Original Post:
I asked, concisely and simply, what was being hidden from us. Most of them just berated me, one user claimed the Syria conflict to which I provided a link to a recent UN Statement on which quite accurately reflected the conflict start to finish. Another user claimed that the recently declassified Nixon era documents about the Chilean revolution and coup, but I was able to find a 1973 archived Newspaper accusing the Nixon Admin of having a hand in it from Times Magazine meaning it was already a mainstream theory at the time.
You mean the guy who was all buddy buddy with Epstein? Well, in that case it must be true, of course.
I’m going to need you to look up “ad hominem” in the dictionary, it’s not just for internet insults
Also let me know if you find one of those climate change articles or anything
I’m actually old enough to remember reading those back in the day. And if you go to any library that has old magazines or newspapers you won’t have any trouble finding stuff. As for Chomsky, this motherfucker (note the ad hominem) has lost every bit of credibility he might ever have had for associating with the kind of people he’s been arguing against all his life.
Here’s an example of what I’m talking about:
https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/03/us/2000-campaign-environment-favorite-issue-gore-finds-himself-2-front-defense.html
Just a bunch of shit, from beginning to end. Not a whisper of the idea that this might actually be an emergency. In fact, it’s kind of treated as a liability for Gore that he keeps saying that it is.
About as good as it gets is this:
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/121898sci-global-warming.html
… which, even if we’re not going to take any points off for “While there are dissenters who believe the warmer climate can be explained by normal variation,” doesn’t really address even to the slightest degree why this kind of thing might actually be important let alone a globe-spanning catastrophe.
That’s what I mean about why Gore had to make his own movie. The media was simply violently opposed to the idea of telling anyone the truth about it, limiting itself to sometimes making a grudging acknowledgement that maybe some of the most basic facts about the present might be true, with nothing at all indicated about what it meant for the future.
Okay, your turn. Where’s the newspaper article where they made it clear that it was an emergency? You said anyone could find them without any trouble, so it should be easy.
Yeah, Noam Chomsky is openly siding with Russia’s invasion, isn’t he? “A Stronger NATO is the last thing we need” he said.
Even then, he’s been a prominent figure and part of the available media in the USA for a very long time, so clearly an example of not being censored.
Yeah. He went off the deep end once he got elderly and his viewpoint of the world ossified. It doesn’t invalidate his earlier scholarship, though.
(Also, his support for Russia is overblown by the disinfo machine. Mostly what he’s saying in things that I have read is that NATO and the West have done ten times worse than Russia is doing in Ukraine right now, so the freakout is a bunch of hypocrisy, which is of course completely accurate. The disinfo likes to spin it like he’s saying Russia is the good guys, which isn’t at all what he’s saying. But yes, I also think he’s missing the central point in Ukraine because it doesn’t fit with how he likes to look at things.)
Well… the US doesn’t have state-sponsored censorship like most socialist countries. That part is true. My point, and I think the OOP cartoon’s point, is that because our media is capitalist, it was more or less impossible before non-big-business media developed out of the internet for certain messages to get out. I do think that’s a fair point. Just the fact that one academic was able to get one counterculture message out (and generally be regarded by 100% of the external political spectrum as a terrorist as a result) doesn’t invalidate that to me.