TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Top 25 Censored Stories of 2001-2002

Top 25 Censored Stories of 2001-2002

to those arguing about the US medias being honnest and independant.

http://www.projectcensored.org/stories/2003/default.htm

every story is fully documented, so don't try your "bashing the US" shit on me

Great post!

whats your point buddy?

My point is that i like this thread you started.. the link is interesting...nothing personal.

oh no, it was directed at Tiesto14 who posted "maybe a plane needs to fly into that beautiful city u have in your sig for you to understand soeme Americans frustraton lately" then deleted his own post...

quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek oh no, it was directed at Tiesto14 who posted "maybe a plane needs to fly into that beautiful city u have in your sig for you to understand soeme Americans frustraton lately" then deleted his own post...

yes i deleted it because i do not want to get into a debate over what i said.....but take it as it was.

quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek oh no, it was directed at Tiesto14 who posted "maybe a plane needs to fly into that beautiful city u have in your sig for you to understand soeme Americans frustraton lately" then deleted his own post...

Im not surprised he would say something sooo stupid....its just in his sad nature.

interesting site...

it is an interesting site, but honestly, i wonder what their agenda is. partly telling another side of a story, but i think that there is something more behind it... not saying that what they are reporting isnt true. all im saying is that you have to look at both sides congruently, not just pick one or the other.

Dont cock knock Tiesto14 please.

Somewhat interesting. I'm not entirely sure how reliable a source of information this organization is, or what their political motivations are, but it's still worth looking at.

As far as documentation goes, it is quite good for some stories, and quite abhorrent in others. Look at #21 - the only source listed is "The Progressive Populist". It doesn't get any more dubious than that.

seems some stories are very local compared to some other international ones... it may explain the lack of info sources.

#18 World's Coral Reefs Dying

This one is very very true.

I just watched a documentary on TV about this about a month ago.

What I was seeing was incredible...

The bleaching made the reefs look like something from another planet...

I must admit some of the stories were somewhat interesting but i really dont understand the point of the site. Where were the stories censored and who censored them? I probably missed something key so if someone could help me out.
But one thing, please please people dont be rash and assume that just because something is from 'alternative press' that it's necessarily accurate. Anti American propaganda is just as much propaganda as pro american.
And Malek I really hope you're not going to try and convince yourself and the rest of us that biased media is limited to America. I am sure there is no bias or propaganda on Al jazeera television. I am sure you wouldn't see many newspapers in Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Seria, Lebanon... showing the injustices caused by their governments.

Re: Top 25 Censored Stories of 2001-2002

quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek to those arguing about the US medias being honnest and independant. http://www.projectcensored.org/stories/2003/default.htm every story is fully documented, so don't try your "bashing the US" shit on me

im not going to bash, i am sure everything is documented, but the way the media portrays it (headlines and shit and bias) i dont agree with, but i am sure you can find an arctile about something from both sides

I love how the majority of articles focus on the US government but fail to mention the wrongdoings of any others. Give me a break ... most governments and not just the US operate in the same way.

Its hard to beleive that news companies like CNN wouldn't talk about those 25 censored. I mean its the twentieth century, people aren't going to suicide if they see something thats shocking. How could they cover up such important news?Iam going to stop before I get ahead of myself.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I love how the majority of articles focus on the US government but fail to mention the wrongdoings of any others. Give me a break ... most governments and not just the US operate in the same way.

Not to the extent that your government does.

quote:

I love how the majority of articles focus on the US government but fail to mention the wrongdoings of any others. Give me a break ... most governments and not just the US operate in the same way.

You're probably right, but you're missing the point.

Regardless of what the other countries do, it does not change the fact that many decisions made by the US government are, for want of a better word, "immoral", and that the US media (and other western media to be fair) has consistently failed to report them (I'll refrain from speculating on why this may be). The "but the other countries do it too" argument just doesn't wash. You cannot condemn other countries for acting immorally and then justify the actions of the US government on the grounds that these other countries do it too. It's the rule of hypocracy: either what you are saying is wrong, or what you are doing is wrong. Which category does the US government fall into?

For the record, I condemn many actions committed by Saddam Hussein and the leaders of many other countries, but for a suppodesly advanced, civilised western nation, the US has a disproportionately poor human rights record, which US citizens - in my admittedly small experience - often fail to acknowledge (perhaps - as this article would appear to be suggesting - this is because the US media often fails to report stories that appear to be critical of the US government, keeping the average American in the dark).

Having said that, I do agree with Arbiter in perhaps questioning the validity/verifiability of many of the articles. The trouble with the more "radical" organisations is that in their desire to persuade and rally their rhetoric, they are often susceptible to "lying through omission". So, for instance, many of these issues may have already been rebutted by the US government (or other bodies/organisations), but the articles presented may have conveniently "omitted" the more valid, opposing opinion in preference of facts that more adequately support the cause advocated by this organisation. I suppose we'll never know, but, regardless of whether all articles can be demonstrated as absolutely true, it does at least succeed in raising awareness of issues we may never have otherwise known existed.

Also, I think it's interesting to notice that this organisation is based in California, somewhat diminishing the validity of the "it must just be people who hate the US" line of argument.

Also, I suggest that you all read this part of the site:

http://www.projectcensored.org/newsabuse.htm

Very well written and although it talks exclusively about the US, it certaintly applies to all media, all around the world.

the site is gay

that is all.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter I'm not entirely sure how reliable a source of information this organization is

haha. someone finally realized that its an ORGANIZATION, maybe that .org gives it away hehe. yeh, many of those one sided .org websites are pure shite - no credibility what so ever (been proved by academia)

so ALL .org websites can lick my balls.

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade You're probably right, but you're missing the point. Regardless of what the other countries do, it does not change the fact that many decisions made by the US government are, for want of a better word, "immoral", and that the US media (and other western media to be fair) has consistently failed to report them (I'll refrain from speculating on why this may be). The "but the other countries do it too" argument just doesn't wash. You cannot condemn other countries for acting immorally and then justify the actions of the US government on the grounds that these other countries do it too. It's the rule of hypocracy: either what you are saying is wrong, or what you are doing is wrong. Which category does the US government fall into? For the record, I condemn many actions committed by Saddam Hussein and the leaders of many other countries, but for a suppodesly advanced, civilised western nation, the US has a disproportionately poor human rights record, which US citizens - in my admittedly small experience - often fail to acknowledge (perhaps - as this article would appear to be suggesting - this is because the US media often fails to report stories that appear to be critical of the US government, keeping the average American in the dark). Having said that, I do agree with Arbiter in perhaps questioning the validity/verifiability of many of the articles. The trouble with the more "radical" organisations is that in their desire to persuade and rally their rhetoric, they are often susceptible to "lying through omission". So, for instance, many of these issues may have already been rebutted by the US government (or other bodies/organisations), but the articles presented may have conveniently "omitted" the more valid, opposing opinion in preference of facts that more adequately support the cause advocated by this organisation. I suppose we'll never know, but, regardless of whether all articles can be demonstrated as absolutely true, it does at least succeed in raising awareness of issues we may never have otherwise known existed. Also, I think it's interesting to notice that this organisation is based in California, somewhat diminishing the validity of the "it must just be people who hate the US" line of argument.

Please please please don't make me dig through a bunch of .org sites to dig up dirt about every other country. No I wasn't missing the point. I could find a similar article documenting similar trangressions that every country has committed if I had the time to look for it on the internet. The US governement does not force the meida to censor articles. You wanna know why? Because there's nothing Americans like better than a scandal. I mean jessus christ ... if we were so intent on maintaining strict secrecy you would think that we would censor shit like monica lewinsky right?????

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.