#if you agree with Kevin's views on everything except banking | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

apistol13 · 7 years

Text

THE ROYAL RUMBLE HAPPENED

The title basically tells you everything you need to know. I was pumped for this year’s Rumble because it is my favorite pay-per-view every year since I saw John Cena return in 2008 and clean house. Because I am trying to be a writer (whether I am successful or not, you be the judge), here is my review of the Royal Rumble.

Before you blow me up in the comments remember this:

MY OPINION DOESN’T MATTER BECAUSE I LOVE WRESTLING.

Now that that is out of the way, here we go!

Kick Off Show

Before the main show, WWE had a couple matches that I really enjoyed. I thought that the RAW Tag Titles shouldn’t have changed hands because I love me some Sheamus and Cesaro, but hey, they make The Club look like an actual threat. So it’s not all bad, but I already miss the previous tag champs.

Along with that match, the Smackdown women had a six-woman tag match where the faces came out on top. I mean, it happened, that’s about all I can say. I do wish that Smackdown Live had a bigger footprint on the show. I mean there was no Intercontinental match or Smackdown Tag Title match. That isn’t smart even if RAW needs all the help they can get.

Nia Jax also crushed Sasha Banks. Crushed may be a strong word but it was what they were going for. It did fine.

Main Show

The first match was the RAW Women’s championship match and it was pretty good. It had some good moments, especially the Natural Selection on the apron, but it didn’t wow me. It moved the story along with Bailey and Charlotte and it makes it seem like Charlotte needs something extra to beat Bailey. I can’t argue with that. Hopefully Bailey does not win the title on RAW.

The second match was Kevin Owens vs. Roman Reigns with Chris Jericho in a shark cage. This match was so freaking good. I loved every second of this match and Jericho’s constant yelling of “KEVIN!!!” was exactly what I wanted. The extreme gimmick was done well while staying within the PG rating. It was a super clean match that got my blood pumping. AND HOW ABOUT THAT FINISH. I LOVE YOU BRAUN STROWMAN!!!

*Cough* Excuse me. I’m sorry, but Braun Strowman has quickly become a favorite of mine on RAW.

Moral of the story: I really enjoyed the match.

Next came the Cruiserweight Championship match. It was fine. I don’t care about the cruiserweights and neither does WWE. We will see if that changes with Neville’s title reign but when he loses it, I will go back to not caring about the cruiserweights.

The next match was easily match of the night and is an early contender for WWE’s Match of the Year. AJ Styles vs. John Cena delivered in all facets. Cena had to pull out all the stops to get this win including putting Styles in the Figure Four Leg Lock. Yes, THAT Figure Four Leg Lock. With the win he ties Ric Flair for the most world titles in a career.

This match had everything. It had high stakes with tying the record on the line vs AJ Styles’ reputation as “just an indie guy.” It had a reckless pace with neither guy working a rest hold. All of their rest came from selling. It was a beautiful match that does get to be in conversation as just as good a match as Okada vs Omega.

Royal Rumble

The Royal Rumble was good for the most part. It had a lot of action and put over the guys that needed to get put over. Braun was strong, so was Lesner, and Goldberg. Do I agree with who won in the end? Not really, I think Randy Orton didn’t need this win, but Bray Wyatt surely did. Bray suffers from never winning the big match. It would be different if his character was the eternal underdog but he is the exact opposite of that! Because of that major factor, he should get a big win to cement him as that powerful heel.

Now, let’s talk about the WWE giving the proverbial double birds to the WWE Universe. At No. 30, Roman “The WWE Tells Me What To Do and It Makes the Fans Hate Me” Reigns came out.

Every. Single. Fan. Cried.

Except for Lucas. Because he’s a troll.

But why? Why wouldn’t WWE go with someone we haven’t seen that night or at all! Bobby Roode, Samoa Joe, Shinsuke Nakamura, Kurt Angle, the list goes on and on of who could have come out but instead we got Roman Reigns. THEN HE ELIMINATED THE UNDERTAKER.

If WWE wanted to make Roman a face then that was a dumb move. This seems incredibly deliberate though. This seems like WWE knowing how the Universe would react and it’s the start of a Roman heel turn. Gosh I sound like an internet smark, but hey, I believe WWE is smarter than expecting a face pop for Roman when literally nobody wanted it.

Maybe that is where I go wrong. I trust WWE.

#wwe #wwe raw #royal rumble

2 notes · View notes

paullassiterca · 5 years

Text

Why Snopes Gets an 'F'

In the barrage of information you come across daily online, how do you know what’s true and what’s nothing more than hearsay, gossip or all-out lies? Some people use Snopes as their go-to source for online fact-checking, believing it to give the unbiased and credible final word on all those widely-circulated stories.

If you’re relying on Snopes as your arbiter of truth, however, you’re in for a surprise: Snopes engages in massive censorship of natural health and general promotion of industry talking points. What started as a tool to investigate urban legends, hoaxes and folklore has manifested into a self-proclaimed “definitive fact-checking resource” that’s taking on topics like whether or not vaccines can cause autism.

Yet, in their purported fact-checking of a Full Measure report1 by award-winning investigative reporter and former CBS correspondent Sharyl Attkisson,2 Snopes simply spewed propaganda, not real facts, in an attempt to discredit the report and the potential vaccines-autism link. In the end, though, they actually ended up confirming the main point of Attkisson’s report. For this, Attkisson wrote, “Snopes gets an ‘F’ for predictable propaganda in [the] vaccine-autism debate.”

Snopes Attempts to Discredit Investigative Report on Vaccines-Autism Link

youtube

Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, a pediatric neurologist, is a pro-vaccine expert witness the U.S. government used to debunk and turn down autism claims in vaccine court. “Zimmerman was the government’s top expert witness and had testified that vaccines didn’t cause autism.

The debate was declared over,” Attkisson reported. “But now Dr. Zimmerman has provided remarkable new information,” she said in the Full Measure report, adding:3

“He claims that during the vaccine hearings all those years ago, he privately told government lawyers that vaccines can, and did cause autism in some children. That turnabout from the government’s own chief medical expert stood to change everything about the vaccine-autism debate. If the public were to find out …

And he has come forward and explained how he told the United States government vaccines can cause autism in a certain subset of children and [the] United States government, the Department of Justice [DOJ], suppressed his true opinions.”

Zimmerman declined to be interviewed for the report, but referred Attkisson to his sworn affidavit, dated September 7, 2018, in which he stated that, in 2007, he told DOJ lawyers he had “discovered exceptions in which vaccinations could cause autism.

"I explained that in a subset of children … vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation … did cause regressive [brain disease] with features of autism spectrum disorder,” Zimmerman wrote.

This reportedly “panicked” the DOJ, which subsequently fired him, saying his services would no longer be needed, but essentially attempting to silence him. According to Zimmerman, the DOJ then went on to misrepresent his opinion in future cases, making no mention of the exceptions he’d informed them of.

“Meantime, CDC [U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] — which promotes vaccines and monitors vaccine safety — never disclosed that the government’s own one-time medical expert concluded vaccines can cause autism — and to this day public health officials deny that’s the case,” according to the Full Measure report.4

Attkisson’s report also reveals how Congressmen who wanted to investigate the autism-vaccine link were bullied, harassed and threatened. Dan Burton (R-IN), Dr. Dave Weldon (R-FL) and Bill Posey (R-FL) are among 11 current and former members of Congress and staff who told Attkisson they were warned by PhRMA lobbyists to drop the vaccine safety issue.

Snopes Gets an 'F’ for Fact-Checking

In an article that attempts to fact-check Attkisson’s investigation, Snopes calls out many of the claims as false while clearly attempting to “debunk” vaccine-autism claims. However, in a rebuttal, Attkisson explains that Snopes earned a failing grade for its reporting.

“[T]he Snopes article debunks claims that were never made and uses one-sided references as its sources — other propagandists — without disclosing their vaccine industry ties.”5

For starters, Snopes labeled Zimmerman as a supporter of vaccination, as though this was something that Attkisson hid. In contrast, this point was central to Attkisson’s story and a large part of what makes his statements regarding vaccines and autism so noteworthy. Some of the additional egregious tactics Snopes used to try to discredit Attkisson’s report included the following:6

Snopes claimed Attkisson’s reading of Zimmerman’s sworn affidavit was flawed when she “simply quoted from the affidavit”

Snopes states that Zimmerman’s view is “not held by many scientists,” but did not survey several reputable scientists who hold the view

Snopes fails to address what its headline promises: the question of whether the government censored its own expert witness’ opinion

It’s important to note that Snopes also wrote their article without contacting Attkisson, who went on to state that they also listed claims she never made, then declared them to be false, and even were incorrect in one of their own claims, specifically that the existence of a potential link between vaccines, mitochondrial disorder and autism was not news at the time of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services omnibus autism proceedings in 2007.

“In fact, this suspected link was not previously known before the so-called 'omnibus’ groups of vaccine-autism cases litigated a decade ago, and it is not widely known among doctors or the general public today; at least as of recently. That’s why it has proven to be so newsworthy,” Attkisson wrote, adding:7

“Snopes demonstrates reckless disregard for the truth when disparaging my reporting by falsely stating that it contains 'misleading claims’ …

Refuting claims never made in my report and putting out one-sided vaccine propaganda makes one wonder whether Snopes author Alex Kasprak even read or watched the report he attempts to criticize, or just blindly printed the propaganda provided to him by vaccine industry interests.”

Snopes Author Uses Industry Sources for 'Facts’

November 16, 2016, Snopes looked into claims made by Food Babe that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) might have shut down its residue testing of glyphosate due to complaints from Monsanto. “False,” Snopes declared.8 Ironically, the page declared that no corporate influence played a role and “the broad scientific consensus is that [glyphosate] is not a risk.”

Yet, a Twitter exchange clearly showed that the fact-checker for Snopes, Kasprak — the same author who wrote the critical review of Attkisson’s investigation — got his information about glyphosate’s safety from Kevin Folta, Ph.D.9

Folta, a University of Florida professor and a vocal advocate of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), who vehemently denied ever receiving any money from Monsanto, was caught lying about his financial ties to the company in 2015. The most flagrant piece of evidence against Folta shows that not only did he solicit funds from Monsanto, but he did so with intent to hide the financial connection between them.

Ironically, getting back to Attkisson’s case, the Snopes report ended up confirming exactly the point she was trying to make, stating, “Zimmerman, a scientist with serious credentials who was once a government expert on vaccines, believes that narrow circumstances might exist in which the combination of preexisting mitochondrial dysfunction and vaccination could trigger ASD [autism spectrum disorders].”10

“Snopes fabricates claims that were never made, debunks the fabricated claims,” Attkisson wrote, “and then ultimately agrees that the report I produced was accurate.”11

Snopes Founders Embroiled in Controversy

It’s dangerous to rely on any one source or group of individuals as authorities on truth, as it sets up the path for inevitable censorship. Even under the best circumstances, everyone is subject to their own biases, but in the case of Snopes, it was founded on fabrications from the start.

Snopes was created in 1995 by Barbara and David Mikkelson, who posed as “The San Fernardo Valley Folklore Society” in the beginning in order to gain credibility. Such a society does not exist as a legal entity, according to an investigation by the Daily Mail.12

The company soon expanded, but ultimately its founders divorced — amid claims that David Mikkelson embezzled company money for prostitutes and Barbara Mikkelson took millions from their joint bank account to buy property in Las Vegas.

According to Daily Mail, Mikkelson’s new wife, Elyssa Young — a former escort, self-proclaimed “courtesan” and porn actress who ran for Congress in Hawaii as a Libertarian in 2004 — was then employed as a Snopes administrator, even though the company claims to have no political leanings.

In response to the allegations, Forbes published an article weighing whether it was just another case of fake news, but ultimately was astonished by the lack of transparency given by the company’s founder when asked for comment, who stated that he was unable to respond due to a confidentiality clause in his divorce settlement. According to Forbes:13

“This creates a deeply unsettling environment in which when one tries to fact-check the fact-checker, the answer is the equivalent of 'its secret’ …

At the end of the day, it is clear that before we rush to place fact-checking organizations like Snopes in charge of arbitrating what is "truth” … we need to have a lot more understanding of how they function internally and much greater transparency into their work.“

Hardcore Censorship of Alternative Health and Media in Progress

Whether it be the recent flu shot stunt at the Golden Globes or the industry-driven "facts” published by Snopes, it’s clear that industry propaganda and censorship of health and media information that strays from the mainstream is a growing problem.

In a 2017 Gallup/Knight Foundation Survey on Trust, Media and Democracy, 73 percent said they believe the proliferation of “fake news” on the internet is a major problem, and only half feel confident that readers can get to the facts by sorting through bias.14 And the fact is, fake news is a real problem. But it’s important to do your own research before believing even “fact-checked” sources like Snopes.

NewsGuard is another outlet to be wary of. The entity is setting itself up as the self-appointed global arbiter of what information is “trustworthy” — based on nine “credibility and transparency” factors — not only for information viewed on private electronic devices, but also for information accessible in public libraries and schools.

Once you’ve installed the NewsGuard browser plugin on your computer or cellphone, the NewsGuard icon rating will appear on all Google and Bing searches and on articles featured in your social media news feeds.

These icons are meant to influence readers, instructing them to disregard content with cautionary colors and cautions, but I believe the true intent will be to bury this content entirely from search results and social media feeds.

It is very likely Google, Facebook, Twitter and other platforms will use these ratings to lower the visibility of content — making nonconformist views disappear entirely. It’s a concerning prospect, especially since NewsGuard received much of its startup funds from Publicis Groupe, a global communications group whose history of clients includes the drug and tobacco industries.

Now more than ever, it’s important to be aware of what companies may be filtering your news media and how their own agenda may color what you see. In your search for the truth, always follow your own guiding light — not one maintained by Snopes or any other internet watchdog or censorship authority that tries to lead you down their own biased path.

from Articles http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/02/05/snopes-fact-check-gets-failing-grade.aspx source https://niapurenaturecom.tumblr.com/post/182572710601

0 notes

jerrytackettca · 5 years

Text

Why Snopes Gets an 'F'

In the barrage of information you come across daily online, how do you know what's true and what's nothing more than hearsay, gossip or all-out lies? Some people use Snopes as their go-to source for online fact-checking, believing it to give the unbiased and credible final word on all those widely-circulated stories.

If you're relying on Snopes as your arbiter of truth, however, you're in for a surprise: Snopes engages in massive censorship of natural health and general promotion of industry talking points. What started as a tool to investigate urban legends, hoaxes and folklore has manifested into a self-proclaimed "definitive fact-checking resource" that's taking on topics like whether or not vaccines can cause autism.

Yet, in their purported fact-checking of a Full Measure report1 by award-winning investigative reporter and former CBS correspondent Sharyl Attkisson,2 Snopes simply spewed propaganda, not real facts, in an attempt to discredit the report and the potential vaccines-autism link. In the end, though, they actually ended up confirming the main point of Attkisson's report. For this, Attkisson wrote, "Snopes gets an 'F' for predictable propaganda in [the] vaccine-autism debate."

Snopes Attempts to Discredit Investigative Report on Vaccines-Autism Link

Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, a pediatric neurologist, is a pro-vaccine expert witness the U.S. government used to debunk and turn down autism claims in vaccine court. "Zimmerman was the government's top expert witness and had testified that vaccines didn't cause autism.

The debate was declared over," Attkisson reported. "But now Dr. Zimmerman has provided remarkable new information," she said in the Full Measure report, adding:3

"He claims that during the vaccine hearings all those years ago, he privately told government lawyers that vaccines can, and did cause autism in some children. That turnabout from the government's own chief medical expert stood to change everything about the vaccine-autism debate. If the public were to find out …

Zimmerman declined to be interviewed for the report, but referred Attkisson to his sworn affidavit, dated September 7, 2018, in which he stated that, in 2007, he told DOJ lawyers he had "discovered exceptions in which vaccinations could cause autism.

"I explained that in a subset of children … vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation … did cause regressive [brain disease] with features of autism spectrum disorder," Zimmerman wrote.

This reportedly "panicked" the DOJ, which subsequently fired him, saying his services would no longer be needed, but essentially attempting to silence him. According to Zimmerman, the DOJ then went on to misrepresent his opinion in future cases, making no mention of the exceptions he'd informed them of.

"Meantime, CDC [U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] — which promotes vaccines and monitors vaccine safety — never disclosed that the government's own one-time medical expert concluded vaccines can cause autism — and to this day public health officials deny that's the case," according to the Full Measure report.4

Attkisson's report also reveals how Congressmen who wanted to investigate the autism-vaccine link were bullied, harassed and threatened. Dan Burton (R-IN), Dr. Dave Weldon (R-FL) and Bill Posey (R-FL) are among 11 current and former members of Congress and staff who told Attkisson they were warned by PhRMA lobbyists to drop the vaccine safety issue.

Snopes Gets an 'F' for Fact-Checking

In an article that attempts to fact-check Attkisson's investigation, Snopes calls out many of the claims as false while clearly attempting to "debunk" vaccine-autism claims. However, in a rebuttal, Attkisson explains that Snopes earned a failing grade for its reporting.

"[T]he Snopes article debunks claims that were never made and uses one-sided references as its sources — other propagandists — without disclosing their vaccine industry ties."5

For starters, Snopes labeled Zimmerman as a supporter of vaccination, as though this was something that Attkisson hid. In contrast, this point was central to Attkisson's story and a large part of what makes his statements regarding vaccines and autism so noteworthy. Some of the additional egregious tactics Snopes used to try to discredit Attkisson's report included the following:6

Snopes claimed Attkisson's reading of Zimmerman's sworn affidavit was flawed when she "simply quoted from the affidavit"

Snopes states that Zimmerman's view is "not held by many scientists," but did not survey several reputable scientists who hold the view

Snopes fails to address what its headline promises: the question of whether the government censored its own expert witness' opinion

It's important to note that Snopes also wrote their article without contacting Attkisson, who went on to state that they also listed claims she never made, then declared them to be false, and even were incorrect in one of their own claims, specifically that the existence of a potential link between vaccines, mitochondrial disorder and autism was not news at the time of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services omnibus autism proceedings in 2007.

"In fact, this suspected link was not previously known before the so-called 'omnibus' groups of vaccine-autism cases litigated a decade ago, and it is not widely known among doctors or the general public today; at least as of recently. That's why it has proven to be so newsworthy," Attkisson wrote, adding:7

"Snopes demonstrates reckless disregard for the truth when disparaging my reporting by falsely stating that it contains 'misleading claims' …

Snopes Author Uses Industry Sources for 'Facts'

November 16, 2016, Snopes looked into claims made by Food Babe that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) might have shut down its residue testing of glyphosate due to complaints from Monsanto. "False," Snopes declared.8 Ironically, the page declared that no corporate influence played a role and "the broad scientific consensus is that [glyphosate] is not a risk."

Yet, a Twitter exchange clearly showed that the fact-checker for Snopes, Kasprak — the same author who wrote the critical review of Attkisson's investigation — got his information about glyphosate's safety from Kevin Folta, Ph.D.9

Ironically, getting back to Attkisson's case, the Snopes report ended up confirming exactly the point she was trying to make, stating, "Zimmerman, a scientist with serious credentials who was once a government expert on vaccines, believes that narrow circumstances might exist in which the combination of preexisting mitochondrial dysfunction and vaccination could trigger ASD [autism spectrum disorders]."10

"Snopes fabricates claims that were never made, debunks the fabricated claims," Attkisson wrote, "and then ultimately agrees that the report I produced was accurate."11

Snopes Founders Embroiled in Controversy

It's dangerous to rely on any one source or group of individuals as authorities on truth, as it sets up the path for inevitable censorship. Even under the best circumstances, everyone is subject to their own biases, but in the case of Snopes, it was founded on fabrications from the start.

Snopes was created in 1995 by Barbara and David Mikkelson, who posed as "The San Fernardo Valley Folklore Society" in the beginning in order to gain credibility. Such a society does not exist as a legal entity, according to an investigation by the Daily Mail.12

According to Daily Mail, Mikkelson's new wife, Elyssa Young — a former escort, self-proclaimed "courtesan" and porn actress who ran for Congress in Hawaii as a Libertarian in 2004 — was then employed as a Snopes administrator, even though the company claims to have no political leanings.

In response to the allegations, Forbes published an article weighing whether it was just another case of fake news, but ultimately was astonished by the lack of transparency given by the company's founder when asked for comment, who stated that he was unable to respond due to a confidentiality clause in his divorce settlement. According to Forbes:13

"This creates a deeply unsettling environment in which when one tries to fact-check the fact-checker, the answer is the equivalent of 'its secret' …

At the end of the day, it is clear that before we rush to place fact-checking organizations like Snopes in charge of arbitrating what is "truth" … we need to have a lot more understanding of how they function internally and much greater transparency into their work."

Hardcore Censorship of Alternative Health and Media in Progress

Whether it be the recent flu shot stunt at the Golden Globes or the industry-driven "facts" published by Snopes, it's clear that industry propaganda and censorship of health and media information that strays from the mainstream is a growing problem.

In a 2017 Gallup/Knight Foundation Survey on Trust, Media and Democracy, 73 percent said they believe the proliferation of "fake news" on the internet is a major problem, and only half feel confident that readers can get to the facts by sorting through bias.14 And the fact is, fake news is a real problem. But it's important to do your own research before believing even "fact-checked" sources like Snopes.

NewsGuard is another outlet to be wary of. The entity is setting itself up as the self-appointed global arbiter of what information is "trustworthy" — based on nine "credibility and transparency" factors — not only for information viewed on private electronic devices, but also for information accessible in public libraries and schools.

Once you've installed the NewsGuard browser plugin on your computer or cellphone, the NewsGuard icon rating will appear on all Google and Bing searches and on articles featured in your social media news feeds.

It is very likely Google, Facebook, Twitter and other platforms will use these ratings to lower the visibility of content — making nonconformist views disappear entirely. It's a concerning prospect, especially since NewsGuard received much of its startup funds from Publicis Groupe, a global communications group whose history of clients includes the drug and tobacco industries.

Now more than ever, it's important to be aware of what companies may be filtering your news media and how their own agenda may color what you see. In your search for the truth, always follow your own guiding light — not one maintained by Snopes or any other internet watchdog or censorship authority that tries to lead you down their own biased path.

from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/02/05/snopes-fact-check-gets-failing-grade.aspx

source http://niapurenaturecom.weebly.com/blog/why-snopes-gets-an-f

0 notes

jakehglover · 5 years

Text

Why Snopes Gets an 'F'

Yet, in their purported fact-checking of a Full Measure report1 by award-winning investigative reporter and former CBS correspondent Sharyl Attkisson,2 Snopes simply spewed propaganda, not real facts, in an attempt to discredit the report and the potential vaccines-autism link. In the end, though, they actually ended up confirming the main point of Attkisson's report. For this, Attkisson wrote, "Snopes gets an 'F' for predictable propaganda in [the] vaccine-autism debate."

Snopes Attempts to Discredit Investigative Report on Vaccines-Autism Link

youtube

The debate was declared over," Attkisson reported. "But now Dr. Zimmerman has provided remarkable new information," she said in the Full Measure report, adding:3

Zimmerman declined to be interviewed for the report, but referred Attkisson to his sworn affidavit, dated September 7, 2018, in which he stated that, in 2007, he told DOJ lawyers he had "discovered exceptions in which vaccinations could cause autism.

"I explained that in a subset of children … vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation … did cause regressive [brain disease] with features of autism spectrum disorder," Zimmerman wrote.

Snopes Gets an 'F' for Fact-Checking

"[T]he Snopes article debunks claims that were never made and uses one-sided references as its sources — other propagandists — without disclosing their vaccine industry ties."5

Snopes claimed Attkisson's reading of Zimmerman's sworn affidavit was flawed when she "simply quoted from the affidavit"

Snopes states that Zimmerman's view is "not held by many scientists," but did not survey several reputable scientists who hold the view

Snopes fails to address what its headline promises: the question of whether the government censored its own expert witness' opinion

"Snopes demonstrates reckless disregard for the truth when disparaging my reporting by falsely stating that it contains 'misleading claims' …

Snopes Author Uses Industry Sources for 'Facts'

November 16, 2016, Snopes looked into claims made by Food Babe that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) might have shut down its residue testing of glyphosate due to complaints from Monsanto. "False," Snopes declared.8 Ironically, the page declared that no corporate influence played a role and "the broad scientific consensus is that [glyphosate] is not a risk."

"Snopes fabricates claims that were never made, debunks the fabricated claims," Attkisson wrote, "and then ultimately agrees that the report I produced was accurate."11

Snopes Founders Embroiled in Controversy

In response to the allegations, Forbes published an article weighing whether it was just another case of fake news, but ultimately was astonished by the lack of transparency given by the company's founder when asked for comment, who stated that he was unable to respond due to a confidentiality clause in his divorce settlement. According to Forbes:13

"This creates a deeply unsettling environment in which when one tries to fact-check the fact-checker, the answer is the equivalent of 'its secret' …

Hardcore Censorship of Alternative Health and Media in Progress

from HealthyLife via Jake Glover on Inoreader http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/02/05/snopes-fact-check-gets-failing-grade.aspx

0 notes

leconcombrerit · 3 years

Text

Okay so it’s 1AM but I won’t be able to sleep if I don’t write this down quickly.

I like fics and concepts when “Kevin gets better and learns to be a better person” as much as anyone, it’s honey balm on my poor heart, but I’m just. Not buying it. Hell, even Lauren would be more likely to achieve that than him in my opinion. Putting this under the cut because I somehow got carried away a little bit.

I doubt it’s just “I’m taking meds that make my brain go psycho and happy”. We’ve seen the trauma in Tryptich. It went far beyond that. Indoctrination, torture, you name it. It was enough to break him. The first step towards recovery would be acknowledging what happened to be able to process it, something he doesn’t seem to be keen on.

Which would mean he’d need help. Except he’s surrounded by people who agree with him and will not question how he acts and thinks : his followers are just as brainwashed, protesters have zero influence on him and are shut down anyway, Lauren is also from Strex, Carlos went back to Night Vale (and ignores issues rather than addressing them, no it wasn’t barbecue sauce Carlos I love you but seriously, and a letter for god’s sake, but that’s). Which leaves us with Cecil, whom he doesn’t see anymore, and Charles, who’s the usual candidate to help Kevin recover.

So, Charles. Now I’m not saying he doesn’t help. We’ve barely seen him and he obviously did a lot : made him feel genuinely happy, a little angry, more responsible, and loved. But remember how Kevin described their date : they talked about many things and agreed. I’ll say it again, I do not trust anyone who agrees with Kevin’s views on everything except banking. He didn’t seem too startled in his voicemail either after going through Kevin’s stuff -that we know to be full of blood and gory. He let him hang out with his son anyway, even after he went back on his cult leader thing. This is where I draw my big red flag. You don’t let people you deem dangerous around your kids. I don’t think Charles wants Kevin to change and be “normal” because I don’t think he sees any problem with his current behavior. Hadn’t Donnie been involved, I wouldn’t have been so sure of myself, but he did make clear his kid was his top priority.

Mark my words, I’m pretty sure Charles will help Kevin feel better and be more honest with his feelings, but absolutely not that it will make him go back to how he was before Strex. He will keep having guts-made home decorations, and try to gain more and more power over the citizens of Desert Bluffs too. Unless it gets himself, Charles or Donovan in danger. That’s basically what happened in the Mudstone Abyss though, and he solved the situation and got back on his feet with even more confidence than before. He will be a genuinely happy psycho cult leader instead of a confused and sad one.

Unless we get a real revolution to make him see the errors of his ways, but... Yeah, not sure. Donnie is also kind of a joker. Maybe he can do something, I trust that kid.

#I trust the writers #I know they can write amazing character arcs #but they did have an opportunity for redemption there #and made his megalomaniac tendencies fly over the roof #while solving other issues he had #so I'm not sure that's what they'll be going for #I could be wrong though surprise me #I mean if he's really happy that's good already #anyway why do I keep ranting in the tags good night #welcome to night vale #wtnv spoilers #wtnv kevin #wtnv charles #charles the theologist #wtnv donovan #carlos the scientist #welcome to desert bluffs #not art #rants

32 notes · View notes