The coming attack on ATS by MSM

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


I suspect that if they are stupid enough to blame ATS for anything membership will increase. Just because they associate ATS with a nut job doesn't mean they can shut it down. If that was the case myspace would be out of business right now.

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo

But what if this is the setup. Plant this idea now. In a few weeks another story, maybe a specific theory. Work up some real ire against Icke or Jones or any of them. "These guys are making money telling you lizards steal your kids, be mad at them. Grrrrrrrr"

In a few months some guy will shoot some people. They will tell us all the crazy sites like this he visited when they look at his computer (after he kills himself or is shot in pursuit). Let's get more bad doctors on tv to tell people in a round about way, since we have no proof, that this man would have been ok with some meds and not going to these sites. People like Yoda will agree and feel vindicated. They will trample the innocent dead to bring their "SEE! TOLD YA" to my front step.

The fear will spread and the talk will boil. "Conspiracy websites are the kind of thing that lead to campus shootings and spree killing and mass murder." And it will be eaten like so much buttery sugar. Then, when Time Warner explains how it is expanding it's already in place web censoring system, it will not only make sense to Yoda, it will seem necessary and be ushered in with little opposition.

Everyone will forget that these exact same atrocities have been happening all along without any help from the web. Columbine, Virginia Tech, Son of Sam. Take your pick, any crime they use to prove their point will have a counterpart predating the web that will soon be forgotten under the context of a new fear for the people to enjoy. But that is just my opinion. I could be wrong but I really hate bloody footprints on my mat.

[edit on 17-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

Thank you! Thank you!

This is exactly what is happening. Pretty soon 'they' will be censoring the internet in order to gain complete control - and remember - it's the WORLD WIDE Web. Does this stink of NWO or what? As we speak the MSM is scrambling to find quality news stories so that they won't lose their jobs.
I know that here in New England our news teams are covering the 'homeless three legged dog stories', etc. Anything to fill the void between denying the Iraqi situation (where they will not even show us film footage of what's really going on at this time), or ragging on who Obama has selected for his cabinet/team today.
SO let's pick on the conspiracy sites?
They tried to put down myspace as the website where your teens are going to 'hook up' - and look what happened - the site mushroomed.

Just a thought - but what if by MSM mentioning ATS and this type of website - more people of like mind show up and register - and create an even bigger demonstration of "we're not gonna take it"?


[edit on 12/17/2008 by dhunter]

I'm still reading all 12 pages of this thread, but I'd like to mention a few things from my perspective.

The MSM is on the defensive. Despite their recent success in helping their chosen cadidate win the Presidency, they know that their credibillity and abillity to influence the more educated masses is waning. Though not as much of an anachronism as the newspapers are their traditional role has been usurped by the internet with it's myriad of multiple-link sites, blogs, and "conspiracy sites". The only advantage that the MSM has over the others is access to Power,but rather than be the check and balance on other centers of power they have simply become a propaganda tool for the political and corporate elite.

Who was on top of the current financial mess over a year and a half ago (and in some cases longer)? It damn sure wasn't any of the MSM, up until the Bear takeover and even for a while after, they simply said "nothing to see here move along" like good little establishment members. But the bloggers (like Denninger, Mish Shedlock, Calculated Risk,etc....) started early and loud about how dangerously bad our economic circumstance is. If you listened to those bloggers, you could have preserved capital and maybe even made a little money if timing and discipline were right. If you believed the MSM you are probably down around 25-40% from last year. The conspiracy sites, with their above average populations of goldbugs were aware of the severity of the problems early as well.

The conspiracy sites do a remarkable job of coalating MSM, blogosphere, foreign news (something sorely lacking in modern Cable News), and mixing it with almost anything goes discussion of issues. ATS does a better job of it than almost anyone, it's attention to decorum and civillity place the discussions where it should be, on the merit of the ideas being discussed.

Non-traditional sources of information are biting into the relevance and profitabillity of the MSM. You can probably expect attacks against non-MSM news sources of all types to intensify.

If there is an actual attack on ATS from NBC and the so called "Main Stream Media" wants to promote internet censorship, then tell me why one of ATS' biggest sponsors on the website is MSNBC?????

I will tell you why in a reiteration of why I believe they posted this article.

They posted this article to start their own conspiracy; that NBC is after all of you. They just totally played off of all of our paranoid fears in order to gain hits on their website, and increase ad revenue. If you search Google for conspiracy theory websites which link to this article, you will see it is all of them. They all are all swarming with people hissing about how this article was wrong, and therefor flocking the masses of so-called "underground media" over to NBC's website.

In a sense, they proved how paranoid and impressionable conspiracy theorists can be. Therefor, they pulled the right trigger to set off this emotional bomb on this website and others. Who fell for it? All of us.

While the argument for the past several days has been whether or not the article is true, we have completely become enemies within the same cause and overlooked the bigger picture which I have attempted to outline here.

In the end, ratings are the #1 goal of a news website because this translates into revenue.

[edit on 12/17/08 by Yoda411]

Originally posted by Yoda411
Who fell for it? All of us.

Actually, many of us never suggested any such paranoia. If you look carefully, you will see that your "all of us" is about a handful of people. Ah yes, they sure pulled a good one there, on you 12 or so people.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


You overlooked the point of my post.

When I say "who fell for it? All of us." I don't mean that we all believed it.

I mean we all flocked to this website of theirs at least once.

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

You overlooked the point of my post.

When I say "who fell for it? All of us." I don't mean that we all believed it.

I mean we all flocked to this website of theirs at least once.

I didn't lol. I never went to the website once. It was clear from early on posts that this was not news. I was going to read it just as soon as someone told me it had at least ONE fact in it. That never happened. I never read it. I never went to their site. I do not watch their news. All I have done is question this BS on a forum I was on anyway looking at pretty pictures of UFO's.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


Regardless if you were a contributor to their success or not, it would be impossible to argue that they did not draw visitors through the use of conspiracy theory websites.

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

Regardless if you were a contributor to their success or not, it would be impossible to argue that they did not draw visitors through the use of conspiracy theory websites.

Impossible? I never went. How many people between the three threads about it went? 25? Do you have numbers to prove this was a successful story about this really rather small group of people?

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

Regardless if you were a contributor to their success or not, it would be impossible to argue that they did not draw visitors through the use of conspiracy theory websites.

Impossible? I never went. How many people between the three threads about it went? 25? Do you have numbers to prove this was a successful story about this really rather small group of people?

Anybody who was actually interested in discovering what this article was about, and attempting to read into the possibility of it directly attacking our ability to share information on Conspiracy Theory websites actually went to the website to read from the source of the content.

That's what conspiracy theorists are supposed to do. They are supposed to hypothesize, research, and then analyze what they have learned and how it applies.

Apparently I have been arguing my opinion with someone who has never even read the story.

Originally posted by Yoda411
Apparently I have been arguing my opinion with someone who has never even read the story.

Why should I read it. I know for a fact that that is a news story with no facts in it. I know this for a fact and am more than equipped to argue my point.

Aside from that, you really want to poke fun that I never read the article? Wow, shame how silly I have made you look and I never even read your article. Glad you made an issue of that.

This thread is about MSM attacking conspiracy sites. Is there a "news" story on ABC attacking conspiracy sites? yes. Is it factual and correct? NO!

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
This thread is about MSM attacking conspiracy sites. Is there a "news" story on ABC attacking conspiracy sites? yes. Is it factual and correct? NO!

Who are you still trying to prove your opinion to?

Is the story technically factual? Yes. If you would have read it, you would realize they raise more questions than they answer.

As to whether or not the claim that conspiracy web sites cause mental delusions is up for debate among psychiatrists, let alone between me and you. The article does a clear and concise job of laying this point out. It also clearly mentions that not all conspiracy theorists are mentally ill, just that there was the possibility of a few wild cards being slipped into the stack.

[edit on 12/17/08 by Yoda411]

Originally posted by Yoda411
Is the story technically factual? Yes.

ARE YOU INSANE???????????????????????

How many times have I asked for ONE fact from the article?????????

Where is it?

ONE, just one. That is all I need and I will read every word of it ten times.

Can you produce one fact from your "factual" story? I am not going to debate what a fact is all over again so I hope you remember from yesterday that facts are not things like "maybe" and "could."

Getting this yet?

Where are the facts?

If you can give me one single fact from that story, I will read it. Your turn.

[edit on 17-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

Originally posted by Yoda411
Who are you still trying to prove your opinion to?

What is my opinion exactly?

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo

Originally posted by Yoda411
Is the story technically factual? Yes.

ARE YOU INSANE???????????????????????

How many times have I asked for ONE fact from the article?????????

Where is it?

ONE, just one. That is all I need and I will read every word of it ten times.

Can you produce one fact from your "factual" story? I am not going to debate what a fact is all over again so I hope you remember from yesterday that facts are not things like "maybe" and "could."

Getting this yet?

Where are the facts?

If you can give me one single fact from that story, I will read it. Your turn.

[edit on 17-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

The cornerstone of Icke's theories is that a malicious race of lizard people -- the "shadowy elite" -- rules the world and all its political leaders primarily by controlling the media and orchestrating fear-mongering catastrophes, such as Sept. 11. Icke said he already has speeches lined up for 2009 in Los Angeles, Mexico, Croatia, New Zealand and Australia.

Whether or not conspiracy theories harm people who are susceptible to mental illness is a matter of debate among psychiatrists.

"Paranoid is wide category -- it's another way of being separate with reality -- but in our culture, we've made it synonymous with persecutory delusions," said MacDonald.

Icke believes his popularity on the Internet is a testament to the validity of his ideas, and that people feel that his predictions have come to pass.

reply to post by Yoda411



I am just going to say this until you get one right.

Show me one fact from that article.

LOL, I do need to add this gem. None of those are facts but this is my favorite

Whether or not conspiracy theories harm people who are susceptible to mental illness is a matter of debate among psychiatrists.

Oh that is great. It does not even remotely resemble a fact. The fact is what? The fact is many people do not know. LOLOLOL. Thank you Yoda for breaking the tension.

Ok, back to this.

One fact from the article, just one.


[edit on 17-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
reply to post by Yoda411

 

I am just going to say this until you get one right.

Show me one fact from that article.

I'm sorry did you not read the last post, or are you trying to start another flame war?

Ok, You forced my hand.

Originally posted by Yoda411

The cornerstone of Icke's theories is that a malicious race of lizard people -- the "shadowy elite" -- rules the world and all its political leaders primarily by controlling the media and orchestrating fear-mongering catastrophes, such as Sept. 11. Icke said he already has speeches lined up for 2009 in Los Angeles, Mexico, Croatia, New Zealand and Australia.

Ok, so that is what Icke talks about. And that is a fact about how it contributes to mental illness through websites how?

Whether or not conspiracy theories harm people who are susceptible to mental illness is a matter of debate among psychiatrists.

See my previous post. I can't keep laughing this hard all day.

"Paranoid is wide category -- it's another way of being separate with reality -- but in our culture, we've made it synonymous with persecutory delusions," said MacDonald.

One man's opinion about what society had done with paranoia. No facts. No conspiracy websites. No link to how they contribute. Did I mention no facts.

Icke believes his popularity on the Internet is a testament to the validity of his ideas, and that people feel that his predictions have come to pass.

"Icke believes"

Do you know what these words even mean?

Oh darn, I do not want to confuse you with a new question. I am still waiting for one fact from the article. Baby steps, Yoda; baby steps.

[edit on 17-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

reply to post by Max_TO


I am more than surprised that it has it taken this long for the MSM to start an attack like this.

Hey you if you think for yourself then you a crackpot fringe guy.

This does seem to be the way in which the current world is being manipulated.

Still while there are free thinkers out there, the MSM still have work.

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
reply to post by Yoda411

 

Whether or not conspiracy theories harm people who are susceptible to mental illness is a matter of debate among psychiatrists.

Oh that is great. It does not even remotely resemble a fact. The fact is what?

Clearly our intellectual discussion was not as intellectual as I had previously assumed. I had assumed you knew the definition of a fact, considering the basis of your argument.

I will take the time to explain to you why this statement is factual for your own knowledge.

The fact being stated is:
The concept of conspiracy theories promoting harm to individuals susceptible to mental illness is currently under debate among psychiatrists.

[edit on 12/17/08 by Yoda411]