Rob Kall: But I just want to ask you. Now, the list that you just gave -- those are
sites that you trust, right?
Paul Craig
Roberts: Well, they are sites where I
can get information that's out of the box.
It's not the usual baloney, and even if it's not always all right, it at
least shows you how to think about it differently. So yes, I trust them in the sense that they
are honest sites, and they're trying to give information that helps people have
a better grasp on reality than the propaganda that comes out from the
mainstream media. So yes, I, in a sense,
I trust them. That doesn't mean I think
that everything that is said is absolutely true, because people make
mistakes. I don't think that very many
of the people that publish on those sources are trying to mislead us by
printing lies.
Rob Kall: You wrote in an article, When truth is
suppressed, countries die, you said "If those who speak truth can not be
bought off or shut up, they are ignored or demonized. Almost everything Americans need to know is
off-limits in public discussion. Anyone
who broaches the truth becomes an anti-American, a terrorist sympathizer or a
Commie Socialist, a conspiracy theorist, an anti-Semite, a kook, or some other
name that's designed to scare Americans away from the message of truth." But then you also just said a minute ago that
there's a lot of quackery out there. How
do you separate that out?
Paul Craig
Roberts: Well, it's just experience and
judgment. You see, the public discussion
is from the mainstream media. You don't
see them standing up in Congress talking about the good information on the
internet or the take on anything that's before Congress that's well-defined in
the internet, or an internet source or sources.
That's not part of the public discussion. The public discussion is limited to the New
York Times, the Washington post, and the main TV news channels. That's the public discussion - and a few
magazines that are run by the council on Foreign Relations, and so forth.
So there is not a participation of internet-based information in the
so-called' public discussion' of policy that goes on in Washington. They don't really know it exists, and they
don't pay any attention to us because they're used to reading about themselves
in the New York Times and the Washington Post and not on the internet. And so they're comfortable. And it's the people who are beginning to
think for themselves who have gone into the internet and tried to create a
reality picture of events, and -
Rob Kall: I guess what I'm asking is, on the one hand
you talk about people being labeled as kooks and what have you, and on the
other hand the internet has all this quackery -- wouldn't you agree that part of
the job of responsible internet publishers is also to provide moderation and
content curation as well?
Paul Craig
Roberts: I think some sites do that, but
there's always a danger in any kind of censorship, even though it needs to be
done so that you don't have flat-earthers or something running the show. But there are many things you can't discuss
very well even on internet sites. Also,
anybody can set up one. And so, somebody
who has got some kind of a far out view of things can run a site too, and that
never really worked in newspapers except for those things that you would by at
the supermarket checkout counter (laughs), you know. I forget, the National Enquirer or some
thing. "Movie star abducted by UFO," and
those sort of things. But that never
really spread into the print media. What
we now have in the print media is this government propaganda, corporate
propaganda.
Rob Kall: What are some of the issues that are not
permitted that need to be discussed?
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
3
3
