I hope you see the importance of turning a spotlight on ATF so that the people responsible for the current state of affairs can be identified and held accountable. I also think identifying and holding media outlets who know about this but choose not to report on it is something we ought to make known... I encourage regular Gun Rights Examiner readers to help spread the word by contacting other newspapers and networks and challenging them to cover this important story. [More]Today's GRE column proposes a simple step you can take to help shine a light on BATFU abuse.
The question is, will you?
6 comments:
Cause they're commies?
It goes a bit deeper then just being 'commies'.
The fact of the matter is the media has been co-opted by a certain alphabet agency that isn't charted to 'work' in the US.
Blackmail is how they keep them in 'control'.
Hence, why they hate the Internet. They can't control it.
If the CIA controls the entire US media, I'd like to see some credible documentation.
Meanwhile, if anyone would actually like to take five minutes and contact a paper or network, please feel free.
I hope I'm not being presumptuous or expecting too much from the people who come here every day and especially from those who regularly leave comments. I do sometimes wonder why anyone would waste their time here on a continued basis if they don't think the ideas are good enough to pitch in and help with.
So many in the MSM (owners/shareholders/stakeholders) seem to be anti-gun, anti-2A as an individual right. Some in the media business also directly impact on the political realm (specifically back East - you know who I'm referring to...).
Is it bias to overlook/under report on a subject that can put you at odds with the people who sign your paychecks? Especially these days when ever more media outlets are own by fewer and fewer owners/shareholders/stakeholders? Journalists used to have something akin to academic tenure, which shielded them from retribution (though I'd guess the editors/producers still controlled what made into the new paper, broadcast, etc).
I'd imagine those types of protections have dwindled along with the numbers of independent owners/shareholders/stakeholders, etc.
With the increase in Internet news over the traditional established sources of news. I hope this becomes less of an influence. However I'd also imagine that keeping up the status quo for many even in the Net is important, since one doesn't want to step on very toes one might wish to kiss later on for a cushy job.
http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=173&a=4872
How the CIA Created a Ruling, Corporate Overclass in America
Interesting link.
Their describing The Washington Post as "right wing" doesn't fill me with confidence they don't have a socialist agenda. And stuff like "During World War II, the OSS actively engaged in propaganda, sabotage and countless other dirty tricks," leads me to ask the burning question: And your point is?
They appear to have some interesting observations, but I don't see some conclusions supported by anything besides their say-so. How far the dots can really be connected would require much study--along with an examination of IntelDaily's motives.
Like I said, interesting link.
Post a Comment