But even if they didn't, surely news organizations would co-operate for a noble cause, yes?
> No, if they really cared they would ban or strictly regulate the use of such chemicals.
Sure, and if they really cared, they could do that even despite the TTIP, or they could reject or re-negotiate the TTIP. There's no way around that, regardless of whether you trust that governments are operating with our best interests at heart.
> But even if they didn't, surely news organizations would co-operate for a noble cause, yes?
As privately run corporations, news organizations go where the money is and I trust them even less than I trust the government. The number of ignoble causes they have cooperated on in the recent past leaves them with a very large credibility gap in my mind.
And while the government is not perfect, at least I live in a country where lobbying (aka bribery) is no where near as institutionalised and prevalent as you see in the U.S.
So while my government might not always have my best interests at heart, they are definitely more concerned and more trustworthy than a news organisation.
He didn't have a point. He just signaled that he can't think independently.
The video is a summary of what we were told happened, through the mainstream media. The story is absurd, which means it's not actually true! That, in turn, means that there was, in fact, a conspiracy!
Here's a few videos of an invisible plane hitting a building, which then collapses seemingly on its own: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWorDrTC0Qg .. but it wasn't on its own, of course, because an invisible plane hit it!
Feel free to start thinking for yourself any time now.
For the record, the video summarizes what we were told happened, through the media.
I shouldn't need to connect the dots for you, and you shouldn't dismiss me as some crackpot lunatic (even though you've been programmed to). Try independent thinking some time. It's pretty cool.
Alright, but if governments work for the people, as we're told, then they'd also erm.. "regulate" news organizations and make them actually serve the public. You know full well they could, if they wanted to.
That would include warning us of cancer-causing shit that we come into contact with all the damn time.
Strangely enough, they don't. What does that tell us?
Well yeah, they largely do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98
But even if they didn't, surely news organizations would co-operate for a noble cause, yes?
> No, if they really cared they would ban or strictly regulate the use of such chemicals.
Sure, and if they really cared, they could do that even despite the TTIP, or they could reject or re-negotiate the TTIP. There's no way around that, regardless of whether you trust that governments are operating with our best interests at heart.