There’s a surprisingly popular flavor of conspiracy theory, seemingly born and bred on the Internet, that I find simultaneously abhorrent as well as totally fascinating in a way, so it ends up being difficult for me to just ignore it. It’s the idea that mass violence in America – especially in the form of shootings – is non-existent, and that all instances of such are elaborate ruses – “false flags” – played out by “crisis actors” in an attempt to disarm the well-behaved and law abiding public. The Sandy Hook elementary school shooting that took place on December 14th, 2012, in Newtown, CT, is a powerful magnet for these goofball theories, and it was ultimately my most powerful motivation for this site.

While reading a Reddit AMA with James Fetzer, the schizophrenic meatball and lifelong crank responsible for penning the atrocious “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”, I realized that it was getting more and more difficult to sift through the unbelievable amount of shit and nonsense (in the form of conspiracy theorist websites). Fantastic sites like MetaBunk and Sandy Hook Facts/Sandy Hook Analysis were out there, but they were being buried by AdWords-rich tripe like… IlluminatiSheeple… UnleashingTheDisinfo… I don’t know; there are just so many of them. And I know one more site isn’t going to bring the appropriate amount of balance, but I can certainly try my best to make sure that my voice is heard by people who may be on the fence about this stuff. People like James Fetzer are a lost cause and I’m not trying to convert them; I’m just trying to make sure everyone else knows these types are completely full of shit and that just because they position themselves as anti-mainstream, they’re no different from every other scam artist trying to make a quick buck off of you.

I won’t limit myself to James Fetzer or even Sandy Hook, but my first order of business will be a thorough, chapter-by-chapter debunk of the awful “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”. It may take a little while, which is why I’ll be doing it chapter-by-chapter (hey, I have other shit to do too), but I may break it up with discussion and debunks of other prominent “false flag” conspiracy theories, especially if a new one arises. And these days, that’s a very real possibility.

Thanks in advance for reading. Please feel free to drop me a line personally if you have any questions or comments or insults, which I’m sure some of you will have plenty of. The comments section will remain open on all posts unless it becomes a total shitshow. Or maybe I should say until it becomes a shitdown, which is an inevitability given the subject matter.

7 Thoughts on “Welcome, Fellow Shills.

  1. Shill Murray, Would you like to be on my radio program?

    • Shill Murray on February 10, 2016 at 3:42 pm said:

      Hi Deanna. I’m interested, but I’m not a particularly great speaker. I guess I’ll have to think about it. Thanks for the offer.

  2. Dear Shill,

    This is a great tool and clearing-house site, really useful for me just lately. I have debated since 2005 on an “Objectivist” or Ayn-Rand-oriented site, though not as a Rand follower but as a critic and investigator of cult dynamics. My first exposure to the fringes of belief and conspiratorial ideation was during the Memory Wars. But I have always maintained an interest in rumour panics, mass crazes, and otherwise awful epistemology.

    A windy way of saying I raised the issue of Sandy Hook conspiracy claims, to underline a concern I had with Quebec City mosque attack truthers. I raised it in the context of on-going harassment and fixations of the nutters. I linked to your site

    It was the immediate reaction of the forum’s leader to reject all my arguments and points — even though I was as a Canadian struggling to understand how the national tragedy and inquiry will unfold.

    Anyway, thank you. This site helped me focus my own argument, which if you are interested is made here:

  3. fuckyou on February 18, 2018 at 1:47 pm said:

    Lmao do you think you’re being cute by naming your site crisis actor guild and calling yourself shill murray? How pathetic, just kys you worthless waste of space. The truth will come out no matter what you do. Keep it up though, cunt.

    • Shill Murray on February 20, 2018 at 12:53 am said:

      Well, I’m sure we can all agree that it’s not nearly as clever as “fuckyou@aol”.

      The truth will come out no matter what you do.

      It’s been more than five years and you dummies haven’t been able to produce a single piece of compelling evidence to back up your nonsensical claims. But any day now, right? With a genius like Wolfgang Halbig on the case…

Please read before commenting.

Comment policy: Comments from previously unapproved guests will remain in moderation until I manually approve them. Honest questions and reasonable comments from all types of folks are allowed and encouraged but will sometimes remain in moderation until I can properly reply to them, which may occasionally take a little while. Contrary to what some of you think, losing your patience during this time and leaving another comment in which you insult me won't do much to speed up that process. If you don't like it, go somewhere else.

The types of comments that will no longer be approved include the following:

1) Off-topic comments. An entry about The Internet Archive's Wayback Machine are not the place to ask about Hillary's e-mails or pizza shop sex dungeons. Stay on topic.
2) Gish Gallops. Don't know what a Gish Gallop is? Educate yourself. And then don't engage in them. They are an infuriating waste of everyone's time and there is no faster way to have your comment deleted.
3) Yearbook requests. Like I told the fifty other folks asking for them: I don't have them, and even if I did, I wouldn't post them. I'm not about to turn my site into some sort of eBay for weirdos, so just stop asking.
4) Requests for photos of dead children. See above. And then seek professional help, because you're fucked up. These items are unavailable to the public; exempt from FOIA requests; and in violation of Amendment 14 of the US Constitution, Article 1 Section 8b of the Connecticut State Constriction, and Connecticut Public Act # 13-311.
5) Asking questions that have already been answered/making claims that have already been debunked. If you want to have a discussion, don't make it painfully obvious that you haven't bothered to read the site by asking a question that I've already spent a significant amount of time answering. I'll allow a little leeway here if you're otherwise well-behaved, but please, read the site. There's a search function and it works fairly well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation