Babe, can you take us step by step to the truth you know about the Boston Marathon firecracker incident?
Like, layout what we've been told. What parts of that are a fabrication. How we know for certain it's a fabrication.
Then, most importantly, what the truth is and how we know for certain that is the truth and not just conjecture filling the void left by the fact that what we've been told is false.
That's why I call it "because we don't know what happened we know exactly what happened" which is the basis of every conspiracy theory I've ever looked into. They shock you with some seemingly inconsistent fact regarding what we've been told (upright water bottles) and from there they reverse construct a set of "facts" that fit the chain of events and then provide a "boom! this is what happened" narrative. The problem I have with that is that it is very easy to invent any number of alternatives to explain an event, but conspiracy theorists seem to think that because their favorite story is so clever and fits the events so well (which again, it's easy to have a series of events laid before you and invent a story that fits) that that in and of itself establishes fact, when it does no such thing.
Like, layout what we've been told. What parts of that are a fabrication. How we know for certain it's a fabrication.
Then, most importantly, what the truth is and how we know for certain that is the truth and not just conjecture filling the void left by the fact that what we've been told is false.
That's why I call it "because we don't know what happened we know exactly what happened" which is the basis of every conspiracy theory I've ever looked into. They shock you with some seemingly inconsistent fact regarding what we've been told (upright water bottles) and from there they reverse construct a set of "facts" that fit the chain of events and then provide a "boom! this is what happened" narrative. The problem I have with that is that it is very easy to invent any number of alternatives to explain an event, but conspiracy theorists seem to think that because their favorite story is so clever and fits the events so well (which again, it's easy to have a series of events laid before you and invent a story that fits) that that in and of itself establishes fact, when it does no such thing.