I did.....anti government paranoia... The idea that the whole of the media is corrupt due to 'mockingbird' is ludicrous.
I don't believe "that the whole of the media is corrupt." I never stated such a thing, by the way. But I am aware that it has been co-opted by governmental agencies from time-to-time. That is an agreeable point, yes?
Of course not. But the course of the discussion (not lead by me) lead to the "corruptness" of the media. I was illustrating that I was aware of such perceived corruption from the government perspective.
But at this point it would have to be corruption of the media on an unprecedented level. 13 years of the media lying without a single slip up. Impossible.
The media has reported a lot on 9/11. They've reported on a lot of stuff that is 'embarrassing' to the government. However, and nevertheless, I don't think enough 'investigative journalism' has been done. Not enough questions have been asked. Hard questions, too. Feet, and lots of them, being held out over the fire until satisfactory results were met. I say a lot of that because there is an abundance of information available, and a whole hell of a lot of it looks bad, but there is never a follow-up story. There is just a blurb and then it is buried in the pages of reporting history, never to be mentioned again unless someone brings it up in an interview, book or documentary.
If they've already started, and made some headway, why would they stop? You say that certain news agencies are "reputable" by your personal standards. Fox, CNN, NY Times, etc. If they are reputable, why do you think they haven't asked those questions? Why haven't they dug into it? Every single scandal in the US has been raped by news agencies. Without any regard for who it was. I remember when the Clinton fiasco started and it was all you'd see on TV. Bengazi, etc. There's so many instances that it's stupid. If they have no issue completely digging in to all of those other stories, why not 9/11? Could it possibly, or by any chance be that there's nothing there? Or is that those news agencies aren't as reliable as you once believed? What truthers see as things that "look bad" are a lot different than what normal people think looks bad. You say "A Clean Break" is the smoking gun behind 9/11. It's a handbook as to why the events happened, and what was to take place afterwards. Why do you think no other news agency cares? Do you think their hands are actually tied by the government? Do you believe that the government picks and choses what disaster the media can dig into? There's a shadowy cabal of people that sit down with news agencies and say, "You can report Bengazi, but not 9/11 or Northwoods. All in favor say "aye"."
