No, that burden falls on you. You made the claim
So far you cited an incident that happened half a century ago.
But you have posted several claims that you present as truth. How can we believe you?
I use an app called Ground News, that gives me a variety of sources. Each item must be evaluated separately. There is no 100% accurate source.
so in the name of balance , the list of sources must include the likes of AlterNet, Consortium News, Common Dreams, the Grayzone, The Real News, TruthOut , FAIR , The Morning Star, Jacobin etc amongst the MSM sources in that app.???
Like I said, any source can be wrong sometime. I’ve asked you to discuss your methods and you’ve avoided that. To save time sometimes I use sites like this
You didnt answer. Does the app you use contain the sources i mentioned?
It has tons of sources. I’ve seen some of those in there. They rate them left, right and center
You can check your facts against this source; https://www.politifact.com/
That site will give you the straight factual truth as it checks every claim for factual truth, not rumor.
Stand up for the facts!
Our only agenda is to publish the truth so you can be an informed participant in democracy.
https://www.politico.com/
I’ve seen some of those in there
And you use them in helping you determine the truth?
No, unlike you I get my facts from this site. Fact-checking is what they do.
And I know lausten long enough to trust his dedication to truth and if he say his sources are neutral and report just facts then I believe him.
So far you have not come up with anything that you are willing to defend or explain. I am still waiting for answers to my simple questions… alas!
It takes more than simply taking other’s word for it.
Willingness to pursue both sides of a story, common sense, critical thinking skills, along with following the various arguments to their rational conclusions, as much as possible.
Internal consistency also matters.
Oh and of course, at some point we learn that “Truth” doesn’t really exist because A) we’re trapped within our own perspectives. 2) There are always unknown facts that impact thee “Truth” - that’s why “Honesty” seems more important to focus on, honestly presenting facts, and honesty presenting your own arguments, as well as others arguments - seems way better than clinging to an idealistic unrealistic assertion of my “Truth.”
Are you going anywhere with this?
Yes. It cant be a balanced approach you take if you dont consider alternative views. Do you use these sites to assist in hunting down the truth?
I’m not sure you’re a real person. Your questions don’t indicate comprehension.
Would that be an admission that you dont utilise these source? Come again.
Would that be an admission that you aren’t doing anything other than trying to see how long you can keep this pointless thread going?
its telling that you have labelled this as a pointless thread.
I do believe metalhead is a chatbot programmed to respond with snide remarks.
Just read an article on that and the bot sounded exactly like our friend from down south.
Indeed.
Where is Isaac Asimov when we need him most, he could come up with the perfect question to get it to start spinning its wheels and frying circuits. Oh why do our gods always abandon us when we need him most. 
1 Like
Here’s a good look at how FOX became such a manipulative success. Doesn’t say much for America’s intelligence acuity.
The Road Goes On For Ever And The Party Never Ends! . . .
By David French
… There are some stories that are important enough to pause the news cycle and linger on them, to explore not just what happened, but why. And so it is with Fox News’s role in the events leading up to Jan. 6, 2021. Thanks to a recent filing by Dominion Voting Systems in its defamation lawsuit against Fox, there is now compelling evidence that America’s most-watched cable news network presented information it knew to be false as part of an effort to placate an angry audience. It knowingly sacrificed its integrity to maintain its market share.
Why? There are the obvious reasons: Money. Power. Fame. These are universal human temptations. But the answer goes deeper. Fox News became a juggernaut not simply by being “Republican,” or “conservative,” but by offering its audience something it craved even more deeply: representation. And journalism centered on representation ultimately isn’t journalism at all.
To understand the Fox News phenomenon, one has to understand the place it occupies in Red America. It’s no mere source of news. It’s the place where Red America goes to feel seen and heard. If there’s an important good news story in Red America, the first call is to Fox. If conservative Christians face a threat to their civil liberties, the first call is to Fox. If you’re a conservative celebrity and you need to sell a book, the first call is to Fox.
And Fox takes those calls. …
… As the Trump years wore on, the prime-time messaging became more blatant. Supporting Trump became a marker not just of patriotism, but also of courage. And what of conservatives, like myself, who opposed Trump? We were “cowards” or “grifters” who sold our souls for 30 pieces of silver and airtime on MSNBC. …
… NOT !
Have a look at the quality ( lack of) in MSM reporting of the recent environmental catastrophe in east palestine that smoking joe refuses to visit