes every 4-8 years? Probably not. But we do want one that's under the control of the people we elected!
And now that well is poisoned. Because TDS means that all of a sudden libs inherently trust every government agency (ok, maybe not DHS, but I bet they will if Biden wins).
I think Deep State in the modern conspiratorial sense always refers to like, Obama, Clinton, and Comey working with CNN and MSNBC to subvert Trump.
Well, yeah, but in a similar way, even though right wingers call legitimate news "fake news", fake news is still a term for completely fabricated stories on facebook. Same with deep state, I've heard it used before 2016 to mean "unelected but powerful government workers" essentially
Another question, what's the deal with Denver Airport? I've seen the freaky art and shit but nothing really pops out as being definitely sinister.
Billionaire pedophiles run the planet is a fact yet is treated as a crackpot conspiracy theory as well by the media. It’s not as simple as flat earthers are idiots and reagan sold crack cocaine to Millions of Americans . There are some conspiracies that are denied by the media such as AIPAC running the American congress which are objectively factual, but still denied by libs. You have to use critical thinking to figure out which is which. This post is liberal as fuck and it’s ridiculous to say things such as the billionaire class aren’t brainwashing the children with television and lobbying our “education system”.
