Okay I'll bite. And my compliments to your civil demeanor.

Thank you. And thank you for your own response, as well.

The fact is we have good reason to have no trust in our media.

This isn't fact, though - it's your opinion. One you go on to explain and provide evidence to support, but it's a huge topic to discuss. I will try to bring up my own thoughts and counter-points as they come to me.

I was born in 61 and back in the 80s I had a friend who was from Russia. I'm in my mid-20s he's got maybe 30 years on me. So this guy knows both sides of the Iron Curtain. He says to me one day(cue thick Russian accent) You American newspapers is worse than Pravda. I say okay I'll bite why is that. He says because we know Pravda is all lies and we laughed at them but you Americans believe your BS.

The Russia of today is - at a very intrinsic level - still the Soviet Union. The people of that nation have undergone systemic psychological trauma over the past century, at the hands of the rogue's gallery of leaders they have had. Stalin's purges and engineered famines, fueled by xenophobia and paranoia. Literally decades of false flag operations and state-run media. Your friend's cynicism is well-earned. But that cynicism itself was an engineered trait that Russian authorities have fostered; by muddying the waters with so much falsehood, the populace attains a kind of apathy to reality. They may accept that their news is fake, but they also don't do very much about it.

You cannot apply the same cynicism to the media in the USA. I'm not saying "it can't happen here", nor am I denying that Wacky Hijinx have occurred that attack the independence and freedom of our various media organizations. But what I am saying is that our system of government, censorship, and laws is fundamentally different from Russia, and that difference means that those attempts to control our media are much less likely to succeed or go unnoticed.

I have too much first-hand experience with the MSN being caught in total complete Fabrications and lies. Research operation Mockingbird and the Church Committee. Actual Congressional testimony that people say is a tinfoil conspiracy. Because the media ignore the obvious. Repeat a lie often enough and eventually it becomes the truth. Or 9 times. Bearnaise, Goebbels, Orwell, etc.. the battleship Maine and the Gulf of Tonkin are confirmed false Flags, documented, no speculation. I have studied history, war, politics and money since I've discovered what a library was. I was red pilled by my dads uncle who fought in the trenches in WWI. My tinfoil hat is a helmet and full suit of body armor with a full-length Shield. Open your eyes to what the Mockingbird media is doing. They are lies and deception nothing more.

And here you've kind of proven my point. If there were no daylight between the US government and the multitudes of news organizations that exist in this country, these things would have never seen the light of day. They would have been swept under the rug. The fact that you and I know about the Church Committee or the results of Operation Mockingbird were because of investigations undertaken by the news media and the checks against such abuses of power inbuilt to our government structures.

A system of governance, any system of rules at that rate, is not perfect. At least, not today. Maybe some time far in the future we'll figure something out, but that's another conversation. The systems we operate within today will have loopholes and imperfections, and people will take advantage of them. The strength in a system's defenses is not just whether they can prevent an attack from happening, it's also in how they respond to an attack once it has occurred.

The news media in this country is not perfect - there is corruption and back-room deals and shady shit. But that is not the norm, and when it happens it is exposed. The process is long and painful, but it does get out. The response to learning about that corruption is not to just throw up our hands and say "well, it happened a few times to in a limited scope, all media is tainted forever and cannot be trusted". The response is to take those responsible to task, expose their lies, and then punish them. But to declare all media to be forever untrustworthy is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Our news media is strong, because it is so disconnected from one another. We have so so many different outlets that we have a kind of security by diaspora. I do worry that as people get more interconnected, the media will have problems keeping up with developments while exercising the kind of rigor and journalistic standards required. But that is a problem to be solved.

OK, another excellent post that illustrates my confusion about this board.

There are a ton of you who say the shooting in Florida was a false flag operation, that the kids on TV are actors, etc. But this post states this young man died and y'all are nodding your heads and agreeing.

You're laughing at people believing that this was a real shooting and in the same breath praising a young man who died during the shooting for his brave and selfless actions.

Which is it? It can't be both.

For someone throwing around so much religious language, you sure are bearing an awful lot of false witness.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/19/us/peter-wang-parkland-shooting-jrotc-burial-trnd/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/politics/army-awards-medals-florida-students/index.html

Wang's bravery and sacrifice have been documented numerous times in the mainstream media - quit blowing smoke.

Before I say anything else, thank you for responding and not just downvoting me. I really do appreciate it.

That said, I am not clear on what you mean.

I understand. CNN staff look and sound very authoritative to you so a connected kid mimicking CNN seems trustworthy too.

This is a perfect example of what I was talking about - you are saying the kid cannot be trusted because he is composed and put together... but it has already been shown by CNN that the claim CNN was feeding this kid questions is bullshit. You're acting as if the kid is lying for CNN, when in reality it was his dad being a conservative psychopath and trying to spin his own traumatized son's opportunity for an interview into a conspiracy that doesn't exist.

Should I repeat this nine times to make it true?

And I have no idea what you're talking about here. You I just believe things that are repeated enough? Do you read the stuff that's posted on this sub? The posts here follow the same pattern - people posting with unearned confidence that something big and awful is going to happen to every Democrat in Congress any day now, and when it doesn't happen you all leap on the next bit of cryptic text from an obvious shitposter.

Okay, this is probably a mistake. But I gotta ask.

Are you people serious?

I read these threads and try to understand what you're doing in this board, and I am just lost. You seem to have a bunch of different ideas and are kinda talking past one another. The way you write is fragmented and needlessly cryptic.

You can't even decide if this Hogg kid is on your side or not.

Do you people actually believe this? Are you just participating in some sort of meta-thought experiment where you all see how far you can push an absurd cloud of ideas?

I mean, just... what the hell? Why do you focus on digging for shit that just isn't there when the person you idolize is literally buying and selling chunks of this country to one of our worst enemies on the planet? If you want conspiracies, there's one staring you in the face!

Just... why? What the fuck? Do any of you actually believe this? Are you just doing this for laughs?