posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 05:30 AM
I would say the people who call this stuff disinfo are correct.
People look to cracked for kicks. Now they see their kicker bashing and making fun of these conspiracies along with their theorists, which, in fact,
have a lot of backing to their claims. A fact not at all mentioned by the author.
This article attempts to make a farce of anyone who looks into said conspiracies. It's easy to see the article slanders these theorists with loaded
words such as crackpot, lunatic, paranoid schizophrenic, etc. Nothing you don't hear from the MSM Department of Truth (DOT = Damage over time).
So, 'healthy', 'sane' people are going to look at people who research conspiracies as crackpots, lunatics, nutjobs, wackos, schizos, etc. Only a
few thousand, if you're lucky, of those million+ fishies looking for entertainment will realize the bait. The rest will bite.
At the end of the article they link to 7 theories "that actually came true." Thus, the message is plain as day, "The theories in this article are
If it aint disinfo, its definitely propaganda. I see both.