Because here's what you are effectively saying:

"See that murder that happened live on TV - Fake"

"See that video footage from the camera man - Fake"

"See that other footage, from the killer - Fake"

"See that Facebook account of the killer - Fake"

"See those dead bodies - Fake"

"See that autopsy - Fake"

"See that coroner and all those policemen and all the hundreds of other people who become involved - All actors"

"See that funeral - Fake"

"See all those people at the funerals. All the friends and families - Actors"

And on and on and on - with a never-ending list of actors who are all in on the conspiracy.

It gets to the point where you are saying everyone else in the world is part of an evil plot against just one person - you.

Of course.

People who believe the event was staged will assume aspects of fakery--if not total management of the situation--from the get go. Knowing that to be the case, you going out of your way to enumerate the various aspects of the skeptics' examination of the event is, well, retarded.

With all due respect, of course.

you going out of your way to enumerate the various aspects of the skeptics' examination of the event is, well, retarded. With all due respect, of course.

I think you don't know what respect is.

Well, isn't that special?

I see your point.

They are going through a whole lot of trouble to fake these things and people still don't believe it...

I'd be angry too.

You can't be serious

Oh bullshit .

How is this the top rated post ? How ?

Makes no sense to me. It's like , people question things and they're the "bad guy" now ?

Your little narrative above is so full of shit , and so generalized ... I don't know anyone that has ever just said "fake... It's all fake and I'am the real victim."

Your full of shit dude.

How about discussing it like an adult, rather than having a childish tantrum and telling me I'm full of shit?

The points I made above would all need to be correct if the shooting was faked.

It's all very well telling me I'm full of shit - but you could at least make an attempt to explain how those things were faked and how all those people were convinced to play their part?

How about you start with the families. How did the conspirators convince the families to pretend their loved-ones are dead.

And how did they convince the hoax 'victims' to leave their lives behind and disappear forever?

Be careful about asking logical questions, you are in /r/conspiracy after all. People here will just cherry-pick facts to support their arguments and ignore the bigger picture. When you start asking the big questions like "how" and "why", their stories tend to fall apart. But unlike normal people, your average conspiracy theorist will ignore your reason and will dig in deeper and just end up pissing you off. Always keep in mind: if you could reason with conspiracy theorists, there wouldn't be conspiracy theorists :)

(autopsy,coroner, police) reports cant be faked?

You must be on a gooood salary...:/

What does my salary have to do with it?

Didn't you hear? Anyone who is skeptical of certain conspiracy theories is a CIA Jew reptoid alien crisis actor working to obfuscate the truth.

(And before you downvote me, I'm intensely pro-Second Amendment, libertarian in many respects, and anti-big-government. But some conspiracy theories are fucking insane.)

I get the disrespect of the dead thing - but people are really curious if people died at all - so they are not intentionally disrespecting any real tragedy - they instead wonder if we all are being direspected by being lied to.

When someone's ideological stance has them calling up the homes of people who's child/spouse/mother/father just died on live television, insisting it's a hoax and they should apologize to the country, then their ideological stance is cancerous to society. Many people in the conspiracy community are brain dead when it comes to ethically dealing with their 'lack of understanding'.

99% of people who think it's a hoax do not attempt any personal contact with those involved, or with anybody related whatsoever. Those who do that sort of thing, if that is indeed happening, do not represent the majority of questioners in any capacity.

I think you're missing the point. What the conspiracy community does is assume that rather than one psychopath being responsible, they're assuming there are literally hundreds of them working in concert. The ridiculous inability to evaluate evidence fairly due to a mistrust of other people is the problem.

I'm sure this felt good to type out, but it is rather far from the truth. It is very interesting that you make assumptions about me and assert that I've made assumptions about you personally. I think you put more emphasis on the group identity you feel from participating in this subreddit than your own identity and working as an individual.

I'd rather you keep trusting your tv.

I don't, but the TV is far more reliable than whatever sources you're using.

For me, insisting the shooting was a hoax is incredibly disrespectful, not only to the dead, but also to those who were close to them. By insisting it was a hoax, you are saying that those people are still alive and also that their loved ones are liars. I think it's pretty obvious to see why that makes people like me angry.

Nobody was insisting it was. The only people insisting are the ones saying it wasn't, which is what's weird.

Well first off, I'm sure there are a few people on this sub who do insist it was fake, however even if you are taking the whole "I'm just asking questions" position, you are still doubting the suffering of those close to the tragedy. Either way, I don't see much of a difference between insisting or not.

You can't have it both ways. It can't be sacrosanct and have the victims families boo hooing on national TV minutes after the hoax goes down. It's like pleading the 5th amendment you can't pull a Lois Lerner and plead your case then all of a sudden decide you should be immune from scrutiny.

I'm not saying that a tragedy makes people free from scrutiny. I'm just saying that there's no difference, when it comes to causing offense, between someone who is insisting it was a hoax and someone who just kind of doubts the official story.

I think that if any facts pointed to the people close to the shooting being liars then those people should receive scrutiny from the law but with due process. The scrutiny coming from people on the intent telling them they're liars is offensive and wrong.

why does people possibly suffering give it the status tht it cant be questioned.

Could you please tell me where in my post I stated that? I'm having trouble finding it.

so you can't stop thinknig critically just because possible suffering is a factor. you have to still examine facts if you suspect you are being lied to, despite the fear of offending.

Again I can't find where in my post I said that suffering meant you can ignore facts. Could you point out where I said that?

take note these people are sking for something in the name of their suffering. they all have immediatey started fundraising for themselves, and they all immediately start lobbying hard for gun control. and sometimes other political asks. laws are being challenged in the name of this suffering. and in many cases have already been rewritten. and miliions of $ is being raised in the name of his suffering, if not much more.

I'm wasn't aware that gun control legislation has already been passed in response to this shooting. Could I perhaps see a source about that? I'd also like to ask where you got your numbers on donation numbers as well as what you mean by "political asks." Just curious.

So if I understand your argument, you think that because the loved ones of the victims are liars because...why? They aren't sad enough? If one of my loved ones were killed by a gunman, you can bet that I'd be wishing for gun control legislation. I think that's a pretty natural reaction to have. And I think some donation money wouldn't be bad either. You can criticize that, but at the end of the day it isn't evidence of a hoax.

If I'm being honest though, I think the main reason I get angry when people say it was a hoax is because it demonstrates a lack of empathy. It'd be another thing to suggest it was a hoax if they had real evidence, but when they have no evidence its utterly disgusting. They aren't trying to think about what those people are going through and instead just think "they aren't sad enough, must be lying." They ignore the fact that people are dead and instead fixate on how they think those close to the tragedy should react and if they don't react the way they expect them to react they cry hoax.

Someone appearing on camera acting strange to someone else is not evidence.

Blurry, sensationalist YouTube videos claiming anyone who questions imperceptible differences in two videos is a moron is not evidence.

A vague tweet from a bbc reporter is not evidence.

Show me a paper by conspirators outlining their plan.

Show me a video of actors rehearsing.

Show me a picture of a supposed dead actor still alive.

Those are evidence.

[deleted]

That is the opposite of the way things work, you may want to study critical thinking. The world does not exist to satisfy the needs of the pathologically skeptical.

[deleted]

Exactly right, except that the official account is backed up with reasonable evidence, something which you do not have for your version of events.

If I came out with a statement, "ASTEROID WILL HIT EARTH", and made press releases about it, etc., no one would believe me unless I backed it up.

That's the thing, you did make a statement. Your statement is that it is a hoax. And like you said, no one will believe you unless you back it up.

[deleted]

You said it is not on you to prove the hoax. If you start calling it a hoax then yeah, that's a statement.

I don't, I said pathological skepticism, which is different. If you have good reason to be skeptical of a particular thing then great. But to be skeptical of everything is extreme, that indicates a disconnection from reality.

Is it reasonable to be skeptical that we know the whole story? Sure. But is it reasonable to be skeptical we know any of the story? No, not without a lot of concrete evidence. And I do not mean circumstantial evidence either, if you spend a lot of time looking for confirmation of your belief you can make damn near anything fit that narrative, but that sort of weak evidence is open to interpretation.

If I may ask, what evidence convinced you it was a hoax?

The reaction isn't really out of anger over disrespecting the dead. You are attacking their reality. Major media being complicit with government in pulling off hoaxes does not fit with their world view. They are protecting their own egos by refusing to look and attacking others who might show them evidence.

This.

Anger->emotion->contemplation->reality->drunken stooper and question world views. Some cannot, just go there. Weak individuals who could watch the walking dead, but couldn't watch an AQ/Cartel beheading. They lash out to preserve their own sanity and world bubble. Pretty pitiful, if you ask me.

Cognitive dissonance.

Normalcy bias. Repeat.

Man at this point in time I can no longer tell what's real and what's fake in life... too much bullshit blends everything together. The Virginia shooting looked fake as hell, and yet in this crazy world we live in everything from the odd fps footage to the bizarre/soulless reaction of the family members & loved ones could very well be real.

That being said it does surprise me the amount of people that avidly defend certain standpoints... like if I was of the belief that everything in MSM was true and the people that believed otherwise were completely nuts then I would stay away from them, not go out of my way to seek them out and argue the same thing/make the same statements over and over. It seems just as crazy as any conspiracy theory to actually want to do that, so it definitely makes me wonder why some people work so hard to derail a line of thought that 99% of people don't agree with or wouldn't believe anyways.

Short answer: because you are effectively denying that real people were hurt and killed. You're implying that the lost lives don't matter, because YOU don't think it happened.

Because that's what theyre getting paid for.

Agreeing with most of the commenters in here, I see their rage as a defense mechanism to their programming. To even INTRODUCE the idea that the media is selling them lies is incomprehensible.

But that's how programming works, anyone that disagrees or does not accept the narrative is "clearly insane" when in reality they're just not participating in that part of the system. It's very hard to understand that while you're currently in the system, but take a step outside and smell the fresh air and realize that most of the shit in our lives is manufactured.

But what about the people related to the ones who die, are they "being sold lies" too?

Clearly since this is all speculation, I think there are certain people that are involved in the hoax that know - Andy Parker and Chris Hurst - but most people have no idea. That allows there to be "true emotion".

The Charleston shooting, though, I think had the families involved to a certain extent, hence the $27 million payoff.

Which that, in and of itself, shows you that this is a hoax. The Charleston families get a payday AND Obama gives a fiery sermon at their funerals. At Alison Parker's funeral? Invite only. No members from the White House were there. No payday.

Oh, wait! There's a scholarship already set in her name so I'm sure that's how they'll get paid.

Are only shootings that are in the news false flags? Are some not? What about all the ones that don't make headlines?

To me, yes. The ones that don't make it to the national platform are real.

Which would explain why they do these false flag operations, because although that particular scenario was fake, there are real shootings out there.

But yeah, I would say basically any event that makes it to the national platform and influences certain legislature, then most likely it was an orchestrated event to get the desired effect.

Information is power. So.. "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."?

People don't like to have their personal reality shattered . Cognitive dissonance defense mechanism.

People don't like to have their personal reality shattered . Cognitive dissonance defense mechanism.

Is it more likely that some dude went on a senseless rampage and killed a reporter and her camera man for maximum effect, or that the government totally staged the exact same as some long term plan to reduce gun ownership?

This question boils down to "was there one psychopath, or is it an entire shadowy organization of psychopaths?" There's a reason why people think conspiracy-minded folks are loons.