Replies

"...This is all just more of the sort of noise that passes for reporting and distracts attention from the fact that 95% of what they're calling News about this is just repeating press releases and looking for the usual sad, bloody, photos. Turn on the media machine, hit the right hot buttons, and all the people who claim to not trust the media will hop on the bandwagon.

If the US and EU media are all going nuts about something and they all agree, it's to sell something critical to their agenda or to keep something critical to their agenda off the front page, not to get the facts out. The more they quote experts the more likely it is they're quoting experts that are in their pocket the way they trot out "Climate Scientists..."

I cannot agree with those two paragraphs more. I've been constantly hammering Freepers on the issue of not believe the media, but still take what they are saying as gospel at the same time.

Being in media, I've just watched the media coverage of this and noticed some thing out of normal. One example is lack of censorship of the bloody gruesome photos that would normally accompany such stories. Another is a question that no one apparently wants to ask: "Why would someone WANT to shoot down a civilian airliner full of passengers?"

Or (adjusting tin foil hat for a comfortable fit): Who benefits?

Certainly not the Russians or their proxy agents in Ukraine. But in the PR war, it certainly helps Ukraine, who despite recently singing a deal with the EU was losing, and still has to kiss the Russian ring to get any oil from them (not to mention, pay the money they owe).

It also helps the US by knocking the Southern Invasion off the front page (a little). Not to worry as the part-time occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave will make it all about him .

While I'm at it: did anyone get an explanation on why Reuters originally reported 29 Americans on the manifest? It's just me, but if I ran one of the biggest Euro media services, some heads would roll over getting something like that wrong. I will go this far to say from all reports I have seen in the media and comments from the EXPERTS:

Someone KNEW they were tracking, targeting, and eventually shooting at a plane flying in civilian airspace. Why?
It seems everyone immediately knew the plane was shot down, and within one hour, began describing the weapon that did the dirty deed. Guess our technology has improved since MH370
Russia is now the bad guy(s), shortly after giving at least verbal support of Israel and making major in-roads toward the BRIC (Brazil, Russian, India, China) international financial network/bank that won't do much except to remove the dollar as the default currently of the globe
Russia seems to be one of the few countries on earth openly supporting Christianity and rejecting sodomy. (I can see the flames coming at me already) And we all know that alone makes your suspect in western world these days

Okay, removing the tin foil hat...

At best, we should say this is some kind of an accident. Be we should all be asking the question of can these systems can be operated remotely. If so, who knows where that could lead.

But to summarize, I must plead with my fellow Real Americans once again to NOT consider the likes of the New York Times and Washington Post valid news sources. There is clearly an agenda being pushed here... by someone.

jimjohn - OUT.

“Being in media...”

Based on your own advice to distrust the media, I’m going to dismiss you and your conspiracy theories. Thanks!

No flame here. I believe you have made valid points and asked legitimate questions.

Yeah, be skeptical of anyone not supporting Putin’s media. That’s the ticket.

I've responded by email as an honest and sufficient response is somewhat lengthy. If others here would like to see my response, let me know here and I'll post it here.

Otherwise I'll figure the circus has moved on and serious folks who have shared here as well.

Regards