Why am I "nutters" for suggesting the CIA controls the MSM?

[Anarchist420]

http://partisan-news.blogspot.com/2010/01/cia-controls-media.html

It isn't the only place that says the CIA controls the media either.

It makes too much sense anyway for 2 reasons:

1. The British government has its own media (the BBC). So why wouldn't the American state control at least a good portion of what Americans hear if Britain does?

2. If the networks were not cartelized, then there is no way in hell the owners of the CiaNN, Faux News, ABC, and MSNBC could be as wealthy as they actually are.

In addition, the MSM beats the war drums for Iran just like they did with Iraq.

I believe there are theories that are credible, while others are not. That said, I don't just believe every conspiracy theory. For example, I can certainly debunk the theory that JWB was a Rothschild agent. However, NO ONE can successfully debunk the theory that the U.S. government wanted the terror attacks that occurred on 9/11/01 to happen. If you think Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, and ABC are making their profits without regulations, then tell me why you think so even though I'll never believe they are.

 

[crashtestdummy]

If you think Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, and ABC are making their profits without regulations, then tell me why you think so even though I'll never believe they are.

This statement makes it impossible to have a reasonable conversation. This gets to the fundamental difference between conspiracy theorists and the rest of us.

Conspiracy theorists have an elaborate worldview based on the the sense that the world is out to destroy them. Anything that fits that worldview and cannot be absolutely refuted is immediately accepted as true.

The rest of humanity requires positive evidence of an event, rather than a lack of negative evidence, for acceptance. For example, you could claim that cave-dwelling martian flying monkeys are planning an invasion of earth and I wouldn't be able to refute your assertion. It does not, however, mean that I would agree to fund the construction of 150 interplanetary missiles armed with old B41s.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Based on this forum's strict policy of no personal attacks, I'll refrain from my immediate thoughts upon reading this thread and simply offer that if you aren't willing to entertain any discussion that contradicts what you already believe, stop posting here and start talking to yourself in the mirror.

 

[Anarchist420]

I probably shouldn't have said "even though I'll never believe they are"; that was my mistake.

Anyway, I'm looking for reasons why people have called me nuts for subscribing to this theory. Just because I'm not going to change my mind on it doesn't mean that I wouldn't like to see why so many people think I'm wrong.

 

[woolfe9999]

http://partisan-news.blogspot.com/2010/01/cia-controls-media.html

It isn't the only place that says the CIA controls the media either.

It makes too much sense anyway for 2 reasons:

1. The British government has its own media (the BBC). So why wouldn't the American state control at least a good portion of what Americans hear if Britain does?

The British eat lots of fish and chips too, so I guess that must mean it's a major part of our cuisine as well. Because after all, everyone knows that's how we do things here - we just follow whatever they're doing in the UK. Wow, what a great argument. You've convinced me that the CIA controls the media.

2. If the networks were not cartelized, then there is no way in hell the owners of the CiaNN, Faux News, ABC, and MSNBC could be as wealthy as they actually are.

Really? Why not? Please explain what you know about their wealth and why it isn't possible unless the networks are "cartelized."

In addition, the MSM beats the war drums for Iran just like they did with Iraq.

If I find you 25 articles in MSM critical of bombing Iran will you change your mind? Of course you won't:

I believe there are theories that are credible, while others are not. That said, I don't just believe every conspiracy theory. For example, I can certainly debunk the theory that JWB was a Rothschild agent. However, NO ONE can successfully debunk the theory that the U.S. government wanted the terror attacks that occurred on 9/11/01 to happen. If you think Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, and ABC are making their profits without regulations, then tell me why you think so even though I'll never believe they are.

And that is why you're a nutter. Yes, let's try to have a logical discussion with someone who a) has no evidence to support his arguments, and b) admits that no evidence or logic presented will ever cause him to change his mind. This is why you are not taken seriously here, nor will you ever be, anywhere in this world, unless or until you grow up.

- wolf

 

[JEDIYoda]

I probably shouldn't have said "even though I'll never believe they are"; that was my mistake.

Anyway, I'm looking for reasons why people have called me nuts for subscribing to this theory. Just because I'm not going to change my mind on it doesn't mean that I wouldn't like to see why so many people think I'm wrong.

No that was a truthful comment coming from you!!
Which most of us already knew about you!!

 

[jagec]

http://xkcd.com/258/

 

[bradley]

Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America's Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years
http://www.amazon.com/Family-Secrets...608190064/ctoc

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. When evidence does not exist there is no valid basis for a claim. When a baseless claim is made there no way to take whatever contention seriously. It is a non thing.

 

[gevorg]

Stepping aside from conspiracy theories, the real issue is concentration of media ownership. Having good connections in just a handful of top five media companies, is enough to fire up your political campaign or introduce the new craze for product X.

EDIT: A similar thing happened to financial institutions in the last decade or two, which made the mega banks "too big to fail".

 

[disappoint]

You want to know why you're nuts? You really want to know?

In short, you've spent more of your life shoving chemicals into your brain that negatively affect it. You've spent very little time training your brain how to think. Reading idiotic conspiracy theories and debating them on the internet is not training your brain how to think. Learning how to do something new is. The brain is like a muscle, if you don't work it out with proper form it atrophies. It could be science, math, playing a new instrument, or any one of a number of other skills. Babbling about doing it isn't going to cut it. You're going to have to actually DO it. I'll bet you're too lazy to really do it too. Too bad for you. What a waste. I guess that's why you 420 folks call it "getting wasted" huh?

However, NO ONE can successfully debunk the theory that the U.S. government wanted the terror attacks that occurred on 9/11/01 to happen.

This, coupled with your manlove for Dr. Paul is evidence of your insanity. Sure Dr. Paul speaks the truth about the nation's ills, but his plan for action to fix those ills belongs right square with you in a rubber room. His medicine would do more harm than good. The fact that you fail to see that and subscribe instead to nutter news daily is why people call you a nutter. They call it like they see it. Sometimes they get it right and sometimes they don't. I'm calling it like I see it as well. I'll be happy to entertain your response.

 

[Zebo]

I think its true. Hasn't there been ties to media moguls, top reporters, and CIA in the past? Even revolving doors?

 

[disappoint]

I think its true. Hasn't there been ties to media moguls, top reporters, and CIA in the past? Even revolving doors?

Some reporters make their bread by lying for money, and some by telling it like it is. Sometimes to find out the truth you need to do a little legwork of your own. To discern the facts from BS you need to start with a properly functioning brain. I didn't post my previous post to vilify anyone, but to help someone reading this to decide what to do, and what not to do.

 

[peonyu]

Its nutty because sooner or later people go from claiming the CIA controls the MSM to claiming Jews control the MSM, all of that is based on the fact that Jews are dominant in the media but being dominant does not = controls it.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Let me assure you, dear Anarchist, that your views on government control of the media are a minor factor in forum members' poor opinion of you.

 

[RocksteadyDotNet]

The BBC isnt controlled by the government. Its an entirely independant organization.

 

[feralkid]

 

[Anarchist420]

Its nutty because sooner or later people go from claiming the CIA controls the MSM to claiming Jews control the MSM, all of that is based on the fact that Jews are dominant in the media but being dominant does not = controls it.

Jews don't control the MSM. As you point out, they may own a lot of it. That, however, does not mean they have the final say in what's said on the quasi private networks that the predominantly Jewish owners' profits are reaped from.

I'm know there are many Jews just as there are non Jews who dislike the MSM, as well.

Anyway, the MSM is the American state's propaganda network and it's controlled by the state.

EDIT: A similar thing happened to financial institutions in the last decade or two, which made the mega banks "too big to fail".

Those financial institutions were cartelized by the government. The reason the MSM has gotten so big is because their losses are socialized and their profits are nominally private. If more people realize how much they shared the lies of the state, then they'd go out of business (as long as the MSM wasn't bailed out also).

If I find you 25 articles in MSM critical of bombing Iran will you change your mind? Of course you won't:

Have they been giving more coverage to saying why the state is lying and that Iran couldn't even have a nuke if life of the Islamic Republic depended upon obtaining nuclear weapons, or have they been spreading more pro-state, pro-war propaganda?

When talking about the Iran, ABC does not predominantly say, "Iran is no threat", "if the U.S. government goes to war over Iran, then it will be because the U.S. government will have ordered a black flag attack". They rarely, if ever mention FDR manipulating the Imperial military into firing the first shot. Disney, which owns ABC, lied about Pearl Harbor in the movie. They told people what FDR told people, which was a bunch of lies.

Why do you think the state has so many "state secrets" and is prosecuting people for exposing them all the time? The correct answer should be obvious.

 

[blankslate]

http://partisan-news.blogspot.com/2010/01/cia-controls-media.html

It isn't the only place that says the CIA controls the media either.

It makes too much sense anyway for 2 reasons:

1. The British government has its own media (the BBC). So why wouldn't the American state control at least a good portion of what Americans hear if Britain does?

2. If the networks were not cartelized, then there is no way in hell the owners of the CiaNN, Faux News, ABC, and MSNBC could be as wealthy as they actually are.

In addition, the MSM beats the war drums for Iran just like they did with Iraq.

I believe there are theories that are credible, while others are not. That said, I don't just believe every conspiracy theory. For example, I can certainly debunk the theory that JWB was a Rothschild agent. However, NO ONE can successfully debunk the theory that the U.S. government wanted the terror attacks that occurred on 9/11/01 to happen. If you think Faux News, CNN, MSNBC, and ABC are making their profits without regulations, then tell me why you think so even though I'll never believe they are.

No man it's the Xenunians who are controlling all of us through the robotic pigeons you see around. The only way to protect against it is to make a faraday cage for your head. Heavy duty tinfoil works.