|
hertz -> RE: Not the 9 o'clock news (10/9/2010 8:17:50 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rulemylife
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aneirin
I always kind of like these websites, websites that tell an alternative version of the stories that we are told in the popular media, as to whether either story is true, who knows, but I temper what I read with what I know of human nature and what that thing called power does to a person, be they with it, or trying to obtain it.
But anyway, I was reading up on a question I had concerning the Bin Laden family ties to the Bush family, as I had heard before that their family interests coincided. In doing this, I happened upon a website that does indeed provide food for thought in other areas besides that one in which I am looking;
TvNewsLIES.org
What your website provides is a lot of undocumented speculation, which you claim is why you don't believe the media.
But then you present this nonsense as the alternative.
The whole media and power angle is so you can create a thread saying the U.S. government conspired to blame an innocent Bin Laden while giving yourself the cover of a philosophical argument so you do not get branded as a conspiracy theorist.
I think that's a bit unfair, rulemylife. If Aneirin wanted to:
quote:
create a thread saying the U.S. government conspired to blame an innocent Bin Laden
then why would he say:
quote:
as to whether either story is true, who knows
It seems to me that Aneirin is leaving things pretty open. He certainly isn't saying that the 'US conspired to blame an innocent Bin Laden', as you claim. Rather, he is pointing out that an alternative narrative exists, and, it is difficult to know the truth of either version.
Maybe this is where his position should be attacked. Why would anyone suggest that they don't believe the standard media narrative? Surely, they would need some evidence that they have been lied to in order to be able to justify such a claim? Personally, I think he's on pretty solid ground here. The British PM told us that it was necessary to invade Iraq because Saddam had 'WMDs ready for deployment within 45 minutes' or some such nonsense, We now know this was a fabrication, designed to justify an attack. Do our governments lie to us? Yes, they clearly do. Do the lies appear in the media, dressed up as truth? Yes, they do.
Here's the question. Can you believe everything your government tells you? Can you believe every media 'truth'? What do you think, rulemylife?
quote:
...so you do not get branded as a conspiracy theorist.
Anyone who challenges an artificially created consensus, is, by definition, a conspiracy theorist. Or an anti-semite, or a nut-job, or a crypto-communist or whatever other slur you want to make against them. It's one of the more objectionable parts of the way power relations are sometimes constructed.
'The winner gets to write history'. Did you ever hear that? It's an obvious truth. The winner writes history to their specification. It's one of the spoils of war. But did you ever think about how they get to keep that history in place? They do it by controlling the narrative, by carefully maintaining whatever version of history they have created. And they do it by ridiculing anyone who chooses to challenge that version of events. Or by threatening them. Look back to any time where a narrative has changed and you will always see the same things. Ridicule and threat. Example? Try Darwinism. Darwin challenged the previous narrative and got loads of grief for his trouble. But we accept his version of events now without much in the way of rational dissent.
In hindsight it is easy to pick the winning tickets. Darwin was a winning ticket. Whether the claim that Obama Bin Laden orchestrated the attack on the US on 9/11 is a winning ticket is, to my mind, still debatable. Obviously someone did it, but was it him?
|
|
|
|
