Phillip, why do you have such a stunning antipathy to ideas? Particularly, ideas which challenge a perspective about the world which you seem to think is important enough to attempt to smear a perfectly reasonable journalist with your online commentary?
What’s wrong with discussing how threads of information from various media outlets appear to weave together or cancel each other out to form a more nuanced picture of reality?
Is it possible that someone inside the DNC could be capable of trying to silence one of its own data analysts?
We certainly don’t have the full picture yet — but most of the media does not appear to be interested in helping anyone understand it.
So, in the meantime, is it somehow impossible to conceive that perhaps the CIA might have a vested interested in the way that power balances are maintained, and in the era of the Internet and instantaneous information sharing (like Wikileaks is capable of with greater and greater effectiveness), those power balances are being eroded? Is it so impossible for you to consider whom might benefit from a stable status quo of oligarchical power propped up by an unaccountable intelligence agency in this country?
No one is asking you to admit that you are wrong about anything. All we are suggesting is that you consider being a little bit more suspicious and critical of what you’ve been told and of the reading material available from establishment media sources.
“The best propaganda is that which, as it were, works invisibly, penetrates the whole of life without the public having any knowledge of the propagandistic initiative.”