The Government’s War on Fake News is a War on You

[Paranormalis]

They are laying it on pretty thick. In the wake of Donald Trump’s unlikely Presidential victory, the opposing party is pulling out all the stops to try to discredit his election win and explain it away. Now, Common Sense Conspiracy is not a political site, and we have frequently explained our one-party two-party system theory about the American government. However, in a case like this, it’s important for our readers to realize that while it looks like partisan politics playing out in a high stakes game, the loser and target is always you and I. This situation is no exception.

The new battle cry against fake news seems like a turning point. We all see the conservative and liberal versions of extremist news sources on our social media feeds and in our email. It’s true that both sides are “liberal” with the facts, and in many cases, it is just spreading incorrect propaganda to forward an agenda. However, when President Obama and company say they are going after “fake news” that is not what they mean. Fake news to them is anything that directly takes on their narrative. Fake news, according to the likes of Obama and Hillary Clinton, would be sites like this one. Any site that doesn’t go along with their absurd official story and tries to inject facts into the equation will qualify as fake news in a heartbeat.

That’s what is so sinister about what they are doing here. It’s calculated. It may seem like it’s about Trump, or just sour grapes from sore losers of a hotly contested election. But it’s just the beginning. They will start by targeting the extreme news sources we referenced earlier, but soon, they will expand it out to include sites like this and any other site out there that is presenting a fact-based approach to their disinformation campaigns.

You have to look at what the other hand is doing. It’s like a sleight-of-hand trick they are playing right in your face. They make you think one thing, and it is a reasonable one that makes a lot of sense. Meanwhile, the other hand is up to something much more sinister. The only thing you can always count on in their schemes is that the loser is always going to be you.

Fake news is bad. But the biggest proponent of fake news in America is the mainstream media. That alone should prove that their intentions are less than honorable.

Source: Common Sense Conspiracy

 

[HDRKID]

Back in the 60's we have the 2001 movie. It was a future we can envision.Here we are 16 years after 2001 and there are still no bases on our moon. In fact, we do not go... to the moon that is. Scientists claim it is too expensive. Also, back in the 60's we had the Concorde jet that could go from New York to Paris five hours - it was supersonic. Teachers in the 60's said that in the 80's we would have hypersonic jets that could go from NYC to Tokyo in one hour, but there are none. Funny, we don't even have the Concorde any more. Again, they claim it is too expensive because of rising gas price. Actually, I paid $1.79 a gallon for gas a few days ago. Jets don't even use gas. Kerosene is their fuel, but that is just one more excuse.

OK, so my belief is that we have suppression of technology by our gov. 2017 should be a time of flying cars or men on mars. Instead, we have a politically correct police state that is always talking about hate speech and racism. Sadly, the world of the 2001 movie is no more.

 

[Classicalfan626]

@HDRKID - We might already have the technology, but the government has a monopoly over what is really known. That technology is kept in the hands of a few.

That being said, I think the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and added taxes played major roles in ruining everything! Communist bastards...

 

[Khaos]

Scientists claim it is too expensive

Its easier to send a lander, rover or probe, because if that malfunctions out there, there is no major loss. If you send a group of humans out there, and they get stranded, with no way to return home, you are looking at a loss of life, and with loss of life, you have family and relatives of the dead who are going to go sue happy on whatever space agency sent those people up there.

So sending robots is more beneficial than sending humans and more cost effective. Because if a robot malfunctions and is stranded, nobody is going to sue the space agency for it. Why would they?

Plus you have to look at many other things. Oxygen supplies, food supplies, fuel supplies, moon lander, moon rover, etc.

A robot doesn't need to eat, nor does it need to breathe.

Though the CT in me says we found something there and we don't want the rest of the world to know about it...