DEVTOME.COM HOSTING COSTS HAVE BEGUN TO EXCEED 115$ MONTHLY. THE ADMINISTRATION IS NO LONGER ABLE TO HANDLE THE COST WITHOUT ASSISTANCE DUE TO THE RISING COST. THIS HAS BEEN OCCURRING FOR ALMOST A YEAR, BUT WE HAVE BEEN HANDLING IT FROM OUR OWN POCKETS. HOWEVER, WITH LITERALLY NO DONATIONS FOR THE PAST 2+ YEARS IT HAS DEPLETED THE BUDGET IN SHORT ORDER WITH THE INCREASE IN ACTIVITY ON THE SITE IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS. OUR CPU USAGE HAS BECOME TOO HIGH TO REMAIN ON A REASONABLE COSTING PLAN THAT WE COULD MAINTAIN. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THE DEVTOME PROJECT AND KEEP THE SITE UP/ALIVE PLEASE DONATE (EVEN IF ITS A SATOSHI) TO OUR DEVCOIN 1M4PCuMXvpWX6LHPkBEf3LJ2z1boZv4EQa OR OUR BTC WALLET 16eqEcqfw4zHUh2znvMcmRzGVwCn7CJLxR TO ALLOW US TO AFFORD THE HOSTING.

THE DEVCOIN AND DEVTOME PROJECTS ARE BOTH VERY IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY. PLEASE CONTRIBUTE TO ITS FURTHER SUCCESS FOR ANOTHER 5 OR MORE YEARS!

Internet Myths Vs The Reality Of TV Network News And Snopes And Wikipedia

It Must Be Real If It's On The News

We are living in a time where masses of people are waking up to discover that the world presented to us by the gatekeepers of alleged reality, through the likes of television network news, as well as websites like Snopes and Wikipedia, is vastly different than what we were programmed to believe.

The difference between actual reality and their versions of reality is shockingly vast. It's so vast, and so shocking, that many people will never be able (or even allow themselves) to see it. Indeed, those people pretty much only believe something if they see it on mainstream news or read it on sites like Snopes or Wikipedia.

Mind you, this is not to say that everything those sources put out is wrong. That's not how disinformation works. You have to reflect a decent percentage of reality in order to get people to trust that everything you publish is the gospel, unbiased truth.1)

Why Don't We Admit To Our Biases?

The way most people tend to think about bias is rather funny. News organizations like to pretend that there is no bias in their reporting. Here's the rather simple, universal truth about bias: We all have biases, individually and as groups.

If there are opposing biases in groups that are strong enough, for long enough, more times than not, the groups will split off. (Think of religious sects, for instance.) If the group is a business, for example, a TV news network, it usually doesn't split. The employees who don't toe the bias line, simply are relieved of their duties.

Wouldn't it be refreshing if news organizations would just come out and admit where their biases are? Most people prefer to get their news from organizations that share their own biases, anyway – which is really quite humorous, considering that most people and most news sources act like they are bias free. (Considering the proclivity of people to be partisan tools, it's rather amazing that most individuals tell themselves that while they identify with one party over all others, they arrive at each one of their specific political opinions, bypassing the natural human proclivity for bias.)

Even though these networks and most of their viewers are in bias denial, everyone understands that Fox News is, indeed, geared toward Republicans, just as MS-NBC News is aimed at Democrats. Laughably, the networks take the position that while their personality driven shows are done by advocates of one (& the same) party, their actual news division is free of any predispositional viewpoints

The game runs deeper, though, because the truth is, at the top, political and media leaders have almost entirely signed their souls over to the globalist agenda. They play up their wedge issues to their members & viewers, like abortion and same gender marriage, all the while working together on policies that give away national sovereignty to international bodies, moving the country steadily toward the dissolution of the Constitution and even the United States, as we know it.

NAU & One World Government Are Scoffed At By The Gatekeepers Of Reality

The first move is to larger supranational groups like the European Union, or the work in progress, North American Union – which, by the way, is what the current southern border stand down by the US border patrol is all about. More than allowing illegal aliens to spill in by the thousands daily, it's actually being carried out by the very patrol guards who are supposed to be keeping them out.

On orders from the White House (which means, on orders from international banksters), they aren't merely letting in teenage drug cartel gang members, people with contagious diseases, and the like; they are feeding them, changing their babies' diapers, and loading them up on buses, taking them wherever they want (as long as the destination remains in the United States.)

After the world is divided into a handful of these hemispheric regional groupings, the plan is to merge all of them into one global body.

The bottom line is, Fox and MS-NBC are playing their viewers, just as the Democrats and Republicans are playing their members. None of the gatekeepers are telling us the truth.

What Are Some Of Your Biases?

One of my biases is towards consumer protection advocates and organizations. For example when the Food Babe warns me that restaurants are putting material in their food that industry uses to make yoga mats, I am prone to believe her, without doing confirmation research. Whereas, if McDonalds were to state that they do not put any non meat substances into their products, I would tend to be skeptical, and be prone to research that statement.

Someone who is biased toward industry, and against consumer watch dogs, whom they perceive as threatening the ability of corporations to enjoy unfettered monetary gain, is likely to, either not believe the Food Babe when she talks about yoga mat ingredients being in the food supply, or to simply rationalize that she's making mountains out of mole hills.

At Least They Are Consistent

The M.O. (modus operandi aka method of operation) of Snopes and Wikipedia, in all likelihood would be – (if they decided to address this subject) to not deny the fact that the industrial ingredient is in a lot of processed food. They would take the mountain out of mole hill tactic, stating that it's such a small amount, it doesn't hurt.

There is no doubt that those websites (among others) as well as mainstream news, are all about protecting the status quo. I found myself in a Facebook discussion yesterday with someone who was saying that it's an Internet myth that a lot of beef products are not what used to be passed as meat decades ago, and that they have dangerous amounts of things that should, in no way, be in them (like bleach and ammonia.)

He was adamant that since Snopes says it's not true, then it's simply not true. He cites the reports they link as evidence that they only publish the truth. He couldn't accept that they have an unquestionable track record of blind support to the powers that be. It didn't seem to dawn on him that there were other websites with reports and experts who refuted the Snopes reports and experts, and that he might actually have to look at both sides to try to find the truth. I doubt that he would ask investigative questions like, who benefits, and what is the motivation.

The NutraSweet Test

If anyone wants to know if Snopes is biased toward the powers that be, all they would need to do is to start reading about (and watching documentaries on) aspartame, also known as NutraSweet. Then they can read apologists for aspartame, like Snopes, and make their own minds up. However, I think this guy would start at Snopes, and then merely refuse to give any credence whatsoever to the countless authorities, studies and incontrovertible evidence that proclaim aspartame should never have been allowed in our food supply and needs to be pulled immediately.

The Facebook guy told me to prove that I'm correct, right then and there, and if I didn't, that just showed I'm one of those people who believes every myth that is publicized on the Web. I don't know how to communicate to people of that persuasion. I actually wrote a long reply, but I stopped myself from posting it, because I knew that it wouldn't make a fat rat's ass worth of difference.

You Can't Budge A Truly Closed Mind

I could have taken several 16 hour days of research and then a few more days, writing, compiling and editing it all while publishing it in a PDF, showing beyond the shadow of any a doubt to any individual with an open mind, that Snopes categorically sides against any alternative information that might infringe upon the domain of the status quo.

Like Wikipedia, they simply don't play fair. They ignore evidence altogether, and when they don't ignore some of it, they present it incorrectly, by creating classic straw men arguments, that they knock down, without allowing for the possibility that they might be wrong. It's bad enough with Snopes, but even worse with Wikipedia, because Wikipedia is supposed to be available to everyone to contribute to.

So, while that guy on Facebook told me to prove my point to him, the truth is, he was not of the mind set that would have allowed me to prove anything to him. In fact, I could have literally taken years to publish a book on my premise, and it wouldn't have budged him from his need to believe that reality is in no way, one iota different, than his belief system about reality.

An Alex Jones Pearl Of Wisdom

Alex Jones talks about how these days two things are happening simultaneously. Masses of people are, indeed, waking up and starting to see how their paradigm is hopelessly faulty, but at the same time, others are doubling down, becoming more closed minded than ever, willing to believe the most obvious lies that come from official status quo sources.

I agree. I think large numbers of people are now in a state of mind where they swallow, hook, line and sinker, stories that they would have scoffed at decades ago. I think part of that is because they subconsciously feel the potential dread of the situation and desperately are trying to avoid it.

War Is Peace - And Raising The Debt Ceiling Doesn't Raise The Debt You Dummy

I also think it's because of various types of mind control we have all been assaulted with over the years. Maybe 20 years ago, the masses wouldn't be so susceptible to believing a president who says that raising the debt ceiling doesn't raise the debt, but instead tells Congress that they have to pay the bills. Now though, probably most Democrats believe him, (just as most Republicans would believe an equally absurd notion from a Republican president.)

These days, the divide and conquer strategy has worked so well, that large numbers of people will put their brains on hold, and simply accept whatever their leader tells them, How else can we explain the fact that long time liberals, so called progressives have not banded together to call for the impeachment of a president who has out Republican'd the Republicans?

Outbushing The Bush Meister

Obama has outbushed Bush, and yet the Democrats are clueless; not just the minions, but many talk radio personalities whose minds are incredibly sharp, some like Thom Hartmann, who I'm sure must be a genius, is content to just be glad a Democrat is in office, regardless of what the Democrat does.

Thanks to the likes of Hartmann, we no longer have to wonder how the German people supported Hitler. Humans, including brilliant ones like Mr. Hartmann, pick a tribe and stand behind the leader, no matter what.

I remember feeling embarrassed for Republicans when Bush was president. I thought that, more than anything, just totally exposed how willfully blind and negligent Republicans are to support their party, no matter how foolish or how evil it proved itself to be.

How Could I Have Been So Wrong?

At the time, I was of the mind that Democrats were different. Not all of them, mind you, but I thought if there were ever a Democratic counterpart to Bush, a significant percentage would be extremely vocal against him or her, and would mobilize with Republicans fOR impeachment. Wow, was I wrong!

My embarrassment now is first, that I could be so wrong, and second, I'm embarrassed for anybody who identifies with a political party. They are all partisan tools. It is so obvious that the globalist cabal that is largely in charge of the world, gets control of all political parties at the national level.

People say that if we had several big parties here in the States, that would change. I ask, how so? It's not different in other countries with more than two parties. They pretend to oppose each other, but they play along and push the globalist agenda. No party exposes sensational scandals in other parties, because they are all in on it together.

Look at the pedophile scandal and continuing in England. Where's the outrage among members of Parliament? At the top, the leaders of every party are protecting the pedophiles. Heaven forbid we find out the truth about the royals and their semi elite stooges.

And, by the way, don't think for one minute things are any different in the Unite States. It's just that the news and cover ups broke on that side of the pond first. It's so much more than enticing, say, adolescents not quite of age, with money and rewards, while being nice to them – which could still have devastating effects on said teens.

Tragically,it often involves tiny children, forced rape, ending in death by torture. It's as dark as it gets. I know this information puts you up against your cognitive dissonance, but if the truth matters to you, do a search on ELITE PEDOPHILE RINGS and take a few hours to digest several sites and videos. How can we ever stop something, if we refuse to admit it's happening?

How To Get Closer To The Truth

If you want to know the truth, you don't have to stop going to Snopes, Wikipedia and TV news, but you have to go to other sources and start comparing the differences between their versions of reality. Then you have to follow it up by opening your mind and researching things for yourself.

I keep thinking about the guy on Facebook who told me I had to prove my point to him, as if I had the ability to impart the information of hundreds of physical books, and untold millions of words online, and who knows how many hours of documentaries. If he ever wants the to know the truth (which I have my doubts will happen in this lifetime for him), he will need to prove it to himself by doing his own open minded investigation.

By The Way

No one is saying that every alternative info report online is true. Obviously there is a ton of nonsense. The greater point though, is that mainstream media is controlled by the status quo. Therefore, they are going to protect the paradigm they have foisted upon us. The Internet though, is not under their control, so that is why you can get the truth online that just isn't available on your Tee-v.

News | Internet | Television | Political Philosophy

1) Although, on the other hand, when it comes to network TV news, I'm not so sure about that. The spin they put on things, combined with the outright lies, seems to usually leave little room for much truth at all.

QR Code
QR Code internet_myths_vs_the_reality_of_tv_network_news_and_snopes_and_wikipedia (generated for current page)
 

Advertise with Anonymous Ads