War On Activism And Citizen Journalists
I noticed that sitemeter has been down for a while and it got me to thinking about what TPTB would do to stem the tide of internet activism and the last bastion of true democracy. Sitemeter's website exclaims that "no body's going to be in the office until the 26th" and have a nice Thanksgiving weekend so I wouldn't think that it's a conspiracy to mitigate general blog effectiveness by getting rid of monitoring capabilities, but hey, that's a possibility.
Ron Paul's effective support on the net is making the despicable MSM sit up and take notice. That old Ghandi quote "First they ignore you" is playing out in real time in front of our eyes. Now TPTB have reached the second part of the quote and are verging on the third - "then they ridicule you then they fight you". Paul's support on the tubes is genuine and widespread and he wins just about every poll there is, exposing the lies at ABCNBCCNNFOX. His stance is absolutely the most frightening message that a candidate could put out there to entrenched power and established media, filled with constitutional references and calls to end illegal war. Lame efforts to ignore and exclude him took heavy criticism, now Big Media, the fascists and their goose steppers are on the attack to marginalize and discredit him, and with him the growing threat of internet activism and self empowerment.
Here are two findings in HR 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, soon to be S1959:
1. The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security.
and
2. The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.
We're starting to see references to activists as terrorists, as if anyone who dares to reject this full throttle fascist stampede is a national threat. Dim Son laid the foundation for this when he threw down the gauntlet with his "you're either with us or agin' us". Well yeah, gaining awareness and sharing information is a threat to the forces that are stealing our country from us and are turning it into a blood soaked theocratic police state. CNN gasbag Glenn Beck recently caused a firestorm on his show by idiotically lumping all dissidents, Ron Paul supporters, Salamifascists and grumpy people together and calling on the US military to be used against them:
"This is part of an ongoing propaganda assault which has also been mimicked by other anti-American Neo-Con talking heads like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh.
Beck opened up his show segment by inferring that the U.S. military should be used to silence domestic dissent against the war, claiming that those he would later identify as Ron Paul supporters, libertarians and the anti-war left and link with terrorists, were a "physical threat."
Big play was given the fact that someone supposedly in bed with the KKK donated to Paul's campaign:
"The Paul campaign has also drawn support from antigovernment fringe groups and 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Since mid-September, a large "Ron Paul for President" banner has flashed at the bottom of white-supremacist Internet forum Stormfront.org. "Really, we haven't seen a candidate like Ron Paul in some time. The closest would have been Pat Buchanan" in 2000, says Don Black of West Palm Beach, Fla., the group's founder and a former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard, who donated $500 to Mr. Paul's campaign."
But the Ron Paul phenomenon is just the poster boy for the wider internet threat to controlled media and authoritarian forces who don't like people operating outside established parameters. There's just too much god damned freedom going on. Up to now Big Media and their masters have had a free ride to frame reality and truth in ways complementary to entrenched power and they hate the fact that people don't need or want their corporatized information anymore. Sitting slack jawed and drooling in front of the BoobTube like a good little consumer is out, creating and uploading video to YouTube is in.
What we're seeing could be the beginnings of the end of the internet as we know it, and the start of a giant effort to paint dissent on the web in the ugliest colors possible.
"Several experts testified this week before a subcommittee of the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security about how the Internet has become the weapon of choice for terrorists and other radicals."
Just the other day Homeland Insecurity made up a supposed threat to the sham peace conference in Annapolis:
“Nonetheless, DHS does not discount the threat of the lone-wolf terrorists, including individuals radicalized by homegrown extremist groups or Internet content,” the threat assessment said."
The internet has been a double edged sword for our preening overlords. On the one hand the net became a freewheeling riot of information where people can organize, communicate and learn, on the other hand our self appointed masters use their carnivore/echelon snoopware and who knows what else to monitor all our activities. I think over the years they've been wary of the potential threat that an awakened populace would be and they've learned how to deal with it. They can just pull the plug on the highway at any time (but not until the holiday shopping season is over) and blame their patsies du jour, or they can get all "domestic terrorists" on us, which is what they seemed to choose. People who point out the fact that ~>Bush et al are mass murdering scumbags <~ could expect a lot more official opprobrium. And worse if they pull a false flag terror incident and try to finger the bloggers.
Just give me back the stupid sitemeter.
Ron Paul's effective support on the net is making the despicable MSM sit up and take notice. That old Ghandi quote "First they ignore you" is playing out in real time in front of our eyes. Now TPTB have reached the second part of the quote and are verging on the third - "then they ridicule you then they fight you". Paul's support on the tubes is genuine and widespread and he wins just about every poll there is, exposing the lies at ABCNBCCNNFOX. His stance is absolutely the most frightening message that a candidate could put out there to entrenched power and established media, filled with constitutional references and calls to end illegal war. Lame efforts to ignore and exclude him took heavy criticism, now Big Media, the fascists and their goose steppers are on the attack to marginalize and discredit him, and with him the growing threat of internet activism and self empowerment.
Here are two findings in HR 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, soon to be S1959:
1. The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security.
and
2. The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.
We're starting to see references to activists as terrorists, as if anyone who dares to reject this full throttle fascist stampede is a national threat. Dim Son laid the foundation for this when he threw down the gauntlet with his "you're either with us or agin' us". Well yeah, gaining awareness and sharing information is a threat to the forces that are stealing our country from us and are turning it into a blood soaked theocratic police state. CNN gasbag Glenn Beck recently caused a firestorm on his show by idiotically lumping all dissidents, Ron Paul supporters, Salamifascists and grumpy people together and calling on the US military to be used against them:
"This is part of an ongoing propaganda assault which has also been mimicked by other anti-American Neo-Con talking heads like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh.
Beck opened up his show segment by inferring that the U.S. military should be used to silence domestic dissent against the war, claiming that those he would later identify as Ron Paul supporters, libertarians and the anti-war left and link with terrorists, were a "physical threat."
Big play was given the fact that someone supposedly in bed with the KKK donated to Paul's campaign:
"The Paul campaign has also drawn support from antigovernment fringe groups and 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Since mid-September, a large "Ron Paul for President" banner has flashed at the bottom of white-supremacist Internet forum Stormfront.org. "Really, we haven't seen a candidate like Ron Paul in some time. The closest would have been Pat Buchanan" in 2000, says Don Black of West Palm Beach, Fla., the group's founder and a former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard, who donated $500 to Mr. Paul's campaign."
But the Ron Paul phenomenon is just the poster boy for the wider internet threat to controlled media and authoritarian forces who don't like people operating outside established parameters. There's just too much god damned freedom going on. Up to now Big Media and their masters have had a free ride to frame reality and truth in ways complementary to entrenched power and they hate the fact that people don't need or want their corporatized information anymore. Sitting slack jawed and drooling in front of the BoobTube like a good little consumer is out, creating and uploading video to YouTube is in.
What we're seeing could be the beginnings of the end of the internet as we know it, and the start of a giant effort to paint dissent on the web in the ugliest colors possible.
"Several experts testified this week before a subcommittee of the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security about how the Internet has become the weapon of choice for terrorists and other radicals."
Just the other day Homeland Insecurity made up a supposed threat to the sham peace conference in Annapolis:
“Nonetheless, DHS does not discount the threat of the lone-wolf terrorists, including individuals radicalized by homegrown extremist groups or Internet content,” the threat assessment said."
The internet has been a double edged sword for our preening overlords. On the one hand the net became a freewheeling riot of information where people can organize, communicate and learn, on the other hand our self appointed masters use their carnivore/echelon snoopware and who knows what else to monitor all our activities. I think over the years they've been wary of the potential threat that an awakened populace would be and they've learned how to deal with it. They can just pull the plug on the highway at any time (but not until the holiday shopping season is over) and blame their patsies du jour, or they can get all "domestic terrorists" on us, which is what they seemed to choose. People who point out the fact that ~>Bush et al are mass murdering scumbags <~ could expect a lot more official opprobrium. And worse if they pull a false flag terror incident and try to finger the bloggers.
Just give me back the stupid sitemeter.
posted by nolocontendere at 4:40 PM
8 Comments:
If the internet does go down, they'll probly blame it on China.
What we have to realize is, they'll be lying about that too.
I'm still surprised the MSM and even the more supposed "progressive" sites have been mum on Paul's obsession with controlling women's wombs.
Conspiracy?? I'm beginning to think there's a radical christian undertaking going on--those who do not support the republican agenda or bush and are strong god-fearing constitutionalists who believe this nation was founded on christian values. You gotta stand up and take notice when the KKK is supporting ANY candidate and ask why.
I wonder what Paul's views are gays and lesbians and their right to marry.
'Tis why I still support Kucinich. He wants us out of Iraq. He supports impeaching Cheney first then Bush--he's one of the authors of the bill awaiting signatures. He wants us out of NAFTO and the WTO. He wants to toss the Patriot Act. He supports health care for all (also one of the authors of a bill that was created) and living wages. He supports a woman's right to choose (where he and Paul deviate) and civil unions for gays and lesbians (too damn bad he doesn't just do the decent thing and support their right to marry). Kucinich also does not support the war on drugs and believes in decriminalizing mj.
Paul says he supports individual freedoms and liberty, which isn't altogether true. He supports it in so long as you aren't female with an unwanted pregnancy...and until I hear otherwise, the jury's out on whether he supports freedom and liberty if you imbibe now and then or if you're gay or lesbian.
Yeah, I like Kucinich a lot. Much more than paul, who has some troublesome views.
Though truly, if you're a hard-core 9/11 skeptic, there's no candidate that is truly acceptable.
In any case, I saw this weekend they started the meme that the internet is "getting full" and it's going to be slower in the future. Clearly paving the way for disruptions on the net.
This whole thing about the internet spawning terrorism is naturally very creepy, but it really makes no sense, as "al qaeda" certainly doesn't want to put out the message that 9/11 was an inside job... the PTB are the biggest terrorists anyway, and the web is hardly recruiting people to the PTB.
Paul also supports the Constitution and the right of states to decide on the issues for themselves, free of the feds forcing them to do everything according to a federal-mandated agenda.
That includes women's rights on abortion. He admitted that although he was personally opposed to abortion, he also said that it would not be his decision, that each state would have to make that decision for themselves.
The problem with Paul's campaign is that it is being suppressed and edited in such a way that Americans aren't getting the whole story, just the part that the MSM, the corporate-run and dem-front blogs want the people to get.
I dig Kucinich and few others. Paul cracks me up but some of what he believes is deeply, profoundly disturbing to me. Just because we're on the same side regarding constitution and war doesn't mean I could stomach him. Kucinich won't win, and I'll have to vote the lesser of two evils yet again, but I like him anyway.
Dig this post, and I'll be linking it in my blog for folks. Great stuff.
Bp
I could support Paul's desire to let the states decide on the abortion issue--IF he didn't intend on creating federal legislation that states life begins at conception--and IF the pro-life citizens and gov't personnel at the state level would refrain from using Paul's federal legislation from banning abortion all together.
However, he does intend on creating this legislation (it's on his website) and we know how the radical pro-lifers in both the public and private sector can be. They would have a HAY DAY with this legislation. And it doesn't make an ounce of sense to even have such a piece of federal legislation unless you have an underlying agenda. And that is what I have yet to see him address--what is his motivation for creating such a piece of (dangerous) legislation.
Great stuff you guys. While I'm personally for "none of the above" it's fascinating to see this Paul phenomena and the panicked reaction of the entrenched MSM.
I can't forgo voting myself. Yep, it's lesser of evils, but there is a lesser, and where I see it is mostly in appointments.
Specific example: rocking educational appointments during Clinton. Clinton? He stunk as bad as the last and that before him, but his education team was good, and financial aid went out smoothly, and people got a bit of service out of their government.
Was Clinton going to limit his own power? No. Was he going to dissolve the federal reserve to save our economy from economic manipulation par extordinaire? No. But, he made a few good appointments, and for that he got my vote over whatever other hacks were running that year.
Post a Comment
<< Home