Unreliable "news" sources

[Sematary]

There are more sources for information now than there ever have been in the history of man. But, that doesn't mean they are all accurate or even telling the truth (only the truth as they see it). Many of them are outright twisting stories in order to make a buck by scaring people or to push an agenda. I will give you my two right off the top (I already know that many people will disagree with me on these but I wanted to see what other sources people feel are willfully attempting push an agenda or make a scare buck or using their alleged "rag" for some other nefarious purpose.

My two are:
1. WND - In my opinion the worst kind of trash to pollute the internet and a source I will NEVER trust. They use fear to sell whatever agenda they are pushing and also to sell products (if you can stomach sitting through a 20 or 30 minute video explaining why you should be so scared).

2. Infowars - not, in my opinion, as bad as WND, but comparing a bruised apple to a rotted apple doesn't mean you have a good apple just because it's only bruised.
Personally, I think I get more truth from Jon Stewart and The Onion than either of these "sources" and if someone were to use them as a source to back up what they are saying, then I will summarily ignore their sources.

There are more, of course, but these two come to mind immediately

[COpatriot]

Yeah. Fox and CNN come to my mind too.

[phill4paul]

Yeah. Fox and CNN come to my mind too.

And the Associated Press and McClatchy News and the White House Press Corps...........

[Spikender]

Is it sad that I knew Infowars would be listed here before I even clicked on the thread? Well, I better go grab my popcorn, can't wait for yet another fight to break out in this thread...

[AuH20]

All news should make you feel good about yourself and society. That's the ticket. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

[AGRP]

Infowars or at least their spam. What happened to the false flag attack we were supposed to fear at the olympics? Maddow, Beck, and Huffpost are others that come to mind.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Unreliable "news" sources

Infowars
Certain talk radio shows (Alex Jones, Levin, etc., etc.)
WorldNetDaily
MSNBC
Anything involving Frum
Multiple partisan blogs and online discussion forums; such as Daily Kos, DemocraticUnderground.com and FreeRepublic.com

[tod evans]

Unfortunately they all put a "spin" on whatever they're reporting......

Even more unfortunate, Americans seem to desire news with a "spin".

[Bruno]

The list of reliable news sources would be much shorter.

[ninepointfive]

Infowars has a lot of accurate news, and news you won't find anywhere else. They also cite a lot of the sources.

Alex is a fiery personality, but then again I'm reminded of a quote by Barry Goldwater in regards to extremism.


Either way - maybe you need to build up a new Infowars full of awesome instead of perpetually complaining about it.

[Travlyr]

The New York Times is the worst. People actually believe they are getting accurate information when, in fact, what they are getting are lies.

[pcosmar]

Reuters and AP..
Faux, CNN, ABC,CBS NBC

http://teetee199thlibstarsnstripes69.webs.com/EyeLies_IncPen_FreeRepublic.gif

[Bruno]

^^^ creepy eye is creepy for a reason

[donnay]

AP = Applied Propaganda

What ever happen to putting on your critical thinking caps and learn how to research. If you feel a story is BS then it is incumbent upon YOU to seek the truth.

Threads like this make me SMH.


"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." ~Thomas Jefferson

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." ~Thomas Jefferson

[Travlyr]

Walter Duranty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty) of the New York Times.
Walter Duranty (1884 – October 3, 1957) was a controversial Liverpool-born, British-American journalist who served as the Moscow Bureau Chief of The New York Times (1922–36). For a series of stories on the Soviet Union, Duranty won a Pulitzer Prize (1932). Duranty has been criticized for his denial of widespread famine, most particularly the Ukraine mass starvation (1932–33). Years later, there were calls to revoke his Pulitzer; even The Times acknowledged his articles constituted "some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper."


Louis Fischer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Fischer) of the Nation

Denial of the Soviet famine of 1932-33
Fischer traveled to Ukraine in October and November 1932, for The Nation, and was alarmed at what he saw. "In the Poltava, Vinnitsa, Podolsk and Kiev regions, conditions will be hard," he wrote, "I think there is no starvation anywhere in Ukraine now — after all they have just gathered in the harvest, but it was a bad harvest."

The Nation is the oldest continuously published weekly magazine in the United States.

[heavenlyboy34]

Unfortunately they all put a "spin" on whatever they're reporting......

Even more unfortunate, Americans seem to desire news with a "spin".
Yup. It's generally called "infotainment".

[green73]

Infowars is one of my top news feeds. I usually skip their original articles or go directly to the first link therein, but occasionally those, too, are worth the entire read. Hell, even Drudge links to them.

[AGRP]

Lets face it. Don't trust anyone. Trust your critical eye.

[Sematary]

AP = Applied Propaganda

What ever happen to putting on your critical thinking caps and learn how to research. If you feel a story is BS then it is incumbent upon YOU to seek the truth.

Threads like this make me SMH.


"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." ~Thomas Jefferson

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." ~Thomas Jefferson

There is a REASON I will never, ever, take anything from WND again - it's because the entire site is a propaganda machine with one goal in mind - to scare the reader into buying something - even if it is just an ideology. Personally, I like to read several sources on any given "story" because that way I get several points of view which allow me to glean the truth. Unfortunately, there are sites that offer no semblance of truth and those are the sites I was speaking of.

[tod evans]

Yup. It's generally called "infotainment".

At one point our forefathers would have tarred-n-feathered someone for "twisting the facts"...

[pcosmar]

At one point our forefathers would have tarred-n-feathered someone for "twisting the facts"...

Actually Dueling was practiced,, and a misspoken word could get you shot.

[angelatc]

There are more sources for information now than there ever have been in the history of man. But, that doesn't mean they are all accurate or even telling the truth (only the truth as they see it). Many of them are outright twisting stories in order to make a buck by scaring people or to push an agenda. I will give you my two right off the top (I already know that many people will disagree with me on these but I wanted to see what other sources people feel are willfully attempting push an agenda or make a scare buck or using their alleged "rag" for some other nefarious purpose.

My two are:
1. WND - In my opinion the worst kind of trash to pollute the internet and a source I will NEVER trust. They use fear to sell whatever agenda they are pushing and also to sell products (if you can stomach sitting through a 20 or 30 minute video explaining why you should be so scared).

2. Infowars - not, in my opinion, as bad as WND, but comparing a bruised apple to a rotted apple doesn't mean you have a good apple just because it's only bruised.
Personally, I think I get more truth from Jon Stewart and The Onion than either of these "sources" and if someone were to use them as a source to back up what they are saying, then I will summarily ignore their sources.

There are more, of course, but these two come to mind immediately

THe reason they do that is because it works. Our whole country is nothing but a cowering mass of ninnies now because we're spoon fed fear all day long. We're going to die in a car crash, our children are going to be snatched, the terrorists are going to blow us up, the medical profession is trying to kill us..it goes on and on.

My husband is the kind of guy who turns the TV on before he gets in the shower, and leaves it on all day. The barrage of messages in the background "noise" is amazing. That's why I hate video information. It's too hard for me to dissect the hyperbole and subsequently interpret the remaining facts in the message for myself. But I already know that the younger generation isn't going to read - all their information is going to be digested this way, and I fear that the consequences won't be positive.

[angelatc]

Lets face it. Don't trust anyone. Trust your critical eye.

That's the thing. If you automatically ignore something just because it comes from a certain source, be it Fox or AJ, you're as much a part of the problem as people who automatically listen to everything they say.

[donnay]

There is a REASON I will never, ever, take anything from WND again - it's because the entire site is a propaganda machine with one goal in mind - to scare the reader into buying something - even if it is just an ideology. Personally, I like to read several sources on any given "story" because that way I get several points of view which allow me to glean the truth. Unfortunately, there are sites that offer no semblance of truth and those are the sites I was speaking of.


You have a funny way of singling out sites. That sure is a broad brush you stroke with. So you think so highly of yourself to make these claims, and to warn others because you think they are too stupid to figure these things out? I mean if you pointed out some legitimate reasons, the people, here, could debate it. But saying, "[WND] site is a propaganda machine with one goal in mind - to scare the reader into buying something..." Aren't you saying people are too stupid to use their own critical thinking and discernment?

[angelatc]

Oh crap - here we go.

[Natural Citizen]

I don't like "sources" period. At least as far as "news" goes.

Is why my sig is what it is.

[Sematary]

You have a funny way of singling out sites. That sure is a broad brush you stroke with. So you think so highly of yourself to make these claims, and to warn others because you think they are too stupid to figure these things out? I mean if you pointed out some legitimate reasons, the people, here, could debate it. But saying, "[WND] site is a propaganda machine with one goal in mind - to scare the reader into buying something..." Aren't you saying people are too stupid to use their own critical thinking and discernment?

Hey, it's just my opinion of WND. It's the Star Magazine version of Internet News but with the slant that it will scare you. They twist the facts (again, in my opinion) so thoroughly to meet their needs that it is impossible to discern truth from any of it. So I ignore their site and will not accept a link to their site as a "source". Much like many instructors in college will not accept Wikipedia as a "source".

[Sematary]

Oh crap - here we go.

It CAN be an interesting discussion.

[asurfaholic]

Jeez... For the sake of sanity, why didn't this thread just attempt to list any "reliable" sources. Then the list is short and the debate doesn't follow the footsteps of so many prior AJ sucks threads...

To that end, ARE there any reliable news?

[pcosmar]

It CAN be an interesting discussion.

Yes,, it can be interesting.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FPAQlbmlSc

Especially when you follow it to it's roots.. including finance and Political/Philosophic roots.
All roads lead to Rothschild.

[angelatc]

It CAN be an interesting discussion.

Oh, it is indeed an interesting discussion. We all have our biases, and I share your opinion of WND and AJ. But I don't automatically disregard everything they say, if for no other reason than to be ready to provide facts to counter the arguments and sentiments when they're encountered in the real world.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Much like many instructors in college will not accept Wikipedia as a "source".

Wikipedia is definitely not trustworthy for anything related to politics or religion. Saw first-hand how biased Sharron Angle's page was written in 2010, with a very unflattering, grainy picture occupying the prominent top spot to boot.

[Natural Citizen]

Wikipedia is definitely not trustworthy for anything related to politics or religion. Saw first-hand how biased Sharron Angle's page was written in 2010, with a very unflattering, grainy picture occupying the prominent top spot to boot.

Anyone can edit wiki. Some lobbies to do so in order to control the terms of controversy, I hear. So...yeah...

[Danke]

You should listen to some of AJ's interviews. That is something you can't often find anywhere else. Aug. 17th was a great one with Robert G. Bernhoft, for a recent example, many others have been posted here.

[angelatc]

You should listen to some of AJ's interviews. That is something you can't often find anywhere else. Aug. 17th was a great one with Robert G. Bernhoft, for a recent example, many others have been posted here.

Listening to AJ is akin to listening to Levin. I just can't stand his voice.

[Miss Annie]

Personally, I think 110% of them are full of crap! They all remind me of rat poison....... alot of truth mixed with enough lie to be deadly!
It is so much fear mongering it's not even funny...... from the MSM, from WND, Brietbart, from Infowars...... it's all fear mongering and psychological warfare!
They can control people like lab rats with what is published? I am betting that the fear keeps the price of silver high with the people scrambling to buy it (not that it's a bad idea.... just sayin). They can escalate any industry they want depending on the type of fear they put into us. I bet freeze dried foods are doing pretty good right now?
I am sick of all the fear mongering and mind control tactics!

[r3volution]

You have a funny way of singling out sites. That sure is a broad brush you stroke with. So you think so highly of yourself to make these claims, and to warn others because you think they are too stupid to figure these things out? I mean if you pointed out some legitimate reasons, the people, here, could debate it. But saying, "[WND] site is a propaganda machine with one goal in mind - to scare the reader into buying something..." Aren't you saying people are too stupid to use their own critical thinking and discernment?

oh , please go on . you're so insightful .

http://files.sharenator.com/lozGr_GIF_Collection_of_someone_eating_popcorn-s360x240-181194-580.gif

[r3volution]

You should listen to some of AJ's interviews. That is something you can't often find anywhere else. Aug. 17th was a great one with Robert G. Bernhoft, for a recent example, many others have been posted here. 1 of my fav's ,


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY-l3ejXVZE&feature=g-hist

[John F Kennedy III]

Don't trust anything. Research it all for yourself.

[Travlyr]

1 of my fav's ,


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY-l3ejXVZE&feature=g-hist

That is not an accurate representation of Alex Jones. If that is one of your favorites, then you don't have any idea what is going on in the world. It pretty much exposes you as a disingenuous member of the forums.

[John F Kennedy III]

I do love how people always make these claims against AJ/InfoWars without ever backing it up with legitimate evidence.

[donnay]

That is not an accurate representation of Alex Jones. If that is one of your favorites, then you don't have any idea what is going on in the world. It pretty much exposes you as a disingenuous member of the forums.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Travlyr again"


Even Reagan got it wrong with saying, "Trust, but verify." Trust nothing until it is verified.



"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it."
~Patrick Henry

[Danke]

1 of my fav's ,


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY-l3ejXVZE&feature=g-hist

That wasn't an interview you dumb-ass troll.

[angelatc]

I do love how people always make these claims against AJ/InfoWars without ever backing it up with legitimate evidence.

And I love how the AJ people can't stop themselves from hysterically defensively hijacking threads anytime somebody dares to mention they don't care for AJ.

[Zippyjuan]

I would add Natural News for their "health" coverage. Everything is fear mongerling like Alex Jones. WND is not news- just entertainment (but so is Alex Jones though).

[ninepointfive]

And I love how the AJ people can't stop themselves from hysterically defensively hijacking threads anytime somebody dares to mention they don't care for AJ.

It appears we have an infinite loop here.

[John F Kennedy III]

And I love how the AJ people can't stop themselves from hysterically defensively hijacking threads anytime somebody dares to mention they don't care for AJ.

Hijack? The AJ haters hijack every single thread that even remotely relates to him or InfoWars and derail it so that the actual topic isn't discussed. Imagine if we did that with every MSM article posted on here. We would be banned.

[Sematary]

I would add Natural News for their "health" coverage. Everything is fear mongerling like Alex Jones. WND is not news- just entertainment (but so is Alex Jones though).

That reminds me of "Doctor Mercola". I don't know if he's a doctor or not but EVERYTHING is going to kill you and only HE has the solution.

[phill4paul]

It appears we have an infinite loop here.

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/5161/g60018g6865.gif

[Sematary]

Hijack? The AJ haters hijack every single thread that even remotely relates to him or InfoWars and derail it so that the actual topic isn't discussed. Imagine if we did that with every MSM article posted on here. We would be banned.

For my part, I don't "hate" AJ. I simply don't believe that what he is disseminating is "news". Like WND, EVERYTHING is going to get you. Everything. He and Infowars just talk about different "things" that are at the top of the hype list right now. I don't trust MSM sources either, but at least I can read the actual news stories and glean some factual information from which I can then research and (if necessary) act upon. Scaring me about chem trails and fluoride not only don't help me, but don't give me any actual information that I can act upon. WND takes apocalyptic "news" to a new level and I don't believe ANYTHING that comes out of that site. At least with Infowars I can try and get something out of it but I still consider most of it to be apocalyptic crap that doesn't help me in any fashion whatsoever.

[Anti Federalist]

Ah, Jesus, here we go again.

FFS, read what you want, and if you find a controversial item, back it up from as many sources as you can.

If you cannot, make a statement to that fact, that there may be a question as to the accuracy of the item.

And let it go.

That said, I hate to think of the spot we'd be in now if not for alternative news, including WND, Jones and the rest.

[Anti Federalist]

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/5161/g60018g6865.gif

Rep.

This circular jerking is getting tiresome.

[jmdrake]

Ah, Jesus, here we go again.

FFS, read what you want, and if you find a controversial item, back it up from as many sources as you can.

If you cannot, make a statement to that fact, that there may be a question as to the accuracy of the item.

And let it go.

That said, I hate to think of the spot we'd be in now if not for alternative news, including WND, Jones and the rest.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again.

[John F Kennedy III]

For my part, I don't "hate" AJ. I simply don't believe that what he is disseminating is "news". Like WND, EVERYTHING is going to get you. Everything. He and Infowars just talk about different "things" that are at the top of the hype list right now. I don't trust MSM sources either, but at least I can read the actual news stories and glean some factual information from which I can then research and (if necessary) act upon. Scaring me about chem trails and fluoride not only don't help me, but don't give me any actual information that I can act upon. WND takes apocalyptic "news" to a new level and I don't believe ANYTHING that comes out of that site. At least with Infowars I can try and get something out of it but I still consider most of it to be apocalyptic crap that doesn't help me in any fashion whatsoever.

I don't understand how reporting on chemtrails and fluoride (whether the article is accurate or not) is considered "scaring you".

At least you also don't trust MSM :)

[NoOneButPaul]

Regardless of your opinions on Alex Jones using him as a news source with the average american is paramount to losing that average americans attention in about 3 seconds...

When trying to convince others it's best to use news sources that the majority believe are legitimate, even if they aren't.

[NewRightLibertarian]

Some cowards are just dedicated from running away from the truth with their tails between their legs. They're hopeless. This thread is full of em


And I love how the AJ people can't stop themselves from hysterically defensively hijacking threads anytime somebody dares to mention they don't care for AJ.

You are wrong. We are just fighting to keep truth in this movement from the onslaught of attacks from idiots who want nothing more to get a pat on the head from the establishment and do not care for liberty. Truthers don't go out of their way to drive truth deniers out of the movement. The denialists are 100 percent the problem and the shit starters

[Anti Federalist]

Regardless of your opinions on Alex Jones using him as a news source with the average american is paramount to losing that average americans attention in about 3 seconds...

When trying to convince others it's best to use news sources that the majority believe are legitimate, even if they aren't.

Most of the stories posted on Infowars are sourced from "reliable" and "credible" news sources.

[Travlyr]

Some cowards are just dedicated from running away from the truth with their tails between their legs. They're hopeless. This thread is full of em


You are wrong. We are just fighting to keep truth in this movement from the onslaught of attacks from idiots who want nothing more to get a pat on the head from the establishment and do not care for liberty. Truthers don't go out of their way to drive truth deniers out of the movement. The denialists are 100 percent the problem and the shit starters

Yep. The liars are the problem.

[angelatc]

Most of the stories posted on Infowars are sourced from "reliable" and "credible" news sources.

The only one I paid attention to lately was the one where he claimed to be uncovering evidence of a secret nuclear facility in a Texas University that turned out to be public record, and wasn't common knowledge only because most people aren't students looking for labs to pursue a degree in nuclear science.

He discredits himself with relentless, unwarranted hyperbole.

[r3volution]

cowards

hopeless

idiots

shit starters

i know you are but what am i ? how is rev9 banned and this guy is not ? at least rev9 was funny about once a month . (im not suggesting that rev9 should not be banned, or that sgt should be). just an observation :D

[angelatc]

Some cowards are just dedicated from running away from the truth with their tails between their legs. They're hopeless.





Well, since we're hopeless, please stop already.

[pcosmar]

When trying to convince others it's best to use news sources that the majority believe are legitimate, even if they aren't.

If you tell a lie often enough,,



“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Amazing amount of Propaganda supporters here.
:(

[Nickels]

Aren't you saying people are too stupid to use their own critical thinking and discernment?

yes.

[Nickels]

If you tell a lie often enough,,

fake quote, I already corrected donnay on it, he gave up and admitted he can't find a source for it.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?384603-Harvard-Study-Finds-Fluoride-Lowers-IQ&p=4558367&viewfull=1#post4558367

posts after that.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?384603-Harvard-Study-Finds-Fluoride-Lowers-IQ/page21

[Sematary]

Some cowards are just dedicated from running away from the truth with their tails between their legs. They're hopeless. This thread is full of em



You are wrong. We are just fighting to keep truth in this movement from the onslaught of attacks from idiots who want nothing more to get a pat on the head from the establishment and do not care for liberty. Truthers don't go out of their way to drive truth deniers out of the movement. The denialists are 100 percent the problem and the shit starters

If it makes anyone feel better, I do trust RT.com who simply REPORT THE NEWS. They don't try to scare people, they just report the news that the MSM won't.

[Acala]

Most of the stories posted on Infowars are sourced from "reliable" and "credible" news sources.

And then exaggerated to a level of near hysteria.

[pcosmar]

yes.


A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it.

And I cannot believe the Weapons Grade Stupidity on display here lately.

[Nickels]

And I cannot believe the Weapons Grade Stupidity on display here lately.

good that we agree, stupidity is dangerous.

[pcosmar]

fake quote, I already corrected donnay on it,

And I will correct you asshole.
I did not attribute it to anyone.

I posted it as a stand alone fact.

[Anti Federalist]

And then exaggerated to a level of near hysteria.

Here's today's InfoWars top stories.

Outside of the "WITW are they spraying?" video link, and a PCR opinion piece, I didn't see anything that was not well sourced and none were particularly hyped to "near hysteria".



ADL Implies Alex Jones Inspiration Behind Louisiana Cop Killings
Paul Joseph Watson | Exploiting bloodshed in an effort to kill free speech.

18 Comments
“Why in the World are They Spraying?” Full Length Documentary HD
Infowars.com | WHY in the World are They Spraying? is an investigative documentary into one of the many hidden agendas associated with chemtrail/geo-engineering programs.

106 Comments
Autopsy Rules Handcuffed Man Killed Himself in Back of Police Car
Adan Salazar | Allegedly, Carter called his girlfriend telling her he would call her back from jail.

No Comments
Amerika’s Future is Death
Paul Craig Roberts | Both parties are driven by neoconservatives who believe that American hegemony is worth nuclear war to accomplish.

77 Comments
Lord Rothschild Betting On Euro Collapse?
Paul Joseph Watson | Banking titan places $200 million dollar short against single currency.

68 Comments
Government and Media Turn Accused Cop Killers into Constitutionalist “Sovereign Citizens”
Kurt Nimmo | Latest effort to demonize constitutionalists as violent domestic terrorists.

91 Comments
Senator Suggested False Flag Attack To Kennedy 2 Years Prior To Operation Northwoods Proposal
Jurriaan Maessen | Former Californian democratic senator George Smathers proposed an Operation Northwoods style false flag attack.

13 Comments
Aurora Eyewitness: Alarm Announced “Murder In The Theater”
Paul Joseph Watson | Another bizarre twist in the ‘Batman’ massacre case.

[Anti Federalist]

fake quote, I already corrected donnay on it, he gave up and admitted he can't find a source for it.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?384603-Harvard-Study-Finds-Fluoride-Lowers-IQ&p=4558367&viewfull=1#post4558367

posts after that.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?384603-Harvard-Study-Finds-Fluoride-Lowers-IQ/page21

It was Goebbels who said something very similar as a negative comment against Churchill and the British.

That's how it came to be attributed to him.

“One should not as a rule reveal one’s secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”

Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik - Josef Goebbels 1941

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb29.htm

[Nickels]

It was Goebbels who said something very similar as a negative comment against Churchill and the British.

That's how it came to be attributed to him.

“One should not as a rule reveal one’s secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”

Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik - Josef Goebbels 1941

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb29.htm

The two quotes mean quite different things, first version (the fake one) implies that Goebbels was a shameless liar and advocated for the State to enforce lies to further their agenda. The other, (or real) shows that Goebbels is opposed to lies, and British are bad guys because they lie, and have no fear of getting caught. If you wish to quote Goebbels demonizing Churchill, be my guest, but then, go ahead and quote what he actually said.

[Anti Federalist]

The two quotes mean quite different things, first version (the fake one) implies that Goebbels was a shameless liar and advocated for the State to enforce lies to further their agenda. The other, (or real) shows that Goebbels is opposed to lies, and British are bad guys because they lie, and have no fear of getting caught. If you wish to quote Goebbels demonizing Churchill, be my guest, but then, go ahead and quote what he actually said.

I have enough to demonize Mr. Churchill without having to use Mr. Goebbels.

I am only pointing out that there he said something very similar to the quote that you stated as having no basis in Goebbels writings or speeches.

[Nickels]

I have enough to demonize Mr. Churchill without having to use Mr. Goebbels.

I am only pointing out that there he said something very similar to the quote that you stated as having no basis in Goebbels writings or speeches.

Fair enough. But I do think the two quotes differ enough that they shouldn't be confused.

[pcosmar]

Fair enough. But I do think the two quotes differ enough that they shouldn't be confused.

Folks here are not confused,, though some are attempting to confuse the issue.
the Quote was a stand alone statement attributed to NO ONE.
Just a statement of fact.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW8Bj1upbJQ

[Nickels]

the Quote was a stand alone statement attributed to NO ONE.
Just a statement of fact.


not a fact, and nobody actually said it.

[Danke]

O.K. I gotta ask, why was Nickels banned this time?

[Anti Federalist]

O.K. I gotta ask, why was Nickels banned this time?

Wasn't me...

[phill4paul]

Wasn't me...

Wasn't me...

[Danke]

Wasn't me...


Wasn't me...
The guilty are always first to deny it.

[pcosmar]

Wasn't me...

Was me,, but I didn't ban him,
Just asked.

he has done nothing but stir shit.

[AGRP]

Didn't AJ just spend the past month spreading fear about a false flag at the olympics that never happened?

[phill4paul]

The guilty are always first to deny it.


Was me,, but I didn't ban him,
Just asked.

he has done nothing but stir shit.

What'cha gotta say now fly boy?

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Sources that consider David Icke and Kevin Trudeau as reliable sources.

Icke believes lizards in the center of the earth really control us, and rule us in the form of the Bush family, the Pope, and the Royal family of England.

Trudeau has been convicted of scams over and over again, always coming back on infomercials with fake, prerecorded callers fooling people into believing he is now the preeminent expert ranging from finances to health cures.

[donnay]

Sources that consider David Icke and Kevin Trudeau as reliable sources.

Icke believes lizards in the center of the earth really control us, and rule us in the form of the Bush family, the Pope, and the Royal family of England.

Trudeau has been convicted of scams over and over again, always coming back on infomercials with fake, prerecorded callers fooling people into believing he is now the preeminent expert ranging from finances to health cures.

He doesn't write articles quoting them, he has them on his radio show. I do not care for either of them, but they do have some good information from time to time. Just like I do not care for Webster Tarpley, but he too, can bring out information I have never heard about. Then I will research it to learn more. It's called using discernment.

He has also had Ann Coulter on and David Mayer de Rothschild too. Doesn't mean that he is friends or even buddies around with these people.

You guys have got to come up with better material, because your arguments are severely lame.

[hardrightedge]

Huffington Post

Msnbc

Reddit r/politics...a lot of people get their news from that site...probably the worst news source that ever existed

[NewRightLibertarian]

You guys have got to come up with better material, because your arguments are severely lame.

People are just desperate to do anything they can to discredit a truth teller. They feel scorn toward him because he is making it tougher to live in their bubble that they've become so accustomed to

[steph3n]

Sorcha Faal laughably bad, I think we can all agree :D

[pcosmar]

Sorcha Faal laughably bad, I think we can all agree :D

Yup,,
I don't trust any of them,,
neither do I dismiss them out of hand..

MSM reports stuff,, or even Sorcha Faal,, and I look at it,,past it and through it.

I filter and parse it..

I add what is left to what is known..

[Anti Federalist]

What'cha gotta say now fly boy?

Yah, you'd think he would have his hands (and God knows what else) full pleasuring his girlfriend, instead of accusing us harmless little fuzzballs.

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://themorningafter.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/napolitano-ataxic.jpg&sa=X&ei=a9QyUNmvOdGVjALCt4GoAQ&ved=0CAwQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNGYBT-58bqS-z4tQHKrA1lHy64ExQ

[NoOneButPaul]

If you tell a lie often enough,,




Amazing amount of Propaganda supporters here.
:(

I wasn't even implying that, I was basically arguing it from your own perspective.

At the end of the day if you want to win politically and win arguments to win the war on ideas you can't use sources that have much, much, much more often reported things that were outright wrong or just plain crazy and still expect to be taken seriously.

This is a fact of life, and if you don't care to win politically and just want to crusade on for "truth" (whatever it is you believe that is) then fine, please do that, but don't berate the rest of us as sheep or morons or statists for simply pointing out that if we want to win politically then we have to win with what works and using infowars with most people doesn't work.

Conspiracy Theorists don't win and they don't sell to the people. Sorry, but that's a fact.

If we're ever to advance ourselves politically we have to drop this stereotype.

[NoOneButPaul]

Didn't AJ just spend the past month spreading fear about a false flag at the olympics that never happened?

Yes... but when it comes to the vast majority of stuff he's wrong about no one says a thing or makes up a long list of excuses.

Look through this forum over the last 5 years for just infowars stuff and you'll see how often they're actually right, but to the people that support it, they're always right.

And when they're not it's just swept under the rug...

[donnay]

Yah, you'd think he would have his hands (and God knows what else) full pleasuring his girlfriend, instead of accusing us harmless little fuzzballs.

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://themorningafter.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/napolitano-ataxic.jpg&sa=X&ei=a9QyUNmvOdGVjALCt4GoAQ&ved=0CAwQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNGYBT-58bqS-z4tQHKrA1lHy64ExQ

Dammit Janet! They both are doing the Time Warp!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rtkdo7bOmJc

[soulcyon]

The thing with Fox/CNN/AP etc is that they report the truth, but with so much emotional bias and clear intent to bias that they become unreliable. It's hard to stop reading sources like AP or Reuters because they have some really top notch reporters mixed in with the rest of the trash.

[pcosmar]

Conspiracy Theorists don't win and they don't sell to the people. Sorry, but that's a fact.

.
You mistakenly think it is about winning something.

Personally, I wish to raise awareness,, the truth will become apparent sooner or later.

Seeking and telling the truth is it's own reward.

[donnay]

You mistakenly think it is about winning something.

Personally, I wish to raise awareness,, the truth will become apparent sooner or later.

Seeking and telling the truth is it's own reward.


Absolutely!! We're like farmers planting seeds.

[Anti Federalist]

+rep

Great point.

This ain't the "big game" nor is it hustling a used car.


You mistakenly think it is about winning something.

Personally, I wish to raise awareness,, the truth will become apparent sooner or later.

Seeking and telling the truth is it's own reward.

[papitosabe]

Especially when you follow it to it's roots.. including finance and Political/Philosophic roots.
All roads lead to Rothschild.

so I've read a bit about the Rothschild conspiracy of them owning all these banks and what not....is there any valid sources, with valid proof, besides alex jones, and David Icke and the like, that supports the claims that the Rothschilds own everything??

[Travlyr]

so I've read a bit about the Rothschild conspiracy of them owning all these banks and what not....is there any valid sources, with valid proof, besides alex jones, and David Icke and the like, that supports the claims that the Rothschilds own everything??

Eustace Mullins - "The Secrets of the Federal Reserve."

[donnay]

"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it's profits or so dependant on it's favors, that there will be no opposition from that class."
— Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863

"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws" — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/images/jekyll_island.jpg

[AuH20]

so I've read a bit about the Rothschild conspiracy of them owning all these banks and what not....is there any valid sources, with valid proof, besides alex jones, and David Icke and the like, that supports the claims that the Rothschilds own everything??


I honestly don't know that the Rothchilds own everything. Based on Eustace Mullins research, he stated that the Rothschilds were the major shareholders of the Federal Reserve but I can neither confirm nor deny that charge. To my knowledge, there are competing families and factions.

What I do know is that for several decades, an anglo-based movement has worked exhaustively to consolidate and control the remaining freedom based institutions in the world. They do almost extensively via the funding of think tanks, research institutes and policy groups, which then shape and craft potential UN initiatives as well as country specific legislation . Professor Carroll Quiqley wrote extensively about this network in his book "Tragedy and Hope" after being allowed access for research purposes. Quigley's startling revelations are the great stake into the heart of the conspiracy deniers:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/yates/yates14.html



Back in the early 1960s, historian Carroll Quigley did extensive research for his encyclopedic Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. Tragedy and Hope recounted, in over 1,300 tightly-written pages of small print, the gradual rise to power of a small cadre of extremely wealthy and powerful individuals. Many were products of wealthy bloodlines. Some were bankers; others began in other industries but got into banking because that was where the real power was. They operated mostly behind the scenes, not as national political elites but as an international elite – or superelite. For them, natural borders and loyalties were increasingly meaningless. Much has been written about the Rothschilds who discovered in the late 1700s that it was possible for bankers to get rich by loaning money to governments, extending the loans encouraging government to become dependent on them, attaching provisions to the extensions calling for specific policies, and then tallying up the interest. Other such bloodlines would soon follow (the Rockefellers and Morgans here in the US).

Shortly before the turn of the last century, Cecil Rhodes, the British diamond tycoon who had operated for years in South Africa, willed a significant portion of his huge fortune to the establishment of a secret society in England. Its purpose was to lay the foundations for world government, under the theory that world government alone could bring about world peace and security for all. The Rhodes Scholarship program at Oxford University was drawn from this fortune as an effort to bring the "best and the brightest" under the influence of a certain body of ideas. Bill Clinton, of course, was a Rhodes Scholar for a while (although he didn’t complete the program). Many other influential politicians, journalists, and writers in the English-speaking world have been Rhodes Scholars.

So-called conspiracy theorists have written extensively of organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations, founded in 1921, the Trilateral Commission, founded in 1973, and the European Bilderberg Group (which, interestingly, has no home page of its own) as having the same goal: the creation of a world government with themselves at the helm. These groups have been accused of having done everything from financing the rise of both Communism and Nazism to bankrolling both sides in World Wars I and II. Allegations abound that they set about to gain control over both major political parties in the US, the US legal system, the US media (including all major newspapers and television networks as well as the Hollywood entertainment culture), and finally – and especially – so-called public education at all levels from kindergarten to public universities. They would operate by seeing to it that programs and projects that would help advance the agenda of centralization were well funded, while others were left to fend for themselves – not knowing why.

How much truth there is to these allegations is, of course, not easy to determine. It is unlikely that the perpetrators would leave a paper trail that just anyone could follow. On the other hand, the existence of such operatives offers an elegant explanation, satisfying Ockham’s Razor in its appeal to simplicity, for why so much of twentieth century history has been a one-way street, with all traffic flowing left. It also answers: Why does the U.S. federal government continue to grow larger and more centralized no matter which major political party controls the White House or Congress? Why do independent political movements (one thinks of the Libertarians and the Reform Party) founder despite having produced some very worthwhile ideas and having gained the support of a segment of the public? Why are efforts to achieve political, economic and educational independence systematically assaulted by pundits, by the media and by well-funded liberal groups as soon as they threaten to become influential in the body politic?

Carroll Quigley wrote, in Tragedy and Hope: "There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act…. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies … but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known."


Who was Quigley? Not a "right winger" in the John Birch Society but a highly respected senior-level professor of political history at the Foreign Service School at Georgetown University. He specialized in macrohistory, or the study of large-scale, global developments and trends. In this one passage, he not only puts his finger on both conceptions of the New World Order as presented above, he positions himself as one of the insiders. While one may, if one is so inclined, discount the writers of self-published tracts with PO Box addresses in small towns hardly anyone has heard of before, Carroll Quigley is impossible to dismiss. He was, after all, one of Bill Clinton’s chief mentors, personal heroes, and the one person Clinton thanked by name in his first inaugural address. Quigley had had Clinton as an undergraduate years before at Georgetown. As a youth Clinton already had his eyes set on the Presidency. Seeing that even as a teenager, Clinton was one of those people who was fascinated by power and would compromise any principle to obtain it, Quigley saw him as having the "right stuff." It was Quigley’s powerful connections that obtained for Clinton the Rhodes Scholarship.

The publishing history of Tragedy and Hope is worth considering, in light of what we have seen so far. There is circumstantial evidence that efforts were made to suppress the book. When it appeared, published by Macmillan, it became the academic equivalent of a bestseller. And then, mysteriously, available copies suddenly disappeared. It became almost unobtainable. Inquirers were told that the book had gone out of print, which was very unusual since there were thousands of backorders. (First editions are now collector’s items fetching hundreds of dollars.) Representatives of Macmillan seemed afraid to talk about the book. Quigley himself struggled to get Macmillan to issue a second edition, as pirated copies were beginning to circulate. It received a legitimate reprint, of course, but by a far smaller publisher with far less prestige, and the book was very hard to find for years (today, with the advent of online companies such as Amazon.com, the book is easier to obtain). Near the end of his life, a despondent Quigley observed that Tragedy and Hope "has brought me many headaches as it apparently says something that powerful people don’t want known."

[Indy Vidual]

At least some good news would be nice.


All news should make you feel good about yourself and society. That's the ticket. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

Does Ignorance = Bliss ?

http://i.imgur.com/aVljB.jpg

[Zippyjuan]

Originally Posted by papitosabe

so I've read a bit about the Rothschild conspiracy of them owning all these banks and what not....is there any valid sources, with valid proof, besides alex jones, and David Icke and the like, that supports the claims that the Rothschilds own everything??
There are shares in the Federal Reserve but they are not like regular stock shares in a company- they are really more of membership fees. When a bank wishes to join the Federal Reserve system and have access to their services, besides meeting other requirements, they must also purchase shares in the Federal Reserve system. They are not allowed to sell or trade these shares to anybody so the Rothchilds are not able to "buy them up". And the shares also carry no voting rights so they have no say in what the Fed does. In exchange for the cost of the shares, the Federal Reserve pays a six percent dividend on the price of the shares every year to the member banks.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm

Who owns the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve System fulfills its public mission as an independent entity within government. It is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution.

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the Congress of the United States. It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which often reviews the Federal Reserve's activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government" rather than "independent of government."

The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized similarly to private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

[Indy Vidual]

Personally, I think 110% of them are full of crap! They all remind me of rat poison....... alot of truth mixed with enough lie to be deadly!
It is so much fear mongering it's not even funny...... from the MSM, from WND, Brietbart, from Infowars...... it's all fear mongering and psychological warfare!
They can control people like lab rats with what is published? I am betting that the fear keeps the price of silver high with the people scrambling to buy it (not that it's a bad idea.... just sayin). They can escalate any industry they want depending on the type of fear they put into us. I bet freeze dried foods are doing pretty good right now?
I am sick of all the fear mongering and mind control tactics!

+1984
Don't be afraid, it's a Brave New World.

[Indy Vidual]

1 of my fav's ,


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY-l3ejXVZE&feature=g-hist


That is not an accurate representation of Alex Jones....

An accurate representation of...?
If I acted like that even 1% of the time, I would expect to end up broke & homeless, or maybe on a comedy show.

<No offense>
How can you be so smart w/ other subjects, and actually think "that creature" is an honest patriot?

[Travlyr]

The video posted by r3volution is designed to discredit AJ by taking him out-of-context to make him look crazy. He's not crazy. Alex Jones is a truth seeking entertainer making a difference.


An accurate representation of...?
If I acted like that even 1% of the time, I would expect to end up broke & homeless, or maybe on a comedy show.

<No offense>
How can you be so smart w/ other subjects, and actually think "that creature" is an honest patriot?
The question you should ask yourself is why would someone want to discredit a talk show host by taking him out-of-context?
The following video is one possible explanation.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzKFnWpPpdM&feature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzKFnWpPpdM&feature=related

Alex Jones KNOWS that honest sound money and truth are at the heart of a free society. Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, F.A. Hayek, Leonard Reed and others point that out in their writings. Rothschilds style central banking is the enemy of liberty. Alex Jones is on our side waking people up by the thousands if not by the millions. Nobody always gets everything right, yet Alex Jones does produce a lot of great information. If you do not wish to listen to him, then don't. Just keep in mind that if quotes are not in-context, and promoted to discredit another, then it is dishonest.

[pcosmar]

Does Ignorance = Bliss ?



It would seem so.

Do people really take news stories and information as a "stand alone" or in a vacuum?
Regardless of the source, be it MSM, or alternative news. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

You can't even take a weather Report thus.. knowing their propensity for being wrong. You look out the window,, check the calender.. look at the horizon..
Are people really that unable to see a big picture?

I take all stories like apiece of the puzzle.. whether they be true or lie.. (even lies fit in the puzzle)
Like a large complicated puzzle,,pieces fit,,and form a picture.. Some pieces off to the side,,till you find where they fit.
Known facts, History, (both truth and lies) Human nature, Physical realities, Etc.
Some fall into place,, in those parts of the picture you can see. Some don't yet..

if you just throw away pieces, because you don't know where they fit,, the picture will always be distorted and incomplete.

[donnay]

An accurate representation of...?
If I acted like that even 1% of the time, I would expect to end up broke & homeless, or maybe on a comedy show.

<No offense>
How can you be so smart w/ other subjects, and actually think "that creature" is an honest patriot?

Passion--something that most Americans lack.

[Indy Vidual]

It would seem so.

Do people really take news stories and information as a "stand alone" or in a vacuum?
Regardless of the source, be it MSM, or alternative news. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

You can't even take a weather Report thus.. knowing their propensity for being wrong. You look out the window,, check the calender.. look at the horizon..
Are people really that unable to see a big picture?

I take all stories like apiece of the puzzle.. whether they be true or lie.. (even lies fit in the puzzle)
Like a large complicated puzzle,,pieces fit,,and form a picture.. Some pieces off to the side,,till you find where they fit.
Known facts, History, (both truth and lies) Human nature, Physical realities, Etc.
Some fall into place,, in those parts of the picture you can see. Some don't yet..

if you just throw away pieces, because you don't know where they fit,, the picture will always be distorted and incomplete.


Passion--something that most Americans lack.

Both great answers, thanks.

[idiom]

http://i.imgur.com/7vwV9.gif

BTW, the difference between CNN America and CNN international is like night and day. Same with CNBC America vs international.

Your domestic news is so different from reality, its like visiting North Korea. Your domestic reporters appear to be living on a completely different planet.

[Travlyr]

http://i.imgur.com/7vwV9.gif

BTW, the difference between CNN America and CNN international is like night and day. Same with CNBC America vs international.

Your domestic news is so different from reality, its like visiting North Korea. Your domestic reporters appear to be living on a completely different planet.

Lol... No Doubt. News - With Intent to Deceive.

[Sematary]

http://i.imgur.com/7vwV9.gif

BTW, the difference between CNN America and CNN international is like night and day. Same with CNBC America vs international.

Your domestic news is so different from reality, its like visiting North Korea. Your domestic reporters appear to be living on a completely different planet.

That video is too goddam funny

[thoughtomator]

I've seen that same exact scene but with a different reporter on a different network... we really do have Orwell-inspired media.

[donnay]

http://i.imgur.com/7vwV9.gif

BTW, the difference between CNN America and CNN international is like night and day. Same with CNBC America vs international.

Your domestic news is so different from reality, its like visiting North Korea. Your domestic reporters appear to be living on a completely different planet.


This is one of the reasons why the PTB hate the internet and want to control it. People, like myself, read more foreign press to get what is actually happening in the US and the around the globe. Another reason why our newspapers, in this country, are getting less readership and why the cable [snooze] is getting less ratings.