Lockerbie, Wikipedia, and “Linda Mack”

[Paul Rigby]

Interesting piece here:

http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/ar...06&rel_no=1

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Peter Lemkin wrote:

I'd suggest those on the side of seeing the seedier side of the secret government [for lack of a better term] start their own such website and fight to maintain control.

----------------

I'm not sure if this is the issue. What bothers the CIA et. al. is NOT THAT ANOTHER SITE EXISTS. The question I think they care more about is does that website have critical mass to control the narrative of current events. If not it might actually be helping the powerful by sowing disagreement about the causes of an event like 9/11 of 11/22, and thus preventing the consolidation of a counter-narrative unified enough to challenge the Official History.

The Corporate Media have shown a new ability to take the net seriously. Witness the way CNN has for two years or so had net reporters, who direct viewers to sites they consider legitimate. Time Magazine and the NYT regularly have articles on top new websites, thereby beulding synergy between Corporate Media and favored branches of the net. The net is not growing organically anymore: rather it is being effected by this Hothouse influence of the Corporate Media. Other sites that don't reach out are contributing to thier own marginalization. To look at the net AS A WHOLE as the opposite of the mainstream corporate media is a dangerous oversimplification that doesn't take into consideration the latest countermoves by Corporate Media.

Not accusing you of this, just postulatin.