Originally posted by onfire49
reply to post by pshea38
Does blindly rejecting everything in any MSM piece make a more workable situation. I can understand people questioning the story but the question the
man exists? I mean on that line, do I have to accept that you are just another guy posting on ATS. I mean its conceivable that you are a govt agent,
or just a super intelligent computer that can respond. But both are likely false. You could post a few pics of yourself or you can show us your
facebook page, but in the age of photoshop those may be fake. My point is that its is 99.99999999999999999% likely that Zimmerman is a real person,
and just because its a media story it isnt any less believable. His existence isnt the least likely part of this story.
I mean I can show things that tend to show he exists, such as the photos, the police surveillance film, his lawyers, the prosecutors, his family, his
friends, his neighbors, the police records, etc. I certainly believe those are more probable evidence for my side then yours. I mean apply the same
logic to anyone that isnt a major figure in history, say someone in WWII who died. There may be a few surviving pictures, but assuming he has no
surviving relatives it is certainly hard to prove he ever existed. If anyone is going about this blindly it is you. You are challenging the existence
of someone because A) you dont trust the MSM at all and B) you dont like the looks of the photos. Id say the evidence weighs much higher on the other
end.
Once again not everything that happens is a conspiracy. The main issue here may be the official story. This is my main issue with the conspiracy radio
hosts and their die hard fans. The basic line of thinking is "X event happens and its not neat and clean....well therefore it must be a govt cover
up." Certainly the MSM has an agenda but I just dont see you angle my friend
You are not comparing like with like. I can prove I exist to you in 1 minute.
I am on skype.
You start by assuming the story is true, and from there decide what
the main issue is. In this day and age, it is foolish imo to make that assumption.
The media is a sold-out tool and is all about deception and manipulation.
You assume the beginning is sound, and the middle or the endings is tainted.
This doesn't make sense to me.
I posted links above which prove the extents to which media fakery is incorporated
into modern news telling. But these facts don't enter into your considerations, where
as they are ingrained now into mine.
People will do pretty much anything for money and there are more people directly
employed by the government now than ever before. They is no shortage of potential
willing 'role-players' I take it.
And I am sure we can agree just how corrupt that government has become (or maybe not).
If they faked the story, they would fake/stage all associated elements of the story.
In this day and age, and with the story receiving so much national attention, 2 or 3
dodgy photographs is extremely suspicious and I have seen nothing concrete yet that
proves that this man in fact exists.
You say you are 99.999999999% certain that he exists.
I say your wisdom is completely consumed in confidence.
I bet you do not know of even one faked news-story, whereas I am aware of dozens.
That's got to enter into the equation when considering issues like this.
But thanks for replying.
