|No rock left un-turned!|
I spoke to a very respected reporter last week, at a major newspaper, who shall remain nameless lest the Schutzstaffel root him out of his desk and toss him into the street.
Having worked for four newspapers covering city council, county commission and some state issues myself, I have an idea or two about how he does his job; what the issues are, what constitutes a news story and what doesn't.
I asked him about the newsworthiness of the Hillsborough Glitch. News has changed since I was in it. Used to be it was in the public record it was fair game: i.e. said at a meeting. Member of the public comes in, tops off, kooky as it may sound, get the reaction from the other side, and you can run it, provided it is balanced and the story has a basis in reality, such as an event the like of the Hillsborough Glitch.
The corporate ooze still hasn't erased the history of it. But it is trying. And the new reportage is the method. It's astounding the bar they've set for what constitutes reality, a workable news story.
Essentially, until I prove what I am saying is true - that's right, unless I root around inside the guts of the voting machines myself and prove they were hacked - it's not a news story. I don't have an opinion worth airing in newsprint. I have to dive inside the machines myself, mind you, and come out the other side with the buzzed out circuit (yep! here it is!) Or, I have to develop my own software worm, break into the systems myself, and have my little algorithm spit back the malware code to me (yep! This is it!) before the newspapers are permitted to even discuss it. To even mention the names of the companies involved all of these things must come to pass. By this test, nothing would ever be brought before a judge, ever; much less be written about.
It's like having to isolate the cancer cells in your mom's brain tumor before being permitted to take her to the doctor. Tell me in what other arena of life is a burden of absolute proof required before even a balanced story is written posing the question, whether a thing is good, or bad?
No no. You must have absolute proof this thing is bad, before we in the media will be permitted to run a story on it, even to take both sides and let the reader make up his own mind.
|Time-Machine checked News only!|
His comment to me was, that since he "can't go back in time" and see whether or not the vote was hacked in Hillsborough County, there's really no reason for his newspaper to even ask the question: this despite a glitch that mysteriously wiped out 38,000 votes. He can't even write a news story airing the fact I would like to get Hills county officials to give me some shred of evidence in writing that the event even happened. That there was even a problem on election night is easily called into question, and I can't get a written record of the event. Nope. Not news, by today's standards. Wowzers! That's some set of standards! Only news verified by TIME MACHINE makes the papers!!!
By the by; this seemingly ludicrous system of byzantine information-choke is how history is erased, mind you. And funny things happen when people start trying to erase history. As we recall? No? Not so much?
|"Helke come away from that window!"|
This is the very excuse logic the German hausfrau's used when they were excoriated for not knowing where the trains went, just down the road from the concentration camps. I don't say this lightly. This is precisely the mentality.
"You didn't have any idea where the trains were going?"
"No we didn't know. We had no idea and since there was no proof we weren't permitted to say anything!"
"The trains went down this road full. Then they came back empty."
"And you didn't ask what went on down there?"
"We were told not to go, not to ask, and so we didn't."
This is the same attitude modern media has with regard to a problem that has left our democracy as vulnerable as Swiss cheese. Machine hacked elections, hacked democracy, election rigging courtesy of Diebold, Premiere or Dominion.
|All seems so Orwellian|
Well that logic rates a hearty "Double-plus-good!" on the tyranny meter!
For scary practical purposes my conversation with the reporter sounded something eerily similar to this:
Me: "But it happened!"
Him: "Did it?"
Me: "You're paper wrote about it!"
Him: "Did we? I can't say as I recall..." (crickets)
Me: "Well, that's what I am asking you to do, to search your archive and look up your old stories on this issue. Surely you can look at your archived stories, where the event was discussed, can't you?"
Him: "I don't know, can I?" (crickets)
|"No he's not, he's just resting!"|
Him: "But what proof do you have?"
Me: "That's right! That's what I am asking you to look into! Look into that!"
Him: "I can ask a question or two, but not much else."
Him: "Well, there's no proof is there. Not much use to us without proof."
If this were NASCAR they would run that film to find out what happened, if it took a million years. If this were footage of a Kardashian's naughty parts in a video clip from Youtube they would run it backwards and forwards all day long all over CNN - with the smudge of discretion of course - just to make sure we had confirmed that indeed, she showed her woo-hoo! during her trip downtown wherein she wasn't wearing under garments!
But since we are talking about the rigging of our entire election system using vulnerable software that's been around since the late 1980s; since we're talking about large corporations essentially perpetrating a silent coup on us all, marshaling us all off to WW III now or God knows what they have in mind; no, we can't discuss it.
We won't even do you the honor of running a news story mentioning your concerns.
Because you, common citizen, have no voice anymore. Not anymore.
Furthermore what The Big Machine really needs from you now, is to STFU and participateLITE in our Ministerial Warm Body Exercise (MWBE) called "voting."
After you show up in the required demographics, we'll juke the numbers the way we like.
We'll take it from there.