No attempts at finding context at least? I said a lot more than that.
How Frownland feels: false flag operations are possible. However, their likelihood is not high enough to blame every terrorist attack, school shooting, or plane crash on being a false flag op. When there is insurmountable evidence that doesn't quite clearly seem to serve a second party interest, I'll consider a false flag op. In the case of 9/11, the evidence that is put forward to propose ambiguity is agreed up on by actual physicists (which highly outweighs the number of "physicists" who signed up to architects for 9/11 truth) to be a hoax. A false flag is possible, but given the amount of evidence suggesting otherwise I highly doubt that it's the case.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.
|