Reading Between the Lines

I often read the MSM news stories, and am always so entertained when i read between the lines. The subtile hints they are giving the masses on what they should expect or how they should act.

I present one example. A news story about parents planting drugs in the car of PTA Board Leader.

Parents Plant Drugs in PTA Leaders Car - News Story

A California couple unhappy with the PTA president at their son's elementary school took an unusual approach to rectify their problem, police say. Kent and Jill Easter, both 38 and attorneys, were arrested Tuesday in Irvine after being accused of planting drugs in the car of Plaza Vista School PTA president Kelli Peters because they believed she was not properly supervising their son, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Irvine police said Kent Easter drove to Peters' home in February and planted a bag of marijuana, along with a pipe and prescription pills in the backseat of her unlocked car. He then called police under a false name a little while later and said that the woman had been driving erratically near their son's school and claimed to see her put the drugs in the car's backseat.

Police arrived at the school and saw the drugs in plain view inside the car, and then contacted Peters, who was inside. After consenting to a search of her car, she said the drugs weren't hers and denied knowing where they came from. After detaining her for two hours, police determined she was in a classroom at the time the call was made to police. Peters then consented to a search of her home. Investigators saw nothing in the home to support drug use or possession, so they began investigating whether the drugs had been planted. After further investigation, police said, they determined that Easter made the call from a hotel near where he worked and was recorded on the hotel video surveillance system.

While reading this i felt that a few things stuck out. They seem to suggest that her consenting to the searches of her car and her home were the only reasons she was cleared of these charges. It just feels like they are saying "Whenever you are in trouble, and you feel you are innocent, just consent and everything will be OK"

There are countless stories where the opposite are true, where cops will plant drugs, or evidence to justify their searches. An ex cop i know told me a story about one of her co-workers (also a cop) whose son got stopped in another town. He consented to a search of his vehicle and the cop miraculously produced a bag of Marijuana. The kid knew it wasn't his and so he called his dad from jail. His dad, being a fellow cop, called the station and told them "I know my son, and i know that weed isn't his. You and I both know you planted it." and lo and behold the charges were dropped.

Just imagine if it was a kid whose dad wasn't a cop, or a dad who didn't know his son well enough.

The point is, consenting to searches is dangerous when the cops abuse their powers as often as they do.

This news story just gives these subtle hints that consenting saved her butt. They also suggest that CCTV systems also proved the guilty of their wrong doing. As if we should just accept big brothers desire to watch us at all times.

I find it interesting that they are charged with several crimes NONE of which are breaking into someones car. Was it not a crime because the car was unlocked??? And furthermore,w ho in Irvine California doesn't lock their car?

This whole article stinks.

Bear in mind, that when you are innocent there is not much you can do but try to prove your innocence. In this case, lucky for the teacher, she was evidently totally innocent in not having any stash at home. In effect, she was able more or less prove her innocence by not being a user. Was her privacy violated by allowing a search to prove her innocence? I don't think so, and I guess she didn't either. So what is your complaint?


"While reading this i felt that a few things stuck out. They seem to suggest that her consenting to the searches of her car and her home were the only reasons she was cleared of these charges. It just feels like they are saying "Whenever you are in trouble, and you feel you are innocent, just consent and everything will be OK" '

Originally posted by Aliensun
Bear in mind, that when you are innocent there is not much you can do but try to prove your innocence. In this case, lucky for the teacher, she was evidently totally innocent in not having any stash at home. In effect, she was able more or less prove her innocence by not being a user. Was her privacy violated by allowing a search to prove her innocence? I don't think so, and I guess she didn't either. So what is your complaint?

Thanks for the comment! My complaint, is that stories like this are the ones the MSM will present the public, but only viral media will present all the countless stories of police abusing their power by planting evidence on those who consent to these searches. To me the situation itself takes the back seat to the choice the MSM makes when giving us stories.

Overall, what was the purpose of this story? Why of all the stories did the media choose this one? I get the feeling they only choose the ones that put police in the best light and the behaviors they want to promote (in this case, consenting to searches).

Thats all i'm saying. Im sure that this isn't something new, just trying to spark a conversation about it.


This story also came out today, and i equally feel there is something more to it than is being given.

Mt Everest Climber Assaulted - News Link

"I did see the permitless chap being ushered down the hill. The Tibetan rope fixers were sent up to get him. I saw them bringing him down the ropes from the North Col to [advanced base camp]. It was disgraceful. They literally kicked him down the ropes. It was a disgusting example of a pack of bullies egging each other on and literally beating him down the hill. It was absolutely unnecessary as he was offering no resistance and was scared out of his mind. The Tibetans should, and could, have just escorted him down the hill and let the authorities deal with him."

Tibetans live inside China (as it is now) and thus, on a political, nationality or legal stand point, they are "Chinese" in this situation.

To make the distinction, without the story making mention of the fact that Tibet aims to gain independence, makes me wonder if this story is simply designed to have people view Tibetans as savage in their nature when dealing with Chinese climbers. Even if there is a reason for their distain of Chinese, this story doesn’t mention the reasons. It only subtly mentions these Tibetans might have had an authority to remove the climber in the first place.

Maybe i'm wrong, but these stories just don't feel right, They feel close to the truth with some sort of agenda behind them that manifests itself is how it is written. What is omitted, and what is emphasized.

Yeah from what I've been watching on Netflix (lots of documentaries while I do other things) a lot of the times we barely hear the full story or it's spun to convey a different meaning to entice people into believing the action. It's sad what we think news has come to but I suppose it is what it is and once you look at it from the perspective of our news agencies in particular as a whole it's something that has been done a lot in the past. Frankly I haven't read anything Main stream in a while and have resorted to just documentaries on events in the past to get a clear picture and sometimes come here for some reading.

In terms of the story yeah it seems to give hints that all will be well if you have nothing to hide that old adage that people love to say. Though it's hard to say that story seems to be touching on two aspects for me. While all cops are certainly not bad this would put almost everyone in the spot light as being bad if that were the case something to which MSM does not wish to do ( at times ). On the other hand if we go back to cases in which cops do plant something it would certainly give rise to bad cops. I don't know it just seems kind of screwy to me and not 100% sure on what to make of it all just yet. In fact my post itself seems disjointed from looking back and thinking over it but at this point it's all I can think to say at least in terms to the cop one.

reply to post by MystiqueAgent


Thanks for the comment.

Yeah i def agree this isn't anything new. It's just funny that when you go in with the right perspective, watching or reading news becomes a whole new event. I'll sit with people who aren't "awake" enough to know whats really going on around them while they watch the news, and they always take the news at face value, repeating it as fact. Never once do they question the news sources, they won't even consider it's a possibility that the MSM can be lying. Even the suggestion that the MSM can lie seems to annoy them. They say

'Someone would say something, they couldn't get away with it"

I always reply "Someone is saying something!!! Me right now!!"

If the MSM is the only source of info for most people, then how exactly would anyone hear about incidents of them lying or having misconduct? The MSM won't point out their own mistakes or devious intents. And these sheeple won't persue independent sources of information. Catch 22?


So many blind people out there

reply to post by tpsreporter


Yeah it's a shame that the MSM is the main source and for them to find a different news agency to follow it's just a matter of moving from CNN to Fox instead of an independent type of place. I don't know though a lot of people seem to at least be watching the documentary I've watched that told the tale of how MSM twisted various stories to fulfil their own agenda. Of course it's not a large majority but seeing the amount of people that commented and voted on it gives hope that at least some are out their for the truth

I think it's just a matter of time type of deal at this point most people don't really pursue the internet as much (I believe) and so they simply have the television as a main source of news. Probably tired from work or something so flip on the TV and see what's on, a shocking story is presented and they will just flip through the channels to see if the same story is repeated. They probably won't even touch the internet to see other information on the story. Hopefully though those same people will soon push out for more information but will at least will take some things with a grain of salt on the internet and will pursue and not take it at face value as you have said.

reply to post by MystiqueAgent


I used to listen to the same radio station every day. I found the way the programs were presented was enjoyable and at the time, factual. It seemed less spin than most and for the most part they seemed to welcome open dialogue.

But as i got older i started to realize they don't have dialogue at all!!! The first step is the screener, who will simply refuse to let anyone with too radical or sometimes too truthful of a view on the air.

On the of chance they do let you on, the radio host just hits the mute button and talks over you!!

All of the shows i once loved, i slowly began to realize were just platforms for pushing the same agenda year after year. Iraq War 2 was the biggest wake up call. It was repeats of the same things said about the first Gulf War. And no one seemed to realize it.

Between the MSM internet news sites, the MSM radio shows, MSM news channels on tv and the false facts repeated on all MSM reality shows and sitcoms, they have like 95% of all people exposed to their lies.

Once you get that, for a simple sheep, its far easier to just go with the flow, follow everyone else and never have to question. They rest easy, because if they were being lied to, the flock would go the other way. Of course it doesn't work that way, but they seem to take comfort in their ignorance.

But really, i think it boils down to them having the peace of mind of not being responsible for anything. If they get fooled, they are the victim. If they get lied to, they get to blame the liars. They never have to make any choice or have any independent thought.

Ignorance is bliss to them.

reply to post by tpsreporter


Yeah I know what you mean I did the same transition while in college basically everything that I watched or listened to slowly came to a halt as I began to learn more about the world. More so than I learned from High school at least. Though I must say once you lose that flow that everyone else has by following the main stream you pretty much feel like an outcast in some ways. I know I do especially when I go to work and hear people talk about this and that, then when asked on my opinion I either can't give it (because sometimes it's just pointless to talk on the matter) or they get very upset.

Yeah most of the time people do not want to feel as if they owe or are apart of something bad but if it's good they will all jump at the chance to be on the bandwagon. It's like a friend of mine said "We all don't want to be told we did something wrong rather we want to be told something right instead." Basically failure or in a way of telling us something we did bad or something to help us learn from our mistakes seems to not get vocalized at much which is rather sad.