Alternative Media and Ahamadinejad's Speech. Total Silence! Total Censorship.
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 http://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 why 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.