reply to post by NoAngel2u
What exactly is suspicious about newspapers that are happy to increase their readership? lol I just don't see the mystery there.
Sadly, the "free-press" won't step on the toes of government for ratings. You are going to buy the paper or turn on the TV regardless od whether
they really report the news or talking about Justin Beaver's haircut.
If the media was really willing to step on the toes of government, they just may report on the news, though sadly, that's not what we get.
Take the Iraq war for instance. Think about the papers that would have been sold, had only the media done their job and told us the truth, such as
"The Bush Admin Lying Through the Teeth, Sends our Boys to War".
For another instance, what about 9/11 and the failure of reporting on that front? You mean to tell me that the papers and media stattions wouldn;t
have boosted rating by reporting on the stone-cold fact that an over-whelming consensus of scientists who have actually looked and tested for
controlled demolitions at the WTC site, has actually found that evidence? Not only have they found that forensic evidence, but a peer-reviewed
scientific paper was published on the findings, proving that it was sound science. Now, whether you agree with this evidence or not, you have to agree
that it is evidence, because it certainly is. There has not been a single scientist to viably counter that science. Instead, it is simply ignored.
Think about the papers that this headline would sell: "Evidence of Controlled Demolitions Found in the WTC Dust: Says Consensus of Scientists".
How about the fact that the media has failed on almost every front concering 9/11, when their ratings would have soared otherwise. In fact, most
Americans have never even heard of Building 7.
What about Sibel Edmonds or the plethora of other whistle-blowers who have risked life and livelihood to come out with their information on government
corruption. They don't get so much as an article in the back of the paper, unless of course it's a hit-piece.
You could also compare Sibel Edmonds to WL on another front. The government actually and easily used the courts to silence Sibel Edmonds, where she
was effectively gagged. You mean to tell me that the government would care about a simple translator, than they would about thousands of "leaked"
Come on, lets deny ignorance here.
I think it is clear to anyone with two braincells left to rub together, that the media is only the propaganda wing of the government. They would never
do anything to expose the underbelly of our corrupt rulers, much less technically break the law by publishing classified information. I find it a
little funny how most information that is mind-bnlowing is absolutely ignored by the MSM, then comes along WL and Assange and not only do they focus
in on him, but they build and define his character. The government huffs and puffs but makes no effort to stop this supposed "damaging" classified
information. Instead, they put on a show, basically.
What's even worse, is that the media issue isn't even a small number of the red-flags, suggesting WL may be something other than what they tout.
There is a mountain of other red-flags, many more obvious than the issue of the media.