Talk:American Free Press/Archive 1

Statement from the editor of AFP

—The above heading was added by 216.239.68.149 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 16 February 2006

One of the fundamental problems with so-called "wiki" is anyone with an opinion — no matter how uninformed it may be — can post an article and claim it to be definitive.

In line with this, a fundamental difference between this site and American Free Press is that we actually make an effort to communicate with people who are knowledgeable about the subject of our articles. In many cases, we seek out primary sources for our reports. No one has ever bothered to contact any of us about this so-called article and the category of "neo-nazism" that we purportedly fall under.

In fact, if readers will check the history here, they will see that we have attempted to delete this post and replace it with one that more accurately reflects reality.

Where the author of this post gets his information about who founded AFP and why remains a mystery to us. The fact is, many people were involved in the founding of AFP, including lawyers, consultants and other regular folks. To credit one person significantly downplays the roles many well-intentioned, intelligent people have played in keeping AFP alive over the years.

If there were any truth to the claims on this site, then it should be easily proven by simply quoting from AFP to demonstrate that we are, in fact, "neo-nazi," "racist" or "anti-Semitic." A discerning reader will notice there are no direct attributions, which should lead him to believe that this specific post is a bunch of hokum.

If anyone should know about this, it should me, the editor of AFP since its founding in August 2001.

C. Petherick
Editor, AFP
—The preceding comment was added by 138.88.210.82 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can actually help this situation, by adding more and better material to the article that gives a better picture, like I just did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.9.29 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 15 October 2005

Don't lie. I just found a copy of AFP at my college and picked it up because the front headlines were anti-war and anti-globalization. I thought it might be an interesting read so I picked it up, and I'm glad I did. I plan on changing the title of this rag to "Nazi Propaganda" on every last one of these lame papers I come across when I go back to school tomorrow. I strongly suspect the person who put these out is the same person who has been drawing swastikas around campus with feel-good phrases like "Niggers Get Out". You have an article that talks about the injustice recieved by a holocaust denier. True, the government shouldn't censor peoples views, but the way you describe it, it's obvious you like this guy's reputation for "writing about little-known facts concerning WWII". Uh huh, yeah, facts. Your idea of "facts" is probably that Nazi Germany didn't actually kill 6 million Jews, (not to mention gypsies, political dissidents, gays, Jehovah's Witnesses, trade unionists, mentally disabled, physically disabled etc...) but actually gave them medals of honor for being great people. What a crock. Of course, you keep the most radical stuff in the classified area, but that is just because most people overlook that. The classifieds advertise for the National Alliance. Now you try and tell me you're not a recruiting tool for the nazis. Oh, and I can't forget the add for the "White Christian Heritage Festival". Oh, and the book The War That Never Ended about the war Hitler started and the "Hitler movement [being] very much alive". Oh, and the books White Man's Bible and On the Brink of a Bloody Racial War. Oh, and books by Christian Identity. Sure, you try to balance this out with one add for an event that includes one african-american speaker, but c'mon, that's just you're token black dude to help deflect the true nature of this garbage. You may be able to fool some of the people most of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. A nazi by any other name would still smell as vile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.114.223.250 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 31 October 2005

You are applying the term "nazis" to antiwar champions of the Bill of Rights! Read more than just the headlines -- e.g.. You will find AFP consistently defending liberty, opposing fascism, and resisting the Zionist/globalist drive to achieve "World War IV". Does that sound like "nazi" to you?

I suspect that your use of the term "nazi" is simply an attempt to smear and silence courageous critics of Israeli fascism.

"They are, in short, the enemies of freedom, the Thought Police of our time."

-- Justin Raimondo, "Do Neocons Exist? / Don't attack neoconservatives -- it's a 'hate crime'!", 03 Jan 2003

-- NonZionist (talk) 19:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was pretty funny. This guy is trying to claim that AFP are not Nazis in the same sentence where he lauds them for "resisting the Zionist/Globalists." That could just as easily have read 'we're not Nazis, we're just trying to stop the Jews from taking over the world.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.72.152.101 (talk) 07:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the AFP has no affiliation with Neo-Nazis or any other White Nationalist Radicals, why does it share an address with The Barnes Review? [see http://911review.com/denial/afp_addr_s.png ; http://911review.com/denial/tbr1_s.png ] --Baltech22 00:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

everybody knows wikipedia is susceptible to bias. However, the AFP and media sources of its ilk have a completely different definition of the terms "bias" and "impartiality" to everybody else, and therefore the only wikipedia article the AFP would accept is one which glorifies it. 213.121.151.174 (talk) 20:04, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More On That

It's always funny how people are forced to use the advertisements to assail American Free Press, claiming the publication is a recruiting tool for this group or that group. Worse, the focus generally is on the Classified advertising, buried in the back of the newspaper. In fact, we have taken advertising from people who claim that UFOs were seen in the United States and from others who believe the 14th Amendment was never ratified. We also have health ads and others from more mainstream organizations. Does that mean we are recruiting for these people, too. Of course not.

The point I am making is that none of these detractors have visited AFP's office or spoken directly to the people who work there. They are merely speculating on what employees may or may not believe. The fact is they do not have any direct insight into the publication, having read just one issue, or know anything about the dozen people who founded it in 2001 and have kept it alive for the past five years.

We cannot be responsible for readers who may get the wrong idea. Every individual is entitled to form his own views about media, and then make a choice as to whether or not he will read it. But do not overstate your own knee-jerk reaction to imply your opinion is anything but an opinion.

For those who are genuinely interested, visit the web site americanfreepress.net. There, you, too, will be able to form an educated opinion and decide for yourself whether American Free Press is a recruiting tool for ufologists, vegetarians, family farmers, anti-globalists, alt currency organizations, tax protesters or any group that chooses to place an advertisement in the publication. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.75.17.170 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 16 February 2006

I'm going to include a link to AFP in the article. Curious that there isn't one there already. Did a detractor of the newspaper remove it? Dr. Moreau 23:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This paper is under no obligation to accept advertisments from nazis, and the fact that it does shows at least some sympathy for their cause, or else a serious thirst for cash. I don't care how much they offer and how much I need, I would never accept money from nazis--I would eat trash before I sold out that much. The Ungovernable Force 04:33, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you arguing that the advertisements in newspapers reflect the editorial policies of those papers? St37 13:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What the...?

How did this become an article on Willis Carto? Willis Carto has no official connection to AFP. All this stuff about Carto belongs in a seperate article. I would change it myself, but frankly, I have no inclination to invest any time in this project. Having worked on articles here in the past, I consider any effort expended here to be a waste of valuable time. Dr. Moreau 23:37, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the article to an earlier version which was much more balanced and NPOV (and which stuck to the subject at hand, rather than turning it into a biography of Willis Carto while removing the external link to the newspaper). Hopefully others will revert again if they notice this kind of vandalism in the future. I will keep this article on my watchlist, and advise my aquantainces here on Wikipedia to do the same. Dr. Moreau 00:02, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added detail

Added ADL statement and link, corrected article to read "ex-contract reporter" for Bollyn (the association was terminated in fall of 2006), and added "AFP". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.29.226.213 (talk) 19:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

NPoV

The article is clearly one-sided; apart from one brief mention that the newspaper rejects the criticism, the whole tenor of the piece is hostile and sneering. There must be something more to be said on the other side. At the moment, the text reads more like propaganda than an encyclopædia article. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely agree with this. Some of the statements in the article are demonstrably FALSE. Others are reminiscent of the tactics of Joseph McCarthy. Specifically:

* There is the UNSUPPORTED statement that AFP is critical of "the existence of Jews and Judaism itself" -- AFP vigorously supports non-Zionist Jews. The AFP criticizes proponents of Israeli fascism -- Jews and non-Jews alike -- and supports Jewish and non-Jewish critics of Israel. The determining factor is not Judaism but fascism.

* There is also the dismissive and biased term "on 9/11 conspiracy theories". For the most part, AFP publishes unexplained or uninvestigated FACTS about 9/11 and raises QUESTIONS. A fact is not the same as a theory. When facts are deliberately mis-characterized and disparaged as "theories", we have a form of censorship.

Actually, Chris Bollyn wrote an article that was featured in the film Loose Change which claims that the engines found at the Pentagon were not the right kind of engines. His "evidence" is that he called a factory which does not make the engines in question and asked someone there if he was familiar with the engines shown at the crash site. He was not. Chris has also claimed that an editor at Popular Mechanics- a magazine that has written extensively on why 911 conspiracy theories are dead wrong- is related to the director of Homeland Security. His "evidence" there is that they have the same last name, Chertoff, so he called the Popular Mechanics Chertoff's mother and asked if they were related. Her answer of "they may be distant cousins" was turned into they ARE cousins. AFP is a conspiracy theory paper and conspiracy theories are silly. That is a fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.72.152.101 (talk) 07:44, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

* There is the McCarthy-style use of guilt by association by the ADL and the SPLC, two organizations that are anything but neutral. While these organizations claim to represent Jews, they exclude and suppress the viewpoint of Jews who are critical of fascist Israel.

NonZionist (talk) 17:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To correct blatant imbalance, I propose adding the following:

The AmericanFree Press is opposed to free trade treaties such as NAFTA and the World Trade Organization, has been strongly opposed to all U.S. military interventions since the fall of the Berlin Wall to the present including the Iraq War, supports a large reduction of immigration into the United States, and supports the elimination of the federal income tax and the abolition of the Federal Reserve Bank. The paper takes a special interest in reporting on the activities of the Bilderberg group and on complementary and alternative medicine. It has published several articles supportive of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.[had to remove a link to Nationmaster Encyclopedia as it's blacklisted being based on Wikipeda]

I would replace "9/11 conspiracy theories" with "investigations into 9/11", since the term "theories" is deliberately misleading.

I would also remove the "antisemitic" category -- or else replace it with a category of "groups falsely accused of 'anti-Semitism'". The following AFP articles disprove the anti-Semitism charge, inasmuch as they demonstrate SUPPORT for Jews who are being persecuted by the Zionist Establishment:

NonZionist (talk) 19:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

Citations

Please please PLEASE do NOT write anything that does not have a CITATION. In order to add a citation, copy the URL of the website you found your information on, and put in this format: <ref>[www.website.org]</ref>. (Check the edit page for words). It's EASY, and it will save everyone from a lot of false information. Thank you! MiniOreo (talk) 01:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is Wikipedia?

Wikipedia is about FACTS, not opinions. Please refrain from using unverified sources, personal opinions, and weasel words. If you need a refresher, try this page. Any comments without valid references can and should be deleted. I'll get on that right now. MiniOreo (talk) 01:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So is it a verifiable FACT that the most noteable AFP reporter Christopher Bollyn is NOT noteable enough for his own article in this encyclopedia? Because it seems that his stories, and his life experiences, over the past 5 years have been far more noteable than any mainstream media's chief reporters... And yet his Wikipedia article keeps vanishing... 68.149.190.31 (talk) 00:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute tags

This article has several challenged statements and dispute tags, some of which have been on the article for over a year. I recommend deleting any statements that are not sourced, and then see about removing the tags. --El on ka 23:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cut or cited everything that had a cite request, and removed the cleanup tags. The SPLC and ADL appears to have a lot of references to this publication, but it may be hard to include them all without unbalancing the article. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ADL and the SPLC are hardly organizations with a NPOV. These organizations obviously have an agenda, which is to censor and destroy critics of Israel and the U.S. Establishment. They are properly seen as hate groups operating at the fringes of the mainstream.

The ADL has been convicted of spying on Americans and passing the information onto foreign governments. See:

Jeffrey Blankfort (25 Feb 2002). "ADL Blinks, Settles Spying Case". Counterpunch. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

And the SPLC, exploiting fear of non-existent threats, has extorted millions from gullible liberals. See:

Ken Silverstein (Nov 2000). "The Church of Morris Dees / How the Southern Poverty Law Center profits from intolerance". Harper's.

Response to SPLC character assassination

Victim of SPLC calumny responds

NonZionist (talk) 18:40, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the above is being used to argue against the ADL, I'll point out that the ADL was never convicted and that to understand the issue it's necessary to read the ADL's article. Doug Weller talk 09:53, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]