Thread by @AlbertanPatriot

@babraham1988 @GtoPmd @MaximeBernier #BernierNation
1-My thread for the day :
Since Mad Max announced the creation of his new party he has been bombarded from all sides (to be expected to some degree). What isn’t fair though is that Canadians aren’t getting the full story.

2-Most Canadians know something isn’t right with our media but just can’t explain it. It is while reading on critical thinking and philosophy that I found most of my answers. Let’s see if I can elaborate a coherent argument on what is happening.

3- In her interview with Mad Max, Mandy Measles tries to tie him with the Koch brother, the Tea Party without providing any evidence that strongly supports her argument. It is called a false cause fallacy. One fact just doesn’t cause the other. 00:20
cbc.ca/news/theweekly…

4- The idea here is not to accuse Max directly of any wrongdoing(Libel,slander) but to repeat often enough to eventually have people associate the two even if they aren’t. A bit like the flash cards you use to teach the alphabet to your kids.

5-3:28 Mandy does it again. Rather than ask about Mad Max’s ideas which would be more relevant for Canadians and the overall political discourse, Mandy tries to tie him to bigotry and asks if he would go to the Rebel Media.
cbc.ca/news/theweekly…

6- She asserts that the Rebel is bigoted and that accepting an invitation for an interview it would make Mad Mad guilty by association. This gets people in general to be repulsed and steer away from even listening to the ideas a speaker has. It is a way of controlling you.

7- Keep in mind it's Mandy's job to control what you think. This segment on MSNBC illustrates it well. From the Mouth of Mika Brzezinski herself.

8- Paul Wells is at it too. Here he makes a Strawman attack on Max saying he is building an anti-immigration party, which is 100% false.

https://twitter.com/PnPCBC/status/1040730081562263553

9-He then tries to discredit him and his followers by calling them stupid. This doesn’t even qualify to be an argument by any stretch of the imagination. He gets a fail from me for his skills in rhetoric.

10-The CBC has done it with Jordan Peterson as well. Again, it is Mandy Measles who is leading the charge
cbc.ca/player/play/11…

11- The interview immediately tries to ties him to Transphobia rather than ask about his ideas and Bill C-16. She then tries to tie him to Rebel media and bigotry in the same way she did with Maxime Bernier.

12- Talking about his ideas would benefit the discourse a lot more but she will stay away from them since she is ideologically driven and wants to control how you think.

13-At 4:42 she tries to discredit him by getting a picture of him standing with a flag of pepe. She implies he could be tied to racist groups using the Anecdotal fallacy. She will also use Pepe with a different definition than what non-casual people really use it for.

14- This is why it is important to hold the linguistic territory, which Peterson refuses to cede to Ideologues. (The left is well known for creating all sorts of new terminology, it is then very difficult to defend against it if you aren’t in the know. AKA: gender pronouns.)

15- In rhetoric, when the meaning of a statement is not clear and the intent is to get to the truth, you have to choose the most plausible interpretation of it or you have to let the speaker clarify his/her view.

16-The idea here is not to win but rather have a rational discussion. You also have to assume the speaker has good intentions and acts in his best interest.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle…

17- The arrival of Trump, has made it even more apparent that the media's intent is to push an ideology and not test the validity of arguments. The media at large has been openly violating this principle and has shown how they did not intend to be fair.

18- Here is a short list to validate my point:
The news reports how Trump made fun of a disable reporter:
It shows him making gestures while talking about a disabled reporter.
cnn.com/videos/tv/2015…

19- But what does it mean? Is he making disparaging comments towards someone who suffers a chronic condition? Or does he have a track record of making those gestures when referring to someone stupid?

20- This compilation seems to demonstrate how he has made those gestures for years when talking about someone he deemed stupid, not handicapped. The media, though, has decided to pick the worst of the two, violating the principle of charity.

21- In this second exhibit, Trump talks about gun control and says:
“By the way, and if she gets to pick — if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks," Trump warned. "Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."
cbc.ca/news/world/tru…

22- Trump purposely omitted to mention what the ideal action should be. The media then, facing two choices:
1- 2nd amendment people should go out and vote.
2- Second amendment people should take their guns and act.
washingtonpost.com/news/post-poli…

23- The second choice is not a rational one therefore the first one should have been reported. Of course, CBC, CNN, MSNBC and all of the MSM outlets decided to pick the irrational choice.

24- Here you have it. Can you see the patterns? The media isn’t in the business of telling the truth.
They sell influence. To do so, they use logical fallacies and rhetoric designed to steer you into a way of thinking.

25- They are also the speakerphone of left leaning institutions. No wonder why even the conservative party has to steer left.

26- Here is the media landscape in the us as it is. There are probably many outlets you have never heard of.

27-This the views we get as Canadians. Effectively we are already censored. We don't see the world as it is but as how the left views it.

28- I have spent many hours doing the research, I do not ask for money. If you like, please feel free to share, like and post your own example if you want me to debunk them. /END

29-And one more hit piece from the CBC.