You must log in or register to comment.

KanyesDemons t1_iugpmzc wrote

Time for these conspiracy nuts to be put in psychiatric facilities and medicated


KamahlYrgybly t1_iugvu87 wrote

This! I am a medical doctor, and the behaviour described in this article brings into question these people's sanity. It sounds like a delusion, which could possibly be a symptom of psychosis or delusion disorder. They need a psych workup. And if they truly believe hugely documented terror incidents with mass casualties, hundreds / thousands of eyewitnesses and extensive media coverage to be hoaxes, they should be committed for treatment involuntarily, as their current behaviour is harmful to others.


255001434 t1_iui7emk wrote

It worries me how online forums are giving support to the delusions of genuinely unwell people. They can connect with people from all over who will tell them they are right. Everyone can find their tribe, no matter how crazy. This is happening not only about political issues, but personal obsessions too.

There is a person who lives in my neighborhood who is clearly paranoid and thinks all her neighbors are conspiring against her to drive her crazy. She posts flyers about something called She can go online to convince herself that it's not just her, it's a real thing that happens to other people too. She harasses all her neighbors with baseless accusations.

This is not only bad for the people suffering from the delusions, but also to society and their potential victims if they are inclined to harassment or violence.


UberHyperKing t1_iuh5yjl wrote

I mean the guy in the article is deplorable for how he is acting. However he could very well be fabricating this for money and leading more impressionable people astray.

Given he is in the UK, the MHA would not cover sectioning this guy at present from what is written in the article. I assume you work elsewhere from the UK.


HorsesMeow t1_iuhy9rm wrote

Agreed. This is an Alex Jones effect. - Delusional grasp at false "special knowledge" in order to seek attention, and it could be a precursor to violence if they dont get attention and accolades that they desire.
The right to Freedom of speech does not include false narratives.


lilrabbitfoofoo t1_iui6kc7 wrote

It's good then that the UK (like all developed nations^1) has a national healthcare system that covers mental illness treatments.

^1 Offer not good only in the United States of America, the richest nation in the history of the human race.


protonfreetome t1_iuibr5y wrote

Thats weird...i live in the USA and my healthcare covers mental illness.


lilrabbitfoofoo t1_iuicugc wrote

Is it part of your insurance plan, which you pay premiums for AND have your salary reduced by the company's matching premium amount? Are there caps on your care by days, by dollar amount, per year, per lifetime of the policy, etc.? Aka American Profitcare?

Or are you on the ACA (aka Obamacare) which still has huge gaps in its coverage? And still doesn't cover everyone, of course.

Because I'm talking about civilized nations that have this coverage for every citizen as a right of citizenship. What our own Constitution refers to as "Life" in the "Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness"...


malazanbettas t1_iuibzho wrote

And only a plus one year waiting list.


lilrabbitfoofoo t1_iuidacg wrote

Help me with the math on this. Is one year better than waiting an entire lifetime like Americans do?

Because I think even one year (thank your conservatives for that, btw) is better than forever...


malazanbettas t1_iuiednq wrote

I’m in the U.K. (so I’ll thank your conservatives) and I waited one year then I waited one more. When I finally saw someone (who I think got their therapy certificate on Wowcher) I was told I didn’t have enough mental illness to get therapy. I still ended up going private and paying 480£ for a (real) psychiatrist and follow ups are 360£. And I do need therapy, or so the 30 years of doctors who treated me (in the states) say. And the crippling agoraphobia that keeps me inside that both PIP and UC agree is pretty gosh darn bad. So yeah a year and you better be coming at them with schizophrenia or you can go home. Forever.


lilrabbitfoofoo t1_iuil5zy wrote

That sucks, mate!

Now, imagine you are in the USA. Where even if you have schizophrenia, you won't get any help until you kill someone. And then you won't get any help, you'll just be imprisoned.

Have you seen all those stories about homeless hordes in the USA? Those are primarily all of our people who aren't mentally ill enough to kill someone and don't get any help from our system at all.

For the record, I think all of them and YOU should be getting the help you need.


bevilthompson t1_iughmjg wrote

There are people who deny the Holocaust, believe the world is flat, and think some 2000 year old dead guy is going to show up and solve their problems. The real question is what do we do about misinformation that fuels this bullshit. I completely advocate freedom of speech but when you promote lies and people are hurt because of your speech there needs to be repercussions.


pantie_fa t1_iugn1rk wrote

> The real question is what do we do about misinformation that fuels this bullshit

It runs very very deep. I don't think that it should necessarily be an infringement on "free speech" to draw a line and say that we do not tolerate intolerance.

>when you promote lies and people are hurt because of your speech there needs to be repercussions.

absolutely. Human civilization is coming apart at the seams due to the failure of leadership to take hold and do something about this; on behalf of the will of the governed.


Vimda t1_iugq83i wrote

> when you promote lies and people are hurt because of your speech there needs to be repercussions.

The difficulty there is proving the link between someones speech, and the actions. If there's a bunch of outlets spewing the same stuff, how do you know which one actually caused it. That's why we're getting all the stochastic terrorism at the moment - all the bullshit stores can hide behind "well actually it was those other guys"


Nopes_alot_ t1_iuhvwdl wrote

I think cases like this, the burden of proof that you were not responsible for the actions of a person who did as directed on media or told them or said “needed to be done” should be on the person who fucking said it. People/Talking Heads/Politicians in the US calling for murder of Nancy Pelosi, should be on the hook to some extent for the crazy asshole who broke in with a hammer and beat Nancy Pelosi‘s husband in the head with it. If anything were to happen to Trump or Putin, I would be willing to defend my words and could probably prove that whoever perpetrated it, never had the chance to hear it from me, if they did it might be worth it anyway. (my value to the world likely being substantially less than the damage of either of those two). Maybe people should be responsible for what they say?


Arigato_MrRoboto t1_iugc04e wrote

Shit man, welcome to the US way of things.


SKYLINEBOY2002UK OP t1_iugcb12 wrote

Scary isn't it.

I mean I understand parts of their views. A small slice, eg losing trust in govt etc, so they look for other "sources'. But to deny true tragedies..


truemeliorist t1_iughm9o wrote

> The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

George Orwell, 1984


Pendu_uM t1_iugpn46 wrote

As someone who deals with people who are conspiracy theorists, that quote could be used by both sides


littlemetal t1_iuh6fxr wrote

What can't?


Pendu_uM t1_iuh7lut wrote

What can't what? Not sure what you're asking, but I'm disappointed people are down voting me. All I'm saying is conspiracy theorists usually has doubts of an epistemic nature to the point where they sometimes only rely on their sense data and other times rely on people they trust. So when this quote goes on to talk about sensory evidence, I realized that this quote for people who doubt the integrity and refuse to rely on institutions or research, in this instance, that quote can be used against you, since it would make sense for their side too.


Klapkop t1_iujtssg wrote

They really love quoting 1984 without reading it so anything from that book will probably be used against you.


Lucerin187 t1_iugmpdi wrote

I mean, when did the rest of the world lower their bar to meet our dumb standards. I had hope the US was just going to be an outlier, but more and more places are becoming just ad bad as us, if not worse.


midwestraxx t1_iugxkjy wrote

The childish "nuh-uh" arguments are somehow gaining ground


YouAreTheTurkey t1_iugosvw wrote

How do these people get to be like this? I've only ever met one in real life and he destroyed just about every meaningful relationship he had because of these beliefs.

Years ago I was friends with this couple who were Scotish and American, both living as citizens in Australia.

He (the Scot) was convinced that just about all terrorist attacks and mass shootings in the US were staged. When the Boston bombings happened he was constantly on social media raving about the actors pretending to be victims, his girlfriend was from Boston and she left him shortly after.


Mushroom_Tip t1_iugz48r wrote

>he was constantly on social media

That's how.

It's not like you log in one day and instantly believe all those things. It's a slow and incremental brainwashing process that's exacerbated by social media algorithms designed to suggest content similar to what you're already viewing to stop you from going outside.

And there is a brand new bunch of people who were new to all this and only started watching covid conspiracies on YouTube and Facebook who are well on their way to harassing mass shooting survivors in oh...well anytime now actually.


TAU_equals_2PI t1_iugia7s wrote

>Nearly one in five people in the UK think terror survivors are not telling the truth about what happened to them, new research for the BBC suggests. A third say the pandemic has made them more suspicious of official explanations of UK terror attacks.



rising_then_falling t1_iuhlha7 wrote

As ever, you have to find the source. The original question in the poll was "In your opinion are the following statements true or false?"

Then various statements rating to terror, cover ups etc. Including "Victims of terror attacks in the UK are not being truthful about what happened to them"

6% said definitely true, another 13% said probably true.

For every statement, about 5% were solid reality deniers.

However, this group. Is significantly skewed towards :

Non voters, people who get their news primarily from social media, and those under 34.

It is slightly skewed towards men and towards Labour voters, who in all cases are more likely to believe the conspiracy theories than Conservative voters.

Original results


Double_Jab_Jabroni t1_iui9png wrote

Labour voters are more likely to believe conspiracy theories than conservative voters? Where do you get that from?


rising_then_falling t1_iuij4nc wrote

Slide nine of the linked PDF.

One of the suggestions is that belief in conspiracy theories is strongly linked to mistrust of the government. It perhaps makes sense that those who are politically opposed to the current government are more likely to mistrust its 'official version' narrative.

Would be interesting to see if this changes after a change of government next election.

It could also be that those inherently mistrustful of government and officialdom are more likely to be conspiracy theorists.

Certainly, all the slightly loopy types I've met with an interest in contrails/conspiracies/vaccine hoax etc have been the hippy/lefty/druggy types, not the UKIP/little Britain/curtain twitcher type.


Nopes_alot_ t1_iuhvzhq wrote

One and five people in the UK lie about everything and think everyone else does too.


SKYLINEBOY2002UK OP t1_iugbbfp wrote

Craziness! Those poor victims, trying to do their best to move on with their lives after their ordeals, only to have some crackpot deny it and question them.


Grouchy-Bluejay-4092 t1_iugw7ak wrote

So this is the UK version of Alex Jones, who claimed that the parents of children killed in the Sandy Hook massacre made the whole thing up.

Victims of this guy should definitely sue. Alex Jones is facing nearly a billion dollar judgment.


autotldr t1_iugi63v wrote

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 96%. (I'm a bot)

> Conspiracy theorists, who claim UK terror attacks have been staged, are tracking down survivors to their homes and workplaces to see if they are lying about their injuries, a BBC investigation has found.

> Mr Hall suggests that those who were killed in the attack are really alive and living abroad. He also promotes theories that several other UK terror attacks were staged.

> He refused to address questions about whether he really believes UK terror attacks were staged and if he understands the harm his conspiracy theories and tactics cause to the survivors of these attacks.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: attack^#1 Hall^#2 Conspiracy^#3 terror^#4 online^#5


Inevitable_Price7841 t1_iugpi74 wrote

Why would an evil global cabal, who controls everything, bother to "stage" events? Surely they would have the means and the motivation to initiate those attacks for real? By the way, my question is rhetorical. Please don't bother trying to "red pill" me.


IneptusMechanicus t1_iuhgpf6 wrote

>Why would an evil global cabal, who controls everything, bother to "stage" events?

Most conspiracies tend to fall apart on the 'why', it's technically possible a group of people could stage conspiracies of that scope, though as a species we're pretty bad at it, but in most cases there's simply no rational reason to do so. The conspiracy theories seem to either come back to people staging something as a pretext for something they could just do anyway, or their motivation being 'dunno lol'.


Inevitable_Price7841 t1_iuhouup wrote

I suppose being technically possible is a good start, but most conspiracy theories fail to even meet that requirement lol. Staging a massacre or crisis makes no sense when you consider the number of psychopaths who would gladly carry it out for fun.


InoyouS2 t1_iuglqd1 wrote

I do wonder why people like this aren't committed.


Colecoman1982 t1_iugw1sj wrote

I'm very disappointed in you UK. First you have your own knock-off version of Trump with Bojo the Clown and now you've got your own knock-off Alex Jones. I know that imitation is supposed to be the sincerest form of flattery, but these are NOT the parts of our American culture anyone should ever be looking to imitate...


jmdg007 t1_iuh5v60 wrote

Not that I disagree this is all bad, Bojo has been a well known figure in British politics for about 15 years at this point.


doomdoggie t1_iuhep0k wrote

I'd like to ask the people who believes the Manchester bombing was staged...

What do you believe is the true story?

And what evidence do you believe is sufficient to prove that the story the media has presented is true? At what point will you be satisfied that it's not a conspiracy?

Please explain.


Sacred_Apollyon t1_iuhacyt wrote

Conspiracy nutters like these need locking up for their own mental health. It's one thing to have some rambling incoherent fantasy BS theory about how the moon landings were faked and it's really cats up there hunting down moon mice before they eat all the cheese etc, another thing entirely to hunt down people so that you can assess the validity of their status as a victim.


At best there's a few ring-leaders making up shit knowingly to con easily swayed folks (Ironically because those same people claim not to be easily swayed and " their own research..."!) out of cash, or at worst they're all fully deranged and need sectioning and medicating or having a LOT of therapy to figure out why they'll believe a guy who has a markey stall and stalks strangers vs the people who actually went through these horrific incidents.


Too many contrarion, defiant, stubborn and idiotic weirdos out there.


NoNefariousness5175 t1_iuhbx3z wrote

This is another example of collective lunacy in the world today.


MrPloppyHead t1_iuhhe6q wrote

Well seems to be a denier, not deniers. Some individual nut job. I assume he either lives on his own or with his parents.

I would have thought there were existing laws that could be used to prosecute this guy, e.g. stalking. Or perhaps treatment for mental health issues as has been suggested.


ImaginationNaive4145 t1_iukamdv wrote

Nah. This cretin is not mentally ill. He probably doesn’t believe a word of what he says and is just making money from the 80,000 subscribers he has. THEY are the ones who are mentally ill, the ones who swallow his bullshit.


spoiled_for_choice t1_iuiv3mp wrote

On a podcast I learned about a couple who's daughter was killed in the Aurora, CO shooting. They travel the country as unofficial councelers to the families that loose loved ones in mass shootings. The first thing they tell families is to brace themselves for the crazies who'll harass them.


rush_me_pls t1_iuh0hra wrote

Pull the plug on the internet before this gets worse


magicalthinker t1_iui4xa2 wrote

We're surrounded by absolute dribbling fools. I remember a time when they didn't speak so boldly because they knew they weren't quite as tuned in as other people. Bottom tier at school for everything.


Early_Accident2160 t1_iuiuhyc wrote

How do these people afford to travel and spend money on this delusion ? It’s got to be hard to employ someone like that… I just cannot not understand how people believe such fantasies


protonfreetome t1_iuiclqu wrote

Like 9/11 truthers....It WuZ cOnTrOlLeD eXpLoShUnzzzz!!