Laugh in the Box: How and why did the media block Paul, Gravel, and Kucinich? Videos

seedikfcuk Says:

Apr 8, 2008 - go to ni4d dot us

seedikfcuk Says:

Apr 8, 2008 - NI = the national initiative for democracy

RationalLiberty Says:

Apr 8, 2008 - of course.

RationalLiberty Says:

Apr 8, 2008 - I just know ni4d, but ok

frzngds Says:

Apr 8, 2008 - I live in CA and we have ballot initiatives. The people will vote for or against these initiatives based on their name and/or how the media has defined them - People will NOT research these initiatives for themselves when they have the MSM there to tell them how to think!"Under NI the MSM has no say, sway or voice" - Oh ya - then how do the masses find out about the benifits and drawbacks of the initiatives?.........The opinionated talking heads of the MSM!

seedikfcuk Says:

Apr 8, 2008 - That's because CA's system is terribly flawed and still hasn't been corrected. That cannot happen under NI4D as it is the source of every bit of the information etc. It shuts out MSM stifling their voice as all of the information you need or want to know about any initiative brought about NI4D it will work to provide. It is in itself its own org and holds MSM legally responsible. YES BELIEVE IT and if that doesn't suit to a tee you can draw up an initiative and we'll all vote on it :)

anyusmoon1 Says:

Apr 10, 2008 - How can the media broadly, immediately 'call the shots' so early in the game?Can you spell CFR?It's globalist agenda is all about finding the folks that are 'for sale'. Dr. Paul ain't for sale- neither am I.Anyone who supports the war, the fiat currency (fed reserve private banks printing our money), redistribution of wealth strategies (whether corporate or social beneficiaries). etc, etc.

RationalLiberty Says:

Apr 10, 2008 - the CFR is not realistic as it is described.Ppl want to control the world, but you cant do it EVERYWHERE. Theres too many competing interests at work.HOWEVER, do the media benefit off of who gets elected-yes. Do the powers that be have a vested stake in the outcome of elections-yes.Will they use any and all influence to impact it-of course. Is it dangerous to democracy-indeed.look at the article i have in the description that Gravel wrote. its about GE booting Mike from the debates

RationalLiberty Says:

Apr 10, 2008 - the CFR is not realistic as it is described.Ppl want to control the world, but you cant do it EVERYWHERE. Theres too many competing interests at work.HOWEVER, do the media benefit off of who gets elected-yes. Do the powers that be have a vested stake in the outcome of elections-yes.Will they use any and all influence to impact it-of course. Is it dangerous to democracy-indeed.look at the article i have in the description that Gravel wrote. its about GE booting Mike from the debates

oldjoe5 Says:

Apr 13, 2008 - Zionist controlled media.

RationalLiberty Says:

Apr 13, 2008 - so you are in agreement with Nazis and anti-semitic groups that claim the Jews control everything?Clarify that.Otherwise, it is anti-semitism and also false.

oldjoe5 Says:

Apr 13, 2008 - Judaism and Zionism are two very different things. You jump to the conclusions that you have been programmed to reach by the Zionist propaganda machine. Break free.

RationalLiberty Says:

Apr 13, 2008 - yea right... Im against Israel, but to say the jews control the media (or zionist sympathisers) is a generalisation. Sure, american media are pro-zionist, but I dont think they have brainwashed people into thinking this. Its a bad tradition that americans have kept since WWII, and I think this also has translated into the media elite. They are probably second generation americans-the baby boomer generation-and they have not grown out of THEIR bias to Israel

oldjoe5 Says:

Apr 13, 2008 - Some Jews control media, not "the" Jews. With the departure of ted Turner to the sidelines, all US mass media outlets are owned by Jewish people as far as I can tell -- please, cite some examples of where I am wrong.

Goobyusa Says:

Apr 17, 2008 - I agree with you and I would love to know specifically what the media stands to gain by keeping Ron Paul out of the public eye. I know about the CFR and Bilderbergs and Rockefeller. I just wish we had ONE reporter with courage. ONE patriotic reporter that would expose the censoring of Ron Paul. They MUST have been instructed to talk him down or to not talk about him. Someone have some courage! Come on reporters, come out of the corporate closet!

RationalLiberty Says:

Apr 17, 2008 - i dont think its cfr or international conspiracy, i think its just easier for them NOT to report on the issues, and they are corporations and they have their wall street candidates lined up.

Goobyusa Says:

Apr 19, 2008 - And you have television broadcasters like General Electric who owns NBC and who just happens to have BIG DEFENSE CONTRACTS. Hmmmm, do you suppose they wouldn't want an anti-war candidate like Ron Paul? The bastards are controlling our election to line THEIR pockets. Wake up America. Vote Ron Paul 08.

RationalLiberty Says:

Apr 19, 2008 - i think thats true to some extent. Definitely though there is a conflict of interest in the case of General Electric, or at least a violation of ethical standarts if they let such things permeate into their reporting.For now, I do agree that they selectively report to wittle down candidates-and they use this personality crap to create interpetations of events that can positively or negatively effect their choice candidates.

aenaot Says:

May 23, 2008 - The reason is quite simple. General Electric owns NBC, The Walt Disney Company owns ABC, CBS Corporation owns CBS and one half of the CW (Warner Bros. owns the other half) and the Fox network is owned by Twentieth Century Fox, which in turn is owned by News Corporation. The coincidence is that these networks, plus their cable counterparts are all owned by big corporations that decide what you see and hear and who are all fascists, something of which Ron Paul is not.

HalcyonRain321 Says:

Jun 1, 2008 - I love seeing young people getting engaged in the political discussion! Keep asking questions, and demand honest answers.Keep voicing your opinions. It's your Constitutional right.Stop watching T.V., it's more about selling you M&Ms and SUVs and distracting you from real discourse with its really stupid reality shows than anything else.

oldjoe5 Says:

Jun 17, 2008 - The three candidates you mentioned (along with Nader) are the only three not Zionist owned.

RationalLiberty Says:

Jun 18, 2008 - I agree with that. They at least question our role with Israel. It would be interesting to see how much influence AIPAC has among both party leaderships-especially since Obama and Hillary spoke at their convention along with the Republican

RationalLiberty Says:

Jun 18, 2008 - i never understand car commercials anyway...

oldjoe5 Says:

Jun 18, 2008 - Just look at the House and Senate voting patterns on the frequent resolutions written by AIPAC and its ilk and introduced by traitors like Lieberman. It is a constant test of the congressmen and senators loyalty to Israel -- and only a handful of the US pols ever stand up to them. Huge passing margins for resolutions praising Israel as it bobms the hell out of one neighbor or another, resolutions proclaiming its neighbors are terrorists, etc. Pathetic

dentalfoto Says:

Jun 23, 2008 - hey man .... cindy sheehan is running as a democrat for congress in california ... check her out ... send her some money