I relay this message of "labourse" of the "Silence of the wolves" which was sent to me by boat, because I believe that it sums up the situation well, the forum "Silence of the wolves" which you can find here
Bonjour à tous
NEW MESSAGE N° 16
"The government is pissing on us, the media is telling us it's raining..."
(slogan we owe to the film Forget Cheyenne by Valerie Minetto (2005)
This post will be dedicated to media deception.
It is a formidable weapon that is used against us.
But it is also a potential BIG weak point for Wolves.
Because if that weapon slips away from them, if they lose control of it, they're finished.
Not only will they no longer be able to advance masked and conceal their misdeeds in preparation
but they will also have to answer for their past actions.
Externally, the media citadel seems impregnable.
Armored. Locked.
But archery shots can hit targets behind the ramparts.
Here a host, there a journalist, there a columnist,…
Remember what I wrote last March:
Quote from: plow (au 09-03-2009 03:23:50)
(...)
The objective is to stigmatize no longer those who question an iniquitous and cynical system but those who have applied themselves to defending the indefensible and obstructing speeches that convey common sense (whether they are economists, journalists or policy).
Quote from: plow (au 17-03-2009 08:02:35)
Let those who play the game of anti-democracy, who practice brainwashing,
which convey the propaganda of the System (lies, dissimulation, rigged or biased debate)
know that the time may come when they will have to answer for their actions...
Quote from: plow (au 17-03-2009 08:02:35)
You thought you were living in a free country with media that inform you about what is happening in the world?
For how many years have we been put to sleep without our knowledge?
For how many years have the guests, the specialists on the sets been chosen, do they pretend and never address in depth what deviates from Globalist Dogma?
(...)
Aren't you like me? Aren't you tired of all this completely sterile media circus?
Aren't you tired of always finding the same faces on TV sets, simulating clashes of ideas with the help of agreed and threadbare arguments?
Aren't you tired of being taken for idiots by presenting you with a sham of freedom of speech, when you are just being given diversion or propaganda?
And in May:
Quote from: plow (au 05-06-2009 09:56:37)
3/ The collusion of mass media, reduced for the most part to the role of mere instruments of propaganda, is already largely suspected by the public. A few concrete and well-felt examples can further reveal the evidence of the wolves' hold on information (newspapers, reports, debates, etc.)
And in October:
Quote from: plow (au 20-10-2009 08:19:01)
"Do you believe that speech is free on official media sites (left and right)?
Do you know that the forums of the sites mentioned above (Europe1.fr, nouveauobs.com,…) are purely and simply censored and that the comments mentioning the presence of Valls in Bilderberg have not appeared?!?
What is the true face of our mainstream media?
Freedom of expression ? equity ? free access to information for the greatest number?
Completely the opposite.
Smear campaigns, process of exclusion and marginalization, incriminating (or exculpatory) televised debates under the false air of contradictory debates, unanimous media passing off as natural and obvious untruths or assertions that are at least questionable, etc., etc…
Because there are words that have more weight than mine, look in what terms
our only French Nobel laureate in economics, Maurice Allais, invited you to ask yourself last December:
Against undisputed taboos, by Maurice Allais
Tribune by Maurice Allais, published in the weekly Marianne n°659 from December 5 to 11, 2009.
« If the reader would go back to my analyzes of unemployment, as I have published them over the past two decades, he would find that the events we are living through have not only been announced there but described in detail. However, they received only an increasingly limited echo in the mainstream press. This silence leads to questioning.
The economic commentators that I see speaking regularly on television to analyze the causes of the current crisis are frequently the same ones who came there before to analyze the good economic situation with perfect serenity. They had not announced the arrival of the crisis, and most of them do not offer anything serious to get out of it. But we still invite them. For my part, I was not invited to television sets when I announced, and I wrote, more than ten years ago, that a major crisis accompanied by uncontrolled unemployment was soon to occur. I am one of those who have not been allowed to explain to the French what the real origins of the crisis are when they have been dispossessed of all real power over their own currency, in favor of the bankers. In the past, I have sent to certain economic programs which I have watched as a viewer the message that I am ready to come and talk about what the banks have gradually become today, the truly dangerous role of traders, and why certain truths are not said about them. No response, even negative, came from any television channel for years.
This repeated attitude raises a problem concerning the major media in France: some experts are authorized and others are prohibited. Although I am an internationally recognized expert on the economic crises, in particular those of 1929 or 1987, my present situation can therefore be summed up as follows: I am a television viewer. A Nobel Prize. .. Viewer. I find myself faced with what the specialists who are regularly invited, for their part, say on television sets, such as certain academics or financial analysts (…)
…these experts are wrong in their explanations. Some are doubly mistaken by ignoring their ignorance, but others, who know it and yet conceal it, thus deceive the French.
This ignorance and above all the desire to hide it thanks to certain media ]denote a rotting of debate and intelligence, due to special interests often linked to money. Interests that want the current economic order, which works to their advantage, to continue as it is. Among them are found in particular the multinationals which are the main beneficiaries, with the stock market and banking circles, of an economic mechanism which enriches them, while it impoverishes the majority of the French population but also of the world.
Key question: what is the true freedom of the big media? I am talking about their freedom from the world of finance as well as from the spheres of politics.
Second question: who holds the power to decide whether or not an expert is authorized to express a free comment in the press?
Last question: why are the causes of the crisis as presented to the French by these invited personalities often the sign of a profound misunderstanding of economic reality? Is it just their share of ignorance? It is possible for a certain number of them, but not for all. Those who hold this decision-making power leave us the choice between listening to the ignorant or the deceivers ».
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I fully agree with the words of our Nobel, which are reminiscent of what I have already written on this file:
Quote from: plow (au 04-04-2009 08:11:08)
What lobby, what forces of influence, what complicity, what duplicities have allowed, allow, this?
Can I trust the Democracy in which I live when I witness this situation where a "vehicle of economic propaganda" is offered regular forums in most of the economic Media?
- Who at Boursorama - and on the basis of what criteria - decided to open a platform for him and to maintain it for him despite everything?
- Who at BFM - and on the basis of what criteria - decided to open a forum for him and maintain it despite everything?
- Who in the Senate - and on the basis of what criteria - decided to allow him to influence our elected officials?
- Etc. ..
Let's stay on the theme of media deception, in a completely different genre but related to the news of recent days:
I would now like to mention the Vincent Peillon / Arlette Chabot affair.
Recall of facts :
The program “A Vous de Juger” Thursday at 20:35 p.m. on France 2 presented by Arlette Chabot had as guests the Minister of Integration Eric Besson as well as Marine Le Pen… and Vincent Peillon.
Theme of the debate: on national identity.
Vincent Peillon, who was to pass in the 2nd part of the debate, having withdrawn at the last moment, when the program had just started.
In a statement released at 21 p.m., the MEP challenges the organization of the program, in which he sees an "unworthy and unacceptable" "drift", and calls for the resignation of Arlette Chabot as well as "leaders of France 2 who authorized this operation".
I am not going to pass judgment here on the man, nor on the merits of his act and I will certainly not fall into the trap of a Right/Left, pro-Sarko/anti-Sarko, pro- yarmulke/anti-burga, pro-Fce2/anti-TF1, etc…
Comments posted on online media sites that discuss this case are most often distressingly biased and inconsistent.
Those who say things that are too relevant will of course have been censored, either by the moderators of the site, or by those of Concileo (thanks to gl33 for the info)
Quote from: gl33 (au 27-12-2009 19:49:29)
When newspapers get rid of their censorship by outsourcing the moderation of their forums:
[url='http://www.betapolitique.fr/Concileo-et-la-censure...]Concileo and internet censorship
[/ Url]
The Conciléo Company is a specialist (among other things) in forum moderation, and in particular subcontracts it to online newspapers such as the "Nouvel Observateur" and "Le Figaro"...
The question is: who sets the rules and principles of censorship?
Who decided on the creation of Concileo?
Who are the shareholders?
And behind them, who determines the "broadcastable" and the non-broadcastable?
The privatization of the supervision of freedom of speech, it still makes you think, doesn't it?
For my part, I will rather offer you a sequence “ interview ».
Friday 15/01, Vincent Peillon explained himself to the Grand Journal of Canal Plus. Alain Duhamel who was present on the television set to question him, speaks of a trap set by the MEP as well as unacceptable behavior.
Excerpts :
VP : There are some who have the right to lie and the others, opposite, must bend before the media powers
AD : who has the right to lie?
VP : you, all the time, permanently; and organize the debates and choose your guests
(...) there are processes in France that must stop
and if I have to sacrifice myself, frankly, personally, to alert some consciences, I do it with great pleasure, because I have noticed that many French people are now aware of this manipulation
Denisot. : do you think there is a big boss who directs all this?
VP : I said that in this case, yes.
AD : don't be paranoid either.
VP : personally, I chose my side, no problem, whatever the price it costs me.
(...)
VP : there it is a high mass organized with a political aim, which does not respect the framework of a democratic debate
and we let things settle like that in this country and nobody says anything.
This time I said to myself "that's enough!" and I'm glad it raises a few questions for everyone.
(...)
and I want the responsibilities to be pointed out, because there are more and less responsible
there were journalists in this newsroom who were deeply shocked
in their professional dignity to have to participate in this.*
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
*actually, a Point article of the day before confirms it:
Published on 13/01/2010 at 19:18 - Modified on 14/01/2010 at 15:44
A threat hangs over the program À vous de magistrat, presented by Arlette Chabot, which is to take place Thursday January 14 live on France 2.
The scheduled face-to-face between Éric Besson and Marine Le Pen on national identity creates a stir within the channel. The SNJ CGT calls for this debate to be deprogrammed on the grounds that it is "unworthy of the country of human rights." No coup de force to be feared from the trade unionists, however the management of France Télévisions remains on its guard and reinforces the security of the plateau. According to the press release signed by the Montreuil central, "journalists from France Télévisions and other media will not be the foils of a debate with nationalist, Islamophobic and demagogic overtones wanted by the Fillon-Sarkozy government on the eve of the regional ."
(...)
For his part, Patrice Duhamel (Alain's brother), the group's general manager, assures that "this program will not be a red carpet rolled out under the feet of Marine Le Pen."
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
We therefore find in Vincent Peillon's speech the same denunciations as in Maurice Allais.
Are we dealing with very ugly conspirators, marginalized people, extremists, revolutionaries
or just to people worried about the turn things have taken?
Of course, as it should be, Peillon was attacked on the form, on the method, on the ulterior motives, etc... but no politician has raised the seriousness of the BOTTOM of the issue he raised.
Thus, Xavier Bertrand said " I understand his cowardice »
Eric Besson said: "Basically, he's like a little boy who broke his toy and now wants someone to help him put the pieces back together.".
Alain Duhamel had slipped, on the set of Canal: "don't be paranoid either".
Quote from: plow (au 14-12-2009 07:17:01)
So here are some examples of behavior faced, when they are not simply ignored, by those who do not go straight: denigration, vexatious personal attacks and attacks,...
Everything in the Mascarade politician who maintains the veil of illusion.
We must break this little game that is taking place at our expense.
It is necessary to support the shootings which target the media citadel.
We must hurt collaborating journalists and support those who speak out against omerta.
The media has blithely deceived you and still shamelessly deceives you about the financial crisis, about the causes of global warming, about H1N1.
They don't inform you, they spread the propaganda of the decision makers.
They condition you.
Free yourself !
And alert your loved ones
And challenge your elected officials
plow
(1018 messages)
Terms & Conditions
Subscribe
Report
My comments