Who's pulling the protestor's strings? (editorial)

[ranxer]

i found this interesting and scary .. is it true?
mostly it seems.. but just because the funding is odd doesnt mean the people working with the funds share the agendas.

ALTERNATIVE MEDIA CENSORSHIP:
SPONSORED BY CIA's FORD FOUNDATION? http://www.questionsquestions.net/gatekeepers.html


indymedia has been funded by many groups but mostly its paid for by people who WORK FOR FREE.. i volunteer at indymedia centers and find the people there are folks that think the major media outlets ignore news from the people..
INDY media is INDEPENDANT MEDIA.. open to anyone who wants to publish.. ANYONE.. stop by and visit one www.indymedia.org look for the "Publish" button.. its available to all who care to post. open media like the rest should be.. call it what you like but you will find right wing and left wing socialist, and capitalist info on them.. activists tend to shock people with news that's not told anywhere else so its natural that it will be under attack.. i hear it every day.. "America wouldn't do THAT" "i can't believe my country would do THAT .. yer a wackko!!!" "you america haters make me sick"

[Abcdxxxx]

IndyMedia still has an agenda. The "Publish" part of IndyMedia only functions as a glorified bulletin board for their "newswire" forum and as they say, "when someone abuses our trust, and posts a story that is way outside what the website is set up to do, we may remove it". I know of several instances where legit posts were published and removed because it contradicted Indymedia's stance.

Just because people donate their time to work for them doesn't mean they're a pure upstanding organization. Also - Being a non-profit doesn't mean you can't make a profit.

Indymedia has a "who owns that" section, tracking conglomorate media ownership. Ironic that they promote actions without any resources for who and what the specific groups in the movement are. While the radical left has become critical of ANSWER in the past year, they were most certainly aware of the Workers World Party connections before now. They helped to obscure who groups like ASNWER are run by. In fact, their site even obscures their own connection to the Independent Progressive Politics Network, and makes little mention that it was formed mainly by Dan Merkle. Their legacy is Protest.Net, and Paper Tiger TV amongst others. The IPPN recieves funding through connections to the Alliance for Democracy, a socialist group, and that would mean money has probably filtered in through the Democratic Socialists of America. Dan Merkle has been outspoken in supporting ANSWER, despite recent criticisms, and pledged to continue supporting their rallies, because as he puts it, anyone in their position, with their success, is likely to have some dirt on them.

[Abcdxxxx]

Originally Posted by mburbank

See, that's what's great about America. We never pull that kind of crap. Plus, our conservative movements never get any funding at all from other countries.

So now we've gone from laughing at the concept, to just flat our saying "hey who cares". Sure America does it, but isn't that why we find the need to use our right to free speech and dissent against our nations policies? Would it make more sense to allign with some OTHER nations fucked up policies instead? Is it okay to support Milosevic just because he's not an American President?

Aren't you displeased to hear that you could go to a rally that you think is to simply stop war, and find out that the organizers have had financial ties with Saddam Hussein? Doesn't that make you uncomfortable in light that you scoff at the idea that being anti-war makes you pro-saddam?

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

IndyMedia still has an agenda. The "Publish" part of IndyMedia only functions as a glorified bulletin board for their "newswire" forum and as they say, "when someone abuses our trust, and posts a story that is way outside what the website is set up to do, we may remove it". I know of several instances where legit posts were published and removed because it contradicted Indymedia's stance.

Yeah, and for every one of those instances, there are 60 posts that read as "FUCK YOU11 COMMIE FUCKERS!!1!! DIE, FUCKIN, DIE!!" on the website. There is dire need for censorship and mediated discretion on that page, hate to say it. It certainly isn't a reliable news outlet, but that posting section isn't the crux of the page (although many would like to pretend it is).

So what if they have an agenda? Their agenda is to create a grassroots news outlet that isn' corporate owned. They certainly have a political agenda, bt so does every other news outlet to one degree or another.

The IPPN recieves funding through connections to the Alliance for Democracy, a socialist group, and that would mean money has probably filtered in through the Democratic Socialists of America.

Wait, wait, wait...can you substantiate this at all, or are you just saying this...? AFD was a group founded by Ronnie Dugger, a guy who considers himself more of a populist than a Socialist. They model themselves as an "organic" organization based upon the populist movements that came out of the anti-monopoly movement in the later 19th Century. Sure, they argue for equity and such, but so does the Democratic Party at times. What verified links can you make between them and the DSA, and even if they are affiliated, what exactly would that prove?

Dan Merkle has been outspoken in supporting ANSWER, despite recent criticisms, and pledged to continue supporting their rallies, because as he puts it, anyone in their position, with their success, is likely to have some dirt on them.

Again, you glossed over this, but they ARE in fact an umbrella organization. Merkle is right, although his unyielding support for them is not.

[incurable paranoiac]

if i go to a rally for breast cancer research that has "secretly" been organized by a bunch of flat world society freaks, it will still be a breast cancer research rally. hidden messages aren't the messages that get across the loudest.

the loudest message behind the massive protests against the war in iraq was "look at all these people who look nothing alike and who probably would never be together otherwise uniting against one issue- the war in iraq." i don't have to like answer itself to attend a rally that they have had a hand in organizing.

[kahljorn]

I like responding to things, do you?

[Abcdxxxx]

kevin - we agree. most every news forum of any kinda has an agenda. we know fox isn't fair and balanced right?... why should anyone be mislead into thinking indymedia is without an agenda too? that isn't to say they shouldn't be allowed to have one. as for their socialists connections... IPPN removed the pages on their site that listed the endorsements from various socialist groups but i'll double check my info if i can...anyways i doubt indymedia fans would care about these connections.... my point really is that i don't think the information should be obscured. old timers in the protest game knew exactly who a.n.s.w.e.r were long before it became common knowledge.

incurable - it's more like attending a breast cancer rally organized by a pharmecutical company that's been lobbying to block another company from curing cancer their own way.

call me crazy, but i find it short sighted and irresponsible to disregard what a conflict of interest it is to attend an anti-war rally organized by a group that endorsed the tinnamen square massacres. it's because of these loose associations with violence that the movement lost momentum for decades.

[Abcdxxxx]

just to add to my last post...

some would say our occupation of iraq is the closest we've come to vietnam in thirty years, and that might account for a percieved loss of momentum during that time span. perhaps.... then again, when the black panther party have reunions, the tears and remorse aren't due to a lack of unifying issues.

again - i just believe this is a murky topic that people shouldn't toss aside so easily.

[ranxer]

I'll align with anybody that believes in peaceful protest of violent 'solutions' to almost anything..

you could be any religion.. i'll support your event if its peacefull.
you could be from any party, any philosophy but you MUST agree that violence is not a solution.

commies don't scare me, socialists don't scare me... satanists don't scare me.. catholics don't scare me.. nra members scare me a little, but who the hell cares what we disagree with if we are coming together to support a single(main) idea?

i value diversity and enjoy different oppinions/philosophies..
most of the people in ANSWER have peaceful agendas.. what's so scary about them?

i think mono-culturists(xeno-phobes) of anykind and those who want to enforce it (with violence or dishonesty) scare me the most.

[Abcdxxxx]

"most of the people in ANSWER have peaceful agendas.. what's so scary about them? "

I encourage you to do a little research then decide for yourself. Plenty of pro-radical, pro-leftist information that will explain what their critics find very scary about them, and how they have supported violence in the recent past.

[mburbank]

While I would of coourse be disturbed to find that pro-wahhtever folks had financed an event I'd attended, if their agenda is so secret that even I attending don't know about it, I don't feel in particularly used.

Here's my agenda. ncrease by one the number of people in media coverage saying they don't like our foreign policy. Period. In my opinion, the pro whatver group is the one who has been used. My participation cost me zero. There's cost more I assume. The message of any large scale protest like the ones I went to is very simple, not honed or nuanced.

I think you are swayed by a propoganda initiative to get you to believe that the protests are meaningless. Concider this. What if, say 98% of the attendees had no idea that their permit and the speakers platform were paid for by pro-wahteverists. Sort of like the innocent frat bpys that stormed the vote counts in florida who's busses were paid for by the Reubican national comittee. It didn't make me doubt the frat boys sincerity for an instant.

[Abcdxxxx]

this is really depressing. as if it wasn't bad enough when people were making the "hey the crazy right wing fuckers do it all the time!" excuse. doesn't anyone believe in integrity?

look, i believe the protests had plenty of meaning to plenty of people... and that's why nobody wants to consider these rallies beyond face value. thinking you're empowered by your ignorance is just a fools rational. while you might view yourself as some fucking one man political army, your attendance is a financial commodity for ANSWER.

if i attended something advertised as a "march for peace" in support of israel, and it was organized by a group called "jews like peace" that turned out to be a front for the jewish defense league, and kahane chai, (two militant jewish groups so extreme, they've called for sharon's death because he's too leniant), then i would feel incredibly decieved and outraged. now i might actually agree with a good 80% of their stance.... but that last 20% is really fucking scary... really scary....and it goes against the entire premise of a peace march. now apply your own excuses to my situation, and tell me how i'd be using these people by lending my presence to their marches...or why i shouldn't care, cause hey, they said it was a peace march, after all? i don't attend their rallies, because i don't agree or trust their agenda.... and they're up to some ridiculous shit that i wouldn't want to inadvertantly be supporting.

[mburbank]

Did you give them your credit card number?

what exactly is it you think ANSWER did for the peace rallies. What do you think they paid for and what do you think they got out of it? I'll admit to ignorance on the subject, I already have, but the coverage I saw of the peace marches mentioned my agenda and never said Squat about Answer.

In the hypothetical situation you mentioned, if your message got out loud and clear and ''sponsorship' by your shadowy string pullers didn't, I'd say they failed. If, unbeknownst to you, they paid for the bottled water I would in no way think you'd been compromised by drinking it or that your message had been, forgive me, "dilluted". If any attempts to coop your message were utterly drowned out by your message I might not even know.

Do you think this is why Bush belittles the peace marches? He wouldn't care one way or the other, he says their focus groups. While I would of course like to know that every peace rally was only about my personal vision of peace, I think I'm unlikely to get that.

What system would you suggest to strain the impurities from a large scale rally? How rigorous should they be and how long should a given event be postponed until purity of message is achieved? All sides of every issue are always vulnerable to being manipulated. You yourslef may have been manipulated to believe so strongly that 'strings have been pulled'. I'm not excusing this by saying 'everybody does it'. That's a misread, although I think it ironic that the same standards are only taken seriously when applied to the left wing. Remeber how absurd Ms. Clinton looked when she talked about a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy? The left is, if anything, far less organized and conspiracy capable than the right. Conspiracy takes discipline.

[Abcdxxxx]

Hey I hear the NRA put up sponsorship money for these great "uphold the constitution" rallies! You love the constitution right? Gonna go?

You went to a rally, you felt good about yourself making a difference having your opinion heard, and you watched the news and heard them minimize the passion, and the turnout... and six months later you don't have a clue or care that one of the fiscal sponsors of the march actually endorses a long list of dictators including saddam hussein...and i'm not talking about protecting saddam's government from american imperialism, i'm talking they full on love the guy and everything he's done, and made yearly visits to meet with him.

What the right wing fuck ups do isn't really a great argument for what the left wing fuck ups do. I don't allign myself with any label really, and when I hear about fucked up shit... it's still fucked up shit...and people should care that a movement is being coopted and being corrupted no matter what the media perception of it is...and let me remind you that a lot of news outlets portrayed the marches as supporting Saddam.

Burbank, you've been posting in this thread for several weeks...plenty of time to give a shit and do the research for yourself... or ask your activist friends what kind of costs go into these rallies and what kindof financial involvement ANSWER or even NION have.

[mburbank]

I think it's possible you're getting hysterical. Am I to assume that you have never and will never engage in a demonstration?

Where does you information on ANSWER come from? Have you exhaustively looked into who paid for the webpage, or the journal or wherevr you found it? I'm thinking perhaps vested interests play a very large part in much of the information you read and digest. ne might even suggest your strings were being pulled.

But I'm not suggesting that. Why do you suppose that is?

[Abcdxxxx]

yeah, totally hysterical. is it less energy to just fake an opinion then doing research of your own first? try this for starters,,,,

http://authoritarianopportunistswhoc...-forpeace.org/

you talk about demonstrations with the romantic naivety of someone who views them as some status event. i know you're an army of one and all but they're rarely supposed to be self help seminars.

[mburbank]

You're totally reading in, and that's one of the main reasons I think you're aa hysteric. I'm not romantic about the demo's and I didn't imagine they have any sort of direct or immediatte impact. I wanted to go so I'd see them and have been there, and so the crowd would be increased by one.

I'll check your link.