Content on the Daily Paul is the opinion of the original poster, not necessarily of the Daily Paul, its owner, moderators.

I believe I'm being CENSORED!

Submitted by LibertyPoet on Sat, 02/16/2013 - 04:02

I've submitted my letter-to-the-editor on Aspartame 5 times:
once to the newspaper online submission feed and four times to the editor's private Democrat Herald email and he says he hasn't received it. It has now been two days and he has not responded to my email asking if he finally received it. My four previous articles were all published via the same means of submission...I smell censorship...my article is being withheld from public view in my honest opinion...

My reply from another OP.

Submitted by Paul_S. on Sun, 02/17/2013 - 03:02. Permalink

http://www.dailypaul.com/274473/persistence#comment-2956644

—

Free includes debt-free!

Perhaps this

Submitted by wistfulthinker on Sun, 02/17/2013 - 02:32. Permalink

Perhaps this letter-to-the-editor isn't passing muster for some reason. Post it here. Maybe DPers can help you get your viewpoint across in a way that doesn't expose the newspaper to liable or boring repetitive submissions. (If your previous letters were also about Aspartame, post those as well to optimize advice.)

Here it is...

Submitted by LibertyPoet on Sun, 02/17/2013 - 02:46. Permalink

Aspartame was discovered in the mid-1960’s by GD Searle, a Chicago drug company. It is also known as, by or under the names Nutrasweet, Equal, Acesulfame Potassium and Aminosweet and is an artificial sweetener/chemical additive. Originally approved in 1974, concerns over deficiencies/inconsistencies in GD Searle tests halted the marketing of Aspartame in dry foods until 1981, despite it being the most contested chemical additive in FDA history due to causation of brain cancer in lab animals. In 1980 the Public Board of Inquiry voted unanimously to reject the use of Aspartame until additional studies could be conducted on its ability to cause potential brain tumors. By 1983 Aspartame was put on the market for consumption and by the following year over 6,900,000 lbs was consumed by Americans. In 1988 80% of volunteered complaints regarding foods and additives dealt with Aspartame products. Please use this article to educate others and know that the ability to avoid Aspartame is within your power, whether by reading the labels of consumer products or questioning the ingredients of prescribed pharmaceuticals/medications for alternatives if possible.

Documentary on Aspartame:
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/sweet-misery-a-poisoned-world/

The 92 different health side effects associated with Aspartame:
http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html

Aspartame studies:
http://aspartame.mercola.com/sites/aspartame/studies.aspx

History of Aspartame:
http://www.wnho.net/history_of_aspartame.htm

Full CDC investigation on Aspartame (text):
http://www.dorway.com/cdctext.txt

—

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit

Perhaps change up a couple things

Submitted by wistfulthinker on Mon, 02/18/2013 - 17:56. Permalink

Couple of things come to mind.
1. This is a really busy time on the editorial page with so many bills before Congress and statehouses. If there's a way to tie the piece to something new happening right now, that could help. Perhaps the latest study or court case or FDA regulation. Best to lead with the newest info rather than the oldest.

2. You could also remove the proper names Nutrasweet, etc. and replace them with general verbiage -- non-plant-derived sweeteners found on grocery store shelves and restaurant tables.

3. If there are more recent studies to cite throughout, that will make your letter look more timely.

Hope something here help. And good luck.

Censorship is

Submitted by CarrotTop on Sun, 02/17/2013 - 02:20. Permalink

done by a government, such as the German law prohibiting the sale of Mein Kempf in Germany. Private firms can publish whatever they want.

"private firms can publish whatever they want"...

Submitted by LibertyPoet on Sun, 02/17/2013 - 02:34. Permalink

And so can Governments...
they either censor directly or through plausible deniability utilizing lobby and reprimand by or in protection of the Multi-National interests of the Corporations they appease and in secrecy represent...

—

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit

What you've described is "Editing"

Submitted by Gene Greigh on Sat, 02/16/2013 - 09:05. Permalink

If I were to invade YOUR website or YOUR newspaper and change or delete your work, THAT would be "censorship."

Please. Words have actual definitions. If they are too often and too frequently misused they tend to degrade until they mean nothing.

—

dynamite anthrax supreme court white house tea party jihad
======================================
West of 89
a novel of another america
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/161155#longdescr

Makes me wonder even if you tried paying for space,

Submitted by ecard71 on Sat, 02/16/2013 - 06:56. Permalink

if they would even still deny it. Seems pretty obvious that someone doesn't want that published.

—

http://www.dailypaul.com/243749/can-ron-paul-win-in-november...

http://www.mediafire.com/?s4snpbpsts5b3 - Thx sovereignjanice

http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/395622.Ron_Paul

"Censored?". A newspaper

Submitted by Freedom's Remnant on Sat, 02/16/2013 - 05:03. Permalink

"Censored?". A newspaper isn't obligated to print a letter-to-the-editor submission.

—

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell

I know fellow Dp'er...

Submitted by LibertyPoet on Sat, 02/16/2013 - 05:20. Permalink

and I never insinuated that...
they did print my last 4 articles, one a guest Op-Ed...
so you do the math..

—

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit

What were the topics of your last 4 articles. Klink?

Submitted by go213mph on Sat, 02/16/2013 - 07:46. Permalink

Every article and/or op-ed I've ever submitted to a MSM "news" outlet has gone into a black hole...except 1. That 1? It was back in 1992 when I was living large inside the matrix and I had moved from NC to Dallas and I didn't think NASCAR received enough coverage in Dallas. THAT they find important enough to print?

Since I began waking up in 2008-2009 I've nixed TV and now see Nascar for what it really is...another place for corporate whores to dump money to distract the masses. Another playground for millionares.

I still own 1 TV and there were a handful of races I watched (with the volume muted) last year. I expect I will watch the Daytona 500 and the races at Talladega this year but only if I can't find something less painful to do at the time. (I still want to go213mph after all) On a disgusting side note...I read online the other day that there is going to be a freaking "sandy hook memorial" car in the Daytona 500. What a bunch of BS! Guess thats some of the 300 million that the pentagon gives Nascar every year to promote their agenda.

Just like I do with drinking booze, my POLICY is NO TV (and I don't drink), however, because I own myself I allow myself personal "waivers" if I want to see something on the tube or if I want to drink a beer when I end up out with friends. I have found that forbiding myself to do anything always leads to failure.

—

DENY CONSENT