Anonymous ID: ed12f4 Aug. 1, 2018, 8:42 p.m. No.2404615   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>4650 >>4658 >>4708

>>2404400

 

He was, and I appreciate it. Dan, we're all about ethics in journalism. We hope you'll give us a fair shake and not condemn us as complete loons. Indeed, your treatment of us in your piece will be telling about where you stand vis a vis our goals. We have seen too many times the massive media coordination emanating from dark corners of the world at 4 am and directing the stories of the day . . . down to the exact phrasing used.

 

And, honestly, that's just lazy. Even for propagandists.

 

There is a real story here that departs from the narrative established over the last 24 hours by the major outlets. Write THAT story, and not a thin copy of what we've seen from elsewhere, and you might gain our respect. GOOD journalists, writing from a foundation of professional ethics and untainted by the corruption of intelligence agencies, are invaluable to a functioning and healthy republic.

 

Unfortunately, they all too often end up dead when they write stories concerning powerful people. Even a cursory inspection of the history of journalism should reveal that.

 

We invite you to look around. Look past the noise and hone in on the signal. Examine the motives and motivations of the dedicated people who have spent thousands of hours devoted to this research and analysis.

 

We're not crazy. We're not all Christians, or even Republicans. Some of us have been lifelong Democrats. Most are highly intelligent professionals. Some are even within government and major media organizations. Not the kind of people to devote their energies to something foolish and phony.

 

This is not a larp.

This is not a game.

And we are passionate about our cause.

Anonymous ID: ed12f4 Aug. 1, 2018, 8:46 p.m. No.2404714   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>2404501

 

Agreed. Newfags, we get incoming shill attacks every night. Not everyone here wants us to succeed. Keep that in mind when you see disturbing images or inflammatory language. Part of it is the chans, and part of it is a comprehensive attack on the research of the board.

 

Apparently, the C_A doesn't like it when you make fun of them as much as we do. Among other three letter agencies.

 

As you were.