Jump to content
The Education Forum

Right-wing blogger condemns Amy Goodman to death


Recommended Posts

Guest David Guyatt
So quit and retain self-respect. What you are defending is a compromiser's self-interested charter. It would appear you didn't follow that path, so why defend it when others do?

Sadly Paul, such a position entirely disregards the human factor.

It is a very big step to turn your back a career, on a known and regular income - security if you will - and to step out on to that slim branch not knowing it will support your weight. Truth is a wonderful thing in life but putting food on the table is essential for life.

I can speak personally as one who turned his back on a successful career and stepped out on that branch. There's slim pickings out there, my friend. From the Savoy Grill and room service at the George V, to baked beans on toast in a rented kitchen, in one foul swoop.

But hey, baked beans. Yum.

Sometimes, I was lucky to come across other journalists, like Jan, who shared the unlikely areas of interest I did and cared about them, and tried to arouse interest in them in the msm ---- with the usual results (but sometimes making a difference, too).

So I would defend others trying to do the right thing inside the beast even when when they know their chances of success are minimal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply
So quit and retain self-respect. What you are defending is a compromiser's self-interested charter. It would appear you didn't follow that path, so why defend it when others do?

Sadly Paul, such a position entirely disregards the human factor.

It is a very big step to turn your back a career, on a known and regular income - security if you will - and to step out on to that slim branch not knowing it will support your weight. Truth is a wonderful thing in life but putting food on the table is essential for life.

I can speak personally as one who turned his back on a successful career and stepped out on that branch. There's slim pickings out there, my friend. From the Savoy Grill and room service at the George V, to baked beans on toast in a rented kitchen, in one foul swoop.

But hey, baked beans. Yum.

Sometimes, I was lucky to come across other journalists, like Jan, who shared the unlikely areas of interest I did and cared about them, and tried to arouse interest in them in the msm ---- with the usual results (but sometimes making a difference, too).

So I would defend others trying to do the right thing inside the beast even when when they know their chances of success are minimal.

David,

I understand your points, and sympathise: kids, mortgages, the whole shebang. It is, unquestionably, a bloody difficult and frightening choice. But let's not pretend that small truths can be preserved while acquiescing in the bigger lies. That's even more facile than anything I've argued. And, in the end, it's about choices. To remain in the bosom of the Beeb, CBS, the Guardian and the NYT - to name but four - while proclaiming a commitment to virtue is no longer tenable. If it ever was.

Best,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest David Guyatt
So quit and retain self-respect. What you are defending is a compromiser's self-interested charter. It would appear you didn't follow that path, so why defend it when others do?

Sadly Paul, such a position entirely disregards the human factor.

It is a very big step to turn your back a career, on a known and regular income - security if you will - and to step out on to that slim branch not knowing it will support your weight. Truth is a wonderful thing in life but putting food on the table is essential for life.

I can speak personally as one who turned his back on a successful career and stepped out on that branch. There's slim pickings out there, my friend. From the Savoy Grill and room service at the George V, to baked beans on toast in a rented kitchen, in one foul swoop.

But hey, baked beans. Yum.

Sometimes, I was lucky to come across other journalists, like Jan, who shared the unlikely areas of interest I did and cared about them, and tried to arouse interest in them in the msm ---- with the usual results (but sometimes making a difference, too).

So I would defend others trying to do the right thing inside the beast even when when they know their chances of success are minimal.

David,

I understand your points, and sympathise: kids, mortgages, the whole shebang. It is, unquestionably, a bloody difficult and frightening choice. But let's not pretend that small truths can be preserved while acquiescing in the bigger lies. That's even more facile than anything I've argued. And, in the end, it's about choices. To remain in the bosom of the Beeb, CBS, the Guardian and the NYT - to name but four - while proclaiming a commitment to virtue is no longer tenable. If it ever was.

Best,

Paul

Paul, on the other hand, sometimes the big truths are pushed through the restraining mesh. Take Richard Belfield's three ITV documentaries on the Diana assassination (er, accident). He also, years earlier, had broadcast his documentary on Delgado's bull, to an unsuspecting public. The few brave souls out there battling the msm from the inside deserve our respect rather than opprobrium, I think. Better that a small but high quality contribution slips through the net than none at all.

I don't suppose we will agree on this one, mate... :blink:

Take care,

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is more than one truther out there that conduct themselves pporly; Peter's sometimes quoted Killclown is a good example:

Mrs. McClatchey was taken aback by the personal criticism by those who, she said, "hide behind their aliases."

"This Killtown, whoever he may be, I find it very disturbing that this is a 16-page attack on me personally," said Mrs. McClatchey, who opened her real estate company a year and a half ago. "My business is named. That hurts me personally. It's pretty disturbing. My whole life is out there, a map to where I live, a map to my office. It's a safety issue for me. There's some crazy people out there."

**************

About Mrs. McClatchey's "End of Serenity," Killtown concludes that either the smoke plume in the photo came from a bomb blast closer to her house, or that the picture was faked by Mrs. McClatchey or the FBI. Killtown writes: "If the first is true, then Val may be off the hook. If any of the latter two are the case, then Val, you got some splainin' to do!" He then proceeds to post her home address, phone number and personal e-mail information.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06218/711239-85.stm

Perhaps Killclown would like his details posted?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul, on the other hand, sometimes the big truths are pushed through the restraining mesh. Take Richard Belfield's three ITV documentaries on the Diana assassination (er, accident). He also, years earlier, had broadcast his documentary on Delgado's bull, to an unsuspecting public. The few brave souls out there battling the msm from the inside deserve our respect rather than opprobrium, I think. Better that a small but high quality contribution slips through the net than none at all.

I don't suppose we will agree on this one, mate... :box

Take care,

David

Upon reflection - well, two hours or so in the sun gardening while waiting for a plumber - I've decided I'm a hypocrite. In the somewhat improbable event the Beeb came to me and said "make a film on the Z film" or Richard Starnes, reasonable budget, no censorship, would I take up the offer? My goodness, what a temptation, and what a dilemma.

Very probably. Under an alias.

The hypocrite. Times two.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest David Guyatt
There is more than one truther out there that conduct themselves pporly; Peter's sometimes quoted Killclown is a good example:

Evan, no disrespect intended to you personally, but I hate to see the word "truther" used in this or other forums. It is one of those emotive and pejorative words I would like to see banned, in fact.

Truth is something to be admired, not tarnished as a handle applied to those who have no rigour, discipline or probity -- or otherwise follow a hidden agenda. Such folk fully deserve to be called something, but whatever word chosen, it shouldn't be confused with the truth. Imo. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand where you are coming from, but they do call themselves the 'Truth Movement', and often refer to themselves as Truthers. I find it amusing because many of them seek not the truth but what supports their own beliefs (whatever that may be).

What would an alternative name? 911CTs (911 Conspiracy Theorists)? RO911Es (Rejects Official 911 Explanations)?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest David Guyatt
I can understand where you are coming from, but they do call themselves the 'Truth Movement', and often refer to themselves as Truthers. I find it amusing because many of them seek not the truth but what supports their own beliefs (whatever that may be).

What would an alternative name? 911CTs (911 Conspiracy Theorists)? RO911Es (Rejects Official 911 Explanations)?

Some people might call themselves that, I agree.

I see no problem with 911 CT's because what we are examining is a conspiracy theory, not an established fact.

I say this even though I personally lean towards the Pearl Harbour/government insiders knew and stood down perspective. Rejecting Official Explanation (ROE's) also works for me. Rejecting official explanations is a time honoured citizen activity that goes back thousands of years and would be a required and necessary adjunct to safeguarding democracy -- supposing we lived in a free and democratic society to begin with.

Sadly, we don't...

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can understand where you are coming from, but they do call themselves the 'Truth Movement', and often refer to themselves as Truthers. I find it amusing because many of them seek not the truth but what supports their own beliefs (whatever that may be).

What would an alternative name? 911CTs (911 Conspiracy Theorists)? RO911Es (Rejects Official 911 Explanations)?

Some people might call themselves that, I agree.

I see no problem with 911 CT's because what we are examining is a conspiracy theory, not an established fact.

I say this even though I personally lean towards the Pearl Harbour/government insiders knew and stood down perspective. Rejecting Official Explanation (ROE's) also works for me. Rejecting official explanations is a time honoured citizen activity that goes back thousands of years and would be a required and necessary adjunct to safeguarding democracy -- supposing we lived in a free and democratic society to begin with.

Sadly, we don't...

A quick Google reveals that the word ‘truther’ is commonly used by both sides of the debate to describe people who belong to the 9/11 truth movement.

There is even a truther site http://truther.org/

It is used frequently by Alex Jones’ sites www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2007/240407truthershooter.htm

www.infowars.net/articles/march2007/160307ODonnell.htm

www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/chretien_ex_canadian_pm_next_truther.htm

www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/220307truthersconfront.htm

www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/210307policeharass.htm

And other truther sites

www.total911.info/2005/06/911-truthers-confront-nist-at-wtc.html

www.rense.com/general76/trthers.htm

I don’t see a better alternative, “member(s) of the truth movement” is too awkward and I think most would find “911 revisionist” favored by Holocaust ‘skeptic’ Kevin “hang’em” Barrett, offensive.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=+...ite%3Amujca.com

Others of course would object to "9/11 CT's" claiming that was pejorative as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So how do I address them Peter? There are the 'no-planers', who believe that no aircraft hit the WTC and Pentagon, that it was hologrammes, laser beams, and cruise missiles. There are those who say the aircraft were intercepted in mid-flight, to be replaced by empty aircraft flown by remote control. MIHOP, LIHOP, no-planers, pod people... there are so many variations!

Isn't 911CT fair and reasonable? It does seem to describe their beliefs.

Perhaps the RO911E term is more accurate?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think 911CT is workable. I'll start using that.

That's very good of you, Evan.

It is a a useless and ambiguous term, as those who support the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 are also 9ll'CT's but since they are persons in denial or involved in cover-up they may even deny this obvious fact - the official version is one of a conspiracy....only who was involved differs in the two camps. Further, these are all and all meant to be derrogetory to paint those who whould ever see a conspiracy as not-all-there-psychologically. Conspiracy is common in business, in love, in war, in pollitics and in life. Only those who have a vested interest in control of the news and views paint 'conspiracy' as a rare event that never can be kept from general knowledge - both big fat lies.

Quite ironic that the person who keeps labeling those who disagree with his views “clown”, “borg”, or some variation of Nazi (brown shirt, kapo, “SS like”, Goebbels worshipper etc) is complaining that “truther” and “911CT” are derogatory. No other member of this forum so consistently insults and personally attacks fellow members.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...