[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Activism
See other Activism Articles

Title: Alternative Media and Ahamadinejad's Speech. Total Silence! Total Censorship.
Source: 911 Blogger
URL Source: http://911blogger.com/news/2010-09- ... total-silence-total-censorship
Published: Sep 25, 2010
Author: pfgetty
Post Date: 2010-09-25 14:18:59 by Original_Intent
Keywords: Censorship, Perception, Management, Omission
Views: 2651
Comments: 47

I have just perused some of the most popular "alternative" media sites this Saturday morning to see what is being written about Ahmadinejad's speech at the UN this week. Seems like complete avoidance. Censorship is a better word. While the msm at least covered the story, the alternative media has avoided the story, hoping it would go away. They are, it seems, under strict guidelines to not mention 9/11 truth or any of the evidence that conflicts with the official story of 9/11.

I looked at Alternet, CommonDreams, Truthout, DemocracyNow, Counterpunch, antiwar.com. I did see a small mention of the speech on DemocracyNow, as part of their news rundown. No details. I didn't see anything on antiwar.com's listing of headlines around the world that normally would have had information about the speech.

I think this is a clear indication that our progressive and independent alternative media is completely controlled. By whom? Well, it seems by the big foundations that help fund these sites. If you go to the foundational support for any of these sites, you will find foundations that link back to the likes of the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, Charles Steart Mott Foundation, McKnight Foundation, Joyce Foundation, and many others.

Michel Chossudovsky explains in his article at Global Research, "Manufacturing Dissent", that this funding is part of a plan by the elites to actually control the content and actions of the so called "people's movement", in that while allowing these groups to actively dissent against the globalization movement of the international powerful elites, they actively fund them so that limits can be placed where necessary. They realize that it is healthiest for a lot of antiglobalization activity to occur, but only up to a certain point, and it is better that they fund those groups that acknowledge their limits and ensure that no real change ever comes about. Certainly one of the limits is that 9/11 truth is not presented in any media outlets "on the take". The website for his article is globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21110.

The Progressive and Alternative media sites that are supported by these foundations obviously want to continue their activism in issues such as antiwar, environmentalism, stopping torture, opposing restrictions on human rights, etc, and I guess they feel that to do so they need the funding from these huge foundations. They may feel that otherwise they could not possibly continue without the money flowing in. In their minds, they have made a compromise worth making. But in the end, their objectives are all thwarted, in that as long as the elites can lie whenever they want to so blatantly, as in 9/11, without the media investigating, there is not much that is ever going to be done in the issues that are so important to them. The elites will continue to pull out the stops whenever real change against them may be in the works. I'm sure they watch closely.

Clearly, we in the 9/11 truth movement need to, first of all, not support any of these alternative media outlets, and we should also do all we can to expose their censorship of the truth. While it may not help, calling or writing to them during their donation drives and explaining why we are adamant in not supporting them is something we can try. And, of course, supporting any of the media outlets that DO expose the lies of the 9/11 official story is something we should all do. And I think monitoring which media groups are supportive of the truth and which are censoring truth is helpful, and that is where 911blogger comes in. Let's keep posting what we see going on in the media. Right here.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 15.

#1. To: Original_Intent (#0)

I was unaware that the "alternative" media was obligated to give Ahmadinejad free publicity, especially for repeating the same claptrap he's put out for the last several years.

Shoonra  posted on  2010-09-25   19:30:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Shoonra (#1)

Oh come now, let's not be coy. We both know that there were several things unique about this particular event.

1. Ahmadinejad spoke specifically implying directly that 911 involved inside elements.

2. The U.S. and a couple other delegations threw a temper tantrum and walked out because of "1." above.

And that particular obvious combination was met with a stunning silence. That IS a noteworthy omission. It is N-E-W-S ANYWHERE except in the country most critically concerned with the aforementioned events.

The reasons of course are obvious. The entire scheme of military adventurism, as well draconian and unconstitutional laws such as der UN-PATRIOT Act, the attempted legitimization of torture, and the unconscionable use of Depleted Uranium are all predicated entirely upon 911 having been conducted by "19Arabswhohateuscuzwe'refree". Which of course it wasn't but that cannot be acknowledged without delegitimizing the U.S. Feral Government with implications reaching into the ZioNAZI State.

At some point that reality is going to be forced into a level of consciousness to where it can no longer be ignored. Stand by to stand by.

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-09-25   20:43:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Original_Intent (#2) (Edited)

1. Ahmadinejad spoke specifically implying directly that 911 involved inside elements.

2. The U.S. and a couple other delegations threw a temper tantrum and walked out because of "1." above.

Keep in mind that Ahmadinejad is a guest of the U.S. He said these accusations in a U.S. taxpayer paid building, inside the U.S.

Original_Intent, if a guest, in your own home, decided to accuse you of cold blooded murder of your own people in front of other guests, what would you have done to the guest making the accusations?

The fact he was not shot right after making the accusations, with Iran being charged the price of the bullet, shows great restraint on the U.S.'s part.

I assure you that Iran's government would not have shown that much restraint if they were in the U.S.'s position.

PaulCJ  posted on  2010-09-26   4:11:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: PaulCJ, Original_Intent, *9-11* (#5)

Original_Intent, if a guest, in your own home, decided to accuse you of cold blooded murder of your own people in front of other guests, what would you have done to the guest making the accusations?

I can't speak for OI, but any innocent person would deny it, not walk out of his own house in a huff.

wudidiz  posted on  2010-09-26   5:24:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: wudidiz (#7)

I can't speak for OI, but any innocent person would deny it, not walk out of his own house in a huff.

You are so naive when it comes to manners and tac. And they walked of the room, not the building.

I have seen first hand people being falsely accused of things. They walked out of the room, instead of harming the accuser.

PaulCJ  posted on  2010-09-26   5:41:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: PaulCJ (#9)

only a minority of americans really believe in the government/big media's conspiracy theories about the september 11'th events. about one third of Americans believe like me that the people who rule us did it (or at least let it happen). and another third understands the official story may be a lie, but has no coclusions as to what happened. and only about one third of our people actually buy the conspiracy theories we're taught on tv. the rest of us should be silent to protect the fantasies of the minority?

the nature of those who cling to the conspiracy theories of our government is such that they're so upset by the truth that they will severely persecute anyone who speaks the truth.

Red Jones  posted on  2010-09-26   8:58:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 15.

#16. To: Red Jones (#15)

Thanks, Red, for stating the case simply and clearly.

For myself, I can hardly bear to talk about it or discuss it any more.

randge  posted on  2010-09-26 09:39:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Red Jones, PaulCJ (#15)

the nature of those who cling to the conspiracy theories of our government is such that they're so upset by the truth that they will severely persecute anyone who speaks the truth.

Exactly and they rank among the most un-American of Americans. You can find their piteous quisling wailings at such as Freeptardia, among the Dildoheads, and other such vermin who would take a lie in preference to the truth because to accept the truth places upon them that most dreaded of words R-E-S-P-O-N-S-I-B-I-L-I-T-Y. And too many people, particularly the Freeptards and Dildoheads, will do anything but take responsibility for knowing the truth and following a course of action to help set matters aright.

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-09-26 12:16:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 15.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]