The_Propagandist
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 10
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #1 |
Hi. I have a ton of questions.
I guess the most important one, to me at least, is:
What is your policy on controversial "political" type subject matter?
For example, the mainstream media (Disney, "New" Viacom [and its former parent CBS Corporation, the former "Old" Viacom], TimeWarner, News Corp, Bertelsmann AG, and General Electric together own something like more than 90% of the media holdings in the United States) rarely ever really talk about issues such as the North American Union (or, Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America - virtually erasing our borders with Canada & Mexico) & the NAFTA Superhighway, or Bohemian Grove & the yearly "mock" (effigy) sacrifices that our world leaders perform there to a giant idol of an owl, or that Bush's Grandfather helped to fund the Nazi party & that the "secret" society "Skull N' Bones," of which both W. and Kerry are members of, has strong ties to the Nazi party, or a never aired Discovery Channel documentary called “Conspiracy of Silence” exposing a network of religious leaders and Washington politicians who flew children to Washington D.C. for sex orgies, or so so many other things that are public knowledge, but are not commonly known by the masses of brainwashed sheeple I find myself surrounded by (I'm an anti-elitist elitist). I could go on & on, even though I would likely be too easily dismissed as a "conspiracy theorist" by too many uninformed or misinformed people even though there is ample evidence for everything I've just mentioned. So yeah, I've got loads of topics I'd love to write about, but am curious as to what kinds of things might have the best chance of being published.
---
...has the right to edit content that is considered obscene or inappropriate in nature determined by the editor/publisher. The Grover News reserves the right to not publish content at their discretion.
...reserves the right to not publish materials which are 1. libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, pornographic, threatening, or an invasion of privacy; 2. blah blah blah...
To my limited knowledge, it is only (legally) defamation if it is not true. My only other concern could be your "discretion."
Were I to even bother to submit anything for consideration, I would take care to include some kind of source for anything I would call a "fact," otherwise I would be sure to make clear that it is opinion.
...If no direction is clearly stated, the Grover News reserves the right to not include your name.
Does this also mean that people can publish under a pseudonym?
I guess this is it for now...
I had hoped to use another quote as my signature, but I kept getting told it was 5 characters too long... no matter how over the limit it was.
The Quote:
"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the Journalist is to destroy truth; To lie outright; To pervert; To vilify; To fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals for rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."
- John Swinton, the former chief of staff for the New York Times.
__________________
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries."
-David Rockefeller, Trilateral Commission Founder - 1991 |
| Loading... | | |
Grover
Registered: 07/13/07
Posts: 10
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #2 |
I think the paper could use this type of theory writing. Whether you agree or disagree it can make you think. Why dont you submit somthing over to me and we will take it from there.
Thanks for writing...
Staci
thegrover@thegrovernews.com
|
| Loading... | | |
ChadW
Registered: 02/18/08
Posts: 8
| |
The_Propagandist
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 10
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #4 |
Excuse me?
__________________
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries."
-David Rockefeller, Trilateral Commission Founder - 1991 |
| Loading... | | |
ChadW
Registered: 02/18/08
Posts: 8
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #5 |
I assume you are a Dem. Otherwise you would not have made that posting. The reason you don't think Fox News is fair and balanced is because they are just that. I wouldn't trust Tim "Socialist" Russert as far as I could throw his fat ass. No matter though, there is no changing the minds of anyone who is a self proclaimed Dem or Rep. PERIOD. |
| Loading... | | |
ChadW
Registered: 02/18/08
Posts: 8
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #6 |
All of those mainstream media publications are owned and operated by Dems. But you know that already Prop. |
| Loading... | | |
The_Propagandist
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 10
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #7 |
You would assume incorrectly, sir. I am not now nor ever will I be a Democrat. Neither am I a Republican. I prefer to avoid such labels altogether, as they are often too confining & inaccurate, &, in this case, almost the same thing. I generally do not believe Democrats & Republicans really even exist, in actuality. That, to me, is simplistic binary thinking. I do believe Republicrats & Demopublicans exist.
To think that, "Otherwise you would not have made that posting," is just silly. I am not a Democrat, & yet I still made that posting. The reason I don't think Fox News is fair and balanced is because they are not. I don't think any mainstream news corporation anywhere exists that is entirely fair & balanced, especially not Fox. I'm sorry that you do. That seems to me to be an awfully naive & trusting position to take.
Have you actually watched the "Outfoxed" documentary? "Orwell rolls in his grave" is another good one (though not specifically about Fox).
I also wouldn't trust Tim "Socialist" (if thats what you want to call him) Russert as far as I could throw his fat ass. So what? Some people accuse him of being a Jesuit agitator, being from a Jesuit university & all, among other things. Adam Weishaupt was also educated by Jesuits, not that that in itself means anything.
No matter though, there is no changing the minds of anyone. PERIOD (especially if they are biased, which everyone is). People can only change their own minds themselves. And those who know do not need to be told, while those who do not know, seldom listen.
I already know that all of those mainstream media publications (listed in my earlier post) are not entirely owned and operated by Democrats or Republicans, but a combination of both... but it doesn't really matter anyway because, as I said earlier, there is little difference. Perhaps because we (as a nation) have moved so far to the "right" that the "center" has become the new left & the old left is now "radical extremism?" To simply say that it's only Democrats is, again, silly. I could go on & on, but instead I refer you & any interested to Wikipedias entry: Media bias in the United States, especially 2 Claims of a liberal bias & 3 Claims of a conservative bias.
Also, if you haven't yet read my post, "Americans are mind controlled slaves," please do so. I'd be interested to hear what you've got to say about that.
__________________
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries."
-David Rockefeller, Trilateral Commission Founder - 1991 |
| Loading... | | |
ChadW
Registered: 02/18/08
Posts: 8
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #8 |
I won't watch outfoxed, I wont watch that fat bastard Moore's crap either. Fox is the only news outlet to have both Dems and Republicans debate the issues on their newscasts. Where do you get your news? Anyone who see's Fox News Corp as a french entity is really out there. And you sir seem to be way out in left field or right field...
We don't need cynics in this country we need realists.
|
| Loading... | | |
The_Propagandist
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 10
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #9 |
Why won't you watch "Outfoxed"? What are you so afraid of? If you are in fact correct about Fox news, you'll not be swayed by some documentary, right? The sad thing is, is that even if you do watch it, you will not likely be swayed by it, as it seems your mind is already made up & that you are not interested in what relevance any new (to you) information might have. An obvious case of confirmation bias.
The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it.
I agree that Michael Moore's stuff is (mostly, at least) crap. And he is fat. I don't know if he is a bastard or not. Still no good reason not to watch anything he has made, but why did you even bring him into this in the first place?
*Fox is not the only news outlet to have both "Republicans" & "Democrats" debate issues on newscasts. If you got your news anywhere other than Fox you might know that.... but I'm guessing you probably won't watch other news outlets (since you won't watch Outfoxed, Micheal Moore, Tim Russert, & I'm sure the list goes on)..... I myself get my news from lots of places (even including Fox news, though I don't much care for them), so that I can get a more accurate understanding of the world around me than if I only got information from one (extremely biased) source.
You said, "Anyone who see's Fox News Corp as a french entity is really out there." WTF?!? A French entity? Huh?!? Now you're starting to sound a little "out there." What are you talking about?
And sure... I'm way out in left field, or right field, but which is it, or maybe it's both? Maybe I'm all over the friggin' place. I must be crazy, huh? So kill the messenger & disregard the message.
*When Fox does have a rep vs dem debate, its often just a set up to trash the position of a weak democrat so they can imply that the position itself is weak. Look at Colmes, for a quick example.... he is a weak looking, nerdy, ugly, spineless type guy while Hannity fits the "code" (or archetype) for the "All American" type guy (aside from the fact that Colmes is a Democrat in name only [DINO] & is practically Hannity's stooge... what a punk). On a subconscious & emotional level, people will want to believe what Hannity says even before he opens his mouth. Watch Outfoxed.
The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who haven't got it. (a quote from George Bernard Shaw)
__________________
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries."
-David Rockefeller, Trilateral Commission Founder - 1991 |
| Loading... | | |
MarkThoman
Registered: 01/26/08
Posts: 5
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #10 |
LOL you sure cover a lot of conspiracy ground in a few posts. Hope to read your article in the Grover soon. Second thought, some conspiracy will probably prevent people from reading it, eh?
|
| Loading... | | |
The_Propagandist
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 10
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #11 |
I do try to cover a lot of conspiracy ground in as few posts as possible - still, people have reeeeaaalllllyyyy short attention spans....
Thanks, I think.... I also Hope to read my article in the Grover soon.... doesn't seem all too likely though. If not for any of the reasons listed in the article itself, perhaps because (among other things), in the first paragraph alone, I imply that most people (especially if they don't "see" things as I do) are either unpatriotic traitors, simply ignorant or even willfully ignorant - delusional & brainwashed, or hopeless, apathetic & uncaring. I admit, it seems kind of insulting. People don't like to hear this kind of stuff, even if it is the truth. Most people won't think It's a "downer." Not good for advertising either as it may spoil the "buying mood." Infotainment is much preferred by all. It also may seem very sensationalist when put together as I have tried to do. I think that is unavoidable though. It is sensational that the American people have allowed things to get the way they are today, while remaining so unaware.
I liked your, "Interview with Mayor Sandack."
__________________
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries."
-David Rockefeller, Trilateral Commission Founder - 1991 |
| Loading... | | |
The_Propagandist
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 10
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #12 |
Where it saeyz: "Most people won't think It's a 'downer,'" change the "won't" to a "will." I missed that..
__________________
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries."
-David Rockefeller, Trilateral Commission Founder - 1991 |
| Loading... | | |
MarkThoman
Registered: 01/26/08
Posts: 5
|
|
| |
Reply with quote | #13 |
Quote: I liked your, "Interview with Mayor Sandack." |
| Loading... | | |
