I just brought up Michael Hastings' death in a conversation yesterday - I think that, more important than the death itself, the lesson to be learned from this incident is how many "non-tinfoil hat" types who would have just rolled their eyes before are now willing to entertain the notion that he was assassinated by our own govt.
Before, this would be the point where I say, "my guts tells me it was just.." Now, my gut tells me to just sit back and wait for what comes of it.
I've lost all trust of my govt. and believe them capable of pretty much anything. We're living "The Bourne Conspiracy" or whatever other movie you think is more apt.
What's funny is that the "burden of proof" to even open people to the possibility of an alternative explanation is so much higher than that required to prove the "official story" (i.e. none for the latter).
As a result, the "official story" almost always stands because it doesn't require evidence. Even if that story makes zero sense whatsoever, people don't tend to consider that there could even be an alternative explanation, unless such an explanation can be exhaustively detailed and proven.
Here's a story about an FBI FOIA document that included the language, "planned to engage in sniper attacks against protestors in Houston, Texas, if deemed necessary." The plotters names are redacted but seems rather disturbing-
Before, this would be the point where I say, "my guts tells me it was just.." Now, my gut tells me to just sit back and wait for what comes of it.
I've lost all trust of my govt. and believe them capable of pretty much anything. We're living "The Bourne Conspiracy" or whatever other movie you think is more apt.