Thursday July 3, 2008, 2:56 pm
Naomi Klein’s speech at the National Conference for Media reform was not included on the conference website. subMedia contacted Free Press, the organizer or the conference, to ask why Klein’s speech could not be found online, and the person explained that Free Press is a non-profit organization and that I should reefer to the disclaimer on their website which reads:

"Despite our best efforts, we feel that some of our speakers encroached on electoral space during their remarks at the National Conference for Media Reform. It is not in our interest to disseminate these recordings. We are reviewing all of our video content and will add that which we determine to be free of electoral statements to this page."

I don’t quite understand how these things work, but whatever. Two sources have told me the reason Free Press did not include the speech was Klein’s criticism of Barack Obama. It would be pretty @#$*#* lame if it were true.

But #@*% it, I got a hold of a copy of the speech and here it is.

Thursday July 3, 2008, 3:07 pm

THANK you, Marcia. Noted and will pass along.

Thursday July 3, 2008, 5:49 pm

Isn't it interesting that Klein's speech was not only censored by the mainstream media, but also by the alternative media that is always clamoring for less censorship. ROFL

Their claim that it comes to close to being political and might endanger their 501(c)3 status with the IRS is spurious, as they frequently publish stuff about political candidates and parties, which is perfectly fine as long as they don't endorse anyone, which Klein obviously did not.

On the other hand, I have to disagree with Klein about first allowing somebody to take office (or even voting for them) and then trying to counter the pressure from corporations in hopes of influencing their agenda. The U.S. is NOT on the point of revolution as it was after the Great Depression, and we don't have sufficient leverage to frighten both the corporate elites and their paid-for sock puppets. What has changed since FDR is not just the private mercenaries, but the billions that have been spent on Homeland Security to train and equip local law enforcement for crowd control. In FDR's time, the local cops didn't have the use of helicopters, for example.

The protests at the Democratic convention in Denver are not going to spur the general public to rise up. The public is already very well informed. Congressional Democrats only have about a 20% approval rating AMONG DEMOCRATIC VOTERS.

What people are looking for is not years of court cases seeking compensation for false arrests, severe injuries or deaths due to police brutality, and some media coverage. Nor is the average person going to leave their home and join a protest just because the TV news shows some cops kicking a pregnant woman in the stomach or bashing someone in a wheelchair over the head with their batons. That might work in other countries, but the mainstream media has been desensitizing people to violence here for many years. Most people see more violence than that accompanied by a lot more blood in an average evening of relaxing in front of the TV set.

I firmly believe that we have to withdraw our consent. It is something that everyone who is disgusted with an undemocratic and unaccountable form of government can do, without getting tasered, maced, or bludgeoned. And if killing millions of innocent people elsewhere hasn't discredited our fascist police state, provoking them into brutalizing a few more certainly won't do it.

As for the Democrats listening, they're the ones who want the free speech zone moved out of earshot. ROFLMAO

No in November

Thursday July 3, 2008, 6:18 pm

Thanks for this post. Didn't even know about the FreePress Conference, less that Naomi Klein had spoken there, to great applause and then her speech was censored ! Great to her what she has to say.

Friday July 4, 2008, 1:39 am
Seriously..why controversial and why removed!??Freepress!???Well if the free press isnt even free "say no more"!!!!.

Friday July 4, 2008, 2:41 am
THANKS FOR THE POST LOVED IT ....NOTE NOTE NOTE ........and loving you today MARCLA C. star star star .........

THE REASON THOUGH THAT THIS IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE AIRED ON A NON -PROFIT SITE though is rather clear .......see she may say she does not support obama or and is not endorsing a candidate or anyone or even a party .....but she states his name continually and the whole point of the speech is to say "WE GET OBAMA IN AND WE NEED TO CONTINUE OUR PRESSURE TO HAVE HIM TO MEET OUR NEEDS "

and due to that it could cost a non-profit their status as a non-profit also there could be fines and charges brought .......MANY MAY DISAGREE WITH THIS IDEA ....BUT BECAUSE a LAY PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF sees it as a promotion of a political party and or candidate .......a lawyer and the irs can make a case which will cost the non-profit money time and possibly their status which i do not want and i bet their lawyers said hey we need to omit this from our site ........SO LETS NOT START SCREAMING CENSORSHIP .......often omitting a work or speech is not censorship but is legally required since non profits are not granted the same freedoms as private organizations ....

the speech is not stopped MISS KLEIN completes here speech no one tells her to stop ........the work is on line for anyone to see and hear .......it appears to have been made available to another site which is not non-profit ..SO WHAT I THOUGHT I WOULD DO TO SEE IF IT IS A CASE OF CENSORING MISS KLEIN.........i will contact the event organizers and the free press conference ask them if they are aware of their intellectual property being shown on line ...... and if they have issue with it being shown outside their organization ......IF IT IS PULLED THEN WE CAN START SCREAMING CENSORSHIP ........and i hope it is not i would then need to limit my involvement with free press .......i have received a email back and at this time many many peoples speeches are being reviewed ......

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY MISS KLEIN IS A AMAZING AMAZING WRITER AND SHE KNEW WHAT SHE WAS DOING WHEN SHE SPOKE ........she is smart enough to have just used group a and group b and would of been able to pass this issue of violating non-profit regulations .......

AGAIN LOVED THIS POST AND STAR STAR STAR .........

those not voting have fun with that ........dont understand you but hope it works out for ya ............

Friday July 4, 2008, 2:49 am

Elgin, I can honestly say that I rarely understand you either. ROFL

I believe that since election boycotts have worked to discredit governments that claimed to be legitimate and have the support of their people, but weren't and didn't, we could do the same thing here.

You got a better idea?

Friday July 4, 2008, 3:26 am
MARK by all means if you do not understand something i am writing please let me know what you dont understand ....i will always try and clarify ....or if one wishes expound on what i have written .......

MY ISSUE WITH the no vote in november is basically the way with our issues as united states of american citizens we try and do denigrate the issues that those in the nations which did wage election boycotts had and or are dealing with .........WE BY NO MEANS HAVE STATE SPONSORED DEATH SQUADS KILLING opposition party members and candidates ........FIRE BOMBING HEAD QUARTERS ......our voter intimidation is like a child's game compared to what those waging election boycotts in other nations ....

PLEASE SHOW ME I AM WRONG ON THIS ........

Friday July 4, 2008, 3:30 am
If you like Naomi Klein's analyses, and what is happening in Iraq matters to you, this is a must-read:

Naomi Klein: Big Oil's Iraq Deals Are the Greatest Stick-Up in History

Friday July 4, 2008, 3:40 am
Yeah yeah the world is still full of double agents and those who completeely have no other alliance then to themselves and thier own personal ego etc etc...nothing new about that one.But generaly speaking we all know or we all should do at least,know what we are doing and why we are doing it whatever it is.But what others make of it is a matter of INTERPRETATION.In the world of the "mighty pen against the sword" even stated facts can be a matter of interpretation of course i.e pigs cant fly?...Oh yes they can when transported in a plane.But thats not flying?and so on and so on!. A large ingredient of the principal of the Free press is of course"Tolerance"and so for me personally in the case of withdrawing or LIMITING Miss Kleins speech is a breach of these principals..period.

Friday July 4, 2008, 4:45 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Marcla because you have done so within the last week.

Friday July 4, 2008, 9:08 pm

After the conference it took a few days for free press to put out the video's. They weren't all released at the same time.
Naomi did say a short 2 or 3 mins with Goodard and I thought that was all she contributed.

I wouldn't have known this was made. Freepress should have at least mentioned more clearly some of the guest talks were not available.

For Jill above:

http://www.freepress.net/node/41314
Legendary journalist Bill Moyers address the National Conference for Media Reform in Minneapolis, June 7, 2008. Presented by FreePress.net.

For more speakers, press coverage, and info, visit: http://www.freepress.net/conference

Other speakers include, Lawrence Lessig, Dan Rather, Amy Goodman,

Saturday July 5, 2008, 2:13 am
well if you got oto the bottom of the video clip page on their site at the bottom it does say the following this is the quote and the reason they give ..........

"Despite our best efforts, we feel that some of our speakers encroached on electoral space during their remarks at the National Conference for Media Reform. It is not in our interest to disseminate these recordings. We are reviewing all of our video content and will add that which we determine to be free of electoral statements to this page."

this is their reasoning and i am behind them .........WHAT WE NEED TO REMEMBER IS THAT AS LONG AS THEY ARE NON-PROFIT THEY MUST OBEY THE LAW .......now i can not afford to pay all their bills .....CAN ANY OF YOU .....lets not be so hard on a non-profit .......

BUT AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN I WANT TO THANK ,MARCLA for bring this to us

Sunday July 6, 2008, 8:20 am
Thank you for posting this. I just found it myself, I subscribe to submedia on youtube & miro. I highly recommend checking out their other videos!

Sunday July 6, 2008, 6:12 pm
Yes, I agree, check out all his stuff...you will be laughing, entertained, all while your blood boils. And you must remember, youtube cuts him off...you have to go to submedia.tv to see the whole thing. I saw my first issue on myspace, then had to see every past issue and have to see everything he puts out since. I may not agree with everything he says but it makes me think. And that tells me alot, entertainment that makes me THINK.

Sunday July 6, 2008, 6:26 pm
And your welcome Elgin. What I have noticed is alot of people don't talk to people from other countries, or are quick to belittle them because they don't live in the US. But I have many friends around the world I talk to, and to hear how the U.S. is percieved kills me. How the people of the U.S. are percieved. And I see it so much here on care2, us citizens attacking people from other countries for being AWARE and CONCERNED about what is going on here, like it's no business of theirs. It is shameful to me that so many other countries know more about what's going on here than we do. Look at the protests in South Korea. Mad cow beef. But most of the U.S. is sheeple in all reality. To me anymore it is all REDNECKED mentality. We are SHEEPLE. Because so many of us are scared. Scared of our government. But some of us are starting to rise up and revolt. I don't believe the NO mentality...but i do support the THIRD PARTY mentality. I think if enough of of finally said..THIRD party instead of NO....I just don't know anymore.

Sunday July 6, 2008, 6:35 pm

Marcia, one of the things that confounds most Europeans and people in other countries is that the U.S. does not have proportional representation. So if a third party gets 20% of the votes in an election, it does NOT get 20% of the seats in Congress.

Those of us who believe that the system itself is inherently undemocratic, don't think that inserting a third or fourth or fifth party into an undemocratic system would help, because they'd have to operate within an undemocratic system.

Did you see this article:

The Fable of Lanova Messiah

That is the system that a third party and its candidates would have to operate within.

But maybe it's possible that us No in November folks just aren't party animals. ROFL