MEDIA MELTDOWN: Tucker Carlson Defends Alex Jones from Censorship Efforts

[AuH20]

Firing squad has begun

https://www.newsweek.com/tucker-carl...ension-1045108

[timosman]

[Sonny Tufts]

Good grief, can't Carlson distinguish between the action of the government and that of a private company?

[Swordsmyth]

Good grief, can't Carlson distinguish between the action of the government and that of a private company?

A "private" company started by US-Intel and run for their benefit.

[Sonny Tufts]

A "private" company started by US-Intel and run for their benefit.

Wow, who knew Ted Turner was a CIA stooge?

[Swordsmyth]

Wow, who knew Ted Turner was a CIA stooge?

Everyone at that level is part of the gang.

[timosman]

A "private" company started by US-Intel and run for their benefit.

You should be more respectful when talking about tech visionaries. These people have more money than you can imagine.

[dannno]

Wow, who knew Ted Turner was a CIA stooge?

Apparently everybody except for you..

But that is beside the point.

Youtube advertises itself as a non-partisan website that allows people to post content based on posted guidelines and are able to use the platform to generate revenue - however the users are also generating revenue for Youtube.

If Youtube wants to start banning people for their political beliefs, they should probably post that in their guidelines so that people who build up an audience on youtube whom youtube disagrees with their views is not wasting their time.

CNN is actively encouraging youtube to censor their media opponents on a platform that is supposed to be open for people to generate content as long as they follow the guidelines.

The President is not obligated to listen to everybody's speech, otherwise he would be obligated to sit down at a meeting with you.

[Sonny Tufts]

Apparently everybody except for you..

In my defense, I didn't receive a tinfoil hat when they were handing them out to the rest of you guys.

[Anti Globalist]

Tucker better be careful or he might end up losing his show.

[donnay]

In my defense, I didn't receive a tinfoil hat when they were handing them out to the rest of you guys.

That's a knee-jerk response an ignorant people say. You obviously have been asleep at the wheel too long. Operation MOCKINGBIRD--look it up!

The CIA conducted a “formal training program” during the 1950s for the sole purpose of instructing its agents to function as newsmen. “Intelligence officers were ‘taught to make noises like reporters,’ explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management. These were the guys who went through the ranks and were told ‘You’re going to he a journalist,’” the CIA official said.” The Agency’s preference, however, was to engage journalists who were already established in the industry. Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

Newspaper columnists and broadcast journalists with household names have been known to maintain close ties with the Agency. “There are perhaps a dozen well known columnists and broadcast commentators whose relationships with the CIA go far beyond those normally maintained between reporters and their sources,” Bernstein maintains. “They are referred to at the Agency as ‘known assets’ and can be counted on to perform a variety of undercover tasks; they are considered receptive to the Agency’s point of view on various subjects.” Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

Frank Wisner, Allen Dulles, and Washington Post publisher Phillip Graham were close associates, and the Post developed into one of the most influential news organs in the United States due to its ties with the CIA. The Post managers’ “individual relations with intelligence had in fact been the reason the Post Company had grown as fast as it did after the war,” Davis (172) observes. “[T]heir secrets were its corporate secrets, beginning with MOCKINGBIRD. Phillip Graham’s commitment to intelligence had given his friends Frank Wisner an interest in helping to make the Washington Post the dominant news vehicle in Washington, which they had done by assisting with its two most crucial acquisitions, the Times-Herald and WTOP radio and television stations.” Davis, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post, 172.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ci...o-know/5471956

[donnay]

Tucker better be careful or he might end up losing his show.

That's the problem with people who know what is going on, they are too scared. Now is the time to stand up for EVERYONE being silenced--the good, the bad, and the ugly. No one's first amendment should be shut down regardless if we agree with them or not.

[Sonny Tufts]

That's a knee-jerk response an ignorant people say. You obviously have been asleep at the wheel too long. Operation MOCKINGBIRD--look it up!



https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ci...o-know/5471956

And what does this article have to do with Ted Turner? Oh, right...nothing. Considering that the crackpot who wrote the article also claims that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax and the Boston Marathon bombing was a government false flag operation, I would suspect his tinfoil hat size is XXXL.

[TheCount]

Everyone at that level is part of the gang.

Then Tucker Carlson is CIA and this thread is disinfo.

[A Son of Liberty]

That's a knee-jerk response an ignorant people say. You obviously have been asleep at the wheel too long. Operation MOCKINGBIRD--look it up!



https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ci...o-know/5471956

The real charm in all of this is that information itself is corrupted by the very knowledge of this program. Not only is information on Facebook questionable, but any information which questions Facebook is questionable as well. And so we are left with no actual information at all. NOTHING is to be believed... and so we believe nothing at all. And so upon these terms, all dialogue breaks down. No meaningful discussion can be had when the basic facts cannot even be agreed upon. And so factions develop and grow, and civil unrest ensues... and eventually, civil war. Rather cunning, I think. I don't see any path through, really. "We" have our approved messengers, and "they" have theirs. Nothing bridges the gap. Thus, no dialogue.

The only light in the wilderness that I see from my limited perch is the intellectual dark web... a small group of thinkers from across the political spectrum who are engaging in long-form political discussion without the "spin", and without the brow-beating. I think they're rejuvenating the art of intellectual engagement in a way that hasn't been seen in decades.

[Swordsmyth]

Then Tucker Carlson is CIA and this thread is disinfo.

Tucker Carlson, founded and owns FOX? That should come as a surprise to R. Murdoch.

[donnay]

And what does this article have to do with Ted Turner? Oh, right...nothing. Considering that the crackpot who wrote the article also claims that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax and the Boston Marathon bombing was a government false flag operation, I would suspect his tinfoil hat size is XXXL.

Your ignorance is showing.

[Sonny Tufts]

Your ignorance is showing.

As is your paranoia.

[donnay]

As is your paranoia.

It's only paranoia when you are not informed--you obviously just need to go back to sleep to avoid that.

[acptulsa]

A "private" company started by US-Intel and run for their benefit.

Thee is evidence this is true of Facebook. But CNN? No...

Tucker Carlson, founded and owns FOX? That should come as a surprise to R. Murdoch.

"Everyone at that level" doesn't include Rupert Murdoch? Since when?

Good grief, can't Carlson distinguish between the action of the government and that of a private company?

On the one hand, your point is not invalid. On the other hand, oligarchy and corporatocracy is blurring the lines, isn't it? Big business and big government are clearly in each other's pockets to an extreme degree. The spirit of the First Amendment is a separation of Press and State, just as it separates Church and State. But when Boeing is a major sponsor of both every mainstream media outlet and most members of Congress, can we reasonably expect peace, or even voices favoring peace?

To my mind, having the most popular internet sites go partisan is basically the same thing as 'free speech zones' for protestors blocks away from the crowds. Yeah, those protestors who get corralled may be crackpots, and Alex Jones may be a crackpot. But the inconveniences crackpots cause to free speech are nothing compared to the inconveniences of not having any free speech.

Liberals recognize the dangers posed by large businesses acting in concert, but mistakenly think government is the solution. Conservatives recognize the dangers posed by government, but seem to overreact by assuming business can do no wrong. Meanwhile, big businesses buy both the Congress and the media, and laugh all the way to the bank. They even bribe Congress not to take over the internet, because if the internet was government, the First Amendment would apply to it. As it is, corporations can 'exert economic pressure', just as they have long done to the media.

I personally think Alex Jones is a psyop originally designed to discredit 'conspiracy theorists' by being a lampoon of serious investigative journalism. So, it stands to reason that the government, the media, and certain internet entities (some of which have demonstrable links to government intelligence agencies) would put him up as a Problem. They always have loved to create Problems, so they can provoke a Reaction that makes it easier to sell their Solution Worse than the Problem.

I'm certainly not one to defend Alex Jones. But this is a much bigger issue than him.

[acptulsa]

A "private" company started by US-Intel and run for their benefit.

There is evidence this is true of Facebook. But CNN? Not that I know of. Run for the benefit of the same corporate sponsors, maybe. But founded on CIA money back during the Carter Administration? Got a link?

Tucker Carlson, founded and owns FOX? That should come as a surprise to R. Murdoch.

"Everyone at that level" doesn't include Rupert Murdoch? Since when?

Who do you think you're defending? Have you ever read any of Murdoch's other propaganda sources besides Fox? His overseas Yellowcake Journalism outlets are often a damned sight more liberal than even CNN.

Good grief, can't Carlson distinguish between the action of the government and that of a private company?

On the one hand, your point is not invalid. On the other hand, oligarchy and corporatocracy is blurring the lines, isn't it? Big business and big government are clearly in each other's pockets to an extreme degree. The spirit of the First Amendment is a separation of Press and State, just as it separates Church and State. But when Boeing is a major sponsor of both every mainstream media outlet and most members of Congress, can we reasonably expect peace, or even voices favoring peace?

To my mind, having the most popular internet sites go partisan is basically the same thing as 'free speech zones' for protestors blocks away from the crowds. Yeah, those protestors who get corralled may be crackpots, and Alex Jones may be a crackpot. But the inconveniences crackpots cause to free speech are nothing compared to the inconveniences of not having any free speech--or not having a place where your free speech can be heard.

Liberals recognize the dangers posed by large businesses acting in concert, but mistakenly think government is the solution. Conservatives recognize the dangers posed by government, but seem to overreact by assuming business can do no wrong. Meanwhile, big businesses buy both the Congress and the media, and laugh all the way to the bank. They even bribe Congress not to take over the internet, because if the internet was government, the First Amendment would apply to it. As it is, corporations can 'exert economic pressure', just as they have long done to the media.

I personally think Alex Jones is a psyop originally designed to discredit 'conspiracy theorists' by being a lampoon of serious investigative journalism. So, it stands to reason that the government, the media, and certain internet entities (some of which have demonstrable links to government intelligence agencies) would put him up as a Problem. They always have loved to create Problems, so they can provoke a Reaction that makes it easier to sell their Solution Worse than the Problem.

I'm certainly not one to defend Alex Jones. But this is a much bigger issue than him.

[Swordsmyth]

Thee is evidence this is true of Facebook. But CNN? No...

CNN is part of operation mocking bird.

"Everyone at that level" doesn't include Rupert Murdoch? Since when?

It does, I wasn't saying it didn't, all I said was that Tucker wasn't at that level, Murdoch founded and owns FOX.

[Swordsmyth]

There is evidence this is true of Facebook. But CNN? Not that I know of. Run for the benefit of the same corporate sponsors, maybe. But founded on CIA money back during the Carter Administration? Got a link?

I was primarily talking about Mugbook but as I said CNN is part of the same gang.

"Everyone at that level" doesn't include Rupert Murdoch? Since when?

Who do you think you're defending? Have you ever read any of Murdoch's other propaganda sources besides Fox? His overseas Yellowcake Journalism outlets are often a damned sight more liberal than even CNN.

I am not defending Murdoch, you are confused, I only said that Tucker wasn't at the same level as Turner.