The Sound of Freedom

[Dogheaded]

not sure what that has to do with Jordan, and how he treats her.

A lot. It goes along with his 'be a monster' thing.

 

[ArmyMatt]

A lot. It goes along with his 'be a monster' thing.

still dunno exactly what you are talking about

 

[FenderTL5]

“Conspiracy” doesn’t mean “falsehood”. It refers to people, generally of wealth and power, seeking to expand that wealth and power at the expense of the common people. The whole question of any claim of conspiracy, or as is commonly said, “conspiracy theory”, is whether the claim is true or false. If true, then it is not a theory, but a fact. If false, it is not a theory, but a lie. That’s why I never use the modrn term, which is meant to cast claims of conspiracy as ipso facto insane, without further serious examination.

agree

As to why the media ignore such stories, I have drawn a conclusion. It is that the media have been purchased by the people conducting these conspiracies. The ultimate owners, hidden behind parent company after parent company in a complex web of deceit, have effectively purchased all of the traditional, “legacy” media and enough of the politicians that they need to have controlling stakes in the various major countries. that is why we need to revoke the licenses of the media, completely replace our governments, with solid term limits for everybody. Professional politicians have become professional receivers of bribes from lobbyists who work for these plutocrats, a word which means people who rule by their vast wealth. The politicians now represent them, and not their constituents. That is why elections have become so futile and don’t result in change that benefits ordinary people,

agree

and why leftist woke ideology has been imposed everywhere, from school boards to state officials, top-down, against the wishes of the grass roots.

it's not that one sided.
It wasn't leftist "woke" ideology that deregulated the media, facilitating the scenario you described earlier, allowing conglomerates to control media. It began in the early 80s with Friedman'esque, neo-liberals in the Reagan Administration and continued through Bush 1 into the Clinton years. It wasn't the left that eliminated the Fairness Doctrine that allowed media news to become opinionated and colored by personal and/or corporate bias - again that was Reagan.
It was done for the sake of capitalism and the all-mighty dollar. The initial beneficiary was right-wing radio, such as Rush Limbaugh. The continued progression has gotten us to where we are today.
I still work part-time in the media.. but i was there in the late 80s, early 90s and saw the changes taking place first hand.
It's certainly as you described, except both political parties have been bought and sold. For every George Soros there are the Koch Brothers and/or ALEC.

 

[rusmeister]

agree

agree


it's not that one sided.
It wasn't leftist "woke" ideology that deregulated the media, facilitating the scenario you described earlier, allowing conglomerates to control media. It began in the early 80s with Friedman'esque, neo-liberals in the Reagan Administration and continued through Bush 1 into the Clinton years. It wasn't the left that eliminated the Fairness Doctrine that allowed media news to become opinionated and colored by personal and/or corporate bias - again that was Reagan.
It was done for the sake of capitalism and the all-mighty dollar. The initial beneficiary was right-wing radio, such as Rush Limbaugh. The continued progression has gotten us to where we are today.
I still work part-time in the media.. but i was there in the late 80s, early 90s and saw the changes taking place first hand.
It's certainly as you described, except both political parties have been bought and sold. For every George Soros there are the Koch Brothers and/or ALEC.

View attachment 333892

No argument on capitalism and the capitalists. It amazes me how many people think there are only two economic alternatives, and how few realize it is possible to think both socialism and capitalism bad.
So if I were to revise my oversimplication, I would say that wealthy capitalists, who then were also often formally Republicans, bought the media up and then began imposing the Leftist anarchy mode - by a uniparty that was ostensibly two opposing parties; thus the RINOs and neocons being at one with the Democrats, once ostensibly the anti-war populist party, which morphed into the party of war and the elites, and thus the opposition and betrayal within the Republican side of Trump, who represented a shift of the party back toward populism and against elitism, which is why the media turned against Trump en masse, and even Fox and Newsmax have been shown to be only sham opposition.

 

[Dorothea]

No argument on capitalism and the capitalists. It amazes me how many people think there are only two economic alternatives, and how few realize it is possible to think both socialism and capitalism bad.
So if I were to revise my oversimplication, I would say that wealthy capitalists, who then were also often formally Republicans, bought the media up and then began imposing the Leftist anarchy mode - by a uniparty that was ostensibly two opposing parties; thus the RINOs and neocons being at one with the Democrats, once ostensibly the anti-war populist party, which morphed into the party of war and the elites, and thus the opposition and betrayal within the Republican side of Trump, who represented a shift of the party back toward populism and against elitism, which is why the media turned against Trump en masse, and even Fox and Newsmax have been shown to be only sham opposition.

That's because Fox is no different than the other MSM state-run media.

 

[FenderTL5]

That's because Fox is no different than the other MSM state-run media.

Correct.
Modern media will run/publish anything if they perceive it will make money. It doesn't matter which "wing" they favor.

 

[FenderTL5]

No argument on capitalism and the capitalists. It amazes me how many people think there are only two economic alternatives, and how few realize it is possible to think both socialism and capitalism bad.

Agree.
Capitalism needs guard rails.

So if I were to revise my oversimplication, I would say that wealthy capitalists, who then were also often formally Republicans, bought the media up and then began imposing the Leftist anarchy mode - by a uniparty that was ostensibly two opposing parties; thus the RINOs and neocons being at one with the Democrats, once ostensibly the anti-war populist party, which morphed into the party of war and the elites, and thus the opposition and betrayal within the Republican side of Trump, who represented a shift of the party back toward populism and against elitism, which is why the media turned against Trump en masse, and even Fox and Newsmax have been shown to be only sham opposition.

No argument from me other than, I'm no apologist for Trump. He's a dishonest, immoral, unethical elitist who has a tortured relationship with truth. He is exactly what he perports to oppose. I've disliked him since I read his book in the late 80s/early 90s.

There is very little integrity in US politics, on either side of the aisle.

Back to the topic.
I haven't seen the movie and probably won't. Those kids were exploited once, I don't want to be party of exploiting them again for entertainment.

That said, I see very few movies.
The last movie I saw in a theatre was 'Paul, Apostle of Christ' which had Caviezel in it as well.

 

[rusmeister]

Capitalism needs guard rails.



Back to the topic.
I haven't seen the movie and probably won't. Those kids were exploited once, I don't want to be party of exploiting them again for entertainment.

A Chestertonian will disagree on capitalism. If it is fundamentally flawed it doesn’t need guard rails. It needs to be ended in favor of distributism/localism.

On entertainment: I think most people see this movie, not as titillating entertainment, but as a true story that edifies and calls to move to put an end to the power of those who exploit children. Thus, it is not “entertainment” in the sense you are thinking of. You might as well say that “Schindler’s List” is exploitation of the Jewish victims of the Holocaust, when in reality it is a scathing reminder to remember what depths of evil people actually came to, so that we might fear its repetition and resist the ideas that made it possible.