Donald Trump and US politics

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

The NYT, like virtually every news source in the run-up to the Iraq war, put too much credence on named Iraqi sources whose intel was false. And you know what? They publicly ripped off their shirt and whipped themselves over it. So did the Washington Post. You wouldn't expect the same from a fake or crap news outlet. Anyone wanna guess on which major cable network never apologized for its role in pushing us towards Iraq, and indeed, spread false and misleading stories about the war on terror long after it became apparent that something smelled fishy? I'll give you a hint - that news organization has yet to be excluded from a Trump press conference.

Sure the old "but we didnt know" excuse with redaction on page 18 like Russia shut down some power grid back east while back. Meanwhile it served its purpose. You have to be a real fool to belive anything they say after so much falsehoods (then redacted)

How about this just the facts no hearsay, anonymous sources, etc? OFC they wont do that because it doesnt push the false narrative they want

So they just publish FAKE NEWS then redact when caught - and you're cool with that.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

LOL NTY pulsed us into 3 wars (that I now of) on anonymous sources (yellow cake from niger, aluminum tubes etc). one costed like 2-6 trillion depending who you ask. Not to mention 2-3 million muslims dead.

FAKE NEWS is what their name should be.

Why would one keep harping on Liberal FAKE NEWS? It is disingenuous. Conservatives did the same.

First of all NYT is not liberal. It's establishment. Deep state. Owned by billionaires to serve billionaires. Thats why you never see exposes about real human suffering (homeless, yemeni starvation going on right now, etc). Second Thanks toClinton for making them all this way, even Fox, with "deregulation" in his term were there was 50 major media company to 6 today. Like he did for bank he did for media.

Liberal news, it is catchy. Your side invented it. Media Pays More Attention to Some Tragedies Than Others. Media cater the news to you. People love watching negative news. News media thrive on profit not sentiments. Media show you what you want to watch. You turn them off when they don't.

What would people do when people see the homeless and Yemen starvation? They do nothing is my safe bet, well probably most of them. So what if people see people in Yemen starving to death? People starve to death all over the world.

Establishment & corporate media will keep peddling bullshit lies and then "apologize" for it. CNN propaganda has been propping up Obama's terrorists in Syria for years now. When those terrorists started to cut throats to children, it's "apology time". 'We didn't know those fanatics that were screaming death to infidels for 5 years were evil radicals, sorry.'

Whenever you read shit like:

* "unnamed officials"
* "sources that are speaking on condition of anonymity"
* "high ranking sources"
* "unnamed sources close to <blah blah officials>"

don't believe a word! Esp. for very important subjects like war, foreign policy, etc.. where many lives are at stake.

"

deathflower wrote:

What would people do when people see the homeless and Yemen starvation? They do nothing is my safe bet, well probably most of them. So what if people see people in Yemen starving to death? People starve to death all over the world.

Liberal hypocrites infatuated with Obama would do and say nothing, even when his gov was helping to create those starving Yemenis, by supporting the Saudi/UAE war against Yemen. (the richest arab countries, attacking the poorest one)

The barely available news from corporate media, when "our" guys are killing and bombing marketplaces, weddings, etc.. is all you need to know about the "freedom of press".

What would people do if they knew more? Well maybe instead protesting the freedom of speech of Milo and other conservative speakers, go protesting against US gov selling bombs to Saudi war-criminals?

"

morbo wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

What would people do when people see the homeless and Yemen starvation? They do nothing is my safe bet, well probably most of them. So what if people see people in Yemen starving to death? People starve to death all over the world.

Liberal hypocrites infatuated with Obama would do and say nothing, even when his gov was helping to create those starving Yemenis, by supporting the Saudi/UAE war against Yemen. (the richest arab countries, attacking the poorest one)

The barely available news from corporate media, when "our" guys are killing and bombing marketplaces, weddings, etc.. is all you need to know about the "freedom of press".

What would people do if they knew more? Well maybe instead of protesting Milo and other conservative speakers, go protesting against US gov selling bombs to Saudi war-criminals?

If rest of the world charge America for Crimes against Humanity, would you nuke us?

"

deathflower wrote:

If rest of the world charge America for Crimes against Humanity, would you nuke us?

Wut? Only YOU can stop your gov from committing war crimes.

"

morbo wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

If rest of the world charge America for Crimes against Humanity, would you nuke us?

Wut? Only YOU can stop your gov from committing war crimes.

That didn't happen with Germany and Japan.

"

deathflower wrote:

That didn't happen with Germany and Japan.

Are you saying Obama was a Nazi-fascist?

Do I really need to explain the difference between 21.st century democratic western governments and WW2 dictatorships?

The US public had to be conned into wars. And the establishment / corporate "free" media, played a big part in this conning.

"

deathflower wrote:

"

morbo wrote:

"

deathflower wrote:

What would people do when people see the homeless and Yemen starvation? They do nothing is my safe bet, well probably most of them. So what if people see people in Yemen starving to death? People starve to death all over the world.

Liberal hypocrites infatuated with Obama would do and say nothing, even when his gov was helping to create those starving Yemenis, by supporting the Saudi/UAE war against Yemen. (the richest arab countries, attacking the poorest one)

The barely available news from corporate media, when "our" guys are killing and bombing marketplaces, weddings, etc.. is all you need to know about the "freedom of press".

What would people do if they knew more? Well maybe instead of protesting Milo and other conservative speakers, go protesting against US gov selling bombs to Saudi war-criminals?

If rest of the world charge America for Crimes against Humanity, would you nuke us?

No people arnt at fault. We've killed 25 million and staged 65 coups since WW2 thanks to FAKE NEWS like NYT and bought and sold politicians. You bet they'd get on the war crimes docket if any justice existed in this world.

The American ppl suffer enough from their exploits anyway from terrorism to anxiety (about everything poor infrastructure, schools, retirement) while they live in the hamptons cashing in.

I hope Trump can resist their 66th coup

News companies don't always maintain their standards over time. It's not good to assume that a news source is being fair or accurate based on their historic reputation.

The Washington Post changed ownership in 2013. Jeff Bezos (the billionaire founder of Amazon) purchased it flat out. He has full control and is free to push whatever narrative he pleases, with no obligation whatsoever to serve public good.

Similar things have happened to the New York Times, with Carlos Slim (2nd richest person in the world, Mexican) recently becoming the largest stockholder (17.4%). It's still mostly controlled by the Ochs-Sulzberger family, but Slim can control up to 1/3rd of the board, and the 250+ million he put in certainly does not come without strings.

And NYT is liberal. They haven't endorsed a republican president in over 60 years. Heck their public editor even admitted they had liberal bias during a CNN interview.

But a lot of the liberal vs. republican stuff is nonsense to distract people from realizing they have two mostly identical parties controlling things.

I'm surprised more Americans aren't angry about receiving their news from a couple billionaires looking out for themselves, or foreign owned media looking out for their own countries.