Miri AF Meets Aisling O'Loughlin
I had a truly tremendous talk today with the quintessentially controversial Aisling O’Loughlin… You can see our conversation here.
Aisling says:
“In this discussion with conspiracy theorist-in-chief Miri (Anne) Finch we discuss the US presidential election, the trouble with false flag investigations and accusing innocent people in the wrong...
Aisling O'Loughlin and Miri AF
Miri AF believes it’s sometimes necessary to accuse innocent people in the wrong. Why? She says it’s the only way to get to the truth. Innocent until proven guilty.
“It’s completely valid to speculate, that’s how we arrive at conclusions. We put forward hypotheses, we test them and then we get to the truth. So yes, speculation is totally valid and as I said, so is accusing innocent people of crime because every single person who is accused of a crime is presumed innocent until they’re found guilty. Although I’m not exactly 100% sure if being a crisis actor is a crime. Is it illegal? I don’t think it is because to be an actor is obviously not illegal and to lie is not illegal,” says Miri.
In this lively discussion we cover the issue with speculation without solid evidence to support the claim, which can lead to the wrong person being attacked by large groups of people on the Internet and beyond. How far should this entitlement to speculate go if it’s causing distress to the victim?
We also discuss the US presidential elections with a special guest appearance from Jack the cat who is clearly fed up with the blue/red Punch and Judy show antics. Miri predicts Trump will return to the White House but not as the saviour he’s portraying himself to be. Let’s see.
One thing we can rely on with Miri is top notch conversation, even if we don’t always agree.
And yes, we discuss Richard D Hall. Think of it as a running theme.
Just seen your talk with Aisling, you were fantastic, unbiased and methodical in your assessment of things, what a true journalist should be. I felt Aisling was slightly influenced by her emotions in her judgement. Nonetheless a very good discussion with some very interesting points and I agree with you, everything should be scrutinized and no one should be offended by that.
I enjoyed this conversation and kudos to both of you for keeping it extremely civil and listening to each other’s points of view, even when you strongly disagree on some important issues.
For me it was interesting to observe the stark differences between; someone who can calmly and logically outline an argument and, someone who has been completely blindsided by their emotions. It’s astonishing to me how Aisling is not able to comprehend the sheer flimsiness and logical fallacy-riddled content of her position which includes such highlights as; ‘their injuries prove there was a bomb’, ‘if you can’t prove they are lying they must be telling the truth and, my personal favourite; ‘it’s true/false because I say it is’!!
Nevertheless my gut is telling me that she is not doing this deliberately and this could be a case of the ‘brain mush’ phase I think we inevitably go through when moving from mainstream normie life into a world where there appears to be an almost infinite number of rabbit holes to investigate.
One thing where I do agree with her is that healthy debate is important, so more of this please.