FOIA help...origins of race baiting in MSM

Hello ATS...

Considering the Obama administration legalized propaganda in the USA a few years ago, and the racial undertones of current MSM events i would like to file some FOIA requests for any policies, emails, and presentation planning that promote racial content for strategic purposes.

But...I dont have any experience in this and i dont know who to send an FOIA to. The goal here is to literally deconstruct bad information.

Any help would be appreciated.

Considering the Obama administration legalized propaganda in the USA a few years ago

a reply to: darkwarrior

First explain where you got this idea.

a reply to: darkwarrior

It's as old as the Abolitionist Movement. Race-baiting was seminal then as conflicting interests fought over the status of Africans.

No FOIA in the 1800s

Propaganda predates the Obama administration by centuries in time and continents in space.

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass

Considering the Obama administration legalized propaganda in the USA a few years ago

a reply to: darkwarrior

First explain where you got this idea.

Without posting originals from the bill heres this

www.maxkeiser.com...

THAT IS HILARIOUS!
It has never STOPPED from the cold war, RACE BAITING was extent as early as the 1800s and it too hasn't stopped like a kind of a bigoted "tennis game" now. KKK type pukes have LONG since been separated from popular white culture.The majority regard them as criminals at best. This time the lefties are looking for payback and now THEY are the new McCarthyists but with progressive intent.
THEY hate GUNS,John Wayne type men and warriors.

a reply to: Kandinsky

a reply to: cavtrooper7


You guys are hilarious. My point is that if a policy or goal to add racism intentionally to a presentation or program is revealed (which there is much speculation that there is intent), then it would be grounds to draft some sort of legislation which would limit slanted reporting. ie interviewing racist people like Ben Crump, Al Sharpton, etc after an "unarmed african american teen is brutally murdered by a white cop". When the actual facts of the scene are minimal and do not require racist overtones.

You guys are stating that because somebody had a bad standard in the 1800's then it is okay to continue to allow it now? Or did I misunderstand your posts?

a reply to: darkwarrior

You misunderstood. WE WANT THE BS stopped with all the people who think SKIN matters,it doesn't. THE issue here is what is FREE SPEECH and it's expression which I'm willing to bet the most intelligent person EVER to be born to man cannot figure out fairly

"then it would be grounds to draft some sort of legislation which would limit slanted reporting."

So you want the government to limit what we can say on T.V. Limit our right of freedom of speech.

Their are a few people on here that have complained to much is getting by and they are getting offended that people are speaking their minds. Change the channel next time...

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: darkwarrior

You misunderstood. WE WANT THE BS stopped with all the people who think SKIN matters,it doesn't. THE issue here is what is FREE SPEECH and it's expression which I'm willing to bet the most intelligent person EVER to be born to man cannot figure out fairly

Sounds funny now...but I understand completely. I cause and effect everything as I see it. So when I see CNN and whoever talking about the performance of the African American community I see them basically training the next generation of racists. It doesnt matter that Mike Brown was black...and it doesnt matter that the cop is white. Its a use of force issue. But still it seems to be a trend in media to divide people and generate unrest with their manner of reporting.

I didnt choose the color of my skin and it isnt an accomplishment or something that is earned or maintained. I went to the party with my dad and left with my mom just like the next person.

So you are correct...what is free speech? Well I tend to believe that media organizations should have a responsibility to the WAY that they spread information. Free speech and freedom to protest are with an individual. If an organization was found to deliberately disseminate info in a way that is intended to sway opinions and generate buzz then there should be some limits to their capabilities or "intent".

So the goal of my unwritten FOIA requests is to uncover a potential plot/goal/policy to deliberately add a racial bias to a story in the media. Its a question of mine. If the information is there then it would settle a lot of disputes and theories.

With all of the theory stuff on ATS regarding the NWO and police state I figured I would have more support or guidance from the posters. I dont draw conclusions unless I have enough verifiable facts to do so. The idea that the media is used to divide and generate reactions is extremely popular here. With some actual verifiable facts then we could all spread it around and maybe leave something behind for the next generation.

a reply to: Eyemin

Im talking about the intent of using racial bias when it isnt a necessary topic to begin with. Dont twist my words with your own agenda.

a reply to: darkwarrior

If you're trying to track the NWO start with PRESCOTT BUSH but THEY control the system,as to a starting point I bet you get an ambiguous answer because you weren't "Officialeze" enough for the system to categorize it by term "race baiting". as opposed to say..."racial prejudice in Broadcasting" maybe.

a reply to: darkwarrior
Try here:
Judicial Watch FOIA Search

a reply to: darkwarrior

Not twisting your words...

Im talking about the intent of using racial bias when it isnt a necessary topic to begin with.

So you want to restrict what can be said... restrictions on what you can say and think about a topic. What if some thinks it is necessary to use bias's to prove a point... might not make them right... but that does not mean they can't show the world they are wrong...

originally posted by: darkwarrior
a reply to: Eyemin

Im talking about the intent of using racial bias when it isnt a necessary topic to begin with. Dont twist my words with your own agenda.

Your grievance should be with the media not the government. If you are unhappy with the way "news" is being presented then perhaps you should start your own network and broadcast your views on what is important to you.

You can start here....

YpJAmlnBxoAwww.celtx.com...

and here is the platform for your network.

www.publicaccesstv.net...

then if you do get info from the FOIA you will have an audiance much bigger than ATS.

It takes effort but join us in trying to make a difference. Otherwise its just whining....

a reply to: olaru12

What change do you want? Larger government less rights? Just because something offends you doesn't mean its wrong...

a reply to: darkwarrior

My main problem with all this is that they hold up MLK as an example of civil rights yet they do not carry his message of I have a dream speech. Especially that people are not to be judged by the color of their skin but by what’s inside them rather than what’s on the outside. But we knew that was not going to happen when MLK was shot, Jesse Jackson wiped MLK blood on his hands and suit like he just go the anointing from a dead man.