Total posts: 1,065
-->
@Best.Korea
No. I dont believe in the existence of DNA.
So all that stuff under the microscope that we've found, none of that is real to you?
Created:
-->
@oromagi
WEF made no plans to edit DNA themselves: economists don't do gene therapy
If you think the WEF is just a bunch of economists you've fallen for the propaganda.
For one, Klaus Schwab himself said the purpose of the WEF is to control the global governance. He even bragged about how he has whole governments working for him:
Additionally, the World Economic Forum's own website states it is a partnership of more than 1000 companies and it is funded by these partners.
They also state:
World Economic Forum Partners are leading global companies developing solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. They are the driving force behind the Forum’s programmes.Our Partners engage in Forum Platforms to shape the future, accessing networks and experts to ensure strategic decision-making on the most pressing world issues.
In their mission statement, it leads with:
The Forum engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas.
In short, they try to control the world.
The article blatantly stated that their partner companies want gene therapy by editing the DNA. This article was an agenda article. Agenda articles literally exist to explain what the WEF wants to do next.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
The video wasn't deceptively edited. The guy got fired by CNN AFTER the video was released.
Yes. Sometimes Veritas selectively edits to the point where it is absurd. But that video wasn't.
Since when did the CIA become a political organization?
In 2020 when they ran 60 Democrat candidates... The CIA always picks a side and runs a bunch of candidates on that side. In 2018, 2020, and 2022 it has been Democrats. They've basically overrun the party:
The Democrat Party is basically an intelligence community, particularly CIA, asset.
And the CIA almost always goes along with the World Economic Forum. It's one big power grab.
I am not too fond of most republicans, either, and many of them are also former military and stuff. But from 2018-2022 the CIA and Pentagon took over the Democrat Party.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
That’s just the first hit on Google. Keep going down the page and it only gets worse.
The video could have been recorded by CNN themselves for all I care. It is video and physical documents I am citing. It doesn't matter who recorded it, facts are facts.
Appealing to authority doesn't actually deal with the real issue, which is that CNN has a long history of colluding with the CIA and even hired former CIA agents to work as newscasters and journalists:
And this one lists the amount of former government agents employed at CNN:
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's the next step in a post-democratic America.
I disagree. The next step is self government and becoming amicable, friendly people who will help each other out and also look after our own affairs ourselves.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Before that it was logical to assume the earth was flat.
I think you completely missed my point. The point was that the "earth being flat" idea was not widely held at all except by the Catholic Church through censorship.
The Ancient Egyptians used calculus to determine the earth was arched. [1] And the Ancient Greeks also determined the earth was round. [2]
SOURCES:
[2] https://youtu.be/T0f6u39jlRA
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
That simply isn't true. Natural immunity is superior to vaccine immunity in many long-term efficacy studies we have to date:
So to claim so brazenly that vaccine immunity is better is to ignore studies published in reputable peer-reviewed medical journals.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
If I am reading this correctly, you are saying that if we redefine flat to "a side or a surface" then the world is flat relative to where we are standing and everything, Therefore, is realigned in reference to our position on earth.
While this is an interesting thought experiment, we already have mountains of data that prove the earth is not flat.
Also, fwiw, the Bible doesn't teach the earth is flat. The Hebrew word translated "circle" (חוּג) in most Bibles actually means vault in the archaic meaning, or an arch. So when it says the vault of the earth, it is saying the earth is curved. [1]
Additionally, ancient rabbinical commentaries on this passage also allude to the fact that the earth is both round and flat. To claim one was always the case is to ignore the Jerusalem Talmud. [2]
SOURCES:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Idk which transitive property this is, but isn't the one that Aristotle and Plato were talking about.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Yassine
I have gathered that you are a Muslim.
How can you be a Muslim and then support LGBT+ stuff?
What is the Quranic justification for this?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Can't wait for the blood in the streets and the predictable anarchy.
What are you, a Bolshevik?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
You don't believe in the existence of DNA?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
- Difficulty breathing or shortness of breath
- Cough
- Tiredness or fatigue
- Chest or stomach pain
- Joint or muscle pain
- Fast-beating heart (heart palpitations)
- Symptoms that get worse after physical or mental activities
- Pins-and-needles feeling
- Diarrhea
- Change in taste and smell
- Fever
- Dizziness or lightheaded when standing up
- Difficulty sleeping
- Rash
- Mood changes
- Headache
- Changes in menstrual period cycles
- Brain fog
Might as well put "craving caffeine, waking up in the middle of the night, panic attacks, tiredness, etc."
What is the scientific justification for this list is the question I have in my mind, personally.
Did they take a sample of COVID-free people and ask them for any symptoms they've had and followed up with them for months or years to track their medical problems and then compare it with people who supposedly have "long COVID" and see what overlaps?
Because I have a feeling a lot of these supposed long-COVID symptoms are symptoms of other things. But it would be interesting to see what the data shows
Created:
Best.Korea:
The World Economic Forum is a collection of businesses that conduct global economic and governmental policy.
The content of the post is literally just a reposting of a section of their blog on the subject of gene therapy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Dr Fauci also systemically denied the superiority of natural immunity and hyped both mask wearing and non-mask wearing over the course of the pandemic.
His credentials are not fake by any means, but his pandemic advice certainly was.
Here's a compendium of all the times Dr. Fauci not only disagreed with the science but also with himself:
Created:
"The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating innovation, implementation and acceptance of molecular therapeutics (e.g. mRNA vaccines) globally. As a result, there is escalating interest in developing molecular interventions for many other conditions, such as gene therapies for genetic diseases. Strategically leveraging infrastructure that is being developed for molecular therapeutics will be critical in manufacturing, testing, and delivering gene therapies across diverse settings.
Three critical areas of consideration include:
- Repurposing manufacturing infrastructure developed during the pandemic to produce gene therapies. This approach will lower costs and accelerate implementation by maximizing use of existing facilities and workforce.
- Extending the current national policies governing molecular therapies, which were rapidly developed during the COVID-19 pandemic, to include gene therapies. Where gene therapy policies do not exist, governments should create accelerated pathways to efficiently evaluate and approve these advanced medicines.
- Educating patients, healthcare providers and funders on the value and impact of treating lifelong genetic diseases with gene therapies. This education should include upskilling healthcare providers to be familiar with gene therapy-specific processes, including safe product handling, treatment infusion and patient monitoring post procedure."
Source: Gene therapy can make a real impact on global health but we need equitable access, say experts
Created:
Posted in:
USERS:
Novice_II
3RU7AL
Intelligence_06
Debate:
The majority of animal agriculture in the United States is slavery
Forum:
DDO is shutting down
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Well I think it isn't that cut and dry. A lot of government execs make royalties if the vaccines go to market. If anything it was collusion for both government employees and vaccine companies to both make money.
But either way the point still stands that CNN is known to be a media company that is completely sold out to Democrat and WEF interests.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I’m arguing that the egregiousness of Fox is not matched to any other mainstream network.
So working as Biden's personal press corps and deciding you're going to use your network to put Biden into the White House is not as egregious as Fox News?
The Project Veritas papers and videos prove that CNN was working for Biden. Then you have the Cuomo situation as well. The only reason these people were fired was because they made CNN look bad. They weren't fired because CNN is an honest network. They were fired because they exposed how corrupt CNN actually is.
If a news network blatantly decides they have a stated goal of removing a president from the White House, that is just as egregious as Fox News.
CNN was also paid by the Federal Government to hype the vaccine. They did not disclose this payment to the general public at all. It was Project Veritas who uncovered it by speaking to employees at CNN. They are literally just as bad, in fact even worse, than Fox News. At least Fox News makes it obvious they are biased toward Conservatives. CNN pretends they are objective and nonpartisan.
Created:
Hideme is my pick. They are based in Malaysia which doesn't have any agreements with other governments and they don't record anything permanently and clear out their servers daily.
They also use AES-256 bit encryption.
The only one I know of that uses advanced encryption is ProxPN but they have atrocious reviews despite the 1048-bit encryption they used.
Though if Snowden is right the NSA can already crack every type of encryption available in a matter of minutes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
So I have a few questions lol
How does this work? Like, do we play the entire game in this forum thread? Do I have to download an app? Is it in Discord?
I have played Mafia in person but how long do we have for discussions?
Will this be weeks long or done in a few hours?
When does it start?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah Sinclair was pro-Trump. I already knew that. The point I'm making is that it is on both sides. It isn't just republicans.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@Double_R
No grey parrot has a point. That shows blatant bias.
But anyways to answer your question, I believe CNN and MSNBC and ABC are basically sold out to the World Economic Forum. And right now the Democrat Party is the part of the WEF.
I have a feeling that mainline are Republicans running in 2022 are also going to be a lot of WEF plants, but that is my argument.
They aren't working for the DNC. They are mouthpieces for the WEF. Ironically so is Fox News. Rupert Murdoch is affiliated now and so Fox News became less conservative on the whole.
Yes, they still hype republican candidates, but they have been largely silent on all the WEF stuff and in some cases have outright peddled propaganda for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Ironically enough. It is what they believed, but it wasn't what they practiced.
I also am not a Puritan, and this country was founded by Episcopalians and Deists in addition to Puritans.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
some people are saying that Christianity is a cult
Then so is Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, and other world religions.
Christianity follows a God. Therefore it isn't a cult. A cult follows a human. A religion follows a God. Even in the pagan religions their gods became men. Oden, for instance, comes down and appears as a human in the myths.
And the Greeks worshipped numerous demigods who were half God and half man.
So why is it so shocking to think of a religion that does the same, yet claims that forgiveness is free and not based on one's actions.
The biggest difference between Christianity and other world religions is that all other religions teach that you have to earn your way into heaven or paradise or any other afterlife, whereas Christianity claims that Jesus already paid our debt and that we need to simply believe and live by faith and in fellowship with God to make it into heaven.
If anything Christianity is a much more plausible worldview than all the others. From a logical standpoint it makes more sense that sinful, selfish, prideful, boastful, lying, and lustful people who collectively believe these things as wrong are in need of a savior who could take the punishment for them than to think they can somehow earn their way in with good deeds. Even though their evil deeds far outweigh their good ones.
Besides, each person's evil deeds then would go unpunished otherwise, and that is a great travesty of justice that exists in all other world religions except Christianity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
you cannot seriously argue that the other networks are on the same level as Fox News when it comes to political bias.
Not only can I seriously argue it, I will actually be willing to formally debate it with you. I am that confident I can prove it.
But it'll have to be in a week or two. I am already in 2 debates right now lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
Just look at the narrative offered against the compound dihydrogen monoxide:
Yeah that's a nice joke copywriters send to each other about framing. Supposedly that actually worried a lot of people when it was jokingly printed the first time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
It's certainly possible. I know the firm I worked at would always put "virtually" next to anything so they covered exceptions. Every place has stuff like that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
Yes it does. I personally say grey propaganda is the most common. Lies mixed with truth. But yeah white propaganda is used a lot.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Your experience is with the people who have no journalistic integrity.
That is a horrible thing to say about all of the coworkers and some of the politicians I've worked for. It they had no integrity I wouldn't have worked with them. Yes. I wasn't in charge of the hiring decisions, but I have never worked for a politician or organization completely devoid of integrity. Many of the people I've worked with were extremely honest people who were just trying to make a difference. Only a few were somewhat unintegritous, and I barely worked with them anyways. We more happened to share an office than actually work with each other. And even then they weren't like the smut you see on TV who lie like no tomorrow.
When you're on campaigns they hire dozens of people and make hundreds more volunteers. Of course there's a few who are bad apples in that bunch. But I vetted every person and organization I worked for personally to make sure they weren't unintegritous. You are a nasty, mean excuse for a human being to think to badly about another person simply because they are not in agreement with you. There are Democrats who are great. There are also Republicans who are terrible. I never just assume a person is a slime bucket or works with slime buckets because they are a Democrat or a Republican.
Most of the horror stories I have are from people I didn't even work with whom my clients previously hired and were scammed and stuff like that. I, personally, only worked for people who have integrity. I never printed things I believed were outright falsehoods about candidates or people. I also only worked for politicians I knew personally or were good people.
The nerve of you. You are an angry, brainwashed, little man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I mean. Believe what you want, but have you even worked a single day as a journalist?
I at least have experience in the field and have worked with and know some very high profile individuals. On both the left and the right.
If anything you should be ashamed of yourself for denying reality and failed fact checks and saying only people who worked for your short list of politicians and publications are considered credible.
It's almost as if you're in a cult and your leader is the Liberal Media. No other authority except your cult leader counts as credible and, when your cult leader is found wrong you respond by denying reality and double down on your cult leader.
Honestly you sound brainwashed to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
you have zero credibility and should be ashamed of yourself.
They were one of many people I've worked for. The brunt of my time in the limelight was with the outlet I ran myself. I've had multiple viral articles that I have written.
I don't honestly care about if you think my previous work experience is credible enough for you. I graduated with a degree in communications, was mentored by a journalist who wrote articles about major politicians and even spoke with Tim Kaine and other celebrity politicians. She also ran multiple political campaigns and won at least one of them.
After working for her, I worked as a political marketer for one of the top 10 conservative political marketing agencies in the country.
Then I went on to become head copywriter for a local political campaign in my state. I briefly worked with people who wrote copy for President Trump.
So when I talk about these things, I know as someone who has had experiences few others can claim to have had.
I also know people who have contacts in the Biden Campaign and BLM and even Antifa. I have heard horror stories that I am not allowed to speak about concerning prominent politicians and political marketers who orchestrated national campaigns because they are locked under NDAs.
So I am not some moron who has no idea how the game works. I literally worked in it for years. I have contacts I can easily connect with on both sides of the aisle if I ever need to get a story out there.
So I really don't care about what you think about how the news business works. As someone who created some of the news business's talking points myself, I would know how it works.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Well I don't want to dox myself, TBH. But I will say the gross majority of articles that were for other news agencies were under the umbrella of Salem's news publishing arm. That is all I'd like to say because you can easily find me specifically if I were to say more.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I’m going to assume the rest of your examples are equally frivolous
You asked if the AP ever said anything that is untrue. I have provided, at this point now, at least 10 times they have. And not on obscure articles, but ones that were nationally read and became syndicated talking points for weeks on end. They printed blatantly false things multiple times on nationally important issues, and yet you still continue to believe that I am somehow not proving the AP is unreliable.
They could have waited to run the story until a recording of the phone call came out. They also could have contacted Trump's Administration for comment, contacted Georgia's Governor for comment, and then ran the article with their comments. This is how journalism was commonly practiced before 2015. But no. Instead they ran with a false story. What the fuck else do you call that? If it isn't outright lying, it is at least extremely lazy journalism. And yet another reason not to trust AP except on a per article basis, which was my ORIGINAL POINT.
All I am saying is that the majority of news articles and outlets these days are not producing news but malarkey. This includes the AP, but they still have solid articles as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
But... Since you asked:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
The article shows at least 5.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
A think tank producing news content.
Yeah so does Brookings Institute, Heritage Foundation, Rand Corporation, Center for American Progress, Cato Institute, Merkatus Center, and many other revered think tanks on the left and right. That is part of what think tanks do these days. They all write news content nowadays.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Give me 2 examples
I gave you more than two in the original article I linked on it. But go ahead and keep saying made up stuff.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Just facts is a Christian News organization.
Actually it's a think tank run by a Christian. That is entirely different than, say, Salem Radio Network or Christian Headlines or Christian Today or The Christian Post, or CBN News, which are all blatantly Christian News networks, and all have their own (different) biases.
There's major differences between aggregating thousands upon thousands of studies and writing summaries of what they have found, with meticulous footnotes that quote the surrounding text in them so that readers can see the summary in context and also go back and find the original source, and what the Washington Post or any major news outlet does. If you can't see that difference then you have to be the biggest moron of all time.
I actually have spoken with Jim Agresti and we occasionally email back and forth. He's not some keyboard-happy ideologue on a mission to convert people. He actually reads everything he can on an issue, from studies to encyclopedias and dictionaries and books by reputable authors on the subject and he then fact checks those books and studies and goes to the primary sources and reads those, too. He is a very thorough researcher. You can tell from his articles, which often cite 20-30 primary sources, studies, and other serious and reputable material.
That doesn't mean he is perfect. Nobody is perfect. But the rigorousness that goes into his articles is much more thorough than most anything WaPo or NYT or Fox News or WSJ or Wash Times or NYP ever does.
The same is true for the CRS. They are basically a center-left version of Just Facts. They are also very rigorous with their research and tell you precisely where to find what they have cited. They also usually heavily cite their reports. This is significantly better than most news outlets.
So, yes. When the CRS and Just Facts are citing dozens to hundreds of studies in their work and going back to the original sources and therefore doing hard research, while WaPo cites anonymous sources and doesn't back anything they say up with any sort of hard research, they are not reputable as a publication.
Goodness gracious you really do ignore the truth when it suits you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
He was documented by the Washington Post as lying more than 30,000 times in his 4 years as President.
The Washington Post is not that reputable anymore, sadly.
Look, to be perfectly honest with you, I have stopped reading the news and instead read the blog of the WEF and the blog from Just Facts and the Congressional Research Service because the WEF sets the news agenda for the next few months and Just Facts and the Congressional Research Service both heavily cite their articles and releases, so it is deeply-researched material.
I used to be a huge news junkie, but now the news, on both the left and the right, is so full of malarkey that it is a waste of time to read it.
WaPo has failed fact checks too. [1] And if their idea of a good source is an "anonymous source," which turned out later to just be another WaPo staffer, then that just isn't good journalism. It isn't my fault you like sources that don't do actual journalistic work.
One of my friends worked for multiple news agencies and graduated with a degree in journalism and she told me that the news agencies used to not rely on just anonymous sources and journalists would be required to find three sources that speak to both sides of an issue and run all of the claims from these sources in their articles. They also were taught to go back to the original source first and to report on that instead of someone's opinion.
News agencies just don't do this very often anymore. They rely on "experts" instead of original sources and, when it suits them, they run stories with "anonymous" and therefore unverifiable, sources.
Your “source” doesn’t support the point you are trying to make.
My point was that the AP has published blatantly false stories. That article proves my point. He cites his sources and also shows how the AP does not even link to the citations they make, which violates both Google's and the Poynter Institute's qualifications for good fact checking.
He also shows, with proper sourcing, that the AP failed multiple fact checks themselves when they were fact checking President Trump.
That was my point, and the article supported that with evidence.
SOURCES:
[1] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/washington-post-beclowns-itself-with-desperate-trump-fact-check
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
The Associated Press is a cooperation of over 1,000 newspapers. They aren't a typical news agency. That is why it depends on the article.
The AP has broken some rather important stories, but they have also told some very serious lies. To me, this would mean they aren't trustworthy. But at the same time there are some stories they publish that are important and factual. So you can't discredit them because they are actually a network of newspapers and not a proper news agency. So, depending on the accuracy of the news agency, that could change the accuracy of the news article that AP puts out.
Everything isn't an either-or decision in life. Sometimes there's other options. With the AP, they have been known to be factual and also lie. So their accuracy depends on the article.
The AP has broken some rather important stories, but they have also told some very serious lies. To me, this would mean they aren't trustworthy. But at the same time there are some stories they publish that are important and factual. So you can't discredit them because they are actually a network of newspapers and not a proper news agency. So, depending on the accuracy of the news agency, that could change the accuracy of the news article that AP puts out.
Everything isn't an either-or decision in life. Sometimes there's other options. With the AP, they have been known to be factual and also lie. So their accuracy depends on the article.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
See, you are a moron.
Once again, ignoring the facts in favor of your opinion. A person with a professionally tested IQ of 144 is not a moron. But maybe the person who disagreed with them is?
Here is an article that debunks multiple claims the AP has made in the past:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
It depends on the article.
As someone who actively ran a news outlet for a few years and worked as a journalist for years before that I'd have an informed opinion on this subject.
The AP has been known to carry government propaganda. They even did it for Trump with vaping. Right around the time the Trump Administration decided to ban vaping, the Associated Press came out with multiple articles on the dangers of vaping and how it should be more heavily regulated. They ran articles of children in the hospital after using vapes and other such things.
Of course, these articles were rife with cherry-picked data and the either-or fallacy and other such a propaganda techniques, but they still did it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You talking about CNN? Because I believe both networks lie. I just think CNN does it more than Fox News. That doesn't mean I think Fox News is a good news outlet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
CNN is “supposed to be” about journalistic integrity
Yeah so is BBC and The Guardian and the New York Post and New York Times and Wall Street Journal, but that doesn't mean they are actually fulfilling their mission. All of those outlets have been caught peddling absolute falsehoods on their front pages.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Equating political support with lying is a false equivalency. Just because a news outlet supports a candidate, that does not mean they lie. It means they engage in propaganda, but not that they lie.
There are three types of propaganda:
White Propaganda: truthful statements that are negative about an opponent or positive about your side.
Grey propaganda: mixed-fact statements that are negative about an opponent or positive about your side.
Black propaganda: outright falsehoods about your opponent or your side.
I'd know this stuff considering I worked in political marketing and news for years. I personally tried my best not to engage in outright propaganda because I believe the truth is what people should know. But I had coworkers who literally wrote drivel and outright propaganda for clients. So I know this stuff exists in politics.
Year-over-year, the most factual network changes according to quizzes of the general public. But as of 2021 Fox News viewers are the most informed. This aligns with my statement that, currently, Fox News is more accurate than CNN:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
They (CNN) have been inaccurately characterized as fake news by former President Trump and many of his supporters
As usual you completely ignored the multiple failed fact checks, the fact that CNN mostly covered President Trump negatively and also covered Mitt Romney negatively, and the "mixed" factual accuracy rating all spoken of by Media Bias Fact Check and zeroed in on the small section of text that agreed with your opinion.
The fact of the matter is that CNN is not a reliable news network at all. Even their own employees (not just Van Jones with the nothing burger (which actually has a real meaning if you had cared to look it up [1])) have stated they have engaged in propaganda.
Once again the secret recordings prove they were Biden's propaganda corps. Here is a Daily Mail article showing the requisite statements made in the secret recording about how CNN was integral in getting Biden into the White House:
'Look what we did, we got Trump out. I am 100 percent going to say it, and I 100 percent believe that if it wasn't for CNN, I don't know that Trump would have got voted out,' Chester said in the video. 'I came to CNN because I wanted to be a part of that.' [2]
And:
'[Trump's] hand was shaking or whatever, I think. We brought in so many medical people to tell a story that was all speculation -- that he was neurologically damaged, and he was losing it. He's unfit to - you know, whatever,''We were creating a story there that we didn't know anything about. That's what - I think that's propaganda,' [2]
And:
Chester apparently mishears and responds: 'Your news health?''What? No, I said Biden, our president,' she replies.'Oh, his health,' says Chester.'I want to take care of him and make sure he's okay,' she continues.'He is definitely - the whole thing of him running during the entire - like run for the campaign. Showing him jogging is obviously deflection of his age and they're trying to make it like, 'Oh, I'm healthy,' Chester said.The woman responded: 'Is that what we did? I don't know. Like what do you mean?''We would always show shots of him [Biden] jogging and that [he's] healthy, you know, and him in aviator shades. Like you paint him as a young geriatric,' Chester said. [2]
This was CNN's technical director saying CNN engaged in propaganda for Biden and against Trump. It was reported on by news outlets around the world. This isn't fake news. Look, you can continue believing propaganda all you like, it is your right as an American citizen, but the fact is CNN staffers know they're making propaganda. Calling people idiots over it isn't going to make the truth go away.
You also completely dropped the secret recordings of CNN employees blatantly stating that CNN's last objective was to "get Trump out of office" and to now focus on selling "climate change" because they can "milk that issue" for years.
If a company has a sole objective to get a Republican president out of office and then goes on to go out of their way to paint him in a negative light, and they also have failed numerous fact checks, then that is hardly a legitimate news source, right?
Fox News isn't much better. This isn't the point. The real point here is you are absolutely blinded by your party loyalty to the point you willfully ignore facts and then call other people idiots because they live in reality.
SOURCES:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
There's Gab. The only accounts they've banned so far are NATO bots.
Gab has their own videos, payment processor, and their own Chrome browser with a comment section for uncensored comments on every website. They also have user-voted news with comments, kinda like Reddit but only for news articles.
It's a pretty decent alternative, though there are some racists and neo-nazis on there. They are not, by any means, anywhere close to the majority. The vast majority of people on Gab are conservatives.
Though if the racists start to become more common, I will probably abandon the platform. I used to try debating those guys and it is like hanging my hand with a hammer. You can prove them wrong with everything and they will just say it is part of the "conspiracy."
Like, yeah, bro. Because scientists have so much to gain from saying all people are equal. Lmao.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Just because it is propaganda that doesn't mean other stations lie less. That's the genetic fallacy at its finest.
CNN staffers have declared multiple times that the organization makes up lies all the time for Democrats. The owner of the station is a hardcore Democrat. They purposely became Biden's volunteer press corps in the 2020 election. But even all of that would not mean that CNN lies more than Fox News. It is just to say that Fox News isn't the only propaganda outlet on the airwaves.
As of late, e.g. the last couple weeks, Fox News has been more factual than CNN. But that doesn't mean it has always been that way. Both networks should not be unwittingly trusted by the general public. They both show a history of extremely biased and outright false reporting.
Created: