CNN's GOP "Debate" Rigged

Wolf Blitzer said that the CNN-controlled debate was going to give all candidates equal time to respond to each question. In-fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Obvious media bias was geared towards the "top tier" demagogues like "Ghouliani", "double the size of Guantanamo Romney" and "torture is bad unless if I vote for it McCain."

Despite all of this, and in contravention to the "wisdom" of CNN's and other MSM "analysts," Ron Paul won almost every online poll, indicating that the public believes that he won the debate.

Analysis Shows Debate Was Rigged
Establishment candidates get double the amount of questions, triple the time

Paul Joseph Watson | Prison Planet
Wednesday, June 6, 2007


A cursory analysis of last night's Republican presidential candidate's debate on CNN manifestly proves that, as in the case of the previous debates, the corporate media rigged the event in favor of establishment candidates while blacklisting underdogs like Ron Paul.

"I think we're a powerful dark horse and I think we're knocking right on the door and I think we've got some of the "top tier" candidates pretty nervous," Ron Paul's communications director Jesse Benton said today during an appearance on the Alex Jones Show.

Benton had one of his assistants calculate the figures, concluding that Ron Paul was asked eight questions and spoke for a total of 6-and-a-half minutes.

In comparison, Rudy Giuliani got 14 questions and spoke for 17 minutes - almost double the amount of questions and triple the amount of time - how can anyone claim that this is not a rigged debate when the establishment candidates are brazenly favored and lavished with attention?

This came to the fore last night when Wolf Blitzer asked a question about health care and Ron Paul - the only candidate on the podium who is also a medical doctor - was completely ignored.

In addition, after the debate Giuliani, Romney and McCain all got immediate interviews with either Wolf Blitzer or Larry King whereas Ron Paul was dismissed, despite the fact that he has been making headlines since the last debate after his confrontation with Rudy Giuliani and won CNN's own debate poll.

Debunkers can make excuses about Ron Paul not being a front-runner, but the fact remains that Paul has won nearly every post-debate poll. Industry forecasters like NFLSystems.com are now on record with the fact that the momentum of Ron Paul's campaign has propelled him from being an unknown also-ran to a strong contender - with seven months still left until the nomination. USAElectionPolls.com also confirm that the Texas Congressman's support in telephone polls is higher than first estimated and growing all the time.

Even aside from this, in the past debates were strictly time-controlled and one candidate was not given preference over another. If this is the way the corporate media chooses to run the show then fair enough - but don't pretend that these debates are anything other than undemocratic, staged and rigged theatre that are designed to cull underdogs while establishment-approved candidates are exalted.

Read More...

Summary only...

Image of the Day

Read More...

Summary only...

DynCorp & Haliburton Sex Slave Trade Scandal

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones | January 1 2006

Almost a year after Representative Cynthia McKinney was told by Donald Rumsfeld that it was not the policy of the Bush administration to reward companies that engage in human trafficking with government contracts, the scandal continues to sweep up innocent children who are sold into a life of slavery at the behest of Halliburton subsidiaries , Dyncorp and other transnational corporations with close ties to the establishment elite.

On March 11th 2005, McKinney grilled Secretary Rumsfeld and General Myers on the Dyncorp scandal.

“Mr. Secretary, I watched President Bush deliver a moving speech at the United Nations in September 2003, in which he mentioned the crisis of the sex trade. The President called for the punishment of those involved in this horrible business. But at the very moment of that speech, DynCorp was exposed for having been involved in the buying and selling of young women and children. While all of this was going on, DynCorp kept the Pentagon contract to administer the smallpox and anthrax vaccines, and is now working on a plague vaccine through the Joint Vaccine Acquisition Program. Mr. Secretary, is it [the] policy of the U.S. Government to reward companies that traffic in women and little girls?”

The response and McKinney’s comeback was as follows.

Rumsfeld: “Thank you, Representative. First, the answer to your first question is, is, no, absolutely not, the policy of the United States Government is clear, unambiguous, and opposed to the activities that you described. The second question.”

McKinney: “Well how do you explain the fact that DynCorp and its successor companies have received and continue to receive government contracts?”

Rumsfeld: “I would have to go and find the facts, but there are laws and rules and regulations with respect to government contracts, and there are times that corporations do things they should not do, in which case they tend to be suspended for some period; there are times then that the - under the laws and the rules and regulations for the - passed by the Congress and implemented by the Executive branch - that corporations can get off of - out of the penalty box if you will, and be permitted to engage in contracts with the government. They’re generally not barred in perpetuity.”

McKinney: “This contract - this company - was never in the penalty box.”

Rumsfeld: “I’m advised by DR. Chu that it was not the corporation that was engaged in the activities you characterized but I’m told it was an employee of the corporation, and it was some years ago in the Balkans that that took place.”

Rumsfeld’s effort to shift the blame away from the hierarchy at Dyncorp and onto the Dyncorp employees was a blatant attempt to hide the fact that human trafficking and sex slavery is a practice condoned by companies like Dyncorp and Halliburton subsidiaries like KBR.

What else are we to assume in light of recent revelations cited in the Chicago Tribune that Halliburton subsidiary KBR and Dyncorp lobbyists are working in tandem with the Pentagon to stall legislation that would specifically ban trafficking in humans for forced labor and prostitution by U.S. contractors?

Three years has now elapsed since President Bush’s promise to bring an end to this disgrace and the Pentagon is still yet to actually bar the practice.

And the employees themselves that are burned for blowing the whistle, like Kathryn Bolkovac who was sacked for reporting on Dyncorp officials who were involved in the Bosnian sex trade.

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is one of very few representatives in high office aside from Cynthia McKinney to demand answers on this issue.

We applaud Blagojevich’s eforts. The iron curtain of official denial and soft-peddling is falling down.

What has happened to the children who were sold into slavery and forced to satisfy the demands of sick pedophiles working on behalf of the US government?

Where were the investigations and convictions in other cases of establishment orchestrated child slavery and prostitution? Like the NATO officials responsible for the mushrooming of child prostitution in Kosovo?

What happened to UN officials identified as using a ship charted for ‘peacekeepers’ to bring young girls from Thailand to East Timor as prostitutes?

In addition, we received an E mail from a person claiming to be a Dyncorp employee stating that a high level Dyncorp official is breaking the law by accepting payment from the US government and in turn the American taxpayer by falsifying timesheets and claiming pay for hours not worked.

The contact states that this was repeatedly brought to the attention of DynCorp program managers by Dyncorp employees but they were told it was “none of their business.”

It is important to stress that at the moment these are allegations and we have no proof of this other than the validity of the e mail.

The e mail is a reminder that we should always consider the fact that the vast majority of Dyncorp employees are just doing their jobs and have nothing to do with this scandal. It is a small faction at the head of the hydra that have authorized and engaged in these horrors.

We have a government that says it doesn’t advocate torture and yet tries to block a law that would end torture. We have a government that repeatedly burns lower level minions to wash its hands of every major scandal that encompasses policies directly administered by the government itself, as in the case of Abu Ghraib and the Dyncorp sex scandal.

A government that covers-up for those who force children into prostitution and slavery is a clear danger to our very way of life. We must demand answers and finally put an end to a process that exploits and wreaks terror on the lives of the most innocent and vulnerable members of society, whether they be in the Balkans, East Timor or here at home.

Our own children.

Read More...

Summary only...

Drama Queen Giuliani and MSM Distort Ron Paul's Words During GOP Debate

The yellow journalists are doing a fine job of exposing their true intent, which is to bungle any chance that America has to return to a constitutional republic, yes it is the MAINSTREAM MEDIA which hates America, not Ron Paul.

It is chilling to watch the reporters say that "Ron Paul Blames America" and other such nonsense, when he was merely making the same point that the CIA made in its reports regarding America's foreign policy's effect on world opinion.

The media is still acting smug and secure, as if they have the upper hand, but I think the media has tipped their hand and anyone who has any critical thinking skills should now realize that the mainstream media is collectively committing a form of treason by trying to manhandle the election process and force any REAL conservatives out of the "Republican" party.

Media echoed, applauded Giuliani's distortion of Paul's comments about 9-11 attacks

MediaMatters.org

Summary: Several media figures mischaracterized a response that Rep. Ron Paul gave at the Republican debate, with some asserting that Paul had "blamed" the United States for the 9-11 terrorist attacks and others simply accepting Rudy Giuliani's misrepresentation of Paul's statement -- that the United States had "invited the attack." In fact, Paul did not blame the United States for the 9-11 attacks or say that the United States had "invited" them.

Covering the May 15 Republican presidential debate at the University of South Carolina, some media figures mischaracterized a response by Rep. Ron Paul (TX), asserting that Paul had "blamed" the United States for the 9-11 terrorist attacks. In other cases, they simply accepted former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's misrepresentation of Paul's statement -- that the United States had "invited the attack." Paul did not blame the United States or say that the United States "invited the attack." He said the attacks were a response to U.S. actions in the Middle East and stressed the importance of understanding the motivations of those who want to attack the United States. Moreover, the media largely ignored Paul's further comments on those remarks after the debate, including his assertion that "Americans didn't do anything to cause" the attacks.

During the debate, Paul asserted that terrorists attacked the United States on September 11 "because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East." When asked by co-moderator and Fox News White House correspondent Wendell Goler if he was suggesting that "we invited the 9-11 attack," Paul replied: "I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it." Giuliani immediately responded to Paul claiming that what he had said was "an extraordinary statement ... that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq." Giuliani added: "I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th." From the debate:

PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right.

We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)

GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9-11 attack, sir?

PAUL: I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, "I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time -- (bell rings) -- have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.

GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)

During a postdebate interview, Fox News host Sean Hannity asked Paul: "Are you suggesting the United States of America caused the attack on 9-11?" Paul replied: "No, I think that's a cop-out." Hannity then asked: "Are you suggesting that our policies are causing the hatred of people that would cause them to want to kill us?" Paul responded: "I think it contributes significantly to it, and this is exactly what our CIA tells us. Paul later stated explicitly: "[T]he Americans didn't do anything to cause [9-11]."

Yet when describing the confrontation between Paul and Giuliani during the debate, numerous media figures claimed that Paul "blamed" the United States for 9-11 or said that the United States was "responsible" for the attacks, and they made no mention of his subsequent clarification. In addition, some not only accepted Giuliani's interpretation of what Paul said but praised Giuliani's response.

For example, on the May 16 edition of CNN's American Morning, Politico executive editor Jim VandeHei said that "Rudy Giuliani came off terrific" during the debate, "mostly because he got that softball, where Ron Paul lobs it to him and basically blames the U.S. for the 9-11 attacks." In response to VandeHei, co-host John Roberts mimicked a baseball swing with his arms and said, "Ron Paul -- lob ball, and boom." VandeHei then concluded: "You dream of those moments when you're a candidate, that's for sure." Later in the program, Roberts said that Paul "did kind of stick his foot in it, though, when he suggested last night that it was U.S. intervention overseas that was responsible for the 9-11 attacks."

A May 16 Politico.com report on the debate by Jonathan Martin mentioned the dispute between Paul and Giuliani and uncritically quoted Giuliani campaign manager Mike DuHaime's claim that Giuliani "is not going to sit there and let somebody say that [9-11] was our fault."

From Fox News' postdebate coverage:

HANNITY: I want to go back to this exchange you had with Mayor Giuliani here for just a second. Are you suggesting the United States of America caused the attack on 9-11?

PAUL: No, I think that's a cop-out.

HANNITY: Our policies?

PAUL: When people imply that what you're saying is that, "If you don't endorse my foreign policy, you're un-American, you're unpatriotic."

HANNITY: I never said anything like that. I'm not saying ---

PAUL: No, I don't say you --

HANNITY: You're suggesting --

PAUL: No, but I think that was the point in the debate that if I didn't endorse this foreign policy, you turn it around or they -- he turned it around.

HANNITY: I'm not saying that, but what specifically then are you saying? Are you suggesting that our policies are causing the hatred of people that would cause them to want to kill us?

PAUL: I think it contributes significantly to it, and this is exactly what our CIA tells us. And anybody who's done any research on this has found out -- [inaudible]

HANNITY: What have we done to cause the attack --

PAUL: Wait, wait, let me answer.

HANNITY: What did America do to cause the attack on 9-11?

PAUL: OK, the Americans didn't do anything to cause it, but policies over many years caused an elicited hatred toward us, so somebody was willing to commit suicide. For instance, the occupation with our military troops on their holy land in Saudi Arabia, bombing a Muslim country for 10 years, putting on sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands of people. So that caused that anger.

From the May 16 edition of CNN's American Morning:

VANDEHEI: I thought Rudy Giuliani came off terrific, mostly because he got that softball, where Ron Paul lobs it to him and basically blames the U.S. for the 9-11 attacks.

ROBERTS: Let's take a quick look at that and then you can keep going on that. Take a look.

[begin video clip]

PAUL: They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years.

GIULIANI: That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've ever heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th.

[end video clip]

ROBERTS: So, Giuliani, in the California debate that you were at, was criticized for kind of not showing the type of, you know, heavily, sharply focused leadership that he is well known for, obviously taking that opportunity there.

VANDEHEI: You can't buy opportunities like that in politics. I mean, this is a guy whose entire campaign is based on, "I can keep you safe, I'm the 9-11 warrior." And here he's able to, you know, stand up in front of this Republican audience and say, "That's absurd. Withdraw your remark." It was great TV.

ROBERTS: Ron Paul -- lob ball, and boom.

VANDEHEI: You dream of those moments when you're a candidate, that's for sure.

ROBERTS: Yeah, absolutely.

[...]

KIRAN CHETRY (co-host): So, who is Ron Paul? Well, he's the man described by some of the political analysts as, quote, "the longest of long shots in the GOP field." He's a nine-term congressman from Texas, an OB/GYN from the Houston area, actually. And he is barely registering in the polling. In fact, in our CNN polls, I think he's under 1 percent.

He's also the libertarian candidate -- he was -- for president back in 1988. Didn't do so well, drawing just about 400,000 votes nationwide. He also voted against the defense spending bill and against the 2002 authorization for the war in Iraq. He believes, as he said, in limited government. He's actually calling for, John, the abolishing of the Homeland Security Department, and he wants to take away a lot of the power of the Federal Reserve.

ROBERTS: Yeah, I saw that. That's how he would cut the federal budget, by abolishing the Department of Homeland Security. He did kind of stick his foot in it, though, when he suggested last night that it was U.S. intervention overseas that was responsible for the 9-11 attacks, which drew that sharp response from Rudy Giuliani, which drew applause from the audience. So it looks like --

CHETRY: That's right, and he didn't back down from it either, so he --

ROBERTS: He didn't, yeah, you're right.

—B.A.

Read More...

Summary only...

Ron Paul Upsets Controlled-Media Debate as Clear Winner

Pundits & Candidates Seek to Exile Statesman from Republican Party-- In Spite of Leading Poll Numbers-- Over His Anti-Torture, Anti-War and Anti-Tax Standpoint

Aaron Dykes & Alex Jones / Jones Report | May 15, 2007

Congressman Ron Paul shook the establishment in last night's second round of 2008 Republican debates for the Presidency. Not only did his anti-war, anti-torture and pro-liberty platform stand glaring in the face of those political whores dubbed as "top-tier" but he managed to catch the ire of 9/11 criminal Rudy Giuliani for daring to suggest aggressive foreign policy would stir up blowback.

What's worse, Ron Paul interrupted the worship of establishment-selected candidates by winning the debate's own poll and forcing FOX to cover the mere "second-tier" candidate-- a distinction mainstream media have been using to marginalize those outside of direct control.

Ron Paul's performance in his second debate victory-- as moderators repeatedly suggest he doesn't belong in the Republican party

Ron Paul garnered approximately 20 minutes of air-time on Fox alone last night-- including about 10 minutes of debate questions and another 10 minutes composed of attacks and dismissals by pundits, other candidates and an interview with Hannity & Colmes.

Sean Hannity stated his "surprise" that Ron Paul was leading with 30% of the FOX News text-message poll vote, despite that fact that he also won the Republican debates on MSNBC-- a fact which the media under-reported and even censored.

At the time of press, Ron Paul also had a distinct lead-- by a huge margin-- in the MSNBC poll regarding the South Carolina Republican debate.

Alan Colmes probed to understand how Ron Paul could emerge the decisive leader in an otherwise revolting adherence to policies advocating war expansion and unrestrained use of "extreme interrogation tactics" which skirt the damning name of "torture."

Fellow "second-tier" candidate Duncan Hunter attributed Ron Paul's dominance in the FOX text-message poll to his "entertainment value," insinuating that his policies and views (including the controversy generated over 9/11 comments) could not be taken seriously.

GOPAC chairman Michael Steele went so far as to suggest that Ron Paul should not belong to the Republican party, stating that he was "done" with Paul and did not care what the results of the FOX poll were.

Debate moderators pointed out Congressman Paul's distinction as the only Republican candidate who voted against military action in Iraq as they repeatedly demanded that he answer to being in the 'wrong party' or 'not fitting in with the Republican party.' Ron Paul answered smartly-- pointing out that he wanted to lead the country, not the party, and that 65-70% of the country was against the Iraq war and long for an end to the mired conflict.

Regardless, he was attacked for his adherence to non-interventionist philosophy and defamed as some kind of 9/11 heretic-- as various pundits pretended he had faltered in the debates and claimed that anonymous South Carolina Republicans had reached consensus on the idea that Ron Paul "did not acquit himself" and must be discarded.

Ron Paul is defamed by pundits and candidates alike who make excuses for his poll victory.

One pundit even goes so far to suggest that Ron Paul's success in the poll was due primarily to attention won after Giuliani attacked him on 9/11 statements, as well as organizational prowess amongst text-messaging voters.

Sean Hannity refused to believe Ron Paul won the debate, claiming he didn't have the opportunity to text in his vote.

Yet, as Ron Paul continued to win the debate poll, the live-results format pigeonholed FOX News into ongoing coverage of the winner-- as his only competition in poll results came from Mitt Romney, who briefly led the poll with 27% when Ron Paul had only 26%.

It is continually suggested that "second-tier" candidates such drop from the race and make way for the "first-tier" candidates to shine, though the only vote process at this stage-- polls-- all indicate Ron Paul as a likely winner and certainly a top contender.

During a post-debate interview with Hannity & Colmes, Ron Paul discusses his differences in foreign policy and much more. Giuliani elaborates on his reaction to Ron Paul's unsettling statements.

Though they would like to exclude him from future debates, his back-to-back debate victory may force moderators into a position of having to invite Ron Paul-- for the time being.

Read More...

Summary only...

Defeat the Media Clones

Thomas E. Woods, Jr. | LewRockwell.com
May 10, 2007

So how does the Establishment deal with a Ron Paul candidacy? What else did you expect? By ignoring him as much as possible.

The Reuters headline following the May 3 GOP debate: "2008 Republicans back war."

All right, you say, perhaps that’s just a crude summary. A headline can’t say everything, after all, and the article itself will surely disambiguate the candidates. It’s certainly newsworthy that a nine-term Republican congressman had been a fierce opponent of the war from the beginning, and made his antiwar position clear time and again during the debate. Naturally this will get some play.

But not even a hint of that in the Reuters article by John Whitesides. I mean, hey, didn’t you read the headline? The 2008 Republicans back war!

Here’s the entire coverage of Ron Paul: "Also participating were Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, Reps. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, Ron Paul of Texas, and Duncan Hunter of California."

Well, that’s just a smash-up job there, Mr. Whitesides.

That wasn’t an isolated case. On the Liberty and Power blog, David Beito reports: "Later that night, CNN's post-debate spin segment sank to an even greater low. The panel included Arianna Huffington and some neo-con guy from The Weekly Standard. Nobody mentioned Paul's views. The ever-insufferable Huffington, who either did not watch the debate or lied about what she saw, self-righteously proclaimed that all of the ten candidates supported the war. Nobody challenged her. Are we to be spared nothing?"

The creepy Dick Morris is in a category all his own. First, he declared John McCain the winner. Now anyone who watched the debate had to be wondering if McCain’s, well, weirdness was meant for laughs. At the same time, you almost had to admire how he could be at once stilted and robotic, and yet also crazed and menacing.

But back to our subject: Morris ignored Paul altogether. Now he managed to find time to mention Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, and Tommy Thompson – heck, he mentioned every other candidate besides Ron Paul, even listing specific winners and losers. Since a candidate like Ron Paul isn’t allowed to exist in Dick Morris’ world, he apparently couldn’t win or lose.

Now we have the phenomenon of Yahoo News inexplicably excluding Ron Paul from its list of GOP candidates. Yet right there are Mike Huckabee and Duncan Hunter, whose combined support in the polls trails Ron Paul’s.

Stunned, I actually called Yahoo and left a voicemail message for their chief communications officer, and included my email address. In their emailed reply, I was told: "According to the latest FEC filings, it is our understanding that Congressman Paul has not officially entered the 2008 Presidential race, but has only gotten to the stage of forming an exploratory committee."

Huh? Unannounced candidates are allowed into the debates? Can't possibly be true, I thought. So I simply went to the Federal Election Commission website, and after three seconds of searching I found Ron Paul's filing statement, dated March 12. (That's funny: I was told Yahoo had consulted "the latest FEC filings.") Well, here are Ron Paul's documents right here.

To Yahoo's credit, after I sent them this documentation I was told that they would have a page for Ron Paul up within a week.

But apparently it's going to take persistence and vigilance to ensure that Paul is treated fairly. As of yesterday, for example, ABC News began deleting and banning posts about Ron Paul, as well as posts complaining about this deletion policy. See this article.

Since that post was written, ABC has begun blocking all comments about Ron Paul.

The same media establishment that bought the Iraq propaganda package and then claimed to be oh-so-sorry is now trying to keep out of the limelight the one presidential contender who has actually bucked the establishment and does something other than parrot government/media slogans. But that’s what the mainstream media’s purpose is: to define the nature of our political debate and make sure no fundamental questions are ever raised.

No, I don’t mean that the heads of these organizations held a special meeting and after exchanging the secret handshake pledged to keep mum about Paul. My point is that no such meeting is necessary. As shills for the establishment, they think alike on everything that matters. While marginal debate is to be permitted here and there, truly independent voices are to be demonized, drowned out, or, better yet, ignored altogether. (Ask Amy Goodman of the left’s Democracy Now! program why she doesn’t close up shop and just let ABC and Fox give us our news.) The media establishment likes the status quo just the way it is.

This is all the more reason for people interested in Ron Paul to talk about him, write about him, and light up the Internet about him. (I wrote this piece as a quick intro to Paul so people could quickly and easily show their friends what made him so unusual and admirable.) Not only will you serve the cause of genuine political debate in this country – if we wind up with Rudy and Hillary, what on earth will they have to debate about? – but you’ll also tick off the race of clones who give us only the news they think we need. That’s reward enough, isn’t it?

Read More...

Summary only...

Yahoo Leaves Ron Paul Off of Candidate List: Boycott Yahoo!!

Dear Yahoo,

I noticed that you left presidential candidate Ron Paul off of your list of Republican candidates. Ron Paul IS in the race, he was at the latest debate and the polls show that he WON the debate.

To leave him off of the page is despicable and immoral. Please add him to the page and give him equal coverage or else Yahoo is guilty of manipulating the election!

If Yahoo does not put Dr. Paul's information on the page, where he rightfully belongs, myself and tens of thousands of others will organize boycotts and protests.

Read More...

Summary only...

'The Net' shoves Ron Paul right down ABC's throat!

Ron Paul did OUTSTANDING after ABC realized that they couldn't FUCK with America. Its funny to see that some of those candidates couldn't get above 20 votes and none but Dr. Paul got above 1,000.

Currently the revised ABC poll (now including Ron Paul) are as follows:

Ron Paul
15,143
It doesn't matter who won. I wouldn't put America in another Republican's hands.
1,484
None of them. I'm interested in the possibility of new candidates like Fred Thompson.
241
Mitt Romney
220
Rudy Guiliani
209
John McCain
122
Tom Tancredo
45
Tommy Thompson
27
Mike Huckabee
20
Sam Brownback
15
Duncan Hunter
15
James Gilmore
10
Total Vote: 17,551


'The Net' shoves Ron Paul right down ABC's throat!

Alaska Intel Report
Tuesday May 08, 2007

Whether ABC purposely left Cong. Ron Paul out of their poll, or whether they're just so arrogant that they just assumed that they know who the candidates are, or should be, they got a cold slap in the face the other day.

After deciding to ignore the 800 pound gorilla on the debate the other night, they thought by not including Mr. Paul in their 'poll', they could steer the results in the direction they wanted.

Wrong !

It didn't take long ! Pretty soon the net erupted and they were swamped with calls and emails demanding that Ron Paul be included.
Well it didn't take ABC long to figure it out, they knew they were busted. They then did the only thing they could, they scrambled to get out in front of it by quickly including him in the list which resulted in these results ! View Here !

Now given that some Paul supporters may have voted more then once, though I believe cookies were dropped to prevent this, that's one hell of a lot of votes !

Even using MSNBC's own numbers, it was a blowout ! View Here !
Ron Pauls amazing come from behind win on the debate embarrassed the bought and paid for media whores so badly that they went into overdrive trying to bury this story.
It would seem like ABC is learning a valuable lesson that DIGG.com just recently learned about modern day America. Americans talk back. And when enough of us talk back and say the same thing, they listen. If they don't listen, we tell the world. Then they listen.

Regardless of whose poll numbers you use, it has become obvious to anyone willing to look, that Americans all over this country, responded to Cong. Ron Paul's message and his straight forward programs to rescue this train wreck that The United States has become. Immigration, The Economy, The War, as you go down the list, his common sense approach and singly focused view of what is best for America within the framework of what the Constitution says, makes him stand out from the rest of the group of professional liars, thieves, and grade B actors like a bonfire on a dark night!

I wouldn't want to be Ron Paul. I've heard that he has some real concerns about his safety should he become a serious contender. And I must admit that we as a country don't have a great record when it come to protecting our leaders when they don't go along with the Bankers and other corporate Godfathers.
I have no inside information about what the future holds for the good congressman, but one thing I CAN say by way of observation ..

"Cong. Paul may not be able to walk on water, but he has already demonstrated that he is fully capable of swimming with the sharks!"

Read More...

Summary only...

Clear Media Conspiracy Against Ron Paul

By Carl F. Worden | Rense.com
May 8, 2007

(The) conspiracy to ignore and marginalize presidential candidate Ron Paul is not a theory. In this case, a jury would have to conclude a conspiracy against Dr. Paul by the corporation-controlled media exists.

First, MSNBC reported that Ron Paul scored the highest positive votes in both Republican debates he attended. That means he beat out Romney, McCain and Giuliani. There was no mention of these poll results in the major media.
Dick Morris, political pundit and former Clinton buddy, wrote an opinion piece that appeared in many media publications 5/7/07, in which he claimed John McCain had won the debate, and I could find nowhere in his piece that Ron Paul had even attended.

CNN's Glenn Beck, an alleged conservative (my fanny) ran a tiny clip on his show that tried to make Ron Paul look like a blithering idiot. He then went on to ask, "How did this guy get in the debate at all"?

Even WorldNetDaily, a prominent, conservative Internet news provider, has largely ignored Ron Paul's candidacy.

When a candidate wins two debate polls in a row that are reported by the likes of MSNBC on its own web page, that is news, especially since the winner of both polls allegedly had no chance to win the nomination. The media normally jumps on that kind of news, because people in America love underdogs, but not this time.

No, this is a concerted effort.

Please review below what Representative Ron Paul stands for, and far more importantly, what he has done. Among other things, Ron Paul is the only congressmen who got up and demanded Congress declare war before attacking Iraq.

Carl F. Worden


About Ron

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul's Record

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.

He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) is the leading advocate for freedom in our nation's capital. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. He is known among his congressional colleagues and his constituents for his consistent voting record. Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Dr. Paul is the "one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill.

Ron Paul was born and raised in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He graduated from Gettysburg College and the Duke University School of Medicine, before proudly serving as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force during the 1960s. He and his wife Carol moved to Texas in 1968, where he began his medical practice in Brazoria County. As a specialist in obstetrics/gynecology, Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He and Carol, who reside in Lake Jackson, Texas, are the proud parents of five children and have 17 grandchildren.

While serving in Congress during the late 1970s and early 1980s, Dr. Paul's limited-government ideals were not popular in Washington. In 1976, he was one of only four Republican congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan for president.

During that time, Congressman Paul served on the House Banking committee, where he was a strong advocate for sound monetary policy and an outspoken critic of the Federal Reserve's inflationary measures. He was an unwavering advocate of pro-life and pro-family values. Dr. Paul consistently voted to lower or abolish federal taxes, spending and regulation, and used his House seat to actively promote the return of government to its proper constitutional levels. In 1984, he voluntarily relinquished his House seat and returned to his medical practice.

Dr. Paul returned to Congress in 1997 to represent the 14th congressional district of Texas. He presently serves on the House Committee on Financial Services and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He continues to advocate a dramatic reduction in the size of the federal government and a return to constitutional principles.

Congressman Paul's consistent voting record prompted one of his congressional colleagues to say, "Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers' ideal of the citizen-statesman. He makes it clear that his principles will never be compromised, and they never are." Another colleague observed, "There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few."

May 05, 2007 Ron Paul Wins MSNBC Debate Poll
Highest Positive, Lowest Negative
In the MSNBC.com rating window of 72,419 votes at 8:10 PM EDT, Friday, May 4, Ron Paul not only had the highest positive rating:
32% Paul
30% Romney
26% Giuliani
21% McCain
14% Huckabee
9% Brownback
9% Tancredo
8% Hunter
8% Thompson
6% Gilmore

...but he also had the lowest negative rating:

29% Paul
35% Romney
37% Huckabee
40% Giuliani
42% McCain
43% Gilmore
43% Hunter
45% Thompson
45% Tancredo
46% Brownback
Posted on May 05, 2007 at 10:57 AM | Permalink

May 04, 2007
Press Release
Ron Paul Wins MSNBC Debate Poll
Ron Paul steps into national spotlight
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 4, 2007
ARLINGTON, VA ­ Congressman Ron Paul finished first in the MSNBC poll following the GOP primary debate last night held at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California. Dr. Paul received 43 percent, beating the second-place finisher by five points, and crushing the rest of the field.

"Last night, Americans met Ron Paul and loved what they heard," said Ron Paul 2008 campaign chairman Kent Snyder. "Dr. Paul's message of freedom and limited government resonates with Republicans hungry for a return to their party's core values."

"Ron Paul is the only true conservative in the GOP race. Americans saw that last night," continued Snyder. "The campaign looks forward to further debates and opportunities so even more Americans will discover Dr. Paul's message of freedom, peace and prosperity."

Read More...

Summary only...

Digg Succumbs to Mob attack

Virtual "Boston Tea Party" shows resolve of net community

Digg's censors were overrun by a stampede of angry users yesterday, after they tried to stop users from posting information about an HD-DVD encryption key. It seems that they have underestimated the resolve of the community to share whatever information they see as fitting.

Here's a blog post from the founder of Digg, Kevin Rose, regarding the virtual Boston Tea Party that occurred lately.

Today was an insane day. And as the founder of Digg, I just wanted to post my thoughts…

In building and shaping the site I’ve always tried to stay as hands on as possible. We’ve always given site moderation (digging/burying) power to the community. Occasionally we step in to remove stories that violate our terms of use (eg. linking to pornography, illegal downloads, racial hate sites, etc.). So today was a difficult day for us. We had to decide whether to remove stories containing a single code based on a cease and desist declaration. We had to make a call, and in our desire to avoid a scenario where Digg would be interrupted or shut down, we decided to comply and remove the stories with the code.

But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you’ve made it clear. You’d rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won’t delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be.

If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying.

Digg on,

Kevin

---

Digg's DRM Revolt

Andy Greenberg | forbes.com

Digg.com has become one of the Web's top news portals by putting the power to choose the news in the hands of its users. Just how much power they wield, however, only became clear Tuesday night, when Digg turned into what one user called a "digital Boston Tea Party."

When the site's administrators attempted to prevent users from posting links to pages revealing the copyright encryption key for HD-DVD discs, Digg's users rebelled. Hundreds of references to the code flooded the site's submissions, filling its main pages and overwhelming the administrators' attempts to control the site's content.

Tuesday afternoon, Digg CEO Jay Adelson had posted a message on his blog explaining that the site was removing links to articles that featured the newly cracked HD-DVD encryption key, which can be used to decrypt the high-definition discs and copy their content. "In order for Digg to survive, it must abide by the law," he wrote. "Our goal is always to maintain a purely democratic system for the submission and sharing of information. ... In order for that to happen, we all need to work together to protect Digg from exposure to lawsuits that could very quickly shut us down. Thanks for your understanding."

But Digg's users were not understanding. Instead, they covered the site's main pages with links to blogs that revealed the HD-DVD code and criticized the site's decision to censor content. Because Digg gives users the ability to rate news stories, pushing their favorites to the site's most visible positions, thousands voted to bring links to the top of the site with titles like "Revolt at Digg?" and "Digg Punched me in the Face for Posting This." By midnight, the site's entire homepage was covered with links to the HD-DVD code or anti-Digg references.

And at that point, Digg's executives conceded. In a note published on the site, Digg founder Kevin Rose said the site would no longer try to prevent users from publishing the code. "We had to make a call, and in our desire to avoid a scenario where Digg would be interrupted or shut down, we decided to comply and remove the stories with the code," he wrote. "But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you've made it clear. You'd rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won't delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be. If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying."

Digg.com, whose executives couldn't be reached for comment, isn't the first site to face legal problems from user-generated content. Viacom's $1 billion lawsuit against Google similarly faults the company for allowing copyrighted material uploaded by users to remain on YouTube, which Google acquired last October.

Read More...

Summary only...

Starbucks is Pirating the Trademarks of Indigenous Coffees

Church of Stop Shopping | RevBilly.com

Here is a video of Rev. Billy, preaching and exorcising Starbucks to let Ethiopian coffee farmers trademark coffee names to help make a living wage.

Join Ethiopian activists, Rev Billy, Oxfam & Global Exchange

More than a year ago, the country of Ethiopia approached Starbucks and asked the company to lead the coffee industry by example and sign an agreement recognizing Ethiopia’s legal ownership of its fine coffee names, such as Sidamo, Harar, and Yirgacheffe—ancient names that have been part of Ethiopia’s culture for centuries.

If companies like Starbucks signed such agreements, Ethiopia would occupy a stronger negotiating position with foreign buyers, capture a larger share of the market associated with its coffee names, and better protect its brands. And the country’s millions of coffee-producing families could rely on a decent income, as coffee has accounted for 40 to 50 percent of the country’s total export earnings and has provided jobs for an estimated 15 million people. Coffee families are experiencing hunger and malnutrition now – with high child mortality rates.

But Starbucks Said No!

In 2004, as the Ethiopian government prepared to submit its applications to the US Patent and Trademark Office to register its coffee names, it learned that Starbucks had already submitted an application to register “Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo” as a trademark for a limited edition coffee sold by Starbucks for $26 per pound.

After learning of Starbucks’ trademark application, the Ethiopian ambassador to the US sent a letter to Starbucks explaining that the company’s application to register Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo would conflict with Ethiopia’s own attempt to register its Sidamo mark and would therefore block Ethiopia’s application. The Ambassador proposed a discussion to resolve the situation amicably and requested that Starbucks withdraw its application and discuss signing a licensing agreement that would allow the company to continue using the term Sidamo on its products. The ambassador’s request was denied.

PLEASE JOIN US IN ASKING STARBUCKS TO sign a nonexclusive, royalty-free licensing agreement with Ethiopia. The agreement acknowledges Ethiopia’s rights in its trademarks to identify coffee and grants licensees non-exclusive rights to use the marks on products and in their promotion.

What to do? Boycott these $4 lattes. Call your friend in the press who might write a story. Come to our actions at the future, info at ReverendBilly.Org

Read More...

Summary only...

The Sordid History of Monsanto Poisoning Your Milk

Dr. Joseph Mercola | Mercola.com

Over 20 years ago, experimental recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) dairy products made by Monsanto were sold illegally to students, staff, faculty, and patients at the University of Wisconsin.

At the time, Dr. David Kronfeld showed that much of the published research on rBGH was fraudulent. He was ridiculed by the drug companies, and he was ultimately demoted and his career nearly destroyed. The passage of time, however, has proven him correct.

For two decades, consumer groups have worked to expose the dangers of rBGH to the public. A recent breakthrough came with the May 2006 discovery that expectant U.S. mothers who consumed rBGH milk experienced problems as a result of elevated levels of Insulin-Like Growth Factor One, which has been linked to cancer.

A year later, California Dairy Inc. (CDI) announced that it would be going rBGH-free as of August 1, 2007 as a result of "consumer demand." CDI processes 45 percent of California's milk. Other dairy companies, and a number of large grocery store and restaurant chains, have also rejected rBGH.

On February 20, 2007 a petition was submitted to the FDA on behalf of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, Family Farm Defenders, and the Organic Consumers Association, requesting a suspension of rBGH approval pending a reevaluation of its human health hazards.

Organic Consumers Association March 18, 2007

---

Dr. Mercola's Comment:

Last fall's wave of dairy companies dropping Monsanto's rBGH, which spurs the production of milk in cows, might have led you to believe the drugging of cows was a fairly recent development. Not so, according to the Family Farm Defenders.

This group has been working for years to expose all the problems associated with bovine growth hormones. And, as you probably expected, many experts who spoke out were slammed, defamed, punished and silenced, just like Dr. Arpad Pusztai was, albeit for his concerns over genetically modified (GM) foods.

As Monsanto's public relations arm has geared up to salvage its product with a smear campaign meant to spread doubts about hormone-free milk, the Defenders, along with other groups, continue to work in the public interest by petitioning the FDA.

Monsanto's genetically modified product may be quite hazardous to your health, and, incidentally, could also account for some of the rise in the births of fraternal twins in America. And, of course, milk made with these unnatural hormones carry no labels warning you that they contain substances that will increase your risk of cancer.

Just a reminder, hormone-free or not, the milk that's best for your health isn't pasteurized and you likely won't find it in your corner grocery store. Raw milk, straight from a local dairy farmer, is your best, healthiest, safest and most nutritious option.

Read More...

Summary only...

O'Reilly Mafia Threatens O'Donnell Over Sex Scandal

Fox News host promises to "go after" The View host and her colleagues

Paul Joseph Watson | Prison Planet

Rosie O'Donnell, currently under attack after she questioned the official story behind 9/11, has revealed that Fox News bully Bill O'Reilly threatened to "go after" her and her colleagues after they mentioned O'Reilly's sex scandal on The View.

ABC has now gagged O'Donnell from mentioning the subject on all future broadcasts.

The policy of mafia-like intimidation directed at anyone who discusses 9/11 truth on behalf of O'Reilly is a common and disturbing theme.

Within the past two weeks, O'Reilly has threatened both Charlie Sheen and Mark Cuban that he'll be "looking out" for them if they continued their involvement in the upcoming release of the Loose Change Final Cut movie. On his Friday show, O'Reilly demanded Cuban, the billionaire owner of the Dallas Mavericks, be thrown in jail.

In October of last year, O'Reilly threatened Jim Fetzer and Kevin Barrett that he would use his influence to push for an FBI investigation of the 9/11 truth professors, in an attempt to discover if they had links with terrorists.

"I'd put the FBI on you and that nutty Barrett and find out what the hell you guys are up to," salivated O'Reilly, making reference to Sammy Al-Arian, a former professor at USF who was charged and later acquitted of helping to lead a Palestinian terrorist group that carried out suicide bombings against Israel.

During a September 2001 interview before his arrest, O'Reilly told Al-Arian, "if I was the CIA, I'd follow you wherever you went. I'd follow you 24 hours."

As Kurt Nimmo writes, "Bill O'Reilly essentially had Dr. Sami al-Arian, an associate professor of computer engineering at the University of South Florida, not only bounced from his job but also arrested and indicted by the Justice Department on racketeering and terrorist charges due to his alleged association with Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Ashcroft went as far as to characterize al-Arian as "the North American leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad."

In March of 2006, O'Reilly threatened disagreeing callers to his own radio show that their information would be turned over to law enforcement and that they would receive a visit from Fox security personnel. One such caller was actually contacted by Fox security after he mentioned Keith Olbermann on O'Reilly's show, an action classified by O'Reilly as obscene.

"If you're listening, Mike, we have your phone number, and we're going to turn it over to Fox security, and you'll be getting a little visit," barked O'Reilly.

In October 2004, O'Reilly Factor producer Andrea Mackris filed a lawsuit in which it was alleged that O'Reilly had subjected her to repeated instances of sexual harassment, including unwanted invitations to engage in phone sex and unsolicited graphic descriptions of O'Reilly's sexual fantasies, as well as O'Reilly masturbating on the phone following an O'Reilly Factor episode in which two porn stars were featured. O'Reilly is married with two children.

Out of court settlements were reached in both Mackris' and O'Reilly's counter-lawsuit. The whole sordid affair can be read here.

O'Reilly has written five non-fiction books, one of which includes graphic scenes of sex and violence, including teenagers having sex with adults. The ending of O'Reilly's detective thriller, Those Who Trespass, features a shower scene that is almost identical to the one described by Mackris in her lawsuit.

Bill O'Reilly has repeatedly called for Rosie O'Donnell to be fired by ABC for questioning the official 9/11 story as well as other controversial statements. On Thursday night, MSNBC guest Danny Bonaduce called for O'Donnell to be executed for treason.

"When Joy and I alluded to O'Reilly's sex scandal on The View," writes O'Donnell on her blog, "we were told the following day that we couldn't bring it up anymore or else Bill O'Reilly would "go after" all the hosts of The View."

O'Donnell goes on to write that O'Reilly carefully edited her statements in his end of week attack on her for discussing the Iranian hostage crisis and 9/11, "molding the facts" like 1984 in an attempt to appease Fox News owner "Big Brother" Rupert Murdoch.

O'Donnell quotes a passage from George Orwell's 1984.

"Parsons was Winston’s fellow employee at the Ministry of Truth. He was a fattish but active man of paralyzing stupidity, a mass of imbecile enthusiasms—one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the thought police, the stability of the Party depended."

The View host warns America that they must question authority before it's too late, and that by 2050 no human being will be able to understand a conversation that requires thought on behalf of the individual.

"The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact, there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness," writes O'Donnell.

O'Reilly's methods are disgraceful and are intended to create a chilling atmosphere to prevent more high profile figures from going public in support of 9/11 truth. But O'Reilly's arrogance is rivaled only by his delusion, ratings for his Fox show continue to plummet, while The View has gained 600,000 new viewers since O'Donnell took the helm.

Telling the truth resonates with the American public - threatening people with consequences unless they shut up does not.

Bill O'Reilly is sowing the seeds of his own downfall as more people every day begin to see through his tenuous facade as a fatuous cheerleader for the Neo-Cons and the Bush administration.

Read More...

Summary only...

Joe Scarborough's Clowns Harass and Threaten Rosie O'Donnell for Thoughtcrime

Ever since Rosie O'Donnell went public on The View with her views on: 9/11 conspiracy, U.S. media manipulation and the captured British soldiers, she has been relentlessly smeared by Joe Scarborough and his associates.

Scarborough has done everything possible to distract from the real issues. Instead of responding with facts and reason, he simply throws accusations at Rosie O'Donnell and executive producer Barbara Walters, him and his cronies repeatedly state that "Rosie should be fired," "something has to be done" and "this cannot be allowed to continue."

Danny Bonaduce, the washed out fossil from the Partridge Family, went ahead and showed his ass on the show when he called for Rosie O'Donnell to be hung by the neck and accused her of high treason, simply for stating what she believed. He also said that she "will not be tolerated" and that Rosie is "offering aid and comfort to the enemy."

Scarborough's clowns called Rosie a "Lunatic" and "Idiot" and criticized her for "blaming the British hostages" for being captured.

Apparently it was a major thought crime for Rosie to have an opinion other than the one expressed in the official version of events; an opinion based on solid facts and not the Mossad-sponsored Orwellian doublethink that Scarborough and his clown college subscribes to.

Indeed the Zionist-controlled media is desperate to stop this can of worms from opening up. If enough people gain an understanding of the real perpetrators behind the 911, sweeping changes are sure to hit America and the world. This, of course, endangers the careers of many of the yellow journalists, who have been making a nice living selling the people they are supposed to be informing down the river, all the while contributing to war mongering propaganda which causes the senseless slaughter of many innocents.

The same groups who today, call for conspiracy theorists to be hung, may one-day find themselves hung for aiding foreign and domestic enemies of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The people are raising their awareness and slipping away from the clutches of Zionist media. Indeed, they are tired of being used like toilet-paper, for Israel's blood-curdling agenda in the Middle-East.

Read More...

Summary only...

Negligent Parents in Combination With Big Food Kills Kids

T.V. is making kids fat, lazy, stupid and violent. Parents aren't doing their job, yet no-one seems to think that it is their place to do something about it.

Parents are supposed to teach and protect their children and ensure their future prosperity, but they don't love their kids enough to put an effort into raising them. Instead, they are letting corporations raise them and poison them with information that is dead wrong.

This is gross negligence and these ignorant parents will be forced to grow old watching the demise of their descendants and the dis-integration of their family traditions.

Its time to unplug the cable and discard the T.V., throw out the microwave, buy some good pans, plant a garden and return to the sustainable ways that have been so conveniently forgotten. There is simply too much at stake to do nothing about it.

---

Forget Big Tobacco, Big Food Kills

Marie Cocco | Washington Post

WASHINGTON—If we are what we eat and we eat what is advertised, then American children are facing death by junk food.

Half of all the advertising time on children's television shows is devoted to food ads, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study of food advertising aimed at kids. And what do the commercials pitch? Candy, cereal, fast-food and other restaurants, soda and other sweetened drinks.

Just as surely as the tobacco industry tried for years—and succeeded—in hooking young kids on its deadly weed, the food industry is spending billions to advertise products that will make the next generation look and live like its porky parents: overweight, and at great risk of debilitating disease and early deaths linked to obesity.

Concerned by the lack of publicly available information about food advertising to kids, the Kaiser foundation went well beyond the 40 to 50 hours of programming that had typically been reviewed in earlier studies and examined 1,600 hours of TV fare. More important, the foundation reviewed all types of programs that children see—not just cartoons and other children's shows but sitcoms, reality shows, movies and others that older children prefer.

The result is an alarming portrait of kids who are bombarded with precisely the opposite message about food and fitness than the one the government and the medical profession agree is needed for good health. Children between ages 2 and 7 see 12 food ads per day—that's more than 4,000 per year. Those in the next age group—the pre-adolescent "tweens" between 8 and 12—see even more. They're tuned in to 21 food ads every day, or more than 7,000 every year. Teenagers see somewhat fewer ads, but even they will view 17 food ads a day.

The foods that star in the ads aren't broccoli or even bread. Kids are pitched a super-sized lineup of ads for candy and snack food, which account for 34 percent of food ads aimed at them. Another third of the ads are for cereal—and not the low-sugar kind.

While young children might beg parents for Pop-Tarts instead of oatmeal, the apparent targeting of pre-adolescents is aimed at a group that is just beginning to get out on its own, have its own pocket money, and begin choosing what to eat. "The tweens are really a big target of food advertising," says Vicky Rideout, director of the Kaiser foundation's Program for the Study of Entertainment Media and Health.

And while a tween sees as many as 21 ads a day for sweets or sugary sodas, the same kid is exposed to only one public service announcement promoting fitness and health every two to three days. "There are very few of them on the air," Rideout says.

Baby boomer parents who remember Tony the Tiger and the Trix Rabbit may not leap to concern. But they might also recall those long after-school bike rides and endless afternoons of neighborhood kickball—not hour upon hour plopped in front of video games or the television. The combination of saturation advertising for junk food and the sedentary lives that today's kids lead already has caused an unprecedented jump in childhood obesity—more than 30 percent of children between 6 and 11 are overweight and 15 percent are obese. The diseases they develop, such as diabetes and high blood pressure, weren't commonly seen in kids a generation ago. Treating them already is costing insurers, employers and taxpayers billions.

It took more than four decades from the time of the earliest government warnings about tobacco's ill health effects to bring that industry under what is a minimal level of control—and even that came only after lawsuits, some of them still moving slowly through the courts. The food industry shouldn't follow this contentious path. It must step up what are now only preliminary efforts to voluntarily change the content of the ads it produces for children.

Otherwise it too could stand accused of killing our kids for profit. There's no way to sugarcoat that.

Read More...

Summary only...

Joe Scarborough - 9/11 official story media-clown

When are these morons going to realize that they are in the minority? These clowns squabble over how "obviously" insane Rosie O'Donnell is, yet their refutations to her claims about the 911 are simply non-existent.

Yes, its time they do what they do best. Its time for these clowns to join the circus where they can continue making people laugh. This would be far more productive than touting the standard and already debunked lies of 9/11 as truth.

Read More...

Summary only...

BBC Reports Collapse of WTC Tower #7 23 Minutes before it actually happens

The incidents reported surrounding the 911 were scripted. Now a major problem has surfaced for the media architects of the 911; it has been discovered that their pre-scripted report was released too early.

Whoever wrote out the teleprompter script for the BBC on the 911 knew that building 7 was the command center and that it would be destroyed.

This fact remaining unrealized for all of these years tells me one thing about the current media system and indeed the intelligence of the public. This... is Hitler's dream come true.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=49f_1172526096

Read More...

Summary only...

Censored Stories: The 10 stories the nation's mainstream news media ignored

The juiciest one of all: Halliburton sold key nuclear-reactor components to an Iranian company as late as 2005, using offshore subsidiaries to circumvent U.S. sanctions. Funny, I don't remember seeing this on Fox News...

read more | digg story

Read More...

Summary only...

Google's response to my complaint about "Terror Storm" censorship

Google had been resetting the hit counter for Terror Storm for the past couple of weeks.  Alex Jones, the author of the film, published an article on his site exposing the fact that the film is being intentionally kept from reaching the top 100 list.

After a flood of complaints, Google restored the film to its top 100 list and restored the value on the hit counter.  This will increase the odds that terror-storm will become as popular as videos like Loose Change, which have received over 3 million hits.

This goes to show that Google needs to be called out when it is caught censoring, so that they will stop the practice.  Here is the response that I got from Google Video:

Hi,

Thanks for your email and we apologize for any frustration. We understand
that you are concerned about the number of public views "Terror Storm"
received.

The temporary statistical change in public views was a result of system
issues experienced earlier this week. However, this issue was resolved,
and the playback statistics are now accurately reflecting the number of
views this video is receiving. We have confirmed that this video is
currently appearing on the top 100 list.

Please note that this technical issue affected all videos, not just the
video in question. However, we are taking steps to ensure that this does
not happen in the future.

In addition, we rank videos based on a number of factors, including the
video file name, title, and any associated metadata to determine whether
videos are relevant to a query. We do not alter any video's statistical
information nor do we manually select the ranking of videos.

We apologize for any confusion and appreciate your understanding. Thank
you for taking the time to write us.

Sincerely,

The Google Video Team

Read More...

Summary only...

Fox News reporter's racist, official story endorsing blog creates a flood of responses from patriots

John Deutzman, like many reporters, is a shill for the globalist order. Perhaps some of us can send him a message that we know who this useful idiot is. It will be interesting to see how he dodges every issue, as he has already dodged the major issues by citing the, already debunked, popular mechanics article; we can easily see how little this guy has bothered to read.

In his blog he writes the following:

My own war against terrorism
John Deutzman | Aug 30, 2006

"Five years ago, thousands of innocent people were massacred by a bunch of nut cases here in my city. I still feel frustrated that I haven’t done enough to fight back. As an 11th generation New Yorker, I take the attacks personally and refuse to listen to any religious baloney justifying the murder of innocent people.

Quite by accident, I discovered I have been doing something to fight terrorism but I didn’t realize it until now. I moved to Manhattan right after 9-11 and have not used a personal car since then. I rarely take a cab and usually take the subway to and from work. It's not like this is some noble gesture by me... I just don't need a car in Manhattan. I know it's unrealistic to expect most Americans to kiss their car good bye but the only way to ultimately take away the power from the Middle East is to stop burning gas and oil.

Unfortunately it all comes down to money. I don’t think we will switch over to ethanol or hydrogen fuel until gas reaches a price that we can’t bear to take. Until that happens, our lives and our children’s lives are in the hands of lunatics. Take away the oil, they have nothing. Sand and camel humps are not in big demand."

In response to alternative 9/11 theorists, he wrote the following.

Journalists should keep an open mind but the conspiracy theories on 9-11 are all baloney.
Trust me, after 25 years in the business, I can assure you that the government is too disorganized,slow and has too many blabbermouths to pull off a conspiracy the size of 9-11.

He goes on to later write:

actually there have been many investigations into the conspiracy allegations. believe it or not popular mechanics did an excellent one. almost all of the theories have been debunked. how can you dispute the video of the two planes flying into the towers???

there are people out there..some of them in my business who are fooled by b.s. all of the time. for example, the "faith healers" and "pyschics" on tv have all been proven to be frauds.
yet they are still on the air and people still believe this nonsense.
i have a science background and choose only to believe what can been scientificaly proven. if you look at most of my stories there is video evidence that can not be disputed.

So this is the level of inquiry to which the reporters are taking, the people who so many Americans rely on to bring them the official version of events.

I responded with the following.

kahotep
Sep 22, 2006 | 5:34 PM

John,

Funny how easily you wrote off the alternative 9/11 theories without even bothering to consider them.

Ah well, I guess you, like most reporters, are afraid of actually thinking. It must be some sort of survival mechanism for you guys.

Should you ever choose to have a conscience, however, I recommend that you consider resigning from Fox News and stopping this racist disinformation campaign before the american people start cracking down on traitors.

Lets tell this fox news reporter what we think; lets make these "news" reporters understand that the American people know that they are copy-typists for the criminals behind the terror attacks.

Read More...

Summary only...