Jesus Wept: The TV is so Tedious

RideOnTime

Sorry a tedious thread about tedious TV.

So I start watching this thing with Trevor Phillips talking about race. God that was soooo boring...

Then I switch over to watch a programme about Sugar.... jesus....

what next a programme about sponge collectors or a 24 hours inside an empty postbox... :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

slowmart

Netflix...

I'd say the vast majority of tv here is on demand. The occasional film and Top Gear was about it and for £5 ish a month its a bargain.

tlw1

Went to the pub, much better than tv, though costs a bit more

Manc33

Nyah nyah nyah nyah its mint brrrap.

When they did that first Big Brother series, I never envisaged another series would get made because they had already done it, the idea had been done. Not only did they make another series, they made fifteen more series of it. Why?

Same with that other show where its people just watching TV themselves but with that its like "easy watching" or whatever. When music is "easy listening" you aren't listening, because its pretty crap and uneventful, but you don't mind it being on.

rick_chasey

Surprised you're not quoting rage against the machine Manc:

They load the clip in omnicolour
Said they pack the 9, they fire it at prime time
Sleeping gas, every home was like Alcatraz

chris_bass

Manc33 wrote:

Not only did they make another series, they made fifteen more series of it. Why?

because people watched it and it made money.

chris_bass

Just watching some police thing whilst working from home and they said:

"There is never a dull moment for Andy and Keith in their unmarked Vauxhall Vectra"

crazy times

finchy

Is that programme where people open boxes in front of Noel Edmonds still on TV? That has to be the nadir, surely...

jawooga

Rick Chasey wrote:

Surprised you're not quoting rage against the machine Manc:

They load the clip in omnicolour
Said they pack the 9, they fire it at prime time
Sleeping gas, every home was like Alcatraz

Great album that. Remember seeing them at Reading 96. Like it was yesterday

Manc33

The old hypnotist in the corner not having the same effect it had 30 years ago. People that are interested in finding out as much as they can about a situation or event and do not want to only get their information from one source, have stopped watching TV.

People don't take the mainstream news programmes as seriously anymore because they are owned by people with special interests. Five minutes on the internet can show you this.

For example the BBC reporting WTC7 had fell 20 minutes before it had and was still there in the background even as the women reported it had fallen. This proves the BBC knew the building was due to fall, when no plane had hit it. This means the whole thing was scripted. Well, sorry guys but if you still watch the news after that and think nothing is up, you deserve to be getting deceived because you're only deceiving yourself.

As people quit believing what the news says, TV appears to gradually go "downhill" in terms of other programmes because its sole purpose from the very beginning of TV being invented was to steer society with it. Maybe there was a year in the 1950s when TV first came about where shady people didn't quite yet have 100% control over it, but thats about it. Beyond that, forget it. Anything that has such influence is grabbed up by the same people that already own everything else.

If society is no longer putting up with the news lying to them every single day and night, there's not much point in the people that own all the media companies putting anything else on either, I mean it serves them no use at all at that point, it was only ever there to provide news so it could shape people's opinions in the first place. They certainly don't care about entertaining you, that is just something that gets huge numbers of people watching the TV and thus, the news.

chris_bass

I've just realised what else is very tedious

orraloon

Oh hello. Manc33 has woken up again and back on the 9/11 conspiracy schtick. And around and around we go.

Word in your ear pal, spend less time listening to / watching internet nutters and more time on your bike and your world will seem a better place.

Manc33

Chris Bass wrote:

I've just realised what else is very tedious

Thinking?

I agree in a way, but it has to be done, you do get used to it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGaoXAwl9kw

tlw1

jawooga wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Surprised you're not quoting rage against the machine Manc:

They load the clip in omnicolour
Said they pack the 9, they fire it at prime time
Sleeping gas, every home was like Alcatraz

Great album that. Remember seeing them at Reading 96. Like it was yesterday

What a great line up

Manc33

I explain why the TV is tedious and that too is a conspiracy theory?

Have a day off. :roll:

You think the whole of TV turned to trash for just no reason at all? When music has gone the same way too... come on its obvious. While you're watching Peter Andre on 60 Minute Makeover you're not thinking critically about anything, you're running away from thinking in fact, which is kinda like... a sin or something.

hector88

I haven't watched the television in 6 years... use iplayer and other online sources. That way you only watch what you make a conscious effort to find. No adverts either.

chris_bass

Manc33 wrote:

Chris Bass wrote:

I've just realised what else is very tedious

Thinking?

I agree in a way, but it has to be done, you do get used to it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGaoXAwl9kw

I'm currently thinking about whether I live far enough away from Manchester.

Seriously though, take a break from it and do something you enjoy

briantrumpet

hector88 wrote:

I haven't watched the television in 6 years... use iplayer and other online sources. That way you only watch what you make a conscious effort to find. No adverts either.

I haven't had a TV for 19 years ... I cut off the aerial cable in 1996 to do the decorating, and was going to reconnect it when something interesting was on...

These days I do watch the odd thing on iPlayer (programmes on domestic rubbish, and shipping containers spring to mind), but most of it is utter tosh.

pblakeney

orraloon wrote:

Oh hello. Manc33 has woken up again and back on the 9/11 conspiracy schtick. And around and around we go.

Word in your ear pal, spend less time listening to / watching internet nutters and more time on your bike and your world will seem a better place.

I would much prefer it if nutters would stay indoors watching the internet to them being allowed out in public.

Manc33

It seemed to start around the time they showed a programme about a £10 note, following it around the country. That was the first programme I reacted to thinking 'who would watch something like that'. Yet it is on TV all the same.

The TV at night is worse than in the daytime... wall to wall autopsies and stuff like that. Why not just have an "Autopsy Channel" and have done with it. What are they trying to do to us all honestly. TV never used to have crap like that on, or it was just a programme once a year or something like a special. Doctor G (the G stands for Gremlin) is cutting people open every single night if you want to see it. Enough of this sh1t. :roll:

Tedious yes... but also insidious.

Stevo_666

Manc33 wrote:

For example the BBC reporting WTC7 had fell 20 minutes before it had and was still there in the background even as the women reported it had fallen. This proves the BBC knew the building was due to fall, when no plane had hit it. This means the whole thing was scripted. Well, sorry guys but if you still watch the news after that and think nothing is up, you deserve to be getting deceived because you're only deceiving yourself.

Here we go again.

If it was reported like this, the BBC news clip will be somewhere on the interweb - post it up or nobody will believe you. (I'm not holding my breath on this one )

Manc33

Stevo 666 wrote:

Manc33 wrote:

For example the BBC reporting WTC7 had fell 20 minutes before it had and was still there in the background even as the women reported it had fallen. This proves the BBC knew the building was due to fall, when no plane had hit it. This means the whole thing was scripted. Well, sorry guys but if you still watch the news after that and think nothing is up, you deserve to be getting deceived because you're only deceiving yourself.

Here we go again.

If it was reported like this, the BBC news clip will be somewhere on the interweb - post it up or nobody will believe you. (I'm not holding my breath on this one )

That is understandable if you have never looked into it but yes, it happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCFRvIfNfOs
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJqDFgba9xo
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3jgJPAf2FE

Just in case you thought it was a one off video or some sort of fake.

Next time she was asked, oops, audio cuts out...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsqAHhTWEH0

The same thing happened when a US soldier (a Corporal) starts asking why the US is supporting all these wars around the world when it is all for Israel, his mic gets cut and he was a Corporal in Afghanistan for two years FFS... then its back to former Jerusalem Post employee Wolf Blitzer! :roll: Its endless propaganda folks. In this instance Ron Paul then let the Corporal speak because he knew he had been cut off.

Funny how technical difficulties only happen when someone is saying something with some substance to it.

chris_bass

http://www.debunking911.com/pullout have a read

Oh, and this..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theed ... s_iii.html

Manc33

Chris Bass wrote:

http://www.debunking911.com/pullout have a read

That's a 404.

Chris Bass wrote:

Oh, and this..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theed ... s_iii.html

That's the exact same people that are being accused.

Not impressed. :roll:

Especially with stuff like:

"They'd just been put back on the wrong shelf - 2002 rather than 2001. Not so sinister after all."

Not so sinister yet it just allows the cover up to carry on that's all, ho hum, nevermind... they will be putting lullaby music on their pages next. People aren't five years old and can just look back to the original report that was claiming a building had fell that had not, that's it, there isn't a defence to that.

So the BBC passes the blame onto Reuters - it is still absurd that they didn't know WTC7 was still standing and they still reported it. They can say anything though. All of the news all that day was scripted. If you asked Reuters they would probably blame someone else.

Stevo_666

I don't know what WTC7 looked like but first impressions are that there are material gaps in the argument.
1. There is no time shown on the TV footage.
2. The building shown in the first link with an arrow pointing to it saying WTC7 looks to be closer to the reporter than the smoke coming up from ground zero.
3. There is no clear evidence that this is the building in any event - there are lots of skyscrapers in Manhattan.
So this doesn't prove it - more like circumstantial evidence at best.

But answer me this: why would anyone want to demolish this building and if they did, why make such an elaborate framework around it involving 2 planes crashing into nearby buildings? Why not just put a big bomb in the building you want to get rid of? Doesn't stack up.

ballysmate

Stevo 666 wrote:

I don't know what WTC7 looked like but first impressions are that there are material gaps in the argument.
1. There is no time shown on the TV footage.
2. The building shown in the first link with an arrow pointing to it saying WTC7 looks to be closer to the reporter than the smoke coming up from ground zero.
3. There is no clear evidence that this is the building in any event - there are lots of skyscrapers in Manhattan.
So this doesn't prove it - more like circumstantial evidence at best.

But answer me this: why would anyone want to demolish this building and if they did, why make such an elaborate framework around it involving 2 planes crashing into nearby buildings? Why not just put a big bomb in the building you want to get rid of? Doesn't stack up.

You don't say!

chris_bass

Try it with out the pullout bit

Stevo_666

Ballysmate wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Doesn't stack up.

You don't say!

I suppose I was risking stating the bleeding obvious, but if people are going to say that a superimposed arrow on a bit of news footage proves that there was some shady conspiracy to demolish a building occupied by a bank involving hijacking two planes and flying them into completely different buildings, then sometimes these things need to be said .

If I was an evil genius plotting to demolish a downtown Manhattan skyscraper for no obvious reason, then I'd probably try flying a plane or two into the building that I wanted to demolish

ballysmate

To all the conspiracy theorists, have you ever tried to keep a secret at work? The more people involved, the greater the risk of exposure.
How many people would need to be involved in a conspiracy of the magnitude to demolish skyscrapers? It would only need one person to break ranks to cause the whole house of cards to collapse. So don't talk bollox.

Manc33

Why would someone break ranks when everything they say would be classed as a conspiracy theory?

People come out all the time claiming to have been abducted by aliens, does anyone believe them?

People shy away from anything that sounds far fetched, but then what sounds far fetched to one person isn't to another. It depends what else you might know, too many variables. I mean if you had been abducted by aliens (hypothetically speaking) you'd think differently about it. Same with UFO's, if you've never seen one you'll never believe they exist. If you have seen one, carrying on with thinking they don't exist is probably not too bright.

Stevo_666

Manc33 wrote:

Why would someone break ranks when everything they say would be classed as a conspiracy theory?

Get real. People involved in a real conspiracy would very likely would have considerably better evidence of said conspiracy than a Youtube clip with an arrow on it. Particularly if they are going to break ranks and blow the whistle.