He got to blather all over the place with Geraldo on Fox last night.

hmmmm

So here is the link for Jessie's article--found it on prison planet--sorry if that offends anyone (not).

If Huffpo really did ask Ventura to write for them, what did they think he was going to write about? Does he ever talk about anything else besides 911 or government conspiracy?

I guess now he can talk about Huffpo's shitty journalism. I'll agree with Ventura on that. But what the fuck is up with his hair? Dude.

He's making room for another face..

I imagine Huff thought he would only rail on repubs and welcomed him with open arms. He is an equal hater of both parties and maybe that didn't fit into their agenda. It is kind of funny they removed his article, seeing as he has been promoting his book about American conspiracies.

Well, liberals always seem to want to censor those that don't agree with them, yet complain when others want to return the "favor."

Wait for it...wait for it.... "Bush's fault" that Ventura was censored.

{facepalm}

Well, liberals always seem to want to censor those that don't agree with them ...

Liberal sites aren't the only ones that ban 9/11 truthers and other conspiracy theorists. Red State recently banned the topic, as we discussed here.

I've made no secret of the fact that I don't believe a lot of the conspiracy stuff posted by users here. But I have never banned it, and I think Huffington Post is treading on some dangerous territory here. Ventura is a former governor. When prominent people challenge the government, the idea that their views should be censored -- on the grounds they are a "conspiracy theory" -- is offensive.

To combat the censorship, I posted a copy of Ventura's commentary and gave it major news banana treatment.

But wait, if they have a standing policy, why is anyone arguing about this? Why did he submit it? If you write for a publication/website, you are subject to their editors' policies and whims. That's not censorship--that's an organization's mission/philosophy.

If HuffPo's full of shit and there is no standing policy, then they're playing favorites.

And no, I don't believe the gov't was in on it, but I do believe that the report was a wash. Many questions remain to be asked. But that's not the point here, or doesn't seem to be. Censorship? I'd have a bigger problem if they'd allowed the post but blocked out certain parts.

#7...

Why else would Huffingotn ask him to write an article if it wasn't to promote his book? He has been on every cable and news outlet since last week.

Rcade makes good points. I hadn't thought of it quite that way. But at the same time, look what happened--he (Rcade) made it available. Perhaps HuffPo's handling of this will actually result in more people reading it. Americans love a great censorship story (though I still wouldn't call this censorship).

If you write for a publication/website, you are subject to their editors' policies and whims.

As I understand it, Huffington Post does not review the work of contributors like Ventura before posting it. So they have an open policy of allowing a wide range of viewpoints, but are actively going back and removing views that they deem conspiracy theories.

They can have whatever policy they like, but I think using that policy to remove prominent criticism of the government -- from a former governor no less -- rises to the point of being censorship.

Why else would Huffingotn ask him to write an article if it wasn't to promote his book?

I may be wrong, but I think every Huffington Post contributor gets an invite from the site to write columns, then can post as many as he or she likes without any editorial approval. So Ventura was asked (or asked) to contribute, got the OK, and was free to cover anything.

Was this policy BEFORE Ventura's post? Or just a reaction AFTER his post?

It's a travesty that our President and Vice President at the time wouldn't see fit to testify under oath. WTF was up with that? Over the worst attack on America since Pearl Harbor? That should piss anyone off - right or left.

9/11 Commission Memebers Doubt Official Story:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A member of the 9/11 commission said Wednesday that panel members so distrusted testimony from Pentagon officials that they referred their concerns to the Pentagon's inspector general.

The panel even considered taking the matter to the Justice Department for a possible criminal probe, commission member Tim Roemer said.

"We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting," Roemer told CNN. "We were not sure of the intent, whether it was to deceive the commission or merely part of the fumbling bureaucracy."

BTW, their questions are over NORAD's response, not over who was behind it.

Yup. Truthers often make it sound like former 9/11 Commission officials are lending credence to the idea the government brought the buildings down. But the issues they raise have been about the government hiding its own failure to prevent the attacks and respond properly during them. That's a different animal entirely.

So HuffPo doesn't edit articles but does monitor threads?

Note I had some ifs in my first post on this matter. I was deliberate in that. I don't _know_ what HuffPo's policies are. I am, however, of the mind that if there is a standing policy or practice, then this is a tempest in a teapot.

And in either case, I applaud Rcade's decision to act as he did in regard to the matter.

If Huff and Puff is worried about conspiracy theories why do they allow stories promoting global warming, the health care bill or evolution?

The photos all linked back to the main page. But, anyone can see how a Crossface Chicken Wing or Shooting Star Press could do serious damage! LOL

I guess the HuffPo is worried that people might think they're a herald for looneys?

The boat left that dock long ago.

And in either case, I applaud Rcade's decision to act as he did in regard to the matter.

#17 | Posted by pragmatist at 2010-03-14 01:37 PM | Reply | Flag

I agree with you, pragmatist.

I don't agree with Ventura, but I believe he has the right to be wrong and talk about it.

Oh,
And I agree that Huffpo can pull it. And then be called on being two-faced on it.

Well obviously Bush exerts great control over Arianna and the thousands of people in on the scam!

Fat White Thom - another swing and miss.

Last year NatGeo had an episode about this very subject (9/11 was an inside job).

Purdue University, the ASCE and others were involved in debunking the "truthers" conspiracy non-sense.

If you haven't seen the episode, I suggest you watch it.

OUR_ZERO

Saw it and it was excellent.
If anyone still has any doubts, that shows puts it to rest.

p.s. Jesse Ventura belongs in a rubber room!

"I agree with you, pragmatist. "

Hm. Hell has frozen over? : )

+++++

Anyway, thanks for the link to moderation policy, but note that's about comments not about articles/commentary created for the site. Different animal, eh? (You might think the same logic would apply, but not necessarily.)

Saints win the Superbowl and the same day Washington D.C. is snowed in....

Hell was frozen over...

Oh, shit. Twice in two months?

huffington post is barely above a tabloid site.

especially its blog section that allows authors to censor things that disagree with their bullshit articles.

one of the best ways to lie is to do so by omission rather than by outright falsehood.

So to Huffpo conspiracy theories now not only include suggesting that the government was involved in it, but now also include suggestions that the government made up stories and took other measures to conceal their gross incompetence? Laughable.

Noam Chomsky, an academic critical of the United States establishment, contrasts conspiracy theory as more or less the opposite of institutional analysis, which focuses mostly on the public, long-term behaviour of publicly known institutions, as recorded in, e.g. scholarly documents or mainstream media reports, rather than secretive coalitions of individuals.[22]

-------------

i.e. defining the function of the system is not a conspiracy.

i.e. defining the function of the system is not a conspiracy.
#34 | Posted by Shawn

If only that were a commonly held opinion.

So what do we do about the Democrat Conspiracy?

So what do we do about the Democrat Conspiracy?

Posted by daprof at 2010-03-14 06:01 PM

hehe...

Its a classic example of how advertising revenue corrupts truth telling.

When is a conspiracy not a conspiracy? When it's out in the fucking open! Ye gods. I may detest the PNAC worldview, but it's hardly a conspiracy theory. One can go read the agenda on the website.

Sorta like "censorship," methinks we need a definition.

Posted by daprof at 2010-03-14 06:01 PM

Make yourself a sign.

#37 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2010-03-14 06:21 PM | Reply |
------------------------------
--
Dude, I can spell. But still, it begs the question of what to do about the "Democrat Conspiracy" to overthrow our government?

Please try to refute with arguments instead of falling back on Alinsky #5 and ad-hominems. If that's possible for you, that is....

You're a good speller.

What 'Democrat Conspiracy'? You're kidding, right?

The mention of something like that ranks of conspiracy theorist.

DaProf

Your 'sign' link:

HTTP Error 403: Forbidden

The Plutonium Files.

How many people knew and how long did it take before it was admitted?

The BBC called that building 7 had collapsed.

20 minuted before it happened.

Now, explain why so many people who knew about the testing of Plutonium on people was never disclosed...

And, explain how the media knew the collapse of a building 20 minutes before it happened and there's no question asked - Who gave that report?

A Win Win by Ventura!!!

So Jesse got 10 times the publicity he would have just by being Censored by the Zionists who run HuffPost? He couldn't have planned it any better!

A Greek Orthodox is a Zionist? Hmm.

Bill O'Reilly declared that Arianna Huffington is no different than a Nazi or a KKK member. Can't the GOP make up their minds?

She's seen from the inside how the Republican Party was hijacked by nut cases. That's why she's adamantly opposed to the nut cases who dominate the GOP today.

Huffington was born Arianna Stassinopoulos in Athens, Greece, the daughter of Konstantinos (a journalist and management consultant) and Elli (ne Georgiadi) Stassinopoulos

She met oil millionaire Michael Huffington, a family friend of the Bushes, at a 1985 party hosted by Ann Getty in San Francisco. The couple was married in 1986 at a wedding paid for by Getty, who had declared that she needed to find Arianna a husband. They moved to Washington, D.C., when he was appointed to serve as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Negotiations Policy. They later established residency in Santa Barbara, California, in order for him to run in 1992 as a Republican for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, which he won by a significant margin. He was a political conservative on most issues. Arianna campaigned for her husband, courting religious conservatives, arguing for smaller government and a reduction in welfare. In 1994 he narrowly lost the race for the U.S. Senate seat from California to incumbent Dianne Feinstein.

The couple divorced in 1997, and in 1998 Michael Huffington revealed that he was bisexual, so they divorced.

Huffington rose to national prominence during her husband's unsuccessful Senate bid in 1994. Although a lifelong liberal, she became known as a reliable supporter of some conservative causes such as Newt Gingrich's "Republican Revolution" and Bob Dole's 1996 candidacy for president.

(thought I'd do a little checking on the "Zionist" claim. Nope.)

I love all the people who rant on about how 9/11 couldn't be an inside job because there is no way to contain the information, and it would've come out by now. This statement in and of itself is naive. How many soldiers do you think the US employs who would never "kill & tell". The CIA and the Marine Corps are filled with guys who would do damn near anything and never tell a soul; you ever hear the "joke": "I'd tell you but I'd have to kill you"? It's not a "joke" for guys like this...

This isn't even mentioning Blackwater and all the other mercenaries (with ZERO compunction toward killing Americans) that Bush Co had at his disposal...

As a person who has studied the events surrounding 9/11 since shortly after the smoke cleared, I just have to chuckle at all the propaganda filled bullshit floating around...

Whether or not 9/11 was an inside job, the "Official Story" is just that; a "story". And, not even a good one...

I mean, I know that none of you are aware of this, but EVERY SINGLE one of the "reports" put out by "independent review" were "investigated by teams headed by DOD, ex DOD and/or DOD contractors. The engineering firm who put out the first one has been awarded the billion+ dollar contract for the new "FREEDOM TOWER"...

Funny, funny shit...

Jesse was censored by Huffington for the same reason the republicans won't look into the issue with an honest inquiry, they are afraid to rock the boat. Anyone with a lick of engineering expertise can see right through this farce. Yea, planes crashed into the towers, but it was known in advance and the owner with the double indemnity policy planned his insurance scam well with those on the very top. Every aspect of this attack, from the NY buildings to the Pentagon to the crash in Pennsylvania was covered up, faked and all evidence dutifully destroyed. If it was not, then I challenge any who thinks otherwise to prove it, not the other way around. The whole story stinks like rotten fish and now, we all know it, but are afraid to face our demons, republicans and democrats alike.

I imagine Huff thought he would only rail on repubs and welcomed him with open arms. He is an equal hater of both parties and maybe that didn't fit into their agenda.
#5 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2010-03-14 01:09 PM

I respect him a lot for his positions on the two party system. However, to be correct he hates republicans more, and has stated so. Specificially for their attempts at bringing religion into everything. Ventura finds that absolutely disgusting.

"If it was not, then I challenge any who thinks otherwise to prove it, not the other way around."

LOL. Typically, when you are trying to convince other people of something, it isn't wise to make statements that demonstrate severe deficiencies in basic reasoning ability. The world doesn't have to disprove theories, the person advancing a theory must supply supporting evidence.

The world doesn't have to disprove theories, the person advancing a theory must supply supporting evidence.

Total bullshit. There is mountains of evidence that 911 was faked and none, what so ever that it happened the way it was presented. The evidence has been documented on thousands of sites and using mountains of evidence. The government can't even produce one picture of a jet hitting the pentagon or the ground in Pennsylvania. If there is one I'd like one of you gullible fools to link to it. The only pictures available are less rubble then you could pile in a small truck. No plane has ever crashed that turned into vapor and just blew away, and then we are to believe that the remains of all the passengers were found? Anybody that believes that crap is a fool, but then half the country did vote for Bush twice. Show me just one sully of a crashed jet, not just a bunch of close ups of debris that could have been from any plane wreck anywhere.

"Total bullshit. There is mountains of evidence that 911 was faked and none"

There isn't a single shred of evidence that 9/11 was faked. There's just "questions" like there are about any complex big event where mass confusion reigns, just as with JFK and every other assassination.

#53 | Posted by nullifidian at 2010-03-15 01:04
***"There isn't a single shred of evidence that 9/11 was faked. There's just "questions""

Exactly, "questions". As in all the questions that have been ignored by the US government in regards to 9/11...

Furthermore, when the government is the one doing the "investigating", and the government is the one in control of the "evidence" I.E. disposing of it/concealing it, one would think that most logical people would realize that hard evidence is going to be difficult to come by. Therefore, one has to examine the government's version of the events for inconsistencies, of which there are many...

Also, a logical person might conclude that if the government wasn't hiding something that they would be forthcoming with all evidence pertaining to the event, which they are not...

Whether or not 9/11 was an inside job, the American people are definitely not being told the truth...

#51 | Posted by Sully at 2010-03-15 12:38 PM
***"The world doesn't have to disprove theories, the person advancing a theory must supply supporting evidence"

I agree whole heartedly, this is why we need the US government to prove that the "official theory" is true in the face of all of the inconsistencies, flawed logic, misrepresentations and violations of physical laws that have surfaced within their theory...

They should totally get on that...

"Exactly, "questions". As in all the questions that have been ignored by the US government in regards to 9/11..."

Many have been answered. What conspiracy theorists do is ignore answers they don't like. Or they ask for explanations for things that don't exist/didn't happen.

Not only that, but the whole rationale for the conspiracy doesn't make any sense in the first place. Invading Iraq in response to 9/11 didn't make any sense. Our government still had to tell lies in order to justify that invasion. If our government faked the whole thing to justify invading Iraq, couldn't they have fake it in such a way as to implicate the Iraqi government? Why go through all the trouble and then leave no smoking gun that points to Iraq and force yourself to tell even more lies?

I know the Bushies the were idiots but you conspiracy people obviously think they were geniuses. Why would geniuses put so much care into a horrible conspiracy that carried such grave risk and then frame someone else other than the people they really wanted to attack? Is common sense too much to ask of you peeps?

"Many have been answered. What conspiracy theorists do is ignore answers they don't like. "

Exactly, like Dealey Plaza, where supposed audio of extra gunshots was shown to be backfire from police motorcycles.

Why would geniuses put so much care into a horrible conspiracy that carried such grave risk and then frame someone else other than the people they really wanted to attack?

Why was the Golf of Tonkin incident faked?

It all boils down to one word, money. We wanted the vast untapped resources in Vietnam that the French could never fully exploit and the Chinese wanted too.

It's all a political game of chess and there will always be both pawn and queens sacrificed if it leads to checkmate.

#56 | Posted by Sully at 2010-03-15 02:42 PM
***"Many have been answered. What conspiracy theorists do is ignore answers they don't like. Or they ask for explanations for things that don't exist/didn't happen"

I don't believe that to be true in all cases. I do agree that there are fringe elements in the 9/11 truther movement, however there are always fringe and misinformed individuals in every movement...

Here are a few unanswered questions (nothing too deep or scary):

Why hasn't the government, in the face of so many requests refused to show the video of the plane hitting the pentagon?

What possible reason could the government have to not do-so?

***"Not only that, but the whole rationale for the conspiracy doesn't make any sense in the first place. Invading Iraq in response to 9/11 didn't make any sense. Our government still had to tell lies in order to justify that invasion. If our government faked the whole thing to justify invading Iraq, couldn't they have fake it in such a way as to implicate the Iraqi government? Why go through all the trouble and then leave no smoking gun that points to Iraq and force yourself to tell even more lies?"