Marty Kaplan points out "the game that CNN is really playing" in his article The CNN/RubeTube Debate, "The notion that the CNN-YouTube debate represents a grass-roots triumph of the internet age is laughable."
"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.
"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?" - CNN-YouTube Debate Producer Doubts the Wisdom of the Crowd
Look at 10Questions.com, they let people vote and the top ten questions the people picked were not "crazy."
SEE VIDEO: The CNN political team chooses the videos, not you.
It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked
Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.
This is a question that should be asked!
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
See this article: CNN-YouTube Debate Producer Doubts the Wisdom of the Crowd
"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.
"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?""
It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked
Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.
This is a question that should be asked!
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?
"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.
"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?""
It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked
Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.
This is a question that should be asked!
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?
Saturday, November 24, 2007
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question 6 Videos
Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us.
Contact CNN: 404-827-1500 or http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv
Mr. Giuliani, how can you lie
to the American people about
why we were attacked on 9/11
and lie about why we're still
at risk of being attacked again?
Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us.
Contact CNN: 404-827-1500 or http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv
Mr. Giuliani, how can you lie
to the American people about
why we were attacked on 9/11
and lie about why we're still
at risk of being attacked again?
Friday, November 23, 2007
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Friday, November 16, 2007
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Sunday, November 11, 2007
If I could ask the media a question
The media helps to sell the idea of bombing Iran by the very fact that they refuse to report that bombing Iran would be a war crime. Bombing Iran would be illegal. Bombing Iran would be a violation of international law.
If I could ask the media a question it would be this: Why the hell can't you report the truth and inform the American people of the basic fact that attacking Iran is illegal?
If I could ask the media a question it would be this: Why the hell can't you report the truth and inform the American people of the basic fact that attacking Iran is illegal?
Friday, November 09, 2007
The first step is to stop using the term "blame America."
Greg, I am disappointed to see you write something like this: "If an Arab sort of blames America for 9/11, it's despicable"
Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal neither "blamed America" NOR did he "sort of blame America."
Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement to the media was, "At times like this, we must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack. I believe the government of the United States of America should reexamine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance towards the Palestinian cause. While the U.N. passed clear resolutions numbered 242 and 338 calling for the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip decades ago, our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of Israelis while the world turns the other cheek."
Greg, I noticed you omitted mention of what "the issues" were which were clearly spelled out in the statement, namely the U.S. government's policy of support for Israel and the resulting suffering of the Palestinians. You mischaracterized Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement, he did not say "America deserved 9/11."
Are you telling me you by into Giuliani's manipulative game of insisting that talking about the motive for the crime of 9/11 means that one approves of the crime or sees it as a justifiable act? Giuliani uses a dirty trick in order to prevent the policy of supporting Israel's crimes from being examined. Giuliani attempts to intimidate people into not questioning the policies or angering people so much that cannot think about the policies.
From what you wrote and what you didn't write, I get the impression that you don't want the American people to realize why it is that terrorists attacked on 9/11 or that you don't want the American people to do something about the policies that unnecessarily make us all targets. Tell me this is not the case and that you will work to make others aware of the devious games politicians and pundits have been playing on the American people. Clearly Giuliani serves the agenda of keeping the status quo with regards to the policy of supporting Israel so he deceives the public to prevent them from even thinking changing the policy of supporting Israel.
I can't think of a more vulgar violation of the people's rights then to rob them of the freedom to decide for themselves if they want to risk their lives over specific foreign policies.
Greg, your article morphs Clinton, Bush and other political elites into a single concept called "America" which you then insist is blameless. This is a dirty game because politicians and their horrible policies are not "America itself." Your artificial construct means that the people of the United States can never hold their politicians accountable for political policies. And that is a serious problem because our lives continue to be totally unnecessarily put at risk because of these illegal and immoral policies. These polices are precisely what enrage people into committing acts of terrorism against the U.S. in spite of the lies Guiliani and other politicians tell. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people." - Michael Scheuer, Former CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief
Greg, you can help stop these politicians from putting our lives at risk. The first step is to stop using the term "blame America." The next step is to call for an end to all illegal and immoral foreign policies.
Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal neither "blamed America" NOR did he "sort of blame America."
Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement to the media was, "At times like this, we must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack. I believe the government of the United States of America should reexamine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance towards the Palestinian cause. While the U.N. passed clear resolutions numbered 242 and 338 calling for the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip decades ago, our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of Israelis while the world turns the other cheek."
Greg, I noticed you omitted mention of what "the issues" were which were clearly spelled out in the statement, namely the U.S. government's policy of support for Israel and the resulting suffering of the Palestinians. You mischaracterized Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement, he did not say "America deserved 9/11."
Are you telling me you by into Giuliani's manipulative game of insisting that talking about the motive for the crime of 9/11 means that one approves of the crime or sees it as a justifiable act? Giuliani uses a dirty trick in order to prevent the policy of supporting Israel's crimes from being examined. Giuliani attempts to intimidate people into not questioning the policies or angering people so much that cannot think about the policies.
From what you wrote and what you didn't write, I get the impression that you don't want the American people to realize why it is that terrorists attacked on 9/11 or that you don't want the American people to do something about the policies that unnecessarily make us all targets. Tell me this is not the case and that you will work to make others aware of the devious games politicians and pundits have been playing on the American people. Clearly Giuliani serves the agenda of keeping the status quo with regards to the policy of supporting Israel so he deceives the public to prevent them from even thinking changing the policy of supporting Israel.
I can't think of a more vulgar violation of the people's rights then to rob them of the freedom to decide for themselves if they want to risk their lives over specific foreign policies.
Greg, your article morphs Clinton, Bush and other political elites into a single concept called "America" which you then insist is blameless. This is a dirty game because politicians and their horrible policies are not "America itself." Your artificial construct means that the people of the United States can never hold their politicians accountable for political policies. And that is a serious problem because our lives continue to be totally unnecessarily put at risk because of these illegal and immoral policies. These polices are precisely what enrage people into committing acts of terrorism against the U.S. in spite of the lies Guiliani and other politicians tell. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people." - Michael Scheuer, Former CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief
Greg, you can help stop these politicians from putting our lives at risk. The first step is to stop using the term "blame America." The next step is to call for an end to all illegal and immoral foreign policies.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Kucinich Reads Resolution to Impeach Vice President Cheney 3 Videos
Kucinich Reads Resolution to Impeach Vice President Cheney 3 Videos
Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States.
Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran.
The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States of America.
The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States.
Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran.
The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States of America.
The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Why should the Palestinians answer for the Holocaust?
Well, if an atrocity was committed in Germany, or Europe for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this?
MR. WALLACE: Okay. Last December, you said this: "The Europeans created a myth -- the Holocaust."
A myth?
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, I don't understand, what questions are you going to put to me?
MR. WALLACE: The questions I intend to put to you are things that you have said in the past, things that have made headlines.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, I have said these in the past. Do you want us to repeat what has been said already? That would produce a very repetitious -- if I can use that word -- interview.
Put a new question to me, sir.
MR. WALLACE: Please. I am doing the questioning.
America is trying to understand President Ahmadinejad. And one of the ways that we can understand you is by repeating various things that you have said over a period of the past years. Certainly you're not ashamed of the things that you've said --
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: That is very correct. I am not ashamed, and I have -- whatever I have said is correct. There are many things that the American public must come to know. Many others, on the other hand, don't want the American public to know about these. It will be best if we talk about those as well.
MR. WALLACE: For instance?
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, with regards to unemployment in the U.S. and the behavior of the American administration throughout the (war/world ?), and also the literacy rate in the U.S., and the wars that have been waged by the American government in the past 100 years, imposed it on others -- these are important issues.
MR. WALLACE: I see --
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: But with regards to the Holocaust --
MR. WALLACE: Yes --
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: -- well, my question is, if something has happened, I am sure that there are very clear evidence out there available. And this is something which has had a hand, if I can use that word, in the equations and the formulas of the past 60 years.
And on the pretext of this, a land has been occupied. Millions of people have been made refugees. Thousands of people to date have been killed, sir. Thousands of people have been put in prison. Well, at the very moment, a great war is raging because of that.
So apparently this was an important issue. If this is real, then they should let everyone research it. Everyone should talk about it. And once it is prohibited -- of course, research and talking about it is prohibited -- that brings about questions. If it is a reality, well, it will only help if we do more research on the subject.
My question was not this, to be honest with you, in the first place. What I did say was that if this is a reality, if this is real, where did it take place?
MR. WALLACE: In Germany. In Germany.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Who caused this? In Europe --
MR. WALLACE: In Europe.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: (In English.) In Europe.
MR. WALLACE: If I may, so what you are suggesting -- one moment -- what you are suggesting, then -- that Israel should be over in Germany, because that's where the Holocaust took place?
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: (Through interpreter.) I'm not saying that, mind you.
Well, if an atrocity was committed in Germany, or Europe for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this? I'm not saying that the answer to the Holocaust led to the establishment of a government. This is something that the British and the Americans are saying. I am saying that if this happened, the Palestinians must not pay for this or be responsible for this. They had no role to play in this. Why on the pretext of the Holocaust they have occupied Palestine? This is the question that Western media -- mass media never bothered with, and to date, I have not received an answer. I think that they have to provide answers to this question. If they do just that, many of the outstanding issues will be resolved automatically. Please remember that we are saddened when a person is killed in any part of the world.
MR. WALLACE: I understand. I understand. Look, if you could -- if you could keep your answers concise, I beg you, we'll get more questions in.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, one of your questions required -- all of your questions require a book-long answer. If you want me to just finish the interview, please tell me and we can wrap up right now.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
I am making a video response to you
Justin,
I had sent you a message back in June. I am planning a video in response to your reply back to me. I wasn't motivated to respond to your reply to me for the simple reason that your reply was dismissive and unreasonable. This was your reply to me, "I am capable of forming my own opinions. Thanks." That was a reply to my message about Prof Jones being wrong. In that message, I had included a link which asked you to check out the fact that "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center."
I just watched your David Ray Griffin Interview and I see you make no mention of this critical fact which Griffin is ignorant of. At the link I sent you, I wrote, "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center.
Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes." But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it. Griffin is simply wrong.
Your reply to me suggests that you didn't even take the time to look at the information I was trying to make you aware of. For someone putting themselves out there as one who is "researching various aspects of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks." I find your response to me especially disappointing and frustrating. What kind of scholar is so sure of his position that he refuses to even look at facts he is being presented with?
I am making a video response to our video David Ray Griffin Interview which will highlight the errors that Griffin makes and which you failed to address.
Since I plan to point out in my video how unreasonable your original reply was to me, I thought I would give you the opportunity to review what I had originally sent you and to formulate some sort of response that won't put you in such a bad light. I assume no scholar would want to look unreasonable and unwilling to even review information that calls into question their theory.
In your interview, Mr. Jackman asks Griffin what is the "the biggest piece of eye-opening evidence" and Griffin says that if the question is what is "the clearest evidence that it was an inside job," he answers, "I, like many other people, would probably say building 7." It is incredible that this man can be ignorant of something so well documented and available but perhaps he too doesn't take the time to review information which people send him. Griffin could take a look at the facts laid out at this link and see that building 7 was hit by debris from WTC 1 and was on fire for about 7 hours. Please review the link for yourself. You will see that it is no mystery why the building collapsed. Captain Chris Boyle of Engine 94 explained, "on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good."
Fire chief Daniel Nigro clearly thought the building could collapse. Here's what he said, "The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt."
Ignorance spreads when there is an unwillingness to engage in a dialog.
-Tom
Representative Press
UPDATE: Here is his e-mail back to me.
I had sent you a message back in June. I am planning a video in response to your reply back to me. I wasn't motivated to respond to your reply to me for the simple reason that your reply was dismissive and unreasonable. This was your reply to me, "I am capable of forming my own opinions. Thanks." That was a reply to my message about Prof Jones being wrong. In that message, I had included a link which asked you to check out the fact that "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center."
I just watched your David Ray Griffin Interview and I see you make no mention of this critical fact which Griffin is ignorant of. At the link I sent you, I wrote, "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center.
Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes." But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it. Griffin is simply wrong.
Your reply to me suggests that you didn't even take the time to look at the information I was trying to make you aware of. For someone putting themselves out there as one who is "researching various aspects of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks." I find your response to me especially disappointing and frustrating. What kind of scholar is so sure of his position that he refuses to even look at facts he is being presented with?
I am making a video response to our video David Ray Griffin Interview which will highlight the errors that Griffin makes and which you failed to address.
Since I plan to point out in my video how unreasonable your original reply was to me, I thought I would give you the opportunity to review what I had originally sent you and to formulate some sort of response that won't put you in such a bad light. I assume no scholar would want to look unreasonable and unwilling to even review information that calls into question their theory.
In your interview, Mr. Jackman asks Griffin what is the "the biggest piece of eye-opening evidence" and Griffin says that if the question is what is "the clearest evidence that it was an inside job," he answers, "I, like many other people, would probably say building 7." It is incredible that this man can be ignorant of something so well documented and available but perhaps he too doesn't take the time to review information which people send him. Griffin could take a look at the facts laid out at this link and see that building 7 was hit by debris from WTC 1 and was on fire for about 7 hours. Please review the link for yourself. You will see that it is no mystery why the building collapsed. Captain Chris Boyle of Engine 94 explained, "on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good."
Fire chief Daniel Nigro clearly thought the building could collapse. Here's what he said, "The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt."
Ignorance spreads when there is an unwillingness to engage in a dialog.
-Tom
Representative Press
UPDATE: Here is his e-mail back to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
