Top 25 Censored Stories for 2009

[alkemical]

Top 25 Censored Stories for 2009

• #1. Over One Million Iraqi Deaths Caused by US Occupation



• # 2 Security and Prosperity Partnership: Militarized NAFTA



• # 3 InfraGard: The FBI Deputizes Business



• # 4 ILEA: Is the US Restarting Dirty Wars in Latin America?



• # 5 Seizing War Protesters’ Assets



• # 6 The Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act



• # 7 Guest Workers Inc.: Fraud and Human Trafficking



• # 8 Executive Orders Can Be Changed Secretly



• #9 Iraq and Afghanistan Vets Testify



• # 10 APA Complicit in CIA Torture



• # 11 El Salvador’s Water Privatization and the Global War on Terror



• # 12 Bush Profiteers Collect Billions From No Child Left Behind



• # 13 Tracking Billions of Dollars Lost in Iraq



• # 14 Mainstreaming Nuclear Waste



• # 15 Worldwide Slavery



• # 16 Annual Survey on Trade Union Rights



• # 17 UN’s Empty Declaration of Indigenous Rights



• # 18 Cruelty and Death in Juvenile Detention Centers



• # 19 Indigenous Herders and Small Farmers Fight Livestock Extinction



• # 20 Marijuana Arrests Set New Record



• # 21 NATO Considers “First Strike” Nuclear Option



• # 22 CARE Rejects US Food Aid



• # 23 FDA Complicit in Pushing Pharmaceutical Drugs



• # 24 Japan Questions 9/11 and the Global War on Terror



• # 25 Bush’s Real Problem with Eliot Spitzer

[baja]

Don't ever show this to TheDave....

[The Lone Bolt]

These "censored" stories are usually just unsubstantiated propaganda pieces not worthy of any legitimate media attention.

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

These "censored" stories are usually just unsubstantiated propaganda pieces not worthy of any legitimate media attention.

Do you realize that your very post - is propoganda? The poisen the well technique is nothing more than a logical fallacy - derrived of argumentum ad hominem?

So by your very own post, you have removed your credibility on this thread.

Here - since i'm a nice guy:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...nda_techniques

Rhetorical Techniques

During the period between World Wars I and II, the now-defunct Institute for Propaganda Analysis (IPA) developed a list of common rhetorical techniques used for propaganda purposes. Their list included the following:

* doublespeak
* fear
* glittering generalities
* name-calling

[edit]
Other Techniques / Terms

* ad hominem
* apologise
* astroturf
* bad science
* bait and switch
* big lie
* buzz
* buzzwords
* comic books
* controlling the message
* demonizing the opposition
* disinformation
* divide and conquer
* doublespeak
* echo chamber
* front group
* greenwashing
* guerrilla marketing
* junk science
* misinformation
* photographic manipulation
* policy laundering
* politics of personal destruction
* Political Code Words
* product placement
* providing pictures
* Public Service Announcments
* push poll
* quoting out of context
* release of forged documents
* repetition
* straw man
* swiftboating
* using celebrities
* talking points
* vagueness
* video news releases
* viral marketing (word of mouth)

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by amesj523

Do you realize that your very post - is propoganda? The poisen the well technique is nothing more than a logical fallacy - derrived of argumentum ad hominem?

So by your very own post, you have removed your credibility on this thread.

Just calling it like I sees it. I've looked into these "censored" stories in the past and the ones that I've scrutinized have been, without exception, unnewsworthy, unsubstantiated propaganda pieces.

Claiming that unsubstantiated stories have been "censored" by the media and therefore implying that the MSM is trying to keep the "truth" from us is just an effort to legitimize propaganda IMO.

[baja]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

Just calling it like I sees it. I've looked into these "censored" stories in the past and the ones that I've scrutinized have been, without exception, unnewsworthy, unsubstantiated propaganda pieces.

Claiming that unsubstantiated stories have been "censored" by the media and therefore implying that the MSM is trying to keep the "truth" from us is just an effort to legitimize propaganda IMO.

Your the guy that thinks Bush is innocent on the grounds of his stupidity right?

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by baja

Your the guy that thinks Bush is innocent on the grounds of his stupidity right?

Nope, I'm the guy who has argued that Bush might (that's M-I-G-H-T) not have intentionally misled the public on the Iraq Prewar intel, that the evidence is entirely circumstantial, that he has not been convicted in a court of law, and that every single American citizen, including Bush, is entitled to presumption of innocence, and that the lynch-mob mentality on this board is inappropriate.

Terribly unreasonable stuff like that.

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

Just calling it like I sees it. I've looked into these "censored" stories in the past and the ones that I've scrutinized have been, without exception, unnewsworthy, unsubstantiated propaganda pieces.

Claiming that unsubstantiated stories have been "censored" by the media and therefore implying that the MSM is trying to keep the "truth" from us is just an effort to legitimize propaganda IMO.

Yes, because the Main Stream Media shows real news and not..what - i dunno - what lohan is doing or maybe some other distraction. As far as legitimizing propaganda your boy GWB and his admin has gotten in trouble for pushing propaganda.

Sorry that you don't agree with these stories as being news worthy - it only affirms how much you support a facist gov't.

Your whole assessment is exactly what i outlined - nothing more than a poison the well technique. You have argued or pointed out nothing other than taken a point of "authority" - which again - is another propaganda technique.

Infact i can make an argument that you are so brainwashed you don't even have your own thoughts on these matters.

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

Nope, I'm the guy who has argued that Bush might (that's M-I-G-H-T) not have intentionally misled the public on the Iraq Prewar intel, that the evidence is entirely circumstantial, that he has not been convicted in a court of law, and that every single American citizen, including Bush, is entitled to presumption of innocence.

Terribly unreasonable stuff like that.

There are no courts for men in positions like Bush, etc.

[baja]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

Nope, I'm the guy who has argued that Bush might (that's M-I-G-H-T) not have intentionally misled the public on the Iraq Prewar intel, that the evidence is entirely circumstantial, that he has not been convicted in a court of law, and that every single American citizen, including Bush, is entitled to presumption of innocence, and that the lynch-mob mentality on this board is inappropriate.

Terribly unreasonable stuff like that.

Well there is no real proof that osama bin Ladin is guilty of being the general behind the 9/11 operation and that is a lesser crime that what Bush has perpetrated on the US people so he should be free too right. oh wait a minute he is free...

[baja]

Josh- Infact i can make an argument that you are so brainwashed you don't even have your own thoughts on these matters.
__________________

It's an epidemic I tell ya....

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by amesj523

Sorry that you don't agree with these stories as being news worthy - it only affirms how much you support a facist gov't.

Your whole assessment is exactly what i outlined - nothing more than a poison the well technique. You have argued or pointed out nothing other than taken a point of "authority" - which again - is another propaganda technique.

Infact i can make an argument that you are so brainwashed you don't even have your own thoughts on these matters.

Once again, I have looked into many of these "censored" stories and have examined them with some critical judgment. You should try it sometime.

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by baja

Well there is no real proof that osama bin Ladin is guilty of being the general behind the 9/11 operation

Except of course his videotaped confessions.

Oh wait, those are all "fake."

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

Once again, I have looked into many of these "censored" stories and have examined them with some critical judgment. You should try it sometime.

* Ad hominem circumstantial
o Involves pointing out that someone is in circumstances such that he or she is disposed to take a particular position.
o Constitutes an attack on the bias of a person.
o Does not make one's opponent's arguments, from a logical point of view, any less credible to point out that one's opponent is disposed to argue that way.


____

If you "critically" looked at the items with as much...effort that you are doing to refute it with your less than stellar cop-out techiques... - i sincerely doubt any iota of "objectivity" you have.

[baja]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

Except of course his videotaped confessions.

Oh wait, those are all "fake."

I know you could make that case. You have done far more for Bush with far less.

[The Lone Bolt]

Originally Posted by baja

I know you could make that case. You have done far more for Bush with far less.

So lemme get this straight . . .

Circumstantial evidence is enough to convice you absolutely of bush's guilt,

But even TWO VIDEOTAPES CONFESSIONS aren't enough to convince you that Bin Laden is guilty??

So if bush confessed tomorrow on videotape to deliberately lying to the public I could say it is a fake and your response would be that I "could make a case" for that?

[baja]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

So lemme get this straight . . .

Circumstantial evidence is enough to convice you absolutely of bush's guilt,

But even TWO VIDEOTAPES CONFESSIONS aren't enough to convince you that Bin Laden is guilty??

So if bush confessed tomorrow on videotape to deliberately lying to the public I could say it is a fake and your response would be that I "could make a case" for that?

i stopped discussing with any level of seriousness this topic with you.

I think osama has been dead for years now but the tapes keep coming. gotta have a boogie man....

[kappys]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

These "censored" stories are usually just unsubstantiated propaganda pieces not worthy of any legitimate media attention.

Really, perhaps you should read the stories. When they cite Justice department documents, etc. it does not constitute "unsubstantiated"

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt

So lemme get this straight . . .

Circumstantial evidence is enough to convice you absolutely of bush's guilt,

But even TWO VIDEOTAPES CONFESSIONS aren't enough to convince you that Bin Laden is guilty??

So if bush confessed tomorrow on videotape to deliberately lying to the public I could say it is a fake and your response would be that I "could make a case" for that?

Which bin laden?

The fake one?

or the dead one?

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by kappys

Really, perhaps you should read the stories. When they cite Justice department documents, etc. it does not constitute "unsubstantiated"

That's what exactly he's dodging and i called him on it. He did nothing but use standard propaganda deflection techniques to side step the issues. He wouldn't even bring up what wasn't "true"... lol