Setting Myself FREE!

[Amaterasu Solar]

I'm not a conspiracist or at least, not a very good one. I do tend to mentally connect individual incidents to
a social movement and ponder that it's a controlling influence by those who wish me to think a certain way.

I convince myself -that even if I find no evidence to support information management, it's a mental excerise
that keeps me dubious in a world of poor journalism and game-show politics.

But the thread, the cord that prompts the conspiracy-like suggestion, tempts me and just like the Star Trek
character Khan Noonien Singh, it tasks me and demands that I run my fingers along the slender wire that
implies sinister forces at work.
Or maybe I'm being melodramatic.

Usually, the intriguing article leads to a small story from a local news outlet and the original story is about
a happening, an occurrence generated by various single actions combining to create a reported outcome.

But the secondary article is woven with a view from from a different angle and offers the reader/viewer an
alternative perspective that generally leads back to a trending discussion in mainstream social media.

It's always disappointing to see a mainstream news medium provide content that is staged-managed,
but like any organised situation, a feigned perception is given due to it's very nature.

Individuals with a common interest are asked to congregate behind a TV Reporter and give the impression
of solidarity. This leads to a possible notion that the group's concerns have merit and it's hoped that the
Reporter is held by the viewer to be dispatching information relevant to contemplate. It serves two demands.
But it's fake in it's accuracy as a neutral, stand-alone record.

There are some out in the big world who deem this behavior as negative -which it is when weighed in a purity
test, but provide an opposite report using the same information-distorting machinery.
.............................

I recall many Walmart stores closing around the USA and the reason offered was that online sales were far
-more lucrative than the Express, Neighborhood Markets, the twelve supercenters and the four Sam’s Club
locations.

Around 16,000 employees were effected and the massive decision concerned some that such a change
must be larger -and in this distrusting environment, more daunting than what the retail outfit was telling the
public.

That's when the suggestion of FEMA camps arrived.
It didn't matter that Amazon were aquiring seventy-one billion dollars of online sales to Walmart's meagre
thirteen billion, it meant nothing to those who whispered that the company's focus -fiscally correct or not,
on internet trade was not a calculated decision but an actual move to prepare for military revolution, they
saw the shadows of conspiracy and said so.

Many of the stores will be 'shuttered' as Walmart stated and thirteen will turned into distribution centres to
cater for their online venture. Whether this change will improve their place in the market and bring financial
growth to shareholders and their trusted boardroom, will be in the eating of the pudding.

By the way, I'm not shilling for Walmart. I don't even live in the country they're based or cater for, I'm just placing
simple information here to be viewed with a neutral, unbiased eye.

The small towns around the United States will of course suffer, but in the harsh world of business, that warm
coddled 'We're Here For You'-routine that many companies adopt is discarded and the ones who advertise
where they work via their uniforms are tossed out of the leaky boat too.

The Public Relations people will assure you that they care, but they don't and they don't have to.
They're not your parents and the world will eat the weak, it's how it really works.
And customer loyalty...? it is and always was a unicorn, you don't need Snopes to find that as a fact.
.............................

The FEMA camps idea does hold water if viewed through a certain lens, but what tends to happen is that the
announcer of this military-enforced round-up of [insert victims here] provides little evidence for such a national
public overthrow, it's weak and provides no rational reason of why it's happening.

There are countless videos of people being housed in Walmart buildings with uniformed military personel
supposedly watching just off-camera, but as the years roll on, we now understand that these empty stores
are now used to house children of illegal immigrants during the processing of their parents.

I won't labour in the 'blame-game' and the sophistry of using our inbuilt concerns of the young to drive a
particular political narrative and I refuse to fall for the trendy 'feelings' ruse that's supposed to make me
feel better via outrage.
That's for the tourists and the undeveloped!

My question is...
Were the stores along the US/Mexican border closed for:
A. The containment of chosen frightened citizens of the USA at gunpoint.
B. The containment of frightened children illegally crossing that border with their parents.
C. An executive decision to save money in a changing retail environment involving a global marketing strategy.

Now... which one helps media ratings and YouTube viewing numbers and which is a rational, unexciting action
that belongs below the fold of The Wall Street Journal?

Can one be connected to another by reason of continuity?
And that's where the misconception is abused in regards of the Walmart closures. If fiscal reasons are offered
as to why smaller stores are being closed and then after a length of time, another unconnected intention is given
to utilise the empty structures, why cannot both have integrity and only be separated by time?

That's why I can see Amaterasu Solar's point of view on the manner news is currently given. It looks staged because
in most cases, the presentation of that news IS arranged and even manufactured to serve various purposes.
At this point, rationality demands that I insert 'not all' for the dozy folk, but it's interesting to follow the tracks to an
original piece and be amazed to find no evidence of manipulation!

If I may and with all respect to Amaterasu Solar, I can see why he asked the question of permission in regards of
being duped by organisations who proclaim they bring us the one true reality.
We're socially-conditioned to accept that truth and rectitude are supposed to be aspired to and yet, these alleged
ethical news outlets do not attempt to reach such goals and in fact, travel the opposite way for reasons far-from
noble.

And in revolt, where can you turn without finding another set of bars that stop your journey? It seems everyone wants
to tell you the truth and yet, it's 'their' truth and usually involves a fee of trust or money.
It may be that Amaterasu Solar's accusation of those in power being psychopaths is a low-ball and really, it's become
merely global policy to treat each other this way.

Again, with all respect to our fellow-member, he's not wrong.

But there's always that lingering question... Are the frogs really gay? (I apologise for the levity!)

What I consider is the fact that over 1/2 of the planet's wealth is flowing to VERY Few People - if viewed statistically, all the wealth flows to no One by a very large margin.  And given that these Ones do nothing to help Humanity, hoarding the wealth instead, I have to conclude They are psychopaths.  And given They are psychopaths, and like to control and manipulate Others therefore, the idea of buying things and People to produce "news" that gives a false "reality" to Us would be not only right up Their alley, but within Their means - easily.

I ponder all these "shootings" and "bombs" and "vehicular attacks" and look at what things were like before 2012 and the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act was put into effect - that "Act" that made it again legal for the USA controlmind (government) to propagandize Us.  All these "crimes" have increased 1,000+ fold - with centuries of guns and a rare incident every 50 years or so, can We give credence to the idea that school shooting organically increased at this rate, over the last 6 years?  Or...  Would it be more reasonable to figure most (likely ALL) are faked, a theatre production, sold to Us as "reality" through the media owned by the same Ones who own the corporation, USA Inc. ("Our government") and all the other corporations around the planet called "governments, the education systems, the military corporations, the Big food, Big pharma, the medical and insurance corporations, and all the other major corporations on the planet?

Given that there is scant true evidence offered for most of these incidents, that stories keep changing (like someOne saying She worked with Nancy Lanza, who was a teacher there, at Sandy Hook elementary, but then Nancy became a substitute...and then never worked at the school at all!), that Ones who question the "official story" are shut down (not laughed at as They would be if Their words were ridiculous), I have to give VERY high probability that what We get on the "news" is fake, is scripted, the actors cast, and the play directed from the wings by the Ones in control on Our planet.