http://www.sf.indymedia.org/news/2002/11/1544222.php

If you'll read the post above and the response, you should be angered by the SF IMC's blatant censorship. What really takes the cake is that the author of this post had his REPLY censored when he attempted to answer the SF IMC's response to why they censor!

My, what courage and confidence is found on the Left.

Why should the left allow itself to be a mouthpiece for the right? They have plenty of money and resources to air their own opinions. We don't have to put our meager resources into doing their work for them.

Anytime someone on the left doesn't allow themselves to be manipulated by the right, folks cry "censorship!" That's BS - censorship would be preventing them from expressing themselves altogether, and I don't see the IMC shutting down any right-leaning websites.

The question is not one of whether the Left should allow itself to be a mouthpiece for the Right. The question is one of censorship. The decision was made to remove posts made by me which touch on a variety of subjects. In fact, an article not unlike the one you are responding to was hidden by SF IMC.

The intent of this behavior is to muzzle criticism. What sort of ‘free’ and ‘open’ forum seeks to prevent discussion? If an idea is good, it is empirically so. If an idea cannot stand the glare of investigation, then it is probably not a good idea. Where do you draw the line when censoring? Presumably you defend the practice of abortion on demand. Should someone who believes that certain limits be placed on abortion be silenced? Should someone who disagrees only incrementally from your party line on any subject be silenced? What does it say about you or your views that you are worried that you will be manipulated? Are you that weak-minded? Are your views so poorly formed they will slip through your fingers should criticism rain down on them?

How illustrative that you don’t consider silencing criticism as censorship, but rather reserve that word for the forceful denial of speech. Scratch a Leftist and find a Fascist.

Open and honest conversations across ideology creates change, conflict and interest. As long as the right-wingers are open to conversation and don't excessively spam to burden the infrastructure, I think their input is an assett.

there are a lot of them out there and I like to know what these folks are thinking and like to know how to argue successfully with them.

"conversations across ideology"--seems to me there's a little problem with that concept. kinda oxymoronic, no? primitive grunting and shit-flinging, yes. conversation? um...I don't know about that.

anyway, why do we keep having this same stupid conversation?

A. Even if he were capable of it in the first place, people like Bush Admirer are not interested in "open and honest conversations" of any kind.

B. You cannot argue with them, period--never mind "successfully argue" with them, because they are not here to exchange ideas or converse (ideology, remember?).

C. If you are so interested in "what these folks are thinking" then go to one of their rightwing websites, check out any big corporate news media, listen to Rush Limbaugh, or fuck man, just look around at our foreign policy, look around you and see how this country is being run.

Most people on Indymedia are here because it's all too clear to them exactly what these greedy, willfully ignorant people are thinking--it's being imposed on all of us on a constant basis. What Bush Admirer is thinking is being shoved down all of our throats every day--that's why most of us are here, to fight back. Does it help to have him "explain" his illogic to us so we understand better what's being shoved down our throats and why? Go to the library and read a book instead, there're plenty of intelligent, articulate writers out there who will explain it very clearly and help you achieve a much greater understanding of it and how to deal with it than responding to trolls on indymedia will.

Once again--IGNORE THEM. Trust me, I know people like this very well. Shit, I have family members who think like this, who ape almost word for word most of the same crap coming out of Bush Admirer's "intellect," which convinces me that either a) I'm related to Bush Admirer (major creepy heebie jeebies considering THAT possibility) or, b) it's all the same scripted rightwing ideology they just regurgitate in a pathetic simulation of "dialogue" and "arguing" and thinking for themselves. After years of dealing with this, I know very well what these folks are thinking--basically, they're thinking what ignoramuses like Rush Limbaugh tell them to think, and nothing more. They CAN'T think for themselves, so cut out the middle man and just listen to Rush yourself if you're so interested.

You can waste your time engaging in one-sided "discussions" with them, or ridiculing them, or you can just IGNORE THEM, the way they are willfully ignoring you.

Let the ruling class right-wingers who own the media go put up their own damn web site and leave the left the last bastion of actual free speech. Isn't controlling 99 percent of all political content on TV and in the news enough for the right, now they want our little niche in cyberspace. Quit with the abstract calls for free speech, the only ones who have it are the ones who afford the costs.

-Fox News does make an effort to be fair and balanced. They do bring on people who come from both sides of the argument.-
Provide examples.

The major news media are run by entertainment divisions. The larger the conglomerate that operates the division, the more "conservative" (not inherently Republican) it becomes - they all want to protect their share of the pie. Hence the gobbling up of smaller markets by such entities as Clear Channel (just one example). The assertion that the media is "liberal" is lacking in its sincerity and scope. While that might be true for PRINT media, many of which are still privately owned, by the time it reaches television, the news has been SO tailored and watered-down, that any capacity to designate it either way becomes moot. Also, Fox News is neither "fair" or "balanced," though these are nifty little catch phrases. It succeeds by provoking.

To begin with I don’t watch much TV, so some of the names you
mention are unfamiliar to me.
I do know a few of the individuals you call liberal; what ever that means nowadays.
Dan Rather who lied about the direction of the motion of JFK’
head when he viewed the Zapruder film and recently told BBC that he could not report the truth on american networks because of censorship, I don’t think liberal means dancing lockstep with the
pentagon. I’m not even looking for liberal; the term has no meaning except in the dictionary.
Geraldo Rivera who is, in my view another entertainer and hardly
anything but a patty cake Howard Stern. A baffoon you would like to have represent the left because he is an idiot.
Let’s see; if you had Kissenger, a balance would be Ralph Shoenman or John Judge(wont happen and you know it) even
Noam Chomsky or Peter Dale Scott would do. Someone from
FAIR maybe. Actually anyone of your ‘worlds dumbest’ list would
be acceptable. Then we could see who was really dumb instead of
your unsupported opinion. I do know that TV is like public school-
mediocre at best compared to the library and full of crap except
for the math classes.

The biggest difference I've seen when discussing left vs. right on indymedia is that many here place the dividing line between corporations and non-corporations. While I see what they are trying to accomplish, it has been my contention that they are confusing the subject. Most Americans simply don't divide it up that way, they divide it between big government and smaller government. And I believe that those who speak of liberal vs. conservative or left vs. right confuse the audiance unless you're already in tune with how they think. Then you throw in people saying "fascist, nazis, anti-capitalist, amerikkka, etc", and you got a message that are going to turn a lot of people right off. Sometimes it's not the food you eat, it's how it's presented to your table. The presentation is getting in the way of the message. I've told them this, they don't wanna listen. Oh, well.

Mr. eggs over easy:
I get your point. I’m too rough. I’m lower class you know, school, active military, community school, blah blah. Had lots of different jobs and trades, technical and mechanical. Please forgive my clumsy meanness. I’ll try to be nice. Thank you. Have a nice day.

Yes the media is revolting. Don’t use it. It’s using you.
And, Barbra Streisand? ? Ha ha ha.
Try, try again. Get real, I like the Southpark episode with her in it but; do me a favor.

>>>Mr. eggs over easy:
I get your point. I’m too rough. I’m lower class you know, school, active military, community school, blah blah. Had lots of different jobs and trades, technical and mechanical. Please forgive my clumsy meanness. I’ll try to be nice. Thank you. Have a nice day. <<<

Re-read what I wrote.

If you can't comprehend marketing your ideas in a package where at least you stand a chance of the general public picking up the product, then don't complain when they never get good shelf space.

Dear Mr. eggs over easy:
Again I apologize to you and whomever may have been so unfortunate as to have read any of my reductive silly meanderings through these threads. Let me sob quietly over there in the corner for awhile.
later....
I’m back now realizing my general non worth as a spokesman for what ever political viewpoint you were making in your advice. Am I confusing the issue?
I’m not a good dog. And I am but one (pray to your G*d) of the angry. My dance is clumsy but shared.
Again, profuse shame and self-pity. I must mend.

with their militant propaganda they've managed to brainwash and incite one of their soldiers to kill:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/11/1545326_comment.php#1545471

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/5372486p-6360638c.html

We have got to shut this network of IMCs down.

I thought that's what you were trying to do all this time anyway.
You mean it could get worse? Good Lord. The horror.

All until now has just been me playing around.

Now, I'm pissed.

I've already contacted an attorney. A wrongful death lawsuit is headed for sf imc.

If they're busy fighting legal battles they won't have time to kill anyone else.

Everyone knows - the owners tend to vote Republican (and give money to both parties), the talent tends to vote Democrat (and give money to Dems). This Dem slant is due to the fact that media tend to operate in LA or NYC, Democrat strongholds, so the reps tend to be Dems.

The newsrooms are the same. The media owners are all pretty much right wing Republicans. The Editors are a mix, and the journalists tend to be Democrats, with a few liberal Democrats. They all tend to be middle class.

The problem with the mass media is that it's too affluent. There's so little working class representation in there. It's rich conservatives, and affluent college educated liberals. And most of them are white people.

getting back to the point....

here is an idea that might help people participate in the IMC without getting bogged down by comments they find repulsive or insulting or scary.

--- - - -- - -- - -- - - - - -- - -- - - - ---- - -- -- ---- - -- - -- - - - -- -

possible solution: when you click on a newswire item headline/link, it opens and the entire article or photo or whatever is displayed. a chronological list of headlines/links to ALL comments about that item, if there are any, will appear underneath the item. when you click on a comment headline/link, it opens and the entire comment is displayed, often underneath the original item and a stack of earlier comments.

when you add a comment you are asked to specify which previous comments, if any, you do NOT want to appear with your comment. when your comment is published, it's headline and your name (or nickname) will appear as a link at the bottom of whichever item or comment you commented on, underneath the links to any previous comments. when you click on the headline/link to your comment, it will open and you will see your comment. above your comment you will see only those previous comments which you wanted to be displayed with yours, if any. anyone is free to comment on your comment, and a list of names and headlines/links may accumulate under your comment.

the key here is the ability to choose which comments will not be displayed in full together with one's own comment. alternatively, and perhaps more "positively", choosing which comments WILL be displayed with one's own, would also work. could even offer both negative and positive selection options. which would take more keystrokes? it depends and i would expect it to vary.

------- - -- - -- --- - --- - -- - --- -- --- - -- - -- - - - - --- - -

You are such a disgusting racist troll, I don't even know why I'm responding to your post. I guess I like a good fight.

The media are not owned by NY Jews. Rupert Murdoch is Jewish, but an Aussie, and he's in the Republican camp. AOL/TW, liberal? They are a megamerger, enabled by the 96 telecom act, which had bipartisan support, but totally corporate and no grassroots support. Vivendi/Universal? French. Walt Disney? Eisner, yes, a Jew... but not NYC, and Disney was not Jewish. Viacom? Redstone, nope. They own Blockbuster, which is known for censorship. Bertelsmann? German, and has a history of business with nazis (of course).

So, no, there's no NYC Jewish media conspiracy Bush Admirer. If anything, there's a vast right wing media conspiracy with a history of war propaganda on behalf of western expansionism. They are all very pro-globalization, and pro-free trade.

Get with it Bush Admirer. The right wing wingnut alliances have changed. Don't you know that your object of hatred is no longer the Jew but the psychotic Arab? They are all suicide bombers, don't you know? The media, they are all a bunch of pro-Palestinian apologists, and our media are under the pernicious influence of the moguls at Al Jazeera. Like, Duh!

Each year, the U.S. government uses $3 billion [$5billion+] of your tax dollars to promote war in the Middle East by funding the Israeli military occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem.

Here's your chance to promote peace.

Give to Jews Against the Occupation

As Israel tightens its grip on Palestinian cities, villages and refugee camps, it is more important than ever that American Jews who oppose Israel's policies raise their voices. Please join Jews Against The Occupation (JATO) in saying NO to Israel's war on the Palestinians. Your tax-deductible contribution to JATO will help build the growing movement of American Jews who denounce the United States' support of Israel's occupation and amplify the voices of progressive, secular and religious Jews of all ages throughout New York City who demand peace through justice in Palestine and Israel.

Please help Jews Against the Occupation continue to -

*Organize* the Jewish community to oppose the Israeli occupation and the U.S. military aid that supports it, as well as work in solidarity with our city-wide allies as part of the Palestine Activist Forum.

*Educate* Jews and non-Jews in New York City about the Israeli occupation and the United States' role in perpetuating the violence in the Middle East.

*Participate* in delegations to Palestine with the International Solidarity Movement which uses non-violent direct action to end the Israeli occupation and raise awareness about the Palestinian freedom struggle.

Thank you for your support and for joining Jews Against the Occupation in our work to insure a peaceful future in Palestine and Israel.

Please make your check out to "The Brecht Forum" with a notation to Jews Against the Occupation in the memo line and send it with your current mailing address to:

Jews Against the Occupation

Prince Street Station

PO Box 494

New York, NY 10012
http://www.jewsagainsttheoccupation.org/donate.html