I'm not one to support conspiracy theories, but it did occur to me that the IDF bombed Gaza the night before...and this didn't make it to the network news at all, as I watched all day and saw only coverage of the synagogue shooting. I sympathize with all the innocent victims in both of these attacks, of course, and I don't really believe there's necessarily a connection between the two. That is, the theory would be that the synagogue shooting is a diversion from the Gaza attacks, but there's no reason to believe this is true. Two unrelated events, motivated by different reasons, carried out by unrelated groups of people. That the network news ignored the Gaza bombings is nothing new, as attacks are so frequent that for decades they've been relegated to the scrolling news ticker. Certainly there are plenty of people who want to spin the news on all sides, every time an event happens, but I see no reason to believe there's any orchestration involved.
The thing about the sociological context is this: we live in public, everybody talks to everybody, secrets are hard to keep, but truths are hard to prove. You know, that "plausible deniability" thing. At the same time, it is very possible for people to stage an attack...we could all mail pipe-bombs to ourselves and then blame it on the MAGA Bomber. It's no different than how a fraternity might play a prank, that any large enough group of people could pull off some magnificent hoax. This wouldn't be a centrally planned event, of course, but rather a local event created by a close nit group of friends. Imagine if you had the pyrotechnics, squibs, and paintball guns, and you were friends with several police and ambulance workers, you could fake an attack. I could imagine some small towns wanting to drum up tourism by drawing a bunch of news media in, right? Wouldn't that be hilarious. Anyway, my point is this: it is possible for hoaxes to occur, because we know of several hoaxes that have occurred, but there's usually little reason to presume as much. The post-modern sense is that history is a free-floating sea of perception and we can never really prove what happened in the past. We each have our own memories, and that's all we have to go on, "well I remember someone telling me that an event happened," and we do our best to discern the reliability of testimony we've been given, but in a critical sense we can't ever know for sure. Even a confession doesn't prove things, because people have been found falsely confessing to crimes they didn't commit before...seems foolish, but some situations might call for such a strange move. We even find that our memories themselves are notoriously unreliable, as we all re-write our old memories as we recall them, blocking out some parts and highlighting others, typically in an attempt to preserve our fragile egos.
The conspiracist viewpoint is plagued by simply misunderstanding how human society functions. It is possible that a supporter of Israel could attack a synagogue in an attempt to buttress support for Israel, propaganda of the deed, what you would call a pro bono agent provocateur, which seems crazy because why kill people you support? Consider the Evangelists whose support of Israel is mainly due to Bible prophesies...they don't necessarily like Jewish people, but they feel Israel is where it's supposed to be right now. These things like false flag attacks and so forth...people really can do such things, and there have been events in history that are agreed by scholars to have been false flag attacks. We don't have to go around assuming every attack is such. Do we see the violent extremist as a missile launched from an entire political body? Political groups forge whether we have talk radio or not, because that's what people do--talk and form groups, and you can't destroy an idea, so there will always be new groups forming to bring it back. So they're saying this guy is a lone nut, just like Lee Harvey Oswald, but what the picture is more like--all people are nuts, they group themselves according to which kind of nut they are, so we have lots of groups of like-minded nuts running around, and every once in a while the nuttiest one in the bunch does something nutty. Government is one such gang of fools, operating in the very same manner. My point is this: we do need to think critically about whether we're being told the truth, because anyone can lie, but in most of these lone nut scenarios, at the end of the day the best way to see it is as a lone nut situation. I do not say bigotry is on the rise, it's Trumps fault, and so forth, because there have always been bigots, brooding and plotting, and it's just another thing society has to keep an eye on.
So again, my heart and prayers go out to the innocent victims of the synagogue shooting and the bombing of the Gaza Strip, and I hope we stop the violence. I hope we can be sensitive to the fact that most attacks are not staged, they have real victims, and that these conspiracy accusations can become very hurtful to the survivors, at the same time as recognizing that we can never be certain about anything, and that plenty of governments have engaged in hoaxes, terrorism and so forth in the past, or the strategy of tension. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you.