Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank caught red-handed feigning interest in Stephen Bassett’s panel discussion on UFOs at the National Press Club in 2007 [CREDIT: Paradigm Research Group] In 2017, Pulitzer Prize-winning ex-New York Times reporter Alex S. Jones wrote an essay about how democracy was better off because of intense but constructive competition between his former employer and The Washington Post. He traced their interlocking trajectories to the Pentagon Papers/Watergate fireworks of the early 1970s, when both camps staked out each other’s sites to grab and devour the opposition’s first-run copies.
As their coverage of the scamdemic has shown even more clearly, the WaPo and NYTimes and the rest of the MSM, are now just "The Ministry of Truth" as foretold by George Orwell in "1984".
There are no "Journalists" employed there, just propagandists.
Supposedly, a free press acts as one of the checks and balances in a democracy, but that's more of an ideal than a reality. Investigative journalists rely on being given stories, before they spring into action. Kean was fed the AATIP story, and even Ross Coulthart was pushed by some Aussie military pilots to look into UAP.
Any investigative journos following up on 'Seven', or the very significant (circumstantial) evidence indicating that Covid was created at Wuhan by U.S. funded research into gain-of-function? What happened with TWA800?
Despite the claim that governments can't keep secrets, how many truths, large and small, still remain unknown to the masses?
Psychology seems to determine whether an individual is going to follow the data. It's a simple decision: If the data are abnormal, am I going to attempt to find out why? (Or do I dismiss the evidence as irrelevant?)
Plus there are concerns as to how I'll be perceived when presenting my information. Is the effort worth the aggro? Is it potentially going to make me look foolish? Is it dangerous?
There's also a term 'the need for cognition'. When you look at individuals like James McDonald and Hynek and their work, how does that stack against Menzel and Klass? Which side has the apparently greater level of curiosity and skills?
As far as open questions go, the field of ufology is a target-rich-environment. Plenty to go around for everyone who's interested.
Whichever metaphor one chooses - 'swimming against the tide,' 'kicking against the pricks,' etc. - the skepti-bunkers' antipathetic arguments are increasingly becoming irrelevant, almost hysterical. According to the latest Gallup survey the number of citizens who think "some UFOs have been alien spacecraft visiting Earth from other planets or galaxies" has risen eight percentage points during the past two years, to 41 percent. In a July survey commissioned by The Hill, 61 percent of respondents said they think the gov. is withholding information about the true nature of UFO/UAP.
Despite the ongoing geopolitical crises, you can bet congressional staffers are watching those numbers.
Better swim and kick harder, dudes. The "mania" is swelling.
As their coverage of the scamdemic has shown even more clearly, the WaPo and NYTimes and the rest of the MSM, are now just "The Ministry of Truth" as foretold by George Orwell in "1984".
There are no "Journalists" employed there, just propagandists.
Supposedly, a free press acts as one of the checks and balances in a democracy, but that's more of an ideal than a reality. Investigative journalists rely on being given stories, before they spring into action. Kean was fed the AATIP story, and even Ross Coulthart was pushed by some Aussie military pilots to look into UAP.
Any investigative journos following up on 'Seven', or the very significant (circumstantial) evidence indicating that Covid was created at Wuhan by U.S. funded research into gain-of-function? What happened with TWA800?
Despite the claim that governments can't keep secrets, how many truths, large and small, still remain unknown to the masses?
Psychology seems to determine whether an individual is going to follow the data. It's a simple decision: If the data are abnormal, am I going to attempt to find out why? (Or do I dismiss the evidence as irrelevant?)
Plus there are concerns as to how I'll be perceived when presenting my information. Is the effort worth the aggro? Is it potentially going to make me look foolish? Is it dangerous?
There's also a term 'the need for cognition'. When you look at individuals like James McDonald and Hynek and their work, how does that stack against Menzel and Klass? Which side has the apparently greater level of curiosity and skills?
As far as open questions go, the field of ufology is a target-rich-environment. Plenty to go around for everyone who's interested.
Whichever metaphor one chooses - 'swimming against the tide,' 'kicking against the pricks,' etc. - the skepti-bunkers' antipathetic arguments are increasingly becoming irrelevant, almost hysterical. According to the latest Gallup survey the number of citizens who think "some UFOs have been alien spacecraft visiting Earth from other planets or galaxies" has risen eight percentage points during the past two years, to 41 percent. In a July survey commissioned by The Hill, 61 percent of respondents said they think the gov. is withholding information about the true nature of UFO/UAP.
Despite the ongoing geopolitical crises, you can bet congressional staffers are watching those numbers.
Better swim and kick harder, dudes. The "mania" is swelling.
Billy, doesn't look like you're intending to read Achenbach's NYT's best seller "Captured by Aliens"... oops I mean WAPO best seller
Ah... the italicized counterpoints.
For the last seven minutes (I'm a slow reader),
I felt like I was elbow to elbow with Billy at The Pineda Inn.
Man, that was a tasty beer.
Thanks for sharing Billy.