Journalism is dead, and it’s about time

This is the last election that will ever feature the lapdog media in any significant role. By next election online media will have entirely taken over.

The only reason the lapdog media still have any audience at all is that there are older people who have not adapted to the death of the journalist as a relevant tradesperson in our society.

It’s the equivalent of the 1910s – there are still horses and carts, but they’re on the way out, permanently.

Unlike the end of the age of the horse, the end of the age of the journalist is being hurried along by their own venality, corruption and incompetence. It’s the information age equivalent of the end of the corrupt pardoners and priests in the middle ages.

The wretched journalists will of course be the last ones to admit it.

Then we have the phenomenon where monolithic social media such as twitter and facebook make no attempt to disguise the fact that they simply want to replace the lapdog media and become the new slave owners. Unfortunately for them in times of revolution entire concepts are revised or thrown out. It isn’t simply a case of swapping bosses.

Of course, there are significant numbers of people who are lazy, moronic or badly educated -or all three. They will form the natural slave class to sustain control systems as they always have. But against that is the fact that “journalism” is dead. There is simply no need for propaganda organs when people can communicate directly.

The next phase of the attempt by the would-be elites to control everyone else will require paid bloggers, shills and trolls. In fact it has already become standard for such things to be done. Experiments in this regard have been carried out for decades, using fringe groups such as UFOlogy.

nothing-to-see-here

 

 

Oannes and Ouranos

It comes as a surprise when one first discovers that the Ancient Greeks quite often “reasoned out” their early mythology from depictions in the abandoned ruins of older and in some cases more advanced peoples.

Ouranos is one of the “primordial” Greek “gods” and the name is “translated” as Father Sky, logical counterpart to Mother Earth.

When one sees that in Ancient Egyp it was MOTHER Sky and FATHER EARTH, one also sees that such sexual designations are not inevitable. And one should also be suspicious of “translations” that make identifications inevitable.

All of which is by way of introcuction to the thought bubble – is ancient OANNES the origin of less ancient OURANOUS? The words are similar, and as much as anti-diffusionists, who in many cases are agenda driven anti-rationalists, oppose any logical thinking in relation to language, it is harder to argue that the same “middle east” which gave wholesale of its original pre-Aryan and Aryan culture to the Greeks and China would somehow omit Oannes.

Ouranos mates with Mother Earth. If we accept the basic syllogism for the purpose of argument, the element of earth is visited by another element. There are only three possibilities – air, fire or water.

In the case of Oannes, he is a “fish with human feet” or amphibian, depicted in a very intriguing way as a bearded human head emerging from a fish – suggestive of aquatic apes and bigfoot sightings such as the of the Big Muddy River in America.

Ouranos is identified with the sky in the usual Greek way of groupings based on an initial flawed premise tested to destruction. In the same manner that Akhnaten and Egyptian Thebes, the monotheism heresy and his children and incestuous relationships becomes Oedipus, the Seven Against Thebes and so on for the Hellenic world when in fact the whole thing is momentous Egyptian history, so too having Zeus (“Sky”) as ruler of the gods means “logically” his father-god and grandfather-god must too be sky rulers. But there is no reason why that would be true. Abandon that point and leave the relationships in place and something more logical emerges.

Oannes the civilizer “married” Mother Earth through the simple precedent of emerging from the ocean to dry land, there to teach the primitives of the foreshore pre-existing knowledge he and his race already held.

Matching Oannes with Ouranos opens some interesting doors.

The Kubrick Moon Landing Fraud – a real fake covering up fake reality.

Interestingly, even several astronauts have said that some of the pictures are “fake” or as they put it “staged” “if the original footage they* got wasn’t good enough or something went wrong technically”.

It’s a big leap from fake footage to saying the whole thing never happened, but allowing the lapdog media to control information, and then catching them lying about everything, encourages first healthy skepticism of EVERYTHING one is told, but then potentially not so healthy magical thinking.

But as the then-head of CIA said, when people are no longer certain of anything, we will have won.

*”they?” don’t they mean “we”? or is it as some believe the case that the astronauts held out as the moon explorers were the front men for still-secret military astronauts? There is definitely a story here.

#migrantfraud #lapdogmedialies Gell-Mann Amnesia : the lapdog media are lying scum

“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.

That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I’d point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn’t. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.”

Michael Crichton