Why does he think wikipedia contains the truth about government corruptions and conspiracies?

Watching these truther documentaries has made one thing abundantly clear to me- there's not enough consequences for people who go out of their way to spread total bullshit. These people should be given the alex jones treatment. I'd like to hear them say under oath that it's all an inside job because "W-well the towers looked like they were in freefall!"

/thread + sage

lol another eceleb thread
Any Forums is literally for fags lol
bump bump bump

>because his life is dependant upon him remaining the rational voice of the age of irrationality
That was Sam Harris's position too but look at him now.

I've been checking in an out of the 9/11 streams. He thinks that Wikipedia contains the "official" narrative, which he is comparing and contrasting with the laughable narrative presented by The New Pearl Harbor. He at no point has said that either narrative is "the truth", rather that the official narrative has actual evidence whereas the counter narrative doesn't.

You can edit wiki entries anytime you want.
There'll be time where you won't even find any mention of FBI involvement there.

kys nigger

>evidence
to you people, evidence means something published in a mainstream news outlet

Because it’s lucrative to occupy the space of preventing people from becoming radicals and him making money depends on it. He’s no different than Jordan Peterson.

Soon

Funny thing is Alex Jones spouts the official narrative of 9/11.

well the counter narrative is mostly just speculation- often on the basis of faulty logic.

to you people evidence means something published by a random faggot on youtube

based

u get to know the threads and truth appears

SNEAKO is /ourguy/

yeah. in their tiny brains, official=bad. If the majority of experts are saying something, that means it's more likely to be false.

The New Pearl Harbor goes out of its way to not present a narrative.
It challenges the official narrative.
This is made clear repeatedly so many times through the documentary I wonder if you even watched it.

bum bump bump keep this faggot eceleb thread at the top of the catalogue lol

sneako is a fag with a fake split eyebrow. it's like a woman who shaves off her eyebrows just to draw them back on. retarded fag shit.

You fell for the "not presenting a narrative" narrative.

You are actually delusional if you think they are "just asking questions".

This is what frustrates me most about my anti-establishment homies. They truly and genuinely believe they are "free thinkers" but they are really just mirror image of npcs who believe everything the mainstream media has to say. They reflexively reject it all without thought.

Look at the list of JFK conspiracy theories, scroll all the way to the bottom.

I understand that you can read very deep implications from the skepticism presented in New Pearl Harbor. But that is something you are constructing in your mind as a viewer.

The documentary does not present its own narrative of the events of 9/11. You can go look and you won't find it.
I am happy to be corrected if someone can timestamp the film where this happens. Its simply not there.