Deputy Cloots

This will be a bit long so I hope yall read it 🙏 In "conspiracy" research... noticing connections, identifying patterns, questioning affiliations, and recognizing inconsistencies does not obviously automatically mean you have legit evidence of someone's involvement with an intelligence agency. Or groups surrounding. Sometimes you may find a collection of circumstances that raise legitimate questions. Sometimes you have enough information to warrant further investigation but not enough to reach a definitive conclusion. And that's okay. Not every suspicion is an accusation, and not every investigative lead comes with irrefutable proof. As we've been discussing more recently, the FBIs COINTELPRO operations DID involve infiltrating organizations, using informants, sowing discord, and attempting to discredit individuals/movements. The point isn't that everyone we disagree with or has a DOD contract is a government operative. The point is that we should understand these tactics have existed, recognize that infiltration is a legitimate subject of historical and ongoing scrutiny, and remain aware of the possibility. We can continue to call out things we notice in potential networks/connections even if we have not come to a definite conclusion. Even if we dont have "proof". I do agree that we should absolutely be cautious about falsely labeling people as bad faith federal agents. I do agree stating it without facts can be harmful. But we should be equally cautious about treating the mere act of questioning someone's affiliations or examining suspicious connections as unreasonable. And MOST importantly, you don't have to fight with people, ostracize them, or turn every disagreement into a division. You can take a step back, observe, consider all available evidence under the same light and allow people to demonstrate who they are through their actions. Don't get caught up in the drama. Don't let personalities, views/likes, alliances, or emotional attachments dictate what evidence you're willing to consider. Be willing to question everyone, including the people you agree with. The objective should be to become more informed, more discerning, and more educated, not more divided. Again, holding everyone under the same light. Keep your eyes open. Follow the evidence. Distinguish suspicion from proof but dont diminigh yiur suspicion if proof is not available. Don't let the fear of being wrong discourage you from asking questions or "noticing" in the first place.