Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28008747
... Quoting: CleverMoniker 19931300
You know, we're all trying to get some quality paranoia going here ...
You know, I don't think it's paranoia to imagine that just maybe 20 children were NOT killed on that day.
But that never occurred to you, all you care about is attacking the discussion in whatever way might work.
But it is MOST DEFINITELY PARANOIA to think that hundreds and hundreds of people are willing to participate in such a dangerously exposable conspiracy...with so many potential holes, and ways it can go wrong...where if it does go wrong, the entire relationship between government and the governed will be devastated (the sheeple realizing that they are being fooled, all control lost) ...and furthermore, that someone was able to flawlessly recruit so many mutually corrupt people, that not one of them tried to expose it, not one person secretely filmed them doing it and leaked it...
I mean, here's the scenario:
"Ok Bob, we're running a little operation here in this sleepy town. We're going stage a fake school shooting where we pretend a whole bunch of little kids get killed, flood the town with actors to pretend they are grieving, manipulate and make fools of the entire country, all so we can get some new gun bill put through. Are you on board?"
And not one of the hundreds of people given this scenario thought to themselves 'holy crap! this is crazy, is our government really doing this? I must expose this...'
Not one person had second thoughts or guilt after the fact, and came forward.
Not one person performed the perfectly safe act of filming the fraud and then anonymously posting it on the internet.
There is an inherent flaw when it comes to corrupt people sharing a secret. That being, the very moral corruption that renders them capable of committing the crime, also makes them generally untrustworthy bedfellows, willing to turn on each other at the drop of a hat for self preservation.
Any one of the participants of such a conspiracy, if they were able to prove it happened, could be an instantly rich anonymous informant. So you're not just gambling on so many people being willing to keep a secret, you're gambling that the mean people you hired to screw over other people *aren't* also going to screw over you.
I mean, this isn't just a little secret kept between confidants. This would involve PAYROLL. There are hundreds of people involved, being displaced for weeks, with varying levels of interest in the 'big picture' that would have to be getting paid to do this. The infrastructure involved in a production like this would be formidable.
I mean, these 'actors' would undoubtably have agents. And agencies. Or at the very least, fellow actors who may or may not like them. People who would look at the tv and go 'Hey! That's not Robbie Jackson! That's Phil MacDonald from my old theatre troupe! I'd recognize that asshole anywhere! FRAUD!!!!
I'm sorry. The resources involved would simply be too staggering. The holes and opportunities for exposure too numerous.
MAYBE the government decided to streamline the narrative of what happened to take advantage of an opportunity. But outright staging the entire thing, complete with grieving actors?