Conspiracy or Censorship?

Posted by Five0ClockCharlie on Mar 12th, 2009 and filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry from your site

I usually don’t get on a soap box about politics or the American government but AMERICA WAKE THE FUCK UP.  We here at the BB offices have been talking a lot about the NAU and Amero.  If you don’t know what those are watch the videos in the previous post “North American Union? Amerio? Is it all TRUE?

Well we have all come to the conclusion that a large amount of the American public are screaming conspiracy. Well what is a conspiracy? According to Dictionary.com “an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.”

Do you see that one special word in that definition?  SECRET. Yes, in order for something to be a Conspiracy it has to be kept SECRET.  So something that is out in the open is not secret and thus not making it a Conspiracy.  Just because all local news stations will not cover the story and even most major networks won’t talk about it does not make it a secret that just makes our media censored.

As a Eagle Scout, Brother, Son, Grandson to soldiers in the Air Force I BEG OF YOU WAKE UP AND TAKE IT UPON YOUR SELF TO FIND THE INFORMATION DON’T BELIEVE WHAT BIG MEDIA TELLS YOU.

Perfect example here is an article from Europe about the Amero. Give it a read.

You wont see that over here folks.

WHY you ask?  Well all of our media is run by big business and so is our government.  1+1 does = 2.  Crazy huh?

Heck we might as well be compared to China. There they only are allowed to know and hear about information the government allows them. All of their media outlets are owned by the government and heck even the internet is censored.

Google China censorship fuels calls for US boycot

Google move “black day”for china

We as Americans have this thing called freedoms you know those rules that were written on that piece of paper many moons ago.  You know the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Civil Rights etc.

According to Wikipedia “Freedom of speech today is understood as a multi-faceted right that includes not only the right to express, or disseminate, information and ideas, but three further distinct aspects:

  • The right to seek information and ideas;
  • the right to receive information and ideas;
  • the right to impart information and ideas.”

So with all of that being said whats my point to this rant.  WAKE UP AND SEEK THE NEWS AND INFORMATION FOR YOURSELF. Freedom of speech is not just a constitutional right but also a human right.

10 Responses for “Conspiracy or Censorship?”

  1. GlazednConfused says:

    OK Charlie, help me out here. Are you saying that BB has a right to express our conspiracy theories? Well no one is going to argue with that. However, I believe we should be more like Ghost Hunters – seek to discredit as much as possible before announcing the truth. Otherwise, we are just another crazy man on the street with a sign that says “The end of the dollar is coming – long live the Amero!”.

  2. Thraxxus says:

    I think he was saying there is no conspiracy – at least that is how I read it – as conspiracies are things held in private. What is going on right now isn’t in private – its right out there in the open – it is just that the American Media doesn’t cover it.

  3. GlazednConfused says:

    Does the media not cover it because it is bogus? You would think even the fringe “respectable” bloggers would have some kind of recent legit proof. HiffingtonPost? Daily Show? Salon? Someone? You’re telling me they aren’t covering it because it is out in the open? Hell, there are a half-dozen 24-hour news channels, and they will run anything ad infinitum.

  4. Thraxxus says:

    I can’t speak to why people do cover it. I find it ironic that you say that CNN and CNBC are not good news sources but Huffington post is. Again, I am not sure I understand your concept of a good news source.

  5. guybehindtheguy says:

    In the broadest sense – why do we consider our reality (what we see) as truth while we consider a conspiracy (what we don’t see) as false?

    As an individual – only you have the ability to make up your mind. It is important to question.

    Regarding media – Anyone of us can argue, “believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see.” Mainstream media is big business. To what agenda they serve? Um – I think money and seemingly more apparent in the past 5 years – politics. Although I think it has always been that way – I am I guess old enough to see it for what it is now.

    For this argument to go any further one would need to be open to the premise that media is big business.

  6. GlazednConfused says:

    Again, I hate to repeat myself but: Lou Dobbs and one guy on ANY station saying “Google it!” is insufficient evidence for me to believe this impending doom. Anything from a questionable source over three years old is also insufficient. Do not blame me for wanting verified sources. Something this big that’s been in process for so long MUST have been mentioned in a published work by now. But no, all I see are vague conspiracy ramblings. You guys can keep bringing the NAU and the Amero up, but I will keep asking “where’s the cream filling?”.

    As for the media, I understand it is big business. That is why I depend on many sources for my information. In this technological day and age, it is very difficult to keep anything a secret. That is the bottom-line.

    Which proves my point: don’t you think there would be a lot of money and prestige in a major media source blowing the cover off the NAU and Amero shenanigans? Any politician even looks at another woman and the media is on him like a pit bull.

  7. guybehindtheguy says:

    GlazednConfused, we share much of the same logic; however, I fail to see where it proves your point. Please explain further.

    I believe you are making quite a leap from Media is big business to exposing government corruption will make money and win prestige.

    You almost need a whiteboard to sort this stuff out.

  8. GlazednConfused says:

    It would be very beneficial for a 24 hour news network to expose government corruption. They would milk it to death for ratings. Look how they are milking this Cramer vs. Stewart event – and the NAU/Amero plot would be 100 times greater. There would be Pulitzers involved. That’s the bottom line – the pros far outweigh the cons of pissing off the government.

  9. Thraxxus says:

    Minus the fact of course that our media is actually REGULATED by the government. See to have a station you actually have to apply for one – so say you attack the government outright, as some radio stations have in the past, there is quite the possibility that your licensing may be harder to get.

    Also take a look at how many media outlets in the United States are owned by Rupert Murdoch. I’m just saying – Most of American Media is actually owned by a Non American – didja know that?

  10. GlazednConfused says:

    Yes, but “ownership” is overrated – and by “regulated”, you must mean the MAJOR media outlets and obviously very loosely. So I get your point, and I think I’ve made mine.

Leave a Reply