Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by aaronman, May 8, 2011.
Media Scrambles as Bin Laden Story Crumbles
Skepticism wins again to blind statist idolatry.
Not surprised, not one bit..
Thanks for the great article, it covers every point of the whole situation.
Just goes to show that this whole thing is nothing more than the CIA dumping an old asset.
inb4 "thenewamerican.com is not a reliable source"
but yeah.. the whole thing smells for sure.
but people only believe what CNN and the white house says.. so it doesn't matter,.
i could see it being another Tonkin episode for sure..
Bin Laden's Compound Now Available as a Counter Strike Map
1) I think; to some extent, this whole clusterfuck of an issue is a poorly-constructed stab at steering the mainstream consensus towards one opinion in an attempt to make it "politically correct," with emphasis placed on doing it in a short amount of time to subdue naysayers and skeptics who want to dissect the situation more deeply than it's presented. Manipulating the general population's emotions is the easiest way to drive propaganda far into the minds of the people.
2) Nobody really knows what's going on, because people are just being told what's going on. Having said that, I think there are a lot of pieces missing, so when we talk about this issue, we shouldn't be attempting to "prove" one way or another - but just to present as much information as we can. No one person knows it all; and if they do, they won't be posting on the politics section of a stoner forum. So don't take it personally when people tell you that your information is wrong, because we're all still trying to figure this out.
I think this is symptom of electronic communications revolutionizing the way we get news across. I'm not defending mainstream news, they should not report things as fact that are not actually provable facts.
It's my opinion they they are in a losing race against emerging technologies and communications methods. No longer are rich media corporations required to spread information.
Before satellite technology or even phones, this news would take weeks, if not months to travel and any discrepancies would be even harder and disprove.
I think most people forget that in reality one week is a very short period of time.
"CIA boss Leon Panetta later exposed that claim as false in an interview with PBS, saying: â€œThere was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes that we really didn't know just exactly what was going on."
I may be wrong but I think he also said that they didnt know what was going on because they where watching from a satellite/drone(?), and for the 20 minutes when the seals entered the house and supposedly killed bin laden they couldnt see what was happening.
The mainstream media isn't the word of god? Who fucking knew?
About 2% of the US population.
I take the stumbling and bumbling as the WH trying to get the truth and news out too fast for their own good. Wasn't until the SEALs were being briefed that the story started hanging. If they wanted to, they could have easily stuck with the gunfight story, but didn't. I like this better than the carefully coordinated lies under Bush. Even homicide detectives will tell you that the first report is most likely not what actually happened. Once adrenaline wears down and the mind clears does the story get near where what actually happened.
Awesome! Did they re-create the weed field in the backyard too?
you like sloppy unorganized lies better than carefully coordinated ones?
i think both kinds of lies suck the same..
Totally. I am just glad that the bullshit is getting called out easier than before. Thank you internet!
could be Obama's new campaign slogan..
"I lie better than Bush"
yes we can!
His new slogan should be, "Yes, I did".
I'll agree... He "did" an awful lot...
I like when they said these kind of things often change as more information is available... like pat tillman.