[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: 2685
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 # 28.

#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  


#18. To: PaulCJ (#5)

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.

Not to get bogged down in technicalities but the U.N. is neutral territory surrounded by the U.S. but IS an international forum and an entity separate from the U.S. though physically surrounded by U.S. soil.

However, the broader point is answered simply that propriety is often based upon circumstance and an important truth is never out of order. Were it a false accusation it would be one thing but the mitigating factor, among others, is that it happens to be true. So, if he speaks an unpleasant truth is that to be condemned in preference to a lie?

"Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it." ~ Patrick Henry, Falls Church, VA, March 23, 1775

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-09-26   12:08:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Original_Intent (#18)

However, the broader point is answered simply that propriety is often based upon circumstance and an important truth is never out of order.

Ahamadinejad is a known tyrant and liar. He has stated multiple times that he would like to destroy the U.S. along with Israel. He has everything to gain by lying and making false accusations against the U.S.

Now, answer my question to you.

PaulCJ  posted on  2010-09-26   15:57:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: PaulCJ (#21)

Your question was answered. You just don't like the answer.

The exit of the American and Israeli delegations exit had nothing to do with being offended and had everything to do with Ahmadinejad hitting the Bulls-Eye which was something they cannot acknowledge or address because admission that 911 was a contrived event conducted as a PsyOp immediately delegitimizes U.S. Policy and War Crimes in the Middle East.

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-09-26   16:25:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Original_Intent (#23)

Your question was answered. You just don't like the answer.

No, you did not answer my question. You sidestepped it. Now answer my question.

PaulCJ  posted on  2010-09-26   16:28:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: PaulCJ (#25)

Your question was answered. I don't play "have you quit beating your wife yet?" games.

911 WAS an inside job, what Ahmadinejad said was true and the real reason that the diplomats walked out was because they dare not acknowledge or grant any credence to the truth.

When someone makes a criminal accusation it is quite normal for the criminal to become upset, particularly in the case of mass murder, as such are often offered a new "neck tie". Criminals do not like having their crimes exposed.

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-09-26   16:40:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Original_Intent (#27)

I don't play "have you quit beating your wife yet?" games.

You comparing a stranger making accusations in a person's home, to someone beating their spouse, shows how messed up your priorities are.

PaulCJ  posted on  2010-09-26   18:03:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 28.

#33. To: PaulCJ (#28)

I don't play "have you quit beating your wife yet?" games.

You comparing a stranger making accusations in a person's home, to someone beating their spouse, shows how messed up your priorities are.

Your analogy is a false analogy and is one of the Logical Fallacies.

False Analogy

The two are not equivalent. The UN is a public diplomatic venue, and is an entity separate and distinct from a private living room. The two are in no way equivalent. You are simply setting up a false argument to divert from the point and significance of Ahmadinejad's accusation.

Oh, by the way where is all the evidence of Osama Bin Forgotten's complicity in 911? The Bush Junta publicly stated they had the goods and yet here 9 years after the fact 911 is not even on Osama Bin Dead alongtime's FBI "Most Wanted" Sheet, and that is a matter of public record.

So, spare me all the histrionics. You have no case, no argument, and no point.

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-09-26 18:25:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 28.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


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