1 minute ago, Hullian111 said:

The admins made a post about it. I would link, but I'm out right now, so I can't.

Alright, hit me when you can. Im really curious.

5 hours ago, S0berDrunk said:

Alright, hit me when you can. Im really curious.

Here you go. 

Seriously, what happened, Australia? First you ban supercars, then you go all social justice, and now you're condemning LCPDFR? Australia is starting to grow out of it's stereotype, people.

4 hours ago, Hullian111 said:

Here you go. 

Seriously, what happened, Australia? First you ban supercars, then you go all social justice, and now you're condemning LCPDFR? Australia is starting to grow out of it's stereotype, people.

 

It's all good in the hood my friend, it's called "progress". Godspeed to them!

19 hours ago, Hullian111 said:

Here you go. 

Seriously, what happened, Australia? First you ban supercars, then you go all social justice, and now you're condemning LCPDFR? Australia is starting to grow out of it's stereotype, people.

Yeah right.. They have done so much research that they couldnt even figure out that its a pro law enforcement mod. Its an insane and disrespectful news outlet, actual police officers play it for crying out loud.. 

If you go to infowars/prisonplanet for news, you obviously lack the proper perspective to determine what is and is not a credible news source.

6 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

If you go to infowars/prisonplanet for news, you obviously lack the proper perspective to determine what is and is not a credible news source.

I watch my countries news and I watch Paul Watson. Paul is the only one with info wars who makes sense. 

3 minutes ago, S0berDrunk said:

I watch my countries news and I watch Paul Watson. Paul is the only one with info wars who makes sense. 

The thing about Paul Watson is that he is MASTERFUL at structuring and presenting an argument, but in terms of the facts, he is very rarely accurate.

 

I'm also fairly certain Paul Watson is a producer for infowars.

Edited March 6, 20179 yr by Riley24

4 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

The thing about Paul Watson is that he is MASTERFUL at structuring and presenting an argument, but in terms of the facts, he is very rarely accurate.

 

I'm also fairly certain Paul Watson is a producer for infowars.

I can see that in some ways he might. I guess you have to find reason between the mainstream media and conservative news outlets.

5 hours ago, Riley24 said:

If you go to infowars/prisonplanet for news, you obviously lack the proper perspective to determine what is and is not a credible news source.

Meh, depends on the article honestly. I don't read it 99,999/100,000 times (yes, not simplified because this number is more accurate), but I won't say I never have. There are absolutely articles that blow things out of proportion, and almost all are very biased, but to say that they are completely not credible is a hyperbole.

 

They are about as far right as CNN is far left for example. If you don't believe me, go to CNN's political pieces and read them, then compare them to Infowars political pieces (nearly all of them).

 

One of my favorites was "He wants to convince colleges hate speech is cool." 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/02/us/milo-yiannopoulos-ivory-tower/index.html

 

Speaking of which, that was not an opinion piece. It purposely was worded, and put so that it had shown Milo in a negative light (well before his well known recent character assassination).

 

Other than that, CNN along with many other mainstream news outlets (like the Washington Post) push many conspiracy theories. One of the more recent ones was "Goldenshowergate." Speaking of which, that document they pushed, was purposely made (falsely) by a retired british intelligence agent to prove that the mainstream media will pick up and run with completely false conspiracy theories against Trump.

 

Yeah, I have a lot of reason to distrust the mainstream media, especially when they ran so long with the "Russian hacking" as if it happened when I myself have read every single document ever published from the government on the event (only to find that the evidence given was inconclusive at best).

 

3 hours ago, crkinnh said:

Meh, depends on the article honestly. I don't read it 99,999/100,000 times (yes, not simplified because this number is more accurate), but I won't say I never have. There are absolutely articles that blow things out of proportion, and almost all are very biased, but to say that they are completely not credible is a hyperbole.

 

They are about as far right as CNN is far left for example. If you don't believe me, go to CNN's political pieces and read them, then compare them to Infowars political pieces (nearly all of them).

 

One of my favorites was "He wants to convince colleges hate speech is cool." 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/02/us/milo-yiannopoulos-ivory-tower/index.html

 

Speaking of which, that was not an opinion piece. It purposely was worded, and put so that it had shown Milo in a negative light (well before his well known recent character assassination).

 

Other than that, CNN along with many other mainstream news outlets (like the Washington Post) push many conspiracy theories. One of the more recent ones was "Goldenshowergate." Speaking of which, that document they pushed, was purposely made (falsely) by a retired british intelligence agent to prove that the mainstream media will pick up and run with completely false conspiracy theories against Trump.

 

Yeah, I have a lot of reason to distrust the mainstream media, especially when they ran so long with the "Russian hacking" as if it happened when I myself have read every single document ever published from the government on the event (only to find that the evidence given was inconclusive at best).

 

I largely agree with you, but I think you're wrong on one major thing. CNN doesn't have a liberal bias, they have an establishment bias. They adored the Bush administration, and repeated every word they said as fact. CNN had great disdain for Bernie Sanders in their reporting, just as they did for Trump.

In my view, it's the stranglehold that left-leaning controlling interests have on some of the bigger mainstream media outlets (for instance, the BBC is now so PC and left-biased that it's essentially a propaganda station) that reinforces this view of 'yes, this thing happened but we're downplaying it so as to not offend certain groups'. We all know what's happening, but we're not allowed to express these opinions on mainstream sites for a notional fear of offence. Political correctness is almost a tool to keep the media churning out stories that spin the truth to whatever tune the controlling interest likes, and frankly most people are getting wiser to this. Just like when they used to -and in some cases still do- whip up some spin story to demonize one group or another to add to the whole mess.

7 minutes ago, wilfordbrimleysmoustache said:

 (for instance, the BBC is now so PC and left-biased that it's essentially a propaganda station)

'Auntie Beeb', well, I've got some trust in it, yet I'm left-biased.

On our subdivision, Look North, though, in an interview about university censorship of students, our man Peter Levy used the term 'snowflake' to describe (not offensively) students that don't want 'safe spaces'. The woman on the other end got slightly triggered, saying she 'took offense to the term'.

Just a tidbit of truth, not even the media is safe from PC against them.

On 3/6/2017 at 11:20 PM, Riley24 said:

I largely agree with you, but I think you're wrong on one major thing. CNN doesn't have a liberal bias, they have an establishment bias. They adored the Bush administration, and repeated every word they said as fact. CNN had great disdain for Bernie Sanders in their reporting, just as they did for Trump.

Now that you mention it, I think you're right.

Most main stream media outlets are biased and will do anything to get there message out. This is very sad because now you don't know what is real anymore because everyone is to worried about being political correct and getting there agenda through the mass audience. I would recommend sources like Infowars and Mark Dice or even Lou Dobbs on Fox news although these are primarily Republican news sources they give you the facts.

2 hours ago, sirkingnut said:

I would recommend sources like Infowars and Mark Dice or even Lou Dobbs on Fox news although these are primarily Republican news sources they give you the facts.

I'd say be very careful as to what infowars says, PJW isn't bad, but god forbid infowars isn't guilty of the same thing the MSM does. Fox News is also hit or miss like the rest of the MSM, in fact they are the MSM.

Please don't watch infowars. It's a huge piece of stinkin' alt right garbage. If you want a real conservative news source, look into the DailyWire.

Infowars, mostly the Alex Jones Show is fear mongering. PJW is alright most of the time, sometimes he can twist the truth a little but atleast he doesnt fear monger. Alex Jones has been saying WW3 is about to happen the second he came out of the uterus.

On 4/16/2017 at 6:33 PM, crkinnh said:

 

 

Still no sort of rebuttal to your extensive comment on the media portraying the refugees as being a positive addition? 

 

Interesting.

 

2 hours ago, TheDivineHustle said:

Still no sort of rebuttal to your extensive comment on the media portraying the refugees as being a positive addition? 

 

Interesting.

 

I was confused for a second considering how long ago it was, but yeah surprisingly you're right. I'm just as surprised as you are.