Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Some Thoughts on Sandy Hook and Media Influence

I woke up this morning thinking about Sandy Hook, and I had a thought that has crossed my mind many times before. All of this media technology that we've so quickly accepted as a good thing has intentionally been used to introduce the rest of the world to us in the privacy (?) of our homes through newspapers, radio, television, and then the internet, but prior to their introduction we didn't concern ourselves very much at all with events that were going on with people we don't know halfway around the world. Local events and people we knew personally were all that mattered. Eliminate the media, or at least localize it, and the perceived problems that we worry about virtually disappear.

Because of this fact, it's actually quite unnatural to concern ourselves too much about children or anyone else who may or may not have been killed in a purported travesty that we would otherwise never hear about and would therefore have no effect on us at all. Millions of people die every single day, by every means imaginable, whether they might be babies or senior citizens, innocents or not-so-innocents, important figures or nobodies, through violence, accidents, or natural causes. That's just a fact of life.

Just ask yourself these questions: How often do you hear about the deaths or travesties of people in your own community? How many of them do you really even know? Who in your community that die, or have crimes committed against them, do you never hear about? Why is who they are and their personal misfortune considered so much less important than those you DO hear about? What causes you to concern yourself with events that go on in communities that have absolutely no association to you? Who or what goads you to concern yourself?

YES, I care about young children, no matter who they are or where they live. I just naturally love them and feel for them. I also care about the threats that lie outside my community that may eventually affect me here at home. However, this fact of human nature (caring) can be abused as much as any other, for purposes that we don't always know or understand, and because of our media technologies more than anything else it CAN and IS being abused to influence us to think and act outside of our natural human state, overlooking our own local world and engrossing ourselves in matters that take place elsewhere.

But of course, what I've just said was merely prompted from a hazy thought that I had while still waking up, so let's move on to matters that we might think are less sleep-induced...

By all appearances, to those who are awake, the Sandy Hook 'shooting' was a fake news event at a fake school involving fake evidence and fake victims who were presented with their fake families in fake photos to present a fake scenario of fake violence perpetrated by a fake suspect whose suicidal death was faked in order to fake the fact that fake guns and fake pharmaceuticals played a fake part in a fake crime that was reported to us by fake reporters giving fake news stories to fake the facts about fake crimes that give them a fake reason to continue to offer fake news.

What is even real any more?

Why do we allow ourselves to be emotionally influenced by all this, and allow it to act on our imaginations to create the perception of a larger world that only makes us fear each other here at home as much as anywhere?

Who is affected by this the most - those who are still sleeping, or those who are waking up and paying attention?

While we study these fake stories and attempt to make sense of the many inconsistencies and constant changes in the 'official' stories, we often forget that these inconsistencies are very often purposefully intended to keep us busy chasing false leads. This just shows that we're still not fully awake.

As an example of purposeful misdirection, very early on when the Sandy Hook story hit the news on December 14, 2012, a law enforcement official (or someone claiming to be one), speaking under conditions of anonymity, told the Associated Press that the shooter was Ryan Lanza, that Adam Lanza was being held in New Jersey for questioning, and that their mother worked at the school as a teacher. According to the original story be the Associated Press, "The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because the source was not authorized to speak on the record about the developing criminal investigation."

So we should ask ourselves, apart from many other questions that this media event raises, WHY was this person speaking at all, if not to obfuscate the facts and send 'conspiracy theorists' chasing false leads?

Looking back in retrospect, we can see the amount of confusion information like this tends to create, making it virtually impossible to bring everybody who's following the story up to speed and thereby dividing them in their beliefs and understandings and causing a lot of infighting that just slows down discovery of the truth.

Little things that get passed off early on as inconsequential matters (such as the fact that this information was given anonymously) are later forgotten or not even recognized, while the tainted information continues to be accepted as fact and mulled over for a long time afterwards. In this particular case, as well as many others, the paper trail back to the original source of information disappears, making it almost impossible to unwind the story and review it in a new light of clearer wakefulness.

These news events pass through our minds like we're in a dream and we don't take much notice of the little details that would reveal that it's just a dream.

Only rarely does anyone bother to archive information about events like Sandy Hook at the moment that they first get it, so that it can be reanalyzed later on if required. We can't rely on a complicit media or anyone else to preserve such key pieces of evidence for us, as with the case here (the Associated Press later removed the article that contained this information from an 'anonymous law enforcement official'). Only by preserving the details we come across that make up the full 'dream sequence' can we later wake ourselves up from the illusions and recognize what is real and what is not.

But maybe it's all just so tiring to do so, and falling back asleep is easier. I don't know...

No comments:

Post a Comment