05-02-2016, 08:16 AM
O'Reilly is playing the role of the sane realist who questions Fetzer's bizarre conspiracy claim. Fetzer is playing the role of the better more reasonable presenter of truth on O'Reilly's show in order to draw in those who don't believe the official account. However the intention is those who are attracted to Fetzer's pitch then check him out some more and discover his nutty claims therefore destroying any faith in conspiracy theorists. All brought to you on FOX.
So you think Fetzer was (and is) a conscious disinformation artist? An agent with a handler? That's a possible scenario. I tend to think of him as controlled opposition in a less cut and dry way. Perhaps his secret sources, the ones he sometimes alludes to, are jerking his chain, feeding him false "inside" information and puffing up his ego? B/c he certainly seems to believe in what he's talking about.
O'Reilly comes across as a bellicose drunken father-figure lecturing a wayward "punk" in that clip, nothing sane or realistic about it IMO. His questions are classic CIA talking points to challenge CT'ers. He's a disgrace.
So you think Fetzer was (and is) a conscious disinformation artist? An agent with a handler? That's a possible scenario. I tend to think of him as controlled opposition in a less cut and dry way. Perhaps his secret sources, the ones he sometimes alludes to, are jerking his chain, feeding him false "inside" information and puffing up his ego? B/c he certainly seems to believe in what he's talking about.
O'Reilly comes across as a bellicose drunken father-figure lecturing a wayward "punk" in that clip, nothing sane or realistic about it IMO. His questions are classic CIA talking points to challenge CT'ers. He's a disgrace.