How Will Net Neutrality Effect SotT?

U

Ubermensch

Guest
ark said:
But the point is not to have allies for SOTT. The point is to find the truth and to find allies for the truth.
I couldn't agree more and that is why I am here today. Their is no true freedom without truth.

sleepvinny said:
not only is there no point making such a list of 'allies'. It would be dangerous to do so:
What, produce a nice pre-compiled priority-hit-list for the cointelpro agents? I don't think so!
It would be very dangerous to do so, but knowing exactly what we are fighting against, I don't think it would be hard for the cointelpro agents to find allies of the truth without a list; assuming they haven't compiled a list already.

sleepvinny said:
Plus, it is necessary to sift through a certain amount of 'rubbish', in order to exercise and develop discernment. It is always possible to get diverted by such disinformation, but at the same time It is part of the 'learning curve' which develops skills that are necessary for survival in the quest for truth, IMHO. If everything is handed on a plate, then how is a person to cope when the going gets tough?
Sometimes, I just don't have the time to sit down and "sift through a certain amount of 'rubbish,' in order to exercise and develop discernment" and that is where most of my concern lies. I believe humanity is here today because like me, the sheeple do not have the time to sit down and search for the truth. Everyone is too busy working their 40 to 80 hour weeks to pay any real attention to what is happening in our country and in the world. And the spare time that most do have is spent sitting infront of the television, reading the newspaper, or listening to the radio; and as we all know, is the same lies over and over again.

I know I am stating the obvious, but the people are sheep because they believe their reality is truth; when in fact, it is quite the opposite. In the quest for the truth, does not spreading the truth go hand in hand? Whenever I get the chance, I tell my friends, family, and even total strangers to visit websites like SotT so that they can understand and see the true face of reality.

I may be just paranoid, but I believe that the truth will become much harder to spread as each day passes. As we all know, television stations, newspapers, and radio stations are controlled by ten corporations; none of them with humanity's future interest in mind. And soon to come, when the populace is robbed of net neutrality- it will become much more difficult to spread the truth in a digital environment soon to be regulated not only by ISPs, but much more strictly by the federal government.

What I am suggesting is that time has not run out yet and there is still some time before the internet becomes a two-tier system, which will give ISPs the unlimited ability to discriminate internet content. SotT's Pentagon Strike Video is a perfect example of why the government/corporate america are trying to strip the internet of net neutrality; because the internet is working for the people and most importantly, for the truth. For instance, in the past few months- regardless of the media's intentions or end result, "9/11 truth" people such as Dylan Avery and Company, Professor Steven Jones, and Mr.Fetzer have made it on television because of the massive momentum on the internet caused by videos such as Pentagon Strike, 9/11 Eyewitness, Loose Change 2nd Edition, Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime, and not forgetting to mention the numerous websites reviewing 9/11 anomalies, such as the collapse of World Trade Center Tower 7, the perfectly punched out holes in the Pentagon supposedly caused by a "Boeing 757," removal of evidence from the crimescene, amongst several hundreds of other oddities. The media has responded because they know that the truth about 9/11 is spreading fast like wildfire through the net and it can't be stopped because in the end- facts don't lie; unless of course you destroy the heart of the source (net neutrality.)

I am trying to put together a website that provides links to a diverse list of websites that are not only interested in spreading the truth; but interested in obtaining it. A list that will be kept up-to-date (in order to remove traitors to the truth) for people like me that do not have time to sift, but have the time to read short articles that they know they can rely on because of people like the SOTT team

[Moderator: I edited out names, because quoting real names here was unnecessary, and was an act of flattering. Morover, If I am correct, it seems that internet screening is going not only to apply to sites, it is going to apply also to the names of the authors. of articles].

("handed on the plate" for the most part.) In other words, a website of objective reality.

I believe that the truth needs to be spread as soon and as far as possible. If 500 million people can watch the Pentagon Strike video, then I believe it is definitely a possibility for more than 500 million people to watch another video dedicated to nothing but the truth. But, I need help. Or am I just being naive?
 

ark

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Ubermensch said:
I am trying to put together a website that provides links to a diverse list of websites that are not only interested in spreading the truth; but interested in obtaining it. A list that will be kept up-to-date (in order to remove traitors to the truth) for people like me that do not have time to sift, but have the time to read short articles that they know they can rely on because of people like Joe Quinn, Henry See, and Scott Ogrin. ("handed on the plate" for the most part.) In other words, a website of objective reality.
We do not want to be on your list. We do not want to see our names on your list. Because we do not know YOUR name, we do not know who you are, we do not know for whom you work. Therefore, please, leave us alone. Your list will not suffer much from missing just us. Thank you.

BTW: In addition to what I wrote above, even if we knew who you are, we do not deserve to be on such a list, because, as the above shows, we are overly paranoid. And it is not your intention to compile a list of overly paranoid sites ..... or is it? ;)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Besides all the above, every site has lists of links to other sites it generally endorses. What would make THIS list special? How would an Internet surfer know if a site were really about truth without examining it? I think sites that are truly pro-truth need exposure. And even if SOTT does not have as much exposure as the more affluent sites, eventually people do run accross it.

Making a particular list and labelling it the "truth" list or whatever is simply ineffective, because ANYBODY can make claimes. The ONLY people it would help are those running disinformation sites, because then they would have all their competition under one label.

I, for one, do not believe events are random. If one is sincere about learning the truth, and does not have overt attachments to being told what to think (as many surfing the Internet do), they WILL find sites like SOTT. It has taken almost five years after 9-11 for things to get organized as they have here. That is not really a long amount of time considering the tremendous resources expended toward keeping people confused.

And it is only the beginning. Things can only snowball from here. What people need are examples. When they have examples others can model their own sites accordingly if they are sincere. As I said, it is only the beginning. The real truth movement can acquire momentum without lists. Like attracts like, and those who really want the truth will eventually find it, sooner or later.
 
U

Ubermensch

Guest
ark said:
We do not want to be on your list. We do not want to see our names on your list. Because we do not know YOUR name, we do not know who you are, we do not know for whom you work. Therefore, please, leave us alone. Your list will not suffer much from missing just us. Thank you.
I understand. It's just an idea that I was thinking about, but like you said, if I do end up doing it- I will leave SotT alone.

EsoQuest said:
Besides all the above, every site has lists of links to other sites it generally endorses. What would make THIS list special? How would an Internet surfer know if a site were really about truth without examining it? I think sites that are truly pro-truth need exposure. And even if SOTT does not have as much exposure as the more affluent sites, eventually people do run accross it.
The truth based on facts will be what makes this list "special." It wouldn't just be a simple website with links, but a website with endless facts (condensed for simple understanding) in order to show that the majority of people live in a false reality created by the mass media. I believe that once people truly understand this, the hunt for objective reality begins. To understand that 9/11 is a false flag operation, that the mainstream media is and has been under Zionists' control, and that Israel is truly responsible for leading America into WWI, WWII, and soon to be WWIII (knock on wood) is essential to accepting reality as it is.

EsoQuest said:
And it is only the beginning. Things can only snowball from here. What people need are examples. When they have examples others can model their own sites accordingly if they are sincere. As I said, it is only the beginning. The real truth movement can acquire momentum without lists. Like attracts like, and those who really want the truth will eventually find it, sooner or later.
Absoutely. I guess that leaves me with starting from scratch and gaining enough trust in the process in order to create an alliance for truth that is large enough to ward the enemies off with ease. And no need to worry ark, I will keep SotT out of anything I do.
 

domi

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Laura said:
Uber said:
The democracy of the internet is at stake here so I wanted to know...what are non-profit websites like SotT going to do to prepare for such a disaster?
Well, we have the sign up thing for SOTT to be emailed. Just now, we email it every day to 1420 people with a total of 2100 signed up for it in case the site is down. So, I guess we will start encouraging people to sign up for the email version and to pass it on to their friends as well.
Well, what is being emailed is the summary version. By that I mean that the full articles are not mailed out but only the first paragraph or so. One still has to go to the SotT website to read the rest. I don't know if that is intentional or not.
If not then the issue might be the fact that text is hidden at the source (e.g. http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/signs/chains/signs20060703_HowtoStartWWIII.php has the javascript "expander") and that is not properly exposed (un-hidden) and included when e-mailing out the SotT newsletter.
 

ArdVan

Jedi
Ubermensch said:
I believe humanity is here today because like me, the sheeple do not have the time to sit down and search for the truth.
IMO you can't force the sheep to learn. Maybe this fits here too. In my words:
Nature makes it so that humans (maybe even animals?) tend to not like things they don't know. Why should we like things we may see only once in our life. It this would be so, we would maybe miss it already afterwards. And of course something unknown may be dangerous. But if this unknown thing happens to us more often we get more exposed to it and then slowly we start to know it and have less negative feelings versus it. The more you learn about this new thing the more you have positive thoughts about it. This "Exposure Effect" happens every time you learn something new or something new happens to you.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_effect
- Vera F. Birkenbihl: The Inner Archive"
This may be used in the negative sense. For example most people know nothing about the life of a family in Irak or Palestine. It is easier to hate or even kill someone you don't know. But how can you hate someone if you really know him? (I'm excluding psychopaths here)

And that's what's happening in the mainstream media. They say that they don't want to hurt people feelings and protect the younger viewers by not showing the cruelties of war. But what I think is, that they don't want the people to see the suffering of the people in Irak and Palestine. Otherwise people would want to know more about them and the "Exposure Effect" would work and then people would start to be more against the war.

Something similar seems to happen by exposing 911 or ponerology. If you just give the people who didn't ask for it the facts, they will reject it (no "Exposure Effect"). Only if they take their time to read and learn slowly they will get accustomed to it and are more willing to accept these new questions and facts, that are so against what the media have told them.

That's why I think that you can't wake up people who don't have or want to take the time to sit down and (re)search and learn about the truth.

Why? Because they want to skip the "Exposure Effect" and therefore are not really open for new information. If they accept the information by learning it by heart without real understanding, the first blow from some COINTELPRO action will then switch them back into their old behaviour pattern.

For sure I would like to wake up more people, but I don't think you can wake people up that don't want to think and learn. I can see this on myself, it is so hard to break my conditioning I have since childhood that it's not allowed to ask questions.

You know: "Learning is fun" ;)
 

anka

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
A brilliant thread. Took me on a crazy journey about deep web search, internet privacy, activism and all the way back to my self-importance and programming.
Thanks to everyone who posted in here. This forum is a jewel.
 
Top Bottom