Top German Journalist Admits Mainstream Media Is Completely Fake: "We All Lie For The CIA"

[mudslag]

3 minutes ago, E Pluribus Unum said:

So is propaganda, the use of it, and those affected by it unheard of?  Ever heard of this thing called learned behavior?  You should read up on it some time.

 

You're deflecting now, you made a claim that you can't support. 

[E Pluribus Unum]

1 minute ago, Raze said:

Your remark about Cognitive Dissonance was, IMO, out of line.  You're not an authority.  And neither are you about common sense. No reason to be condescending.  And my final remark was in regards to the both of you.

 

Again, no reason to be condescending.

It wasn't intended, besides, that was just your assumption.  It was a point made to illustrate the tendencies of people.  I myself am included.  

 

Again, that's your assumption at the tone of my voice in the words I wrote.  Read what I responded to and you may see him doing exactly that by calling me ignorant.  And what better way to enlighten the ignorant than by research and study?  If you see that as an insult, then no value can be added to the discussion.

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

19 minutes ago, Raze said:

Good that's progress, admitting our faults.  It teaches one humility.  

Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.

 

To the other commentators here: I'm sorry I insulted you each time you wanted to polemicize with me and I just kept on insulting you in return.

[E Pluribus Unum]

16 minutes ago, mudslag said:

 

I don't know how much anyone else knows. I just know that you made a claim that others are brainwashed by the media, a claim that is unsubstantiated. You made the claim, not me, so it's on you to support your claim for which you haven't done. I also showed you why such claims are ignorant to make in the first place. 

 

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, mudslag said:

 

You're deflecting now, you made a claim that you can't support. 

You made an accusation that my claim of the media being used as a tool of propaganda, or the use of propaganda in general is unsubstantiated.  A quick search on google would reveal much information on this issue, so if you'd like me to spoon feed you information, here are some examples: 

 

President Obama: "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."

 

The NSA: "We aren't spying on the phone calls or emails of U.S. citizens."

 

Big Pharma: "We don't need to charge you exorbitant prices for drugs for our own profits; we only need the money to bring you amazing breakthroughs!" (REALITY: Most drug company R&D money comes from taxpayer dollars funneled through the NIH.)

 

The U.S. Congress: "We can pay off the national debt by slightly reducing the acceleration of the growth of new debt being added to it."

 

The IRS: "We need your tax revenues to fund the government." (But when banksters need another trillion-dollar bailout, they instantly create the money from nothing.)

 

 

 

Whether you like it or not, accept it or not, propaganda has existed, been used by those in power on all levels since the beginning of time.  Now it's your turn, prove me wrong.

[+Raze Subscriber²]

15 minutes ago, E Pluribus Unum said:

It wasn't intended, besides, that was just your assumption.  It was a point made to illustrate the tendencies of people.  I myself am included.  

 

Again, that's your assumption at the tone of my voice in the words I wrote.  Read what I responded to and you may see him doing exactly that by calling me ignorant.  And what better way to enlighten the ignorant than by research and study?  If you see that as an insult, then no value can be added to the discussion.

I call it as I see it, if I am mistaken, I'm sorry.  Maybe if you had said "myself included" it would have prevented any misunderstanding.

[E Pluribus Unum]

1 minute ago, Raze said:

I call it as I see it, if I am mistaken, I'm sorry.  Maybe if you had said "myself included" it would have prevented any misunderstanding.

No worries, I'm certainly not immune to becoming passionate during discussions 

 

Sorry if I appeared to be insulting.  

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

16 minutes ago, Raze said:

I call it as I see it, if I am mistaken, I'm sorry.  Maybe if you had said "myself included" it would have prevented any misunderstanding.

When the whole nature of your comments comes to down to pointing out infinitesimal errors and inconsistencies in other members' post (instead of discussing the actual topic) it kinda shows that you are not interested in having a real conversion and just want to derail the topic.

[Torolol]

2 hours ago, FunkyMike said:

Furthermore Udo Ulfkotte isn't some nobody conspiracy nut... He has been a well respected journalist for most of his LONG career ..

 

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udo_Ulfkotte
 

um, Bing refuse to translate that because its 'secure page', must be conspiracy!

 

EDIT: Thankfuly Google translate can do the job better than microsoft.

[mudslag]

44 minutes ago, E Pluribus Unum said:

 

You made an accusation that my claim of the media being used as a tool of propaganda, or the use of propaganda in general is unsubstantiated.  

 

Now it's your turn, prove me wrong.

 

 

 

No, I asserted that your claim that "They've been told to think that way " was not supported. I never once claimed that the media was never used as a tool of propaganda. Even what you quoted me now doesn't support that I stated that. So yes you're wrong.

 

 

 

44 minutes ago, E Pluribus Unum said:

A quick search on google would reveal much information on this issue, so if you'd like me to spoon feed you information, here are some examples: 

 

President Obama: "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."

 

The NSA: "We aren't spying on the phone calls or emails of U.S. citizens."

 

Big Pharma: "We don't need to charge you exorbitant prices for drugs for our own profits; we only need the money to bring you amazing breakthroughs!" (REALITY: Most drug company R&D money comes from taxpayer dollars funneled through the NIH.)

 

The U.S. Congress: "We can pay off the national debt by slightly reducing the acceleration of the growth of new debt being added to it."

 

The IRS: "We need your tax revenues to fund the government." (But when banksters need another trillion-dollar bailout, they instantly create the money from nothing.)

 

 

 

Whether you like it or not, accept it or not, propaganda has existed, been used by those in power on all levels since the beginning of time.  Now it's your turn, prove me wrong.

 

As for you're examples, those don't really cut it either, those are bad examples if you're attempting to show media manipulation and propaganda. I see where you got your silly list from but again this isn't manipulation or propaganda. They reported what was said, only later did it turn out to be a lie, which is a huge difference then saying it was some sort of manipulation or propaganda. To say that is to suggest that it was a known lie before hand. Those that made the statements may have known it was a lie but that in no way equates that it was a known lie by the media reporting what was said. 

 

This link shows better examples of what propaganda and manipulation actually is.

http://www.activistpost.com/2014/03/6-examples-of-media-manipulation.html

 

So again I never once stated propaganda didn't exist, yet again you're wrong.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

1 hour ago, chrisj1968 said:

Age(of the story) means nothing. the CIA is behind a lot of stuff going on in the world. look at the CIA's Iran/Contra scandal. I know of soldiers when I worked at Walter Reed in DC, Who guarded Poppy fields in Afghanistan. the CIA is a known drug running operation by using those funds to buy info, weapons and ammo for allied groups. it's so easy to dismiss everything as conspiracy. 

The age really had nothing to do with it...though the original video in the OP aired in 2014 though the article was reported on yesterday...by a questionable site.  The main issue is that this was posted in "Real World News/Issues" ... when it probably should have been posted in "It's A Conspiracy" (which it has since been moved to).  In other words, one reporter's "revealing" on a Kremlin sponsored network in which he was promoting his book ... isn't exactly "Real World News" ... it needs to be backed up by other sources.

 

Nothing else you posted is relevant to this thread ... and could be post(s) on their own. 

[+Raze Subscriber²]

9 minutes ago, Mirumir said:

When the whole nature of your comments comes to down to pointing out infinitesimal errors and inconsistencies in other members' post (instead of discussing the actual topic) it kinda shows that you are not interested in having a real conversion and just want to derail the topic.

Pot meet kettle.  

 

You are quite right, I don't like it when someone tries to perform a conversion based on their own biases, including attempting to intimidate by insulting/demeaning them.

Errors and inconsistencies can lead to misunderstanding, wouldn't you agree?   Note the word in bold.   So is it up to me to guess you meant conversation, or just to be told I was wrong and to only read it as written.

[E Pluribus Unum]

3 minutes ago, mudslag said:

 

 

 

No, I asserted that your claim that "They've been told to think that way " was not supported. I never once claimed that the media was never used as a tool of propaganda. Even what you quoted me now doesn't support that I stated that. So yes you're wrong.

 

 

 

 

As for you're examples, those don't really cut it either, those are bad examples if you're attempting to show media manipulation and propaganda. I see where you got your silly list from but again this isn't manipulation or propaganda. They reported what was said, only later did it turn out to be a lie, which is a huge difference then saying it was some sort of manipulation or propaganda. To say that is to suggest that it was a known lie before hand. Those that made the statements may have known it was a lie but that in no way equates that it was a known lie by the media reporting what was said. 

 

This link shows better examples of what propaganda and manipulation actually is.

http://www.activistpost.com/2014/03/6-examples-of-media-manipulation.html

 

So again I never once stated propaganda didn't exist, yet again you're wrong.

Where else did the the masses learn to dismiss sources outside of the media as conspiracy theories?  What is the common source of information that the masses are exposed to from day to day?

 

Look at Israel, for example, there have been countless propaganda promoting Israel, while demonizing the Arabs.  We're led to believe that Israel is the victim, and the Arabs are the terrorists.  A lot of people I come across would utter the same BS on the matter, but some of them would realize that it's propaganda after putting a bit of thought into it.  You see, If someone comes by one day and takes over a part of your property, claiming that it belonged to their ancestors, you, like the Arabs would be come angry.  Yet, the media would never bring this point out because it would undermine their message.

 

I didn't need any hard proof to substantiate my claims regarding this matter, it's just common sense.  And if they've been doing this on Israel, what else are they doing behind the scenes.  Don't let the little details spoil the bigger picture in the discussion.

 

[Pishaw]

There are people everywhere that will lie to you for whatever reason. Some of them work for media.

 

Pro Tip: When a news source needs to remind you every 11 minutes that all other news sources lie about EVERYTHING, and only they tell you the truth, they are lying. About everything.

 

Part of being an adult is associating yourself with people you can trust and rely on. This includes where you get your information about the world at large. Step it up.

[mudslag]

Just now, E Pluribus Unum said:

Where else did the the masses learn to dismiss sources outside of the media as conspiracy theories?  What is the common source of information that the masses are exposed to from day to day?

 

First off it would be irrelevant to make this about the masses, as the "masses" haven't chimed in on this thread. Only a hand full of people have commented in this thread and of those X amount disputed what was said and/or the sources relating to it. To make this issue about the masses is simply moving the goal post.  With that, at no point does disputing the sources the OP used equate disputing all other outside sources of the MSM. It seems you and Mirumir tried to make this about MSM vs everything else. You guys made the jump that dismissing one source equates dismissing anything outside the MSM. 

 

As for questions, there is no one answer fits all. Everyone has their own views, specially so when it comes to what to believe. 

 

Look at Israel, for example, there have been countless propaganda promoting Israel, while demonizing the Arabs.  We're led to believe that Israel is the victim, and the Arabs are the terrorists.  A lot of people I come across would utter the same BS on the matter, but some of them would realize that it's propaganda after putting a bit of thought into it.  You see, If someone comes by one day and takes over a part of your property, claiming that it belonged to their ancestors, you, like the Arabs would be come angry.  Yet, the media would never bring this point out because it would undermine their message.

 

I didn't need any hard proof to substantiate my claims regarding this matter, it's just common sense.  And if they've been doing this on Israel, what else are they doing behind the scenes.  Don't let the little details spoil the bigger picture in the discussion.

 

This is an entirely different topic. 

 

 

 

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

1 hour ago, Raze said:

Pot meet kettle.  

 

You are quite right, I don't like it when someone tries to perform a conversion based on their own biases, including attempting to intimidate by insulting/demeaning them.

Errors and inconsistencies can lead to misunderstanding, wouldn't you agree?   Note the word in bold.   So is it up to me to guess you meant conversation, or just to be told I was wrong and to only read it as written.

Yep, you're picking on a typo as per usual = you don't have an argument.

 

Did you also have a chance to proof read the comments made by all the other members?

[+Raze Subscriber²]

7 minutes ago, Mirumir said:

Yep, you're picking on a typo as per usual. 

 

Did you also have a chance to proof read the comments made by all the other members?

Okay, so now you're a victim.  But, of course, you ignore my reason.

 

Yes.

Edited March 30, 2016 by Raze

[E Pluribus Unum]

1 hour ago, mudslag said:

 

First off it would be irrelevant to make this about the masses, as the "masses" haven't chimed in on this thread. Only a hand full of people have commented in this thread and of those X amount disputed what was said and/or the sources relating to it. To make this issue about the masses is simply moving the goal post.  With that, at no point does disputing the sources the OP used equate disputing all other outside sources of the MSM. It seems you and Mirumir tried to make this about MSM vs everything else. You guys made the jump that dismissing one source equates dismissing anything outside the MSM. 

 

As for questions, there is no one answer fits all. Everyone has their own views, specially so when it comes to what to believe. 

 

 

This is an entirely different topic. 

 

 

 

You've made a lot of bad assumptions in your comments. I never sought to explain everything with a one size fits all approach - that's your supposition. I base my understanding of what's taken place in history thus far, combine it with the tendencies of the human nature, to produce a virtual projection of what could happen. Is abstract thinking/inference too difficult to procure?

 

If the loss of privacy and freedoms since 9/11, and the increasingly hostile attitude of the federal government doesn't arouse any kind of suspicion in you, then you should take a serious moment and think about where this could ultimately lead. The MSM was an instrumental tool used to disseminate information, called news, to control public opinion. 

 

There's a reason why I said what I said. With each law, act, executive order, court ruling that further undermines the constitution - why are those in power allowed to continue to do as they please? Brainwashing doesn't have to always be political, it can be in the form of entertainment, music, education. Can you not see that we are way too comfortable and complacent in our lifestyle? Do you not inferentially see that our leaders know this as well, and are exploiting it?

 

You know what? There's a reason why the age in which we live is called the Information Age. If you bothered to take the time to do some serious investigative research, you'd discover for yourself some rather disturbing, inconvenient things. The truth is there if you search for it. If nothing I've mentioned resonated with you, then continuing the discussion with you would be pointless, because you seem too fixated on finding flaws, and pointing fingers rather than contribute in any meaningful way. 

 

 

[Noir Angel]

Lying for the CIA? newp.

Full of BS polemics? absolutely.

[FloatingFatMan]

20 hours ago, Mirumir said:

It appears, only the news manufactured by the companies owned by  Viacom, CBS Corporation, Time Warner, 21st Century Fox and News Corp are considered to be truthful and valid. 

 

Anything else published outside their realm is a conspiracy.

 

They've really cornered the information sphere market and brainwashed ALL of you.

 

My condolences.

Good to know that BBC, Al Jazeera & Reuters are still trustworthy

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

3 minutes ago, FloatingFatMan said:

Good to know that BBC, Al Jazeera & Reuters are still trustworthy

To be honest, both Reuters and Bloomberg are "okay" when they stay away from geopolitics and stick to reporting economy and business related news.

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

RIP

[Dick Montage]

On 3/30/2016 at 1:36 AM, Mirumir said:

I've just had this same discussion with Nik L recently.

 

I'm not going to go over all of this again.

And yet you are somehow happy to repost the same old "Russia has no propaganda, that's a tool only the Western media use" nonsense...

[FunkyMike]

Why is this in the conspiracy section?

 

This guy was one of the five editors for FAZ (Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung - one of the "top" newspapers in germany) for 17 years.

 

RIP

 

 

Quote

In November 2014 he said the following in an interview with Oriental Review:

 

I didn’t get money – I got gifts. Things like gold watches, diving equipment, and trips with accommodations in five-star hotels. I know many German journalists who at some point were able to take advantage of this to buy themselves a vacation home abroad. But much more important than the money and gifts is the fact that you’re offered support if you write pieces that are pro-American or pro-NATO. If you don’t do it, your career won’t go anywhere – you’ll find yourself assigned to sit in the office and sort through letters to the editor.

When you fly to the US again and again and never have to pay for anything there, and you’re invited to interview American politicians, you’re moving closer and closer to the circles of power. And you want to remain within this circle of the elite, so you write to please them. Everyone wants to be a celebrity journalist who gets exclusive access to famous politicians. But one wrong sentence and your career as a celebrity journalist is over. Everyone knows it. And everyone’s in on it.

 

 

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

14 minutes ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

And yet you are somehow happy to repost the same old "Russia has no propaganda, that's a tool only the Western media use" nonsense...

Where did I ever say that?

 

If you'd like to read my most recent comments on the issue, you may want to take a look here and here.

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

16 minutes ago, FunkyMike said:

Why is this in the conspiracy section?

I hope that in the future, the man will be remembered as the one who popularized the term "fake news" as his original interview was published before the last summer's "fake news" media frenzy.