Poll: US Government "Inside Jobs"

[Ernie]

Poll: Which of the poll options do you think were probably a US "Government Inside Job" set up, to make it appear like something/someone else was responsible?

Vote and discuss.

[Bootstrap]

Can you define what you mean by a "Government inside job"?

If some people in government are involved in serious wrongdoing, does that count, or are you asking for instances where the government as a whole has gone rogue?

If someone currently in office uses non-governmental channels to do something wrong against the government, does that count?

[Josh]

Can you define what you mean by a "Government inside job"?

If some people in government are involved in serious wrongdoing, does that count, or are you asking for instances where the government as a whole has gone rogue?

If someone currently in office uses non-governmental channels to do something wrong against the government, does that count?

That’s a good question. If a somewhat rogue part of an agency (such as the MK Ultra program) spends years trying to conduct tests to see if they can force someone to be a violent terrorist, was it an “inside job” if such a person ends up like McVeigh or Kaczynski? These programs were certainly not approved by the rest of government and in fact Congress shut down that program after public congressional inquiry (after decades of stonewalling and hiding behind “national security).

[Ernie]

Can you define what you mean by a "Government inside job"?

If some people in government are involved in serious wrongdoing, does that count, or are you asking for instances where the government as a whole has gone rogue?

If someone currently in office uses non-governmental channels to do something wrong against the government, does that count?

That’s a good question. If a somewhat rogue part of an agency (such as the MK Ultra program) spends years trying to conduct tests to see if they can force someone to be a violent terrorist, was it an “inside job” if such a person ends up like McVeigh or Kaczynski? These programs were certainly not approved by the rest of government and in fact Congress shut down that program after public congressional inquiry (after decades of stonewalling and hiding behind “national security).

By "government inside job", I'm talking about officials plotting to do something terrible or illegal, and then trying to get the press to believe that it had nothing to do with the government. I don't know anything about MK Ultra, but "ending up" a violent terrorist is different in my mind from orchestrating people and money to get some men to commit a particular deed/action.

In the case of the moon landing, "trying to fake an actual mission with people to the moon."

[Bootstrap]

By "government inside job", I'm talking about officials plotting to do something terrible or illegal, and then trying to get the press to believe that it had nothing to do with the government. I don't know anything about MK Ultra, but "ending up" a violent terrorist is different in my mind from orchestrating people and money to get some men to commit a particular deed/action.

Thanks. That's clear enough that I was able to vote.

[Ernie]

Whoever voted for "2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting", do you basically believe the narrative that Alex Jones gives or something quite different?

[Josh]

Whoever voted for "2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting", do you basically believe the narrative that Alex Jones gives or something quite different?

Something different.

In the case of MK Ultra, they experimented to see if they could use mind control experiments to make people become terrorists against their will. It appears they were successful. The government officials involved vastly exceeded their authority, destroyed documents, and when finally hauled in front of Congress, the program was promptly shut down.

[Ernie]

Something different.

I'd like to hear your narrative as the only one I have heard of is the one from Alex Jones.

[Josh]

Something different.

I'd like to hear your narrative as the only one I have heard of is the one from Alex Jones.

It would be circumstantial.

The family involved was a wealthy family. Dad worked for a hedge fund. The parents were separated. The son was known to be unstable.

Mom kept buying guns over and over, Dad couldn’t do anything to stop it. Other family members had concerns about so many guns and the son having access to them. Nothing was done. CT is a state that has stricter gun control too.

The reaction was immediately to call for national gun control restrictions (instead of enforcing existing laws which would have prevented this). Careful checking into backgrounds of the victims revealed either the families didn’t exist prior to the shooting or names were changed (the latter being more likely).

In short, mass shootings seem to be events that are sometimes tolerated or even promoted in order to create tragedies then used to advocate for disarming American citizens. This is similar to what Netanyahu has done with Hamas: encourage a violent, terrorist government to rule Gaza so he can then advocate for invading and destroying Gaza, instead of a more reasonable government with a two state solution, or sharing voting rights and citizenship with 2 million Gazans.

Events like in Nashville confirm this for me. They refused to release the shooter’s manifesto, even tho every other mass shooting I can remember, the manifesto was immediately released. The reason? That mass shooting didn’t have a bogeyman of blaming “right wing white supremacists”. Instead. The shooter’s agenda was to kill conservative Christians. Why was releasing this suppressed?

[Ernie]

Something different.

I'd like to hear your narrative as the only one I have heard of is the one from Alex Jones.

Careful checking into backgrounds of the victims revealed either the families didn’t exist prior to the shooting or names were changed (the latter being more likely).

How many victims does this describe?