In this politically correct world, our right to free speech is increasingly being eroded by the apparent rights of others who disagree with our views.
State broadcaster Television New Zealand came under attack last month, when they were accused of including
a ‘racist’ question in their new KiwiMeter survey.
KiwiMeter, a 10-minute on-line questionnaire, which examines what being a New Zealander means to different people, places participants in one of six groups according to their views – patriot, globalist, egalitarian, loyalist, traditionalist, or sceptic.
TVNZ’s Head of News and Current Affairs, John Gillespie, explained that KiwiMeter is a scientific study designed to provide a data-driven picture of New Zealand’s national identity in order to help the broadcaster ‘stay connected’ to the issues their audience most cares about. It was put together by the same team that developed their Vote Compass election survey, and was preceded by a local pilot study of 11,000 of those 300,000 participants.
Over 220,000 New Zealanders have completed KiwiMeter, and with the flag question accurately predicting the results of the final referendum, the data will indeed give TVNZ a real understanding of the views of our population.
But it didn’t take long for the critics to emerge. Within days of the survey being launched, the Labour Party’s MP for Te Tai Tokerau, Kelvin Davis, claimed that KiwiMeter was inciting “racial intolerance”.
There are three questions that touch on Maori culture, where respondents are asked to agree or disagree with a statement:
“Maori culture is something that all New Zealanders can take pride in, no matter their background”
“A history of discrimination has created conditions that make it difficult for Maori to be successful”
“Maori should not receive any special treatment”
Mr Davis claimed the question that included the statement, “Maori should not receive any special treatment”, was “out and out racism”. He demanded it be removed from the survey, stating, “It just evokes images of Don Brash 2004: implying that Maori have special treatment, I’d like to know what special treatment they’re talking about.”
Well, let’s try to answer that question for Mr Davis – and let’s begin with his Te Tai Tokerau electorate seat.
The Maori seats were created as a temporary measure in 1867 when gender, age, and private land title were the criteria used to determine voting eligibility. Since much of the land held by Maori was in common ownership, rather than private title, the Maori seats were introduced to ensure all Maori men had the right to vote – a privilege not enjoyed by those non-Maori men, who held land jointly or not at all.
In 1879, when all men gained the vote, the Maori seats should have been abolished, but as a result of strong advocacy – and weak politicians – they were retained.
It was the same in 1996, when MMP was introduced. The Royal Commission on the Electoral System had recommended that the Maori seats be abolished if MMP was adopted – to prevent an over-representation of Maori in Parliament. But Jim Bolger’s National Party retained the seats to appease Maori leaders, and as a result, the predicted over-representation of Maori in Parliament has now occurred, with twenty-three percent of current MPs claiming Maori descent.
These reserved seats, of which Kelvin Davis’s electorate seat is one, are a fine example of Maori privilege. Mr Davis is in Parliament because of Maori special treatment.
As a result of the Parliamentary leverage created by the race-based Maori seats, there are a plethora of race-based legislative initiatives that give Maori special rights. These include:
Special Maori content in the education curriculum
Maori-only education scholarships
Maori-only housing projects
Maori-only health initiatives
Maori-only welfare initiatives
Maori-only prisoner programmes
Maori-only positions on government agencies
Maori-only consultation rights under the Resource Management Act
Maori-only co-management of parks, rivers, lakes, and the coastline
Maori-only ownership rights to the foreshore and seabed
A special Maori Authority tax rate of 17.5 percent
A special Maori-only exemption to allow blood relatives to qualify for charitable status
Maori language funding
Maori radio and TV
Maori-only seats on local councils
Maori-only appointments onto local government committees
Maori-only local government Statutory Boards
Maori-only local government advisory committees
Maori seats in Parliament
The list of statutory Maori privilege is increasing all the time, as the government’s current plans to confer race-based rights to control fresh water demonstrates only too clearly.
As justification for Maori privilege, Mr Davis and others point to so-called ‘Maori disadvantage’. But they should remember that the statistics on these matters are no longer clear-cut.
Back in the seventies, when widespread intermarriage was resulting in a sharp decline in the number of people who could be categorised as Maori, the Labour Government changed the rules. Through the 1974 Maori Affairs Amendment Act, the racial classification of “Maori” based on someone having 50 percent or more of Maori blood was changed to one based on self-identification and ethnic affiliation – in other words, having a Maori descendent.
This guaranteed that the number of people being classified as Maori would continue to grow, since anyone with even a smidgeon of Maori blood could, for official purposes, be counted as Maori.
In 2000, Simon Chapple, a senior researcher with the Department of Labour, used 1996 census data to examine the impact of these new definitions. He found that instead of the 273,693 New Zealanders who indicated they were Maori-only being recognised as Maori for statistical purposes, the new policy of adding everyone who included Maori as one of their ethnic groups into the final count, boosted the official tally to 580,374.
In other words, that change in methodology effectively doubled the “official” number of Maori. Simon Chapple recommended to the Government that the Maori ethnic group should be restricted to those who identify as Maori-only in the Census, with everyone else allocated to their other major ethnic group. But his suggestion was ignored. As a result, so-called Maori disadvantage is overstated.
In addition, a fact that Mr Davis and others like to conveniently forget, is that while people who claim Maori ancestry might appear to be over represented in our worst social statistics, the causes are well documented and include long-term welfare dependency, solo parenthood, child abuse, and educational failure. Skin-colour does not predetermine one’s future.
TVNZ denied the accusations of racism being made against it. The Canadian firm Vox Pop Labs, which helped to design KiwiMeter – along with input from Auckland and Victoria University political scientists – refuted the racist allegations as “categorically false”.
But Mr Davis, no doubt with his own self-interest in mind, remained adamant: “I think it’s offensive, I think it’s racist, and I think it should be pulled.”
While Labour leader Andrew Little also condemned the question, the Prime Minister defended it, saying it was a legitimate question to ask. “There was nothing wrong with asking a question, to get a sense of what people’s views are. People ask questions all the time about potentially controversial things, we live in an open society and people are free to ask a question.”
John Key is right. In this country – at least at the present time – our rights to free speech are protected by law and guaranteed under Clause 14 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act:
"Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and opinions of any kind and in any form”.
However, the right to say whatever we like is tempered by the Human Rights Act, which makes it an offence to express opinions that could be deemed to be ‘threatening, abusive, or insulting’ on the grounds of ‘colour, race, or ethnic or national origins’.
While the Human Rights Commission indicated they were looking into complaints of racism against TVNZ, their website explains, that our right to the “freedom of expression” means that people can make highly controversial or unpopular remarks, and while they may be regarded as offensive, unless they are likely to cause or exacerbate serious ethnic tension or unrest, no action will be taken:
"Only where there is the potential for significant detriment to society can the right to freedom of expression be limited”.
The right to offend is at the heart of robust debate about controversial matters. As British comedian Rowan Atkinson explained;
"The freedom to criticise or ridicule ideas – even if they are sincerely held beliefs – is a fundamental freedom of society. In my view the right to offend is far more important than any right not to be offended.
The right to ridicule is far more important to society than any right not to be ridiculed because one in my view represents openness – and the other represents oppression.”
David Round, a law lecturer at Canterbury University and this week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator – with a speech he delivered at the University’s commemoration of the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta – is no stranger to free speech and controversy.
He remains undaunted, upsetting many sensitivities when he used his address to denounce the “deplorable shortsightedness and stupidity on the part of our political and intellectual class”, who claim the Treaty of Waitangi is a “Maori Magna Carta”:
“Now ~ in our own day, and in our own country, there is a mythologizing and a flagrant misinterpretation, as notable and as bizarre as any seventeenth century deification of Magna Carta, of a certain document.
That document is of course the Treaty of Waitangi, sometimes referred to as ‘the Maori Magna Carta’.
This brief general memorandum of understanding recorded ~ not just in the English translation but in the Maori original ~ an agreement that the Queen should be sovereign over New Zealand and that Maori should be her subjects, with the rights and privileges of British subjects ~ a position of equality before the law.
By some mysterious alchemy the document has come to be widely understood to mean the exact opposite ~ to establish some as yet undefined ‘Maori sovereignty’ or at the least a ‘partnership’ between the Crown and Maori, or between part-Maori New Zealanders and those not of Maori descent.
This process is at least as remarkable as anything that happened in the seventeenth century. It is complete nonsense to describe the current misinterpretation of the Treaty as anything remotely like Magna Carta.”
Feigning offence is a tactic commonly used by those who want to close down a debate. By using this strategy and playing the race card, Kelvin Davis was able to divert attention away from the real issue of Maori privilege onto the question of whether or not KiwiMeter – and TVNZ – is racist.
Maori sovereignty activists are increasingly targeting the media in an attempt to prevent them from publishing anything that doesn’t suit their separatist agenda.
It is going on right now, with some of the newspapers around the country that are currently running the NZCPR’s public information advertisement calling for submissions on National’s plan for the race-based control of fresh water, being targeted and accused of racism – including by the taxpayer funded Maori TV.
By using bully-boy tactics, they no doubt hope to intimidate newspapers and discourage them from running such ads in the future.
And with the Human Rights Commission maintaining a register of media that publish material they deem to be unfavourable to Maori, it is clear that our fundamental right to the freedom of speech is under serious threat.
If, as a society, we value free speech, we must not allow ourselves to be intimidated into silence. For silence is interpreted as approval. In the present debate over fresh water, the government will think that those who are not speaking out condone tribal control – when that is the very thing that most will oppose.
Speaking up is vital in a democracy. Your single voice is critical. Together many voices can move a nation.
If you haven’t put in a submission opposing all race-based proposals for fresh water reform, this is our last reminder. People power is the only way to stop this – a simple email stating your position and sent to email@example.com is all that is needed. And why not send your thoughts on to all National MPs (their addresses are here), as they are the only ones who can stop this.
Prince’s death was unexpected, shrouded in mystery and full of strange facts. In short, it was a typical Hollywood death. What happened and why?
Prince was the exact opposite of most pop stars of today: He was immensely talented, completely original, fully involved in artistic creation and extremely outspoken – especially against the music industry. More than being in a class of his own, he was in a world of his own, floating in a giant purple bubble while masterfully playing his guitar.
Prince was not merely a singer – he was songwriter, a multi-instrumentalist, a record producer, and an actor. He was keenly aware of the workings on the music industry and often fought bitter battles to preserve the integrity of his work, his image, and his legacy.
While his enigmatic and eccentric persona never ceased to amaze his fans, the discovery of his lifeless body inside an elevator left the world with one final enigma: What happened? Before we look at this death, let’s look at his career.
Prince spent his entire career battling “record label tyranny” which lead to some memorable outbursts. In 1993, when a deal with Warner Brothers went south and left him without control of his work and without the advances he was promised, he orchestrated a rebellion that only Prince could think of. In a perplexing (and often ridiculed) move, Prince replaced name with an unpronounceable symbol. People then had to refer to him as “The artist formerly known as Prince”.
The Love Symbol on the cover his 1993 album. Although Prince never fully explained the meaning of this symbol (other that it “came to him during meditation”), one can easily discern an amalgamation of the “male” and “female” symbols crossed by a trumpet-like instrument. It might be a visual representation of the his androgynous musical persona.
Although this move was widely misunderstood by the public (and media), Prince clearly explained the rationale behind it.
"The first step I have taken toward the ultimate goal of emancipation from the chains that bind me to Warner Bros. was to change my name from Prince to the Love Symbol.
Prince is the name that my mother gave me at birth. Warner Bros. took the name, trademarked it, and used it as the main marketing tool to promote all of the music that I wrote. The company owns the name Prince and all related music marketed under Prince. I became merely a pawn used to produce more money for Warner Bros…
I was born Prince and did not want to adopt another conventional name. The only acceptable replacement for my name, and my identity, was the Love Symbol, a symbol with no pronunciation, that is a representation of me and what my music is about. This symbol is present in my work over the years; it is a concept that has evolved from my frustration; it is who I am. It is my name."
– Michael Heatley, Where Were You… When the Music Played? 120 Unforgettable Moments in Music History
During his legal battle with Warner Brothers, Prince appeared in public with the word “SLAVE” scribbled on his cheek.
Prince, with the word “Slave” written across his face at New York’s Rockefeller Plaza on July 9, 1996.
Prince also enjoyed speaking about unpopular issues such as chemtrails, religion and morality. Here’s a 2009 interview where he speaks his mind.
Several years later, Prince was still going at it. In 2015, he compared artists to “indentured servants with little control over how their music is used”. In a rare interaction with media, Prince stated:
"Record contracts are just like — I’m gonna say the word – slavery. I would tell any young artist… don’t sign.”
Strange Circumstances Around His Death
As it is the case for most unexpected celebrity deaths, there is a lot information, misinformation, rumors, gossip and conflicting reports floating around. Here’s a quick sum up of his last days. At the time of writing this article, the cause of his death is unknown.
"On April 7, 2016, Prince postponed two performances from his Piano & A Microphone Tour, at the Fox Theatre in Atlanta; the venue released a statement saying he was “battling the flu”.
He rescheduled the show for April 14, even though he still was not feeling well. While flying back to Minneapolis early the next morning, his private jet made an emergency landing at Quad City International Airport in Moline, Illinois, so that he could seek medical treatment.
Representatives stated that he suffered from “bad dehydration” and had been fighting influenza for several weeks. Prince was seen in public the following evening, when he shopped at the Electric Fetus in Minneapolis on Record Store Day, and made a brief appearance at a dance party at his Paisley Park recording studio complex in Chanhassen, Minnesota, stating that he was feeling fine.
He attended a performance by singer Lizz Wright at the Dakota Jazz Club on April 19, 2016.
On April 21, 2016, Prince was found unresponsive in an elevator at Paisley Park, which also served as his Minnesota home.
A 9-1-1 call was placed at 9:43 a.m; he did not recover with CPR by emergency responders and was pronounced dead at 10:07 a.m. He was 57 years old."
Although reportedly “combating the flu”, Prince was active and healthy enough to attend concerts and perform a couple of shows. Things took a mysterious turn on April 15th, when his private jet made an emergency landing in Moline, Illinois – even if he was at about 40 minutes from his final destination.
According to some sources, Prince was treated for an overdose.
"Multiple sources in Moline tell us, Prince was rushed to a hospital and doctors gave him a “save shot” … typically administered to counteract the effects of an opiate.
Our sources further say doctors advised Prince to stay in the hospital for 24 hours. His people demanded a private room, and when they were told that wasn’t possible … Prince and co. decided to bail. The singer was released 3 hours after arriving and flew home.
We’re told when Prince left he “was not doing well.”
We know authorities in Minnesota are trying to get the hospital records from Moline to help determine cause of death.
We have made more than a dozen attempts to reach Prince’s reps for comment, but they went radio silent."
– TMZ, Treated For a Drug Overdose Days Before Death
Strangely enough, every time there’s a strange celebrity death, the word “overdose” is thrown around almost immediately.
The next day, Prince appeared at a concert and somewhat prophetically said:
"Wait a few days before you waste any prayers.”
The same day, a popular gossip website cryptically announced that a famous African-American celebrity had AIDS.
"MediaTakeOut.com just received word that a VERY popular African-American celebrity – who has recently been in the news – now has what is being described as AIDS. Obviously since we are not able to 100% confirm the story – we’re going to leave it as a Blind Item. We want to make it clear we are NOT talking about Magic Johnson.
This report REALLY hurt our heart.
According to a person EXTREMELY CLOSE to the situation, the celebrity, who is known for having a very EXTREME sexual past reportedly contracted the illness sometime in the 1990s. He kept the illness quiet but began taking his medication RELIGIOUSLY up until about two years ago. Here’s what we’re told by a VERY trusted entertainment insider:
[The celebrity] believed that he was cured, and he had some crazy [religious]people who told him that God cured him. So he stopped taking his medication and the sickness came back. Now doctors say he’s dying, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.”
We’re told that the celebrity is expected to get sicker and sicker, and eventually pass. It can happen as soon as the summer."
Mediatakeout.com, Insider Claims That A VERY POPULAR African-American Celebrity . . . Is Stricken With AIDS . . . Not HIV
A few days later, Prince was found inside an elevator in his studio.
Strange fact: One of Prince’s most famous songs is Let’s Go Crazy. Not unlike much of his writing, the lyrics of this song can be traced back to his Christian beliefs, where he uses the word the “de-elevator” to refer to the devil. He sings:
"And if de-elevator tries to bring you down
Go crazy – punch a higher floor"
"And when we do (When we do)
What’s it all for (What’s it all for)
You better live now
Before the grim reaper come knocking on your door
Tell me, are we gonna let de-elevator bring us down?
Oh, no let’s go!"
In a morbidly symbolic setting, Prince’s body was found inside an elevator. Did the “de-elevator” finally bring him down?
A great deal of facts need to be checked and questions need to be answered. One thing is for sure: When things are shady, truth often remains in the shade.
Mainstream Media Achieve Historic Milestone + Trust This: New Zealanders Don't Trust MPs, Bloggers, The Media April 24 2016 | From: Geopolitics / AP / RadioNewZealand The mainstream media has achieved a new historic milestone lately: Only 6% Americans trust them, which means 94% are now asking relevant questions that are pushing them away from the lies and deceptions that mainstream media are all about.
Trust in the news media is being eroded by perceptions of inaccuracy and bias, fueled in part by Americans’ skepticism about what they read on social media. Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public’s view of other institutions. In this presidential campaign year, Democrats were more likely to trust the news media than Republicans or independents.
But trust today also goes beyond the traditional journalistic principles of accuracy, balance and fairness.
Faced with ever-increasing sources of information, Americans also are more likely to rely on news that is up-to-date, concise and cites expert sources or documents, according to a study by the Media Insight Project, a partnership of The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the American Press Institute.
They want to be able to navigate the news app or website easily and quickly, without having to wade through intrusive or annoying ads.
“The skill set that journalists have to master is bigger,” said Tom Rosenstiel, executive director of the American Press Institute. That’s because the expectations of news consumers have increased.
The poll shows that accuracy clearly is the most important component of trust.
Nearly 90 percent of Americans say it’s extremely or very important that the media get their facts correct, according to the study. About 4 in 10 say they can remember a specific incident that eroded their confidence in the media, most often one that dealt with accuracy or a perception that it was one-sided.
The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court’s 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama’s health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.
Download the survey results and analysis from here.
The establishment is definitely feeling the crunch as of late. But, they are still in control of the system, and they are still rigging it.
A New York City elections official has been suspended without pay after a bureaucratic error allegedly resulted in the removal of over 100,000 Brooklyn voters’ names from the city rolls during the state’s presidential primary, according to a report.
Sources told the Daily News that Borough Office Chief Clerk Diane Haslett-Rudianoshe skipped one of the steps meant to stop the system from purging eligible voters.
The voting books need to be purged from time to time to eliminate people who pass away, move to new locations or become ineligible for other reasons. This eventually resulted in voters being improperly removed.
She was suspended “without pay, effective immediately, pending an internal investigation into the administration of the voter rolls in the Borough of Brooklyn,” the city’s Board of Elections (BOE) reportedly said in a statement.
This disenfranchisement of 100,000 voters was claimed to have tip the balance towards Clinton’s favor.
So, not only that both parties are owned and controlled by the same puppet masters, the process of selecting party candidates itself is also a game of survival of the fittest.
And as the masses are fully entertained by this periodic game of musical chairs, the Western economy is left burning without the mainstream media telling like it is.
They’re not only in utter denial, but they are wary more of their own irrelevance as the internet-based alternative media is now virtually certified as the new mainstream media.
Humanity has definitely achieved something significant right here. And we can still achieve more if we continue to work together in spite of our cultural differences.
Trust This: New Zealanders Don't Trust MPs, Bloggers, The Media
New Zealanders are trusting politicians less and less, according to a new survey. Just 8 percent of people questioned said they trusted MPs, while government ministers edged up towards 9 percent.
The survey, carried out by Colmar Brunton for Victoria University's Institute for Governance and Policy Studies, asked 1000 people across the country about their confidence in government ministers, academics, judges, churches and the media, among others.
Medical practitioners scored highest with 56 percent trusting them "lots" or "completely", followed by police (53 percent). Judges and courts had a 34 percent rating.
But there was little faith in politicians, nor in media, with print and broadcast media at 9 percent, and last on the list, bloggers, trusted by 5 percent in the survey.
Not only do people have little trust in their elected officials, they're trusting them less.
The survey showed trust in MPs and government ministers fell over the last three years more than any other group, with 58 percent saying they trust them less.
ACT party leader David Seymour said the survey was concerning, though not surprising.
“"It was already starting from a low base, so that is very disappointing."
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters said once politicians get into parliament, they forgot the people who elected them.
“Many MPs are living evidence that New Zealanders can take a joke. You've seen their behaviour - their egregious, self-serving behaviour [and] the fact they get outside their electorate and forget their people."
Green Party co-leader James Shaw said politicians tended to come across as a "self-interested political class" who had "nothing better to do than throw insults at each other."
In order to fix that image, the processes in Parliament needed to change.
“The way that we examine bills breaks the process down in such a way that MPs, they show up, they make a five-minute speech and they go away again. That is clearly not a real debate.
There are some things that the Speaker can do to lift standards of behaviour [and] I think we should have a code of ethics for politicians and political operators that is way more rigorous than the one we currently have."
Institute for Governance and Policy Studies director, Professor Michael Macaulay, said the rankings offered a snapshot of the current political climate, which was "typified by low voter turn out and a public largely disengaged with politics."
The survey revealed numbers but did not go into the reasons for people's lack of confidence, and he wanted it to be used as a basis for further research.
Half Of All Published 'Scientific' Literature Is Completely Fabricated Or False April 18 2016 | From: NaturalNews For years, alternative news sources such as Natural News have been warning the public about industry-generated scientific research which incorporates falsified data to produce desired results.
These charges have now been corroborated by Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the world's best known medical journal, The Lancet. Dr. Horton has publicly stated that as much as half of the scientific literature being published is unreliable and often completely false.
From a commentary by Dr. Horton published in The Lancet:
"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."
Those are very strong words, particularly since they came directly from the horse's mouth. For someone in Dr. Horton's position to make such statements is indeed compelling evidence that (in his words): "Something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations."
"Peer-Reviewed" Studies no Longer Reliable
According to Dr. Horton, scientists often "sculpt data" to fit a theory or "retrofit hypotheses" to fit the data – even "peer-reviewed" studies published in journals such as The Lancet are no longer reliable.
"It's common for many to dismiss a lot of great work by experts and researchers at various institutions around the globe which isn't "peer-reviewed" and doesn't appear in a "credible" medical journal, but as we can see, "peer-reviewed" doesn't really mean much anymore. "Credible" medical journals continue to lose their tenability in the eyes of experts and employees of the journals themselves, like Dr. Horton."
Biased Industry-Sponsored Research
Dr. Horton is not the only one among his peers who has been compelled to speak out. Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine, has written extensively about corrupt methodology and the influence of industry on scientific research:
"Clinical trials are also biased through designs for research that are chosen to yield favorable results for sponsors. ... In short, it is often possible to make clinical trials come out pretty much any way you want, which is why it's so important that investigators be truly disinterested in the outcome of their work."
There are a number of dirty tricks that are routinely used by industry-sponsored researchers. For instance, by not publishing the results of unfavorable studies, the makers of useless or dangerous drugs often manage to market their products to an unsuspecting public.
In the case of one antidepressant drug – paroxetine – which resulted in a record $3 billion lawsuit against GlaxoSmithKline, a dangerous and ineffective medication was prescribed to millions of children before it was revealed to cause an elevated suicide risk.
When legal proceedings uncovered the truth, it was found that GlaxoSmithKline had hidden not only the fact that their product was only slightly more effective than a placebo, but also that it caused suicidal behavior.
Is There a Solution?
It is now clear that publication of spurious or falsified research has become endemic within the research publication community.
Dr. Horton offers some suggestions for restoring integrity to scientific research methodology:
"Part of the problem is that no-one is incentivised to be right. ... Instead of changing incentives, perhaps one could remove incentives altogether. Or insist on replicability statements in grant applications and research papers. Or emphasise collaboration, not competition. Or insist on preregistration of protocols. Or reward better pre and post publication peer review. Or improve research training and mentorship."
The bad news, according to Dr. Horton, is that even though "science is beginning to take some of its worst failings very seriously... nobody is ready to take the first step to clean up the system."
Finger In Every Pie: How CIA Produces Our ‘News’ And Entertainment April 14 2016 | From: 21stCenturyWire / Sputnik In so many respects, ‘our’ media is not our own. In the past, 21WIRE has detailed various aspects of Operation Mockingbird and other CIA-related media pursuits, as well as many other bogus news stories which appear on a regular basis.
Claire Danes as Carrie Mathison in Homeland
Previously, we showed how the Hollywood hit ZeroDarkThirty was a completely fabricated piece of fiction which was passed on to the public as a “true story”. Also, the popular TV series, Homeland, is one of the most obvious propaganda productions in recent years, designed to reinforce many flawed assumptions and false believes about the world outside of the United States.
Did you know that the CIA has actually produced a number of high-profile ‘history’ TV programs that appear on US and world media channels?
Yes, it’s true…
Finger in Every Pie: How CIA Became Involved in Entertainment Business
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has a finger in every pie including… the entertainment business: it turns out that the CIA has played a role in producing at least 22 entertainment projects; investigative journalist Adam Johnson argues that by doing this the US intelligence agency puts American media workers at risk.
Related: Maybe She’s Born With It? CIA Funds DNA-Collecting Skincare Line
It seems that the US Central Intelligence Agency follows the theory that says that there are no little or insignificant things. The intelligence agency has long been keeping an eye on the Western entertainment industry and has even had a role in producing popular fiction movies and documentaries.
In his article for Fair.org media watchdog investigative journalist Adam Johnson argues that this type of collaboration may cast a shadow over the image of US media workers and even put them at risk.
"For years, artists from across the entertainment industry - actors, authors, directors, producers, screenwriters, and others - have been in touch with the CIA to gain a better understanding of our intelligence mission," the CIA public website reads.
According to the website, the CIA's goal in engaging with the industry is to ensure "an accurate portrayal of the men and women of the CIA, and the skill, innovation, daring, and commitment to public service that defines them."
Johnson cites the recent article by Jason Leopold of VICE News who shed some light on how deep the CIA's Office of Public Affairs (OPA) has been involved in US popular entertainment projects.
"Vice's Jason Leopold has uncovered documents showing the CIA had a role in producing up to 22 entertainment 'projects,' including History Channel documentary Air America: The CIA's Secret Airline, Bravo's Top Chef: Covert Cuisine, the USA Network series Covert Affairs and the BBC documentary The Secret War on Terror-along with two fictional feature films about the CIA that both came out in 2012," Johnson narrates.
He points out that the CIA has a long history of "helping" to produce films and documentaries.
"The Agency, for example, secretly bought the rights to Animal Farm after Orwell's death in 1950 and produced an animated adaptation centered on demonizing the Soviet Union rather than capturing Orwell's broader critiques of power," the investigative journalist underscores.
And, yes, the CIA and other intelligence agencies are also recruiting prominent media figures.
In September 2015 the conservative group Judicial Watch released a 2012 CIA inspector general's audit covering the CIA's OPA cooperation with the entertainment industry.
The report specifically criticizes the CIA's OPA for excessive engaging with the media figures, in particular for inviting entertainment industry workers to secret briefings and other events.
"There was an instance in which the CIA allowed an entertainment industry representative to attend a CIA event in which information classified at the SECRET level was discussed," the document reads.
Johnson emphasizes that it is no secret that Hollywood players took part in various covert operations. He refers to the fact that legendary film producer Arnon Milchan worked for years for Israeli intelligence dealing arms and obtaining sensitive technical information for defense programs.
Sydeny Pollack in 'Eyes Wide Shut'
Remarkably, in his interview with BBC in 2013 Milchan admitted that Academy Award-winning director Sydney Pollack had also been involved in covert intelligence operations.
"In such revelations, an important point is often overlooked: The CIA assisting or posing as filmmakers, journalists and other creative roles-a practice the Agency reserves the right to partake in to this day-puts actual filmmakers, journalists and other creators at risk overseas," Johnson emphasizes.
According to the investigative journalist, it is dangerous to "blur" the lines between covert intelligence and legitimate media activities, because it puts the media workers at risk of being considered CIA associates.
"The spectacle of Hollywood teaming up with US intelligence agencies to make propaganda - especially given the dodgy historical context - no doubt stokes the fears of countries already hostile to Americans within their borders," he explains.
"Every time this type of behavior is normalized, or shrugged off, or made sexy, real journalists and real filmmakers overseas are put further at risk," Johnson concludes.
Related: The American Media Is A CIA Front - Paul Craig Roberts
I reported honestly the facts of the US coup that overthrew the elected Ukrainian government in 2014 (see my columns in February and March 2014). However, the US print and TV media, led by the New York Times, lied through their teeth.
Indeed, the “mainstream” US media functioned as agent and propagandist for the Washington neoconservatives who destroyed Ukrainian democracy and imposed massive suffering and death on Ukrainians.
There is no crime that the American presstitutes will not commit and no lie that they will not tell.
Yesterday (April 11, 2016) Robert Parry held the sordid presstitutes accountable:
Why You Should Never Watch RT - Ever April 10 2016 | From: RussiaInsider Plurality of views must be prevented in order to stop the war against war.
As RT UK launched [and over time since], attacks on the channel in the British media stepped up…
The latest is a piece by Mr. Cyril Waugh-Monger, a very important newspaper columnist for the NeoCon Daily, a patron of the Senator Joe McCarthy Appreciation Society and author of 'Why the Iraq War was a Brilliant Idea' and 'The Humanitarian Case for Bombing Syria.'
Dear socially inferior person reading this article. My name is Cyril Waugh-Monger (I'm called 'Mr Terribly Pompous Neo-Con' by my friends) and I’m here to tell you why on no account should you watch RT and why you should be making complaints to Ofcom about this dreadful channel so that in the interests of 'free speech' and 'democracy' we can get it off air.
1. RT Doesn’t Peddle Russophobia
Outrageously, RT doesn’t compare Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler. It doesn‘t join in with the demonization of Russia and its leader.
How can we have a channel which is watched by people in Britain, which doesn’t do that? We neocons say that demonization of Russia and its leader is compulsory. How dare RT not do as we say!
2. RT is Sometimes Rude to Bankers
There’s a man on RT called Max Keiser and he is often very rude to bankers. Why, he has even called for them to face the death penalty. Such disrespect to our financial elites is shocking and should not be allowed in a free society.
Former CEO of HSX Holdings/Hollywood Stock Exchange and host of RT''s 'Keiser Report' Max Keiser
3. Its Coverage of the MH17 Crash
Shockingly, RT commentators didn’t rush to blame Vladimir Putin for the air disaster within seconds of the news breaking. Some even said that we should wait for the forensic evidence before any statements apportioning guilt were made.
Others said that we couldn’t rule out that the plane was downed by an another aircraft. This failure to come and say loud and clear “Putin personally shot down the plane with a missile he made and fired with his own hands” within minutes of the crash is clear evidence of RT’s bias and why it must be taken off the air.
4. RT’s ‘Pundits’ Include People Who Aren’t Neocons and ‘LiberalInterventionists’
This is truly scandalous: RT gives airtime to people who don’t support the West’s policy of endless war and who opposed airstrikes on Syria last year. Why, it’s even broadcast interviews with the convener of the Stop the War coalition – and has a regular weekly show fronted by George Galloway!
British politician, broadcaster, and writer George Galloway often speaks out against western foreign policy
This is unconscionable. Only people who support Western foreign policy should be allowed to express their views on international affairs on television, not 'cranks' and 'fanatics' who oppose attacking a sovereign state in the Middle East on deceitful grounds every couple of years.
Why, if RT had been around in 2003, it would no doubt have given airtime to anti-war ‘conspiracy theorists’ who would have told viewers that Iraq had no WMDs – and claimed, fantastically – that Bush and Blair were making it all up.
5. RT Provides Airtime to Genuine Socialists and Genuine Conservatives
This is really terrible: RT interviews people who oppose neo-liberalism and globalization, from both the left and the right. It’s given the microphone to socialists, communists, greens, and 'extremists' on the right, like Ron Paul.
These people should not be allowed to express their views on television; they are 'cranks' and should be totally marginalized. Only those who support the hegemonic consensus should be allowed on TV. It's very important that in order to protect free speech and democracy, alternative opinions are not heard.
6. RT Pundits Have ‘Extremist’ Links
I monitor the people who appear on RT very, very closely and I can tell you that there was once a case of an RT interviewee who had a link on his website to another website which had a link to another website which had a link to another website – which denied the Holocaust and said that little green men from Mars were ruling the US.
After considerable research I also found that another RT pundit once attended a conference where a fellow invitee had once sat at a restaurant table, a few days after another person who had actually praised Adolf Hitler, Chairman Mao, and Josef Stalin in a magazine article published in North Korea in 1962.
7. RT is Anti-Semitic
Ok, I’ve got no evidence of this, but I’ll bung it in anyway as it sounds good.
8. RT has Broadcast Documentaries on the Wars in Yugoslavia Which Don’t Blame the Serbs for Everything
This is totally unacceptable.
9. RT Has Had ‘Experts’ on its Programs Who Have Made Some Very Strong Criticisms of Israel
This too is totally unacceptable.
10. RT Pundits Have Often Ridiculed Leading American Policy Makers
For instance, when the US Secretary of State John Kerry said that “you just don't in the 21st century” invade another country on “completely trumped up pretext,” some people on RT had the audacity to say “What about Iraq?”
This lack of respect towards a leading American politician is appalling, and in a free society ought not be allowed. The correct procedure whenever a leading US political figure speaks is to tug one’s forelock.
11. RT’s Coverage of the Conflict in Syria
In 2011-13, we had so-called ‘experts’ on Syria telling us on RT that some of the freedom-fighting pro-democracy rebels were actually fanatical terrorists who were guilty of committing atrocities.
This was obviously a clear lie. Islamist terrorists like ISIS have only been active in Syria since 2014 and of course it’s all the fault of President Assad and Russia.
12. RT Interviews Lots of People Whose Views I Do Not Share
It ought not to be allowed! Aren’t we supposed to live in a democracy?
13. The Most Important Reason: RT is a Threat
More and more people are watching it – which is why me and my little group of neocons and ‘liberal interventionists’ are so worried and stepping up our attacks on the station and denigrating those people who appear on it.
The next big war is going to be much harder for us to ‘sell’ to the plebs, because we are no longer in control of the narrative as we were in 2003, before the Iraq war. Oh, what happy days those were!
Don’t watch RT because we really don’t want you to 'question more.' We want you to question less. It's much easier for us that way.
CIA Agents To Troll Alternative Media Sites In Huge Propaganda Program April 4 2016 | From: HumansAreFree The CIA are expanding an existing program that influences mainstream media outlets to promote fake propaganda stories, by having agents troll internet forums, social media, and website comment sections – in an effort to disrupt alternative media sites.
In an expansion of Operation Mockingbird, the agency are now creating fake user accounts on various internet forums and social media channels, arguing politics with real users in an attempt to stifle and subvert genuine communications between users.
According to RT news, agents have up to “10 fake shill accounts” used to troll and create the illusion of having a genuine network of friends.
"They will defend current administration decisions with relentless irrational stubbornness that one can only be paid to do.”
Abby Martin, from RT’s “Breaking the Set,” reported on an up to date Operation Mockingbird with the sole purpose of misleading the public on-line.
In the congressional hearing from 1976 (below) listen to how many agents are in the media to write false stories.
According to the Congress report published in 1976:
By the year 1953 Operation Mockingbird dictated information in over 25 newspapers and wire agencies.
These organizations were run by people with well-known right-wing views such as William Paley (CBS), Henry Luce (Time and Life Magazine), Arthur Hays Sulzberger (New York Times), Alfred Friendly (managing editor of the Washington Post), Jerry O’Leary (Washington Star), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Barry Bingham, Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal), James Copley (Copley News Services) and Joseph Harrison (Christian Science Monitor).
Even Rolling Stone claimed that journalist Joseph Alsop was under the control of Operation Mockingbird in 1977.
His articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists alleged by Rolling Stone Magazine to have been willing to promote the views of the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), Charles Douglas Jackson (Time Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), William C. Baggs (The Miami News), Herb Gold (The Miami News) and Charles Bartlett (Chattanooga Times).
According to Nina Burleigh (A Very Private Woman), these journalists sometimes wrote articles that were commissioned by Frank Wisner, creator of the program.
The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work.
Devil Music: A History Of The Occult In Rock & Roll April 1 2015 | From: Medium
From The Beatles and the Stones to Led Zep, Alice Cooper and Black Sabbath, how the dark arts cast a spell on popular music.
On June 1, 1967 the most famous musicians in the world released a new long-playing record whose jacket depicted a gallery of unconventional personalities and one individual whose unconventionality was infamous.
The Beatles’ Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band was a widely anticipated album that confirmed the band’s status as the defining tastemakers of their time. It was the soundtrack to the blissful “Summer of Love,” it firmly established the primacy of psychedelic rock music, and it was hailed as a musical breakthrough that offered a mass audience a representation of the marijuana and LSD sensation in sound.
Today Sgt. Pepper is remembered as the classic album of the classic rock era, notable for its pioneering recording techniques and enduring Beatle songs (“With a Little Help From My Friends,” “Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds,” “A Day in the Life”), although the group’s earlier and later music has aged more successfully.
Even the album’s cover is considered a landmark in the field of record packaging from the years when music was actually presented on physical discs in physical sleeves and millions of fans studied the jacket photo and the puzzling assembly of figures it depicted.
Photographed by Michael Cooper, the Sgt. Pepper cover shot had taken place on March 30, 1967. The Beatles, innovating with every step, decided on a layout that broke with their habit of simply posing the quartet alone in a single portrait. Designer Peter Blake, a rising star in London’s Pop Art world, later recalled conferring with the Beatles and art gallery owner Robert Fraser on a different approach to the design:
“I think that that was the thing I would claim actually changed the direction of it: making a life-sized collage incorporating real people, photographs, and artwork.
I kind of directed it and asked the Beatles and Robert (and maybe other people, but I think it was mainly the six of us) to make a list of characters they would like to see in a kind of magical ideal film, and what came out of this exercise was six different sets of people.”
The result was a group shot of almost seventy people, with the four costumed Beatles as the only live bodies in the picture. Among the selections picked by the Beatles, Blake and Fraser were admired contemporaries Bob Dylan and writer Terry Southern; movie stars Fred Astaire, Laurel and Hardy, Tony Curtis, Marlon Brando and Marilyn Monroe; and a number of artistic and literary outlaws Edgar Allan Poe, William S. Burroughs, Aubrey Beardsley, Dylan Thomas, and Oscar Wilde. And in the top left corner of the collection, between the Indian yogi Sri Yukteswar Giri and the nineteen-thirties sex symbol Mae West, glared the shaven-headed visage of a man once known as “the Wickedest Man in the World.”
The original Aleister Crowley shot used for the cover of
Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club
His name was Aleister Crowley.
Most accounts name Paul McCartney as the Beatle who picked Crowley, although the foursome’s more controversial choices of Adolf Hitler, the Marquis de Sade, and Mahatma Gandhi were dropped from the collage.
What McCartney knew of Crowley was probably superficial; his subsequent life and work makes no reference to Crowley whatsoever, but in 1967 the Beatle was highly attuned to the prevailing vogues of young Britain and America and the burgeoning counterculture.
At the same time, Peter Blake’s specialty was in “found” pictures from decades past: the Pop sensibility of exhibiting rediscovered advertising and newspaper illustrations with a distancing layer of irony.
Together the musician and the designer were sensitive to the revival of Victoriana that characterized British graphics and style in the later sixties (seen, for example, in the uniforms of the Sgt. Pepper bandsmen and the circus poster that inspired the lyrics to the album’s “Being For the Benefit of Mr. Kite”), and Aleister Crowley, born in 1875, was part of that revival.
The Crowley photo used by Blake had been photographed by Hector Murchison in 1913 and, thanks to its promotion by the Beatles, became the most recognizable image of him.
Like three of the other cover subjects, the “decadent” artist Aubrey Beardsley, the proto-surrealist author Lewis Carroll, and the scandalous writer Oscar Wilde, Crowley’s reputation was gradually being rehabilitated for a more tolerant time. He was no longer an affront to Britannic majesty but a martyr to moral hypocrisy.
Born into a brewing fortune and raised in a fanatically religious household, Edward Alexander Crowley was, in some ways at least, a typical product of his class. He was wealthy enough to avoid regular employment from youth onwards; studied at Cambridge and travelled broadly (sometimes on perilous climbing expeditions in Britain, Europe, and Asia); wrote and self-published prose and poetry; adventured sexually with women and men; and freely partook of alcohol, stimulants, and opiates.
Had this been all there was he might have been remembered as just another fin-de-siècle libertine, but Crowley had another pursuit that was not merely the vice of a privileged dandy but an all-consuming passion. Such was his irreverence and appetite for transgression, obvious even as a child, that his mother labeled him as “the Great Beast,” taken from the apocalyptic Book of Revelation.
For the remainder of his life Crowley adopted and sought to live up to the designation, preaching and practicing his abiding tenet: “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of law.”
Aleister Crowley’s earthly exploits were a story of substantial literary gifts and metaphysical scholarship in service to an arrogant and abrasive personality. He could both impress with his brilliant mind and intimidate with his vicious head-games.
“I took an immediate dislike to him,” recounted the novelist Somerset Maugham of his meeting Crowley in Paris in the early 1900s, “but he interested and amused me. He was a great talker and he talked uncommonly well…
He was a liar and unbecomingly boastful, but the odd thing was that he had actually done some of the things he boasted of. Crowley told fantastic stories of his experiences, but it was hard to say whether he was telling the truth or merely pulling your leg.”
Maugham would go on to base the villainous title character of Oliver Haddo in his The Magician on Crowley.
Aleister Crowley’s The Book of the Law
Intelligent and cultured yet selfish and domineering, Crowley had joined the Order of the Golden Dawn mystical sect but fell afoul of its leadership and formed his own circle, the Order of the Silver Star; his “Great Operation” was the transcription of The Book of the Law, as dictated by the spirit Aiwass through his wife Rose in Cairo in 1904.
A succession of spouses, lovers, disciples and intimates passed through his life.
He exiled himself to America during World War I, formed a ragtag cult of believers at a Sicilian abbey in the early nineteen-twenties, and lost a much-publicized libel suit in 1933.
At his height he was a figure of international notoriety for the diabolic excesses of his lifestyle and his gleefully blasphemous writings and art (he even signed his name with an unmistakably phallic A), but his money and press appeal gradually ran out.
Crowley’s voluminous treatises on yoga, chess, poetry, Tantric sex, mountaineering and the lost arts of what he always called “magick” drew a steady audience of devotees, yet by the end of his life only a few remained committed.
He died in a boarding house near Hastings, England, in 1947, addicted to heroin and largely forgotten by the countrymen he had once so shocked. To one witness, his last words were, “Sometimes I hate myself.”
But it was Crowley’s “Do what thou wilt” that the youth of 1967, both the members of the Beatles and the group’s countless listeners across the globe, most appreciated. To them, Crowley was not a wicked man but one well ahead of his time, who anticipated the later generation’s rejection of outmoded pieties of duty and restraint.
What Crowley stood for, ultimately, was self-gratification: no mere aimless indulgences but the healthy and liberating pursuit of one’s deepest will and desires against the soulless and shallow expectations of authority.
Crowley’s elaborate credo of Thelema (Will) gave young people’s enjoyment of sex, drugs, and rock ’n’ roll a dimension beyond their immediate pleasures; from a Crowleyan perspective, such joys could be considered sacred.
“We suppress the individual in more and more ways,” ran Crowley’s 1938 introduction to The Book of the Law.
“We think in terms of the herd. War no longer kills soldiers, it kills all indiscriminately. Every new measure of the most democratic and autocratic governments is Communistic in essence. It is always restriction. We are all treated as imbecile children.”
These sentiments underlay the complaints voiced by the marchers and demonstrators of the sixties. Though Crowley is but a footnote in the Beatles’ legacy, it was inevitable that many of the buyers who scooped up Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band and gazed through expanded minds at its cover would investigate his biography and apply his teachings to their own circumstances.
If Aleister Crowley had incidentally also conducted animal sacrifice, vociferously denounced Christianity, and claimed to have called up demons out of the nether worlds, well, those too became part of his legend. That baleful face on the jacket of a milestone collection of popular music was to be the one which launched a million trips.
The Beatles’ nearest rivals in rock ’n’ roll were the Rolling Stones. It was the Stones who really seemed to symbolize the dangerous glamour of the genre and the time. They had no need to put Aleister Crowley on a record cover when they already seemed to live by his dicta.
From their earliest successes they had been cast as a dirty, brutish counterpoint to the happy and lovable Beatles; their music was more aggressive and more obviously derived from the snarling grit of American blues.
The month of Sgt. Pepper’s release, three Stones (Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, and Brian Jones) were in London courtrooms on drugs charges, and by the end of 1967 their psychedelic equivalent of the Beatle album had been released, its title a sneering parody of the royal preface on British passports: Their Satanic Majesties Request. It was only a pun, but it was the first time the Prince of Darkness had been named on a major pop record.
The Stones’ LP Their Satanic Majesties Request (1967) and the single “Sympathy For The Devil” (1969)
Over the next couple of years the Rolling Stones became more associated than any other entertainers with a personal depravity that surpassed that of just hard-partying rock stars. There had been mavericks, bad boys and tough guys in show business before, but the Stones took those prototypes to a deeper level of outrage.
Much of this, certainly, was projected on them by critics and fans who wanted to ascribe to the group more significance than the members themselves wished. And some of their aura really came from their friends and hangers-on, who were already basking in the Stones’ outlaw status and adding their own personal predilections into the mix.
“There were a lot of Pre-Raphaelites running around in velvet with scarves tied to their knees… looking for the Holy Grail, the Lost Court of King Arthur, UFOs and ley lines,” recalled Keith Richards in his 2010 memoir, Life. Jaded aristocrats, bored Euro-trash, and striving Americans, the guitarist recalled, all showed off “the bullshit credentials of the periodùthe patter of mysticism, the lofty talk of alchemy and the secret arts, all basically employed in the service of leg-over.”
It was the famous Rolling Stones, not their lesser-known supplicants, who took the heat for this.
That said, the musicians were infected with the intellectual fashions of the counterculture, and suffused as they were in drug experimentation, they made willing ventures into some of the growing body of Occult literature then in currency: everything from the Taoist Secret of the Golden Flower (read by Mick Jagger while making Their Satanic Majesties Request) and collections of Celtic mythology, to the American Charles Fort’s compendium of reported natural aberrations
The Book of the Damned (1919) and Louis Pauwels’ conspiracy-tinged The Morning of the Magicians (1960). All such work played to the prejudices of the young, the disaffected, the hip, and the stoned.
They confirmed their views that the establishment was lying, middle-class morality was a sham, reality was subjective, and the world could be a magical place if you only knew where and how to look.
The Rolling Stones at an outdoor concert in Paris, 1967 | photo by Keystone-France/Gamma-Keystone
The Rolling Stones’ next album, Beggars’ Banquet, took the implications of Satanic Majesties even further, with its hypnotic and tribal single, “Sympathy For the Devil.” This longtime favorite, which remains a Stones anthem to this day, originated with Mick Jagger’s reading of Russian novelist Mikhail Bulgakov’s allegorical The Master and Margarita.
The literate and sensitive Jagger was given the book (written in 1939 but not published until the mid-sixties) by his then-girlfriend Marianne Faithfull.
“He devoured it in one night and spit out ‘Sympathy For the Devil,’”
Faithfull remembered in her own autobiography of 1994. “The book’s central character is Satan, but it has nothing to do with demonism or black magic… "
Mick wrote a three-minute song synthesized out of this very complex book.” Now considered one of the great Russian novels, The Master and Margarita is a wild satire of life in the darkest days of the Stalinist USSR, with echoes of the Faust legend and appearances by Pontius Pilate and St. Matthew.
With a working title of “The Devil is My Name,” “Sympathy For the Devil” was recorded by the Rolling Stones in the spring of 1968 (the sessions were filmed by Jean-Luc Goddard and incorporated into his eponymous film) and released in December.
Jagger sang his classic first-person narrative of Satan’s presence at crucial points in history including the crucifixion of Christ, the Russian Revolution, the Nazi Blitzkrieg and even the assassinations of John F. and Robert F. Kennedy, with the lyrics retouched to reflect the latter’s death on June 5.
It was a compelling song that, in a violent and tumultuous year, further stirred up an already fraught cultural mood. Yet, as Marianne Faithfull pointed out, Jagger’s devilish act was completely affected.
“The only reason that the Stones were not destroyed by the ideas they toyed with is that they never took them as seriously as their fans,” she recalled.
“Mick never, for one moment, believed he was Lucifer.” No, but plenty of others were far more credulous.
The Rolling Stones’ link to the Occult did not end with “Sympathy For the Devil.” Keith Richards’ partner, Anita Pallenberg, was a wickedly beautiful German model who, herself caught up in the vortex of drugs and debauchery in the band’s orbit, was rumored to be a practitioner of the dark arts. Faithfull again: “Anita eventually took the goddess business one step further into witchcraft.
There were moments, especially after Brian [Jones, original Stone] died, where she went a little mad.” It didn’t help that she was cast with Jagger in the film Performance, in which a London gangster (played by James Fox) changes identities with a decadent rock star (Jagger, naturally).
Keith Richards considered the director, Donald Cammell, “a twister and a manipulator whose only real love in life was fucking other people up,” but Pallenberg appeared to enjoy her nude scenes with Jagger and another member of their threesome, Michelle Breton.
It made for a twisted atmosphere of jealousy and orgiastic dissipation which, whether Pallenberg really was or thought of herself as a sorceress, definitely made the rumors plausible.
Still the Occult links deepened. The American underground filmmaker Kenneth Anger was in London and, via his connections with gallery owner and socialite Robert Fraser, approached the Rolling Stones to play in his latest project, Lucifer Rising. Anger was older than the Stones and their followers (he was born in 1927), a one-time Hollywood child actor and author of the vitriolic tell-all Hollywood Babylon, and not least of all a devout student of Aleister Crowley.
His low-budget shorts Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome, Scorpio Rising and Fireworks were unintelligible cinematic collages of Occult motifs, sadomasochism, pop appropriations, and gay male erotica. Anger described himself as a warlock and was deadly serious about his work; he corralled Mick Jagger into doing an abstract synthesizer soundtrack for one of his efforts, Invocation of My Demon Brother.
He also needed money and the attention the presence of the world-famous rock group would lend to Lucifer Rising.
“The only reason that the Stones were not destroyed by the ideas they toyed with is that they never took them as seriously as their fans,” she recalled.
“Mick never, for one moment, believed he was Lucifer.” No, but plenty of others were far more credulous.
“All the roles were to be carefully cast,” Anger said later, “with Mick being Lucifer and Keith as Beelzebub… The Occult unit within the Stones was Keith and Anita, and Brian. You see, Brian was a witch, too. I’m convinced. He showed me his witch’s tit. He said, ‘In another time they would have burned me.’ He was very happy about that.”
But the Rolling Stones, as they did with so many, were only toying with Anger as long as he tickled their druggy fancy. Their real occupation was recording and performing their own music, and they saw earnest outsiders like Anger as disposable nuisances, trying to ride on their coattails and absorb some of their marketability. “Kenneth Anger they thought laughable,” wrote Marianne Faithfull. “Mick and Keith were utterly contemptuous of his satanic hocus-pocus.”
The quintet’s reputation grew yet blacker in 1969, when the deaths of two men were popularly attributed to them. Brian Jones was discovered drowned in his Sussex swimming pool on July 26th.
Though he had founded the Rolling Stones, and chosen their name from a Muddy Waters song, Jones had never been able to cope with their fame and the consequent sexual, alcoholic, and chemical license afforded them. He was, in fact, a very vulnerable personality and suffered bouts of asthma on top of his heavy drinking and drug use; his suspiciously convenient arrests for drug possession at the hands of a head-hunting Scotland Yard did little to help his state of mind.
Jones was no more involved in the Occult than anyone in the Stones or their circle (his witch’s tit notwithstanding), but now the band appeared not just dangerous but potentially lethal. The band was definitely lethal for Meredith Hunter, a San Franciscan concertgoer who was killed by Hell’s Angels at the Stones’ December 6 concert at the Altamont Speedway in California.
Again, the cause of death was more banal than demonic; the weather was cold, the crowd was ugly, facilities were lacking, the show was late, the Angels were brutal and hallucinogens were everywhere. But Hunter, stabbed while the Stones played “Under My Thumb,” was another casualty for fans and foes to take in.
The funeral of Brian Jones
After the Altamont tragedy the Rolling Stones seemed to leave much of their recklessness, or in any case much of their sixties spiritual naivety, behind them. With their next public appearances in 1972, they had entered a jet-set materialism and were no longer considered by their young fans to be minstrels of an imminent revolution.
Their 1973 record Goat’s Head Soup did open with the seductive riff of “Dancing With Mr. D,” which described graveyard trysts, fire and brimstone, and the whiff of voodoo, but by then such references from the Stones were not as inflammatory as they had once been. During this decade other rock ’n’ roll acts had taken to spreading the Occult message, and spreading it more widely, and more loudly, than ever.
One overlooked musician whose music made emphatic allusions to Aleister Crowley was the British rhythm ’n’ blues keyboardist and vocalist Graham Bond. Unlike Mick Jagger or Keith Richards, Bond was no dabbler in the Occult.
He actually believed himself to be Crowley’s illegitimate son - Crowley’s acknowledged daughter died in childhood and he left no legal heirs - and his albums Holy Magick and We Put Our Magick On You listed songs with titles including “The Pentagram Ritual,” “The Magician,” and “The Judgement.”
Though Bond never scaled the peaks of fame and wealth as many of the contemporaries he influenced (his band the Graham Bond Organization became best-known as the source of the bassist Jack Bruce and drummer Ginger Baker in the superstar trio of Cream), his life and works are explicitly linked with the Occult. Drug and career problems, combined with mental instability, drove Graham Bond to kill himself under the wheels of a London train in 1974.
One of Led Zeppelin’s early group photos, 1968
In 1968 the former studio guitarist and member of the Yardbirds Jimmy Page formed his new quartet Led Zeppelin. Signed to the major label of Atlantic Records and abetted by the loyal and fiercely protective management of Peter Grant, Led Zeppelin quickly gathered a large following in the United Kingdom, Europe, and especially the United States, where their histrionic and very heavy brand of electric blues appealed to the restless post-Sgt. Pepper student cohort.
Led Zeppelin bothered little with the typical promotional tactics of earlier rock ’n’ rollers and their record and ticket sales suffered not at all, but what emerged from Page’s infrequent interviews was his dedicated study of the Occult.
“[Y]ou can’t ignore evil if you study the supernatural as I do,” he told a journalist in 1973.
“I have many books on the subject and I’ve also attended a number of seances. I want to go on studying it.”
Throughout the seventies Led Zeppelin was at or near the apex of the rock world, and Page, as leader, guitarist, and producer of the group, was dominant in the band’s Occult reputation. Indeed the other players Robert Plant, John Paul Jones, and John Bonham had no affinity whatsoever for Page’s tastes, but each became, in varying degrees, tarnished by association.
In 1970 Page, now with ample Zeppelin concert and royalty money flowing in, had moved from collecting Aleister Crowley books and other artifacts to purchasing a one-time Crowley home, the Boleskine House, on the shores of Scotland’s Loch Ness.
That same year Page and engineer Terry Manning inscribed the first vinyl pressings of the album Led Zeppelin III with Crowley’s adjurations “Do what thou wilt / Shall Be the Whole of Law” on the runoff tracks, instead of the usual serial numbers.
In 1971 Led Zeppelin’s fourth album was given no formal title but an identifying quartet of runic or alchemical symbols that were later displayed by all four band members in concert; Page’s was an unreadable sigil resembling the word “ZoSo,” which was eventually traced to the Renaissance Italian astrologer and mathematician Girolamo Cardano (c. 1490–1565) and two nineteenth century texts from France, Le Triple Vocabulaire Infernal and Le Dragon Rouge.
Plant’s symbol of an encircled feather stood for the purportedly lost Pacific kingdom of Mu. The gatefold of this album was illustrated with an adaptation of the Hermit card from a well-known 1910 edition of the Tarot deck.
Led Zeppelin’s fourth album and its accompanying quartet of alchemical symbols
In 1974 Page purchased a London Occult book shop called The Equinox, in addition to architect William Burges’s lavish neo-Gothic Tower House in the city’s exclusive Kensington district. When Led Zeppelin founded a boutique record label Swan Song, also in 1974, launch party invitations with the heading “Do What Thou Wilt” were distributed, and strippers dressed as nuns were part of the festivities.
The company’s logo was a stylized rendering of the mythical winged Icarus or, by other interpretations, Lucifer, the fallen angel. In 1975 and 1977 Page performed concerts in a black stage costume embroidered with astrological symbols, the ZoSo sigil, and a full-length twisting dragon.
In the 1976 Led Zeppelin film The Song Remains the Same, a solitary Page was shown on the wooded grounds of his English home; as he turned to the camera, his eyes were made to glow with an otherworldly light. Before Zeppelin’s outdoor Knebworth gigs in 1979, Page investigated the Occult antiques stored at the nearby mansion once home to Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Earl of Knebworth.
U.S. ad for Kenneth Anger and Jimmy Page’s “Lucifer Rising”
Trouble was brewing in the Led Zeppelin camp, however: singer Plant and his wife were seriously injured in a 1975 car accident, and Plant’s young son died of an infection in 1977, shortly after John Bonham, Peter Grant, and two other members of the group’s road crew were arrested for assault backstage at an Oakland concert.
By that time Jimmy Page himself, like many rock stars of the period, was caught up in a serious cocaine and heroin habit.
Page had also met Kenneth Anger at an auction of Aleister Crowley collectibles, where the rich guitar hero outbid the struggling cineaste, and Page had agreed to compose gratis a soundtrack for Anger’s ongoing Lucifer Rising project.
The two fell out, however, as Anger complained about Page’s delays in delivering usable music, while Page was annoyed that Anger had set up an editing room in the basement of his Tower House and was offering visitors unauthorized tours of the premises.
Anger publicly broke with Page in 1976, telling journalists of Page’s drug issues and threatening, “I’m all ready to throw a Kenneth Anger curse!”
Anger finally screened Lucifer Rising in 1980, with assorted shots of himself, Page, a heavily drugged Marianne Faithfull, and Mick Jagger’s brother, Chris.
The official soundtrack was credited to Bobby Beausoleil, an incarcerated murderer and member of the Charles Manson family.
Led Zeppelin formally disbanded in December 1980 after John Bonham drank himself to death in a binge at Page’s Windsor home three months earlier, a year after another young friend of the band was found dead of an accidental overdose in Page’s Sussex residence. In the band’s last years, and for well beyond them, both fans and American anti-rock religious zealots claimed to hear subliminal “messages” in Led Zeppelin’s famous “Stairway to Heaven” when the epic composition was played in reverse. Among the audible sounds therein, it was said, were the following phrases:
"There is no escaping
Whose path will make me sad, whose power is Satan
He will give you 666
Here’s to my sweet Satan"
By then the tabloid press in Britain and rock publications in America had begun to print stories of “the Zeppelin curse” that had wrought such misfortune on the quartet.
In addition to the “backward masking” rumors that attended “Stairway to Heaven” - which reached as far as a committee of the state legislature of California in 1982 - more conjectural whispers held that Page had actually sold his, Robert Plant’s, and John Bonham’s souls to the Devil in exchange for Led Zeppelin’s enormous popularity.
John Paul Jones, the low-key musician’s musician of the ensemble, refused to sign the infernal contract (so went the story) and thereby avoided the deaths and afflictions that struck the others.
These tales reflected Led Zeppelin’s enigmatic album covers, their loud, dramatic records and shows, Plant’s mystical lyrics, and the players’ notoriously profligate personal lives and violence-prone security backup, but they originated with Jimmy Page’s admitted interest in the Occult.
Yet as early as 1976 Page was backing away from the most speculative reports.
“I do not worship the Devil,” he asserted in a Rolling Stone interview that year. “But magic does intrigue me. Magic of all kinds.”
He went on to tell his interviewer, journalist Cameron Crowe, “I’m not about to deny any of the stories… I’m no fool. I know how much the mystique matters. Why should I blow it now?”
After the death of Plant’s child and the “curse” myth that sprang up, Page was more adamant:
“The whole concept of the band is entertainment,” he told the U.K. music paper Melody Maker. “I don’t see any link between that and ‘karma,’ and yet I’ve seen it written a few times about us, like ‘Yet another incident in Zeppelin’s karma’… It’s a horrible, tasteless thing to say.”
Page has never denied his interest in Aleister Crowley and is believed to be a practicing Thelemite and still affiliated with Crowley’s Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Temple of the East), but he told Guitar World magazine in 2003;
“It’s unfortunate that my studies of mysticism and Eastern and Western traditions of magic and tantricism have all come under the umbrella of Crowley. Yeah, sure, I read a lot of Crowley and was fascinated by his techniques and ideas. But I was reading across the board… It wasn’t unusual [in the sixties] to be interested in comparative religions and magic.”
Long after Led Zeppelin’s demise and entering retirement, Page has had to dispel the scurrilous curse and backward masking libels that arose during the seventies;
“I don’t want to get into too many backlashes from Christian fundamentalist groups,” he was quoted in 1995. “I’ve given those people too much mileage already.”
In 2000 he took legal action against a London magazine that published a story suggesting he had cast Satanic spells over John Bonham as the drummer died; the story was retracted and Page was paid damages, which the millionaire musician and Occultist donated to charity.
Allegations around Led Zeppelin came gradually during the group’s life and into its formidable posthumous influence. But in 1969 the up-and-coming Zeppelin had shared bills in Los Angeles with another act that caused a much greater, if briefer, scandal with a flurry of controversial records and sensational concerts in the early years of the next decade: Alice Cooper.
Initially a collective promoted by the master rock satirist Frank Zappa, the Alice Cooper band fused the raucous teenage energy of electric boogie music - simpler and less expertly played than Led Zeppelin’s - with a ghoulish theatricality that was eventually labeled “shock rock.”
The singer was a young Vincent Furnier, a willing participant in the ploy, who soon became identified as Alice himself; the name, he maintained, was taken from a Ouija board session where he learned he was in fact the reincarnation of a seventeenth-century witch of that appellation.
Alice Cooper, 1972
Cooper wore makeup and women’s clothes on stage, performed with a live boa constrictor, destroyed baby dolls before audiences, appeared to hang and/or decapitate himself in climactic noose and/or guillotine rituals, sang songs titled “Dead Babies,” “Halo of Flies,” “Under My Wheels,” “Only Women Bleed,” “I Love the Dead,” “Black Widow,” “Is It My Body,” and the necrophiliac “Cold Ethyl,” and put out albums called Love It to Death, Killer, Welcome to My Nightmare, and Alice Cooper Goes to Hell.
A persistent folk tale held that Cooper had won an onstage “gross-out” contest with Frank Zappa, which (depending on the storyteller) involved the public production and ingestion of bodily wastes. Parental groups and mainstream commentators were outraged, while the press lapped it up.
In 1971 Albert Goldman, music critic for Life magazine, wrote that “The advance publicity for Alice Cooper almost turned my stomach… It’s a frightening embarrassment… What gets everybody uptight is the sacrifice he makes of shame.” For a few short years, Alice Cooper was the ne plus ultra of rock ’n’ roll ugliness: “We are the group that drove a stake through the heart of the love generation,” he told eager reporters.
Before long, though, Alice Cooper (the individual) began to downplay the shock rock label. He didn’t disown his music or his stage routine, but he made it pretty clear that what he was doing was no more than a gimmick that had caught on with America’s frustrated teenagers and their worried moms and dads.
Cooper hobnobbed with old-time show business figures Groucho Marx and Bob Hope, and was seen competing in very non-shocking celebrity golf tournaments. Behind the scenes, he was not a Satan-crazed drug addict but a minister’s son from Phoenix, Arizona and functioning alcoholic.
Casual observers naturally linked him to the cresting Occult wave, given his garish spectacle and horrific lyrical themes, but insiders knew better. Journalist Bob Greene followed the Cooper band on an American tour and noted how unmoved the vocalist was by his own hype.
“He was aware that much of America took his sick, blood-soaked image very seriously indeed, which made him all the more willing to laugh at himself,” Greene wrote in his 1974 chronicle, Billion Dollar Baby.
“Alice was proud of his intelligence and his sense of irony, and in the studio he did all he could to show that the job of playing the Alice Cooper role was just that, a job...[H]e was always eager to demonstrate once again that he was not mistaking himself for the dangerous wretch named Alice Cooper that was being sold to the public.”
During his reign as the king of shock rock, one of Alice Cooper’s opening acts was the east coast American band Blue Öyster Cult. Unlike the headliner, the Cult did not go for blatant scenes of transvestitism or public execution; they had a similar heavy rock sound but with subtler material that retained some air of mystery.
The group’s lyrical themes were often tongue-in-cheek, as was the slightly ridiculous group name, but they were delivered with an intensity (laser beams and exploding flash pots were onstage staples) that made them a popular draw in the mid-seventies.
Much of this was down to their producer, manager, and co-songwriter Sandy Pearlman, a university graduate and occasional music critic who has been credited as the first to use the term “heavy metal” in describing aggressive guitar-based rock music.
Keyboardist Allen Lanier himself formed a curious link between the crunching stadium rock of Blue Öyster Cult’s genre and the cerebral bohemianism of his one-time partner, punk singer Patti Smith.
Blue Oyster Cult
Following the Led Zeppelin model, BÖC devised a series of unfathomable album covers that implied Occult significance, with the M.C. Escher-esque graphics of their self-titled 1972 debut and the next year’s Tyranny and Mutation, followed by the Luftwaffe jet fighter on 1974’s Secret Treaties, while 1975’s On Your Feet or On Your Knees pictured a sinister black limousine in front of an old church set against a storm-tossed sky.
Each of these tableaux featured a cryptic logo said to stand for the scythe of Cronus, leader of the Titans of Greek mythology, as well as being the alchemical symbol for the heaviest of metals, lead.
Like Jimmy Page’s ZoSo, the BÖC design virtually became an Occult trademark which millions of fans adopted onto their own clothes and other accessories. Use of the umlaut in “Öyster,” pointless though it was, began a long trend of employing the intimidating Germanic accent in other heavy metal group names: Mötley Crüe, Motörhead, and so on.
The band’s songs further suggested a vaguely science-fiction or transgressive aesthetic, including favorite numbers like “Dominance and Submission,” “Subhuman,” “Tattoo Vampire,” “Career of Evil,” “Astronomy,” “I Love the Night,” “Nosferatu,” “Flaming Telepaths,” “ETI [Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence],” and the Tokyo-destroying monster riff of “Godzilla.”
Blue Öyster Cult’s biggest hit record became one of the best-known rock singles of its day, and one of the spookiest.
Composed by guitarist Donald Roeser under his far cooler pseudonym Buck Dharma, “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper” was a ghostly minor-key ballad of a lovers’ suicide pact that hinted at the lurking presence of Death himself just outside the curtained window and the candlelit room.
The morbid verses fit perfectly with the whispery arpeggios and remains, like Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven,” an anthem of shadowed passions and Gothic power.
It was quoted in a variety of later cinematic and literary works, including Stephen King’s end-of-the world epic The Stand and a televised version of Norman Mailer’s nonfiction book about murderer Gary Gilmore, The Executioner’s Song.
The album it highlighted, 1976’s Agents of Fortune, again featured the Cronus logo and the arcane imagery of Tarot cards (as well as lyrics contributed by Patti Smith).
For the legions of young rock ’n’ rollers who learned the tunes on their guitars or who played the tracks on their bedroom stereos, “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper” and other BÖC works were entries to the world of the Occult: accessible yet indecipherable, catchy yet confounding.
Hard rock and heavy metal bands of the late sixties and throughout the seventies commonly referenced the Occult, either directly in their music or as part of their general demeanor. A little-known British progressive rock group, Black Widow, made songs titled “Attack of the Demon,” “The Conjuration” and “Come to the Sabbat,” while enacting sacrifices of nude females on stage.
In 1969 the Chicago-based psychedelic folk act Coven made their own paeans to witchcraft and the black arts; through either a weird coincidence or the intervention of dark forces, their bassist was one Oz Osborne. Black Widow and Coven were perhaps too committed to their ideals to capture a wide audience, but later outfits appropriated Occult trappings for fun and profit.
Gender-bending glam star David Bowie went through an Aleister Crowley fascination, aggravated by the extreme quantities of cocaine he consumed, and mentioned the Occultist and the Golden Dawn in his 1971 song “Quicksand.”
The costumed quartet Kiss appeared in bizarre makeup as an ensemble of mysterious identities; bassist and vocalist Gene Simmons came as “The Demon” and revived classic theatrical trickery to breathe fire and spit fake blood in concert.
Simmons also claimed to have invented the two-fingered heavy metal salute, which zealots detected as the sign of the devil but which the Demon explained was his way of waving back at his audiences while still gripping his bass guitar pick.
In 1977 the savvy marketers in Kiss lent their names and likenesses to a Marvel comic series which was advertised as being printed in the real blood of the group’s personnel.
Australian rockers AC/DC scored a major hit with their 1979 album Highway to Hell, the cover of which portrayed guitarist Angus Young with horns and a devil’s tail, and singer Bon Scott with the Occult symbol of a pentagram dangling from his necklace.
Kiss’ Marvel Comics Super Special boasted that it was “printed in real Kiss blood.”
These small, offhand gestures of busy and ambitious working musicians, some of them chronically intoxicated, were all it took to inspire fans’ excitement. Such was the size of the rock market in these years that audiences devised their own scary urban legends around players who neither needed much good publicity nor bothered to deny bad.
The name Kiss, disclosed the hardcore, was a secret acronym for the group’s role as Knights In Satan’s Service, while AC/DC stood for Anti-Christ, Down with Christ. The Demon and his fellow knights laughed all the way to the bank. “Complete and utter bullshit,” Kiss guitarist Ace “Spaceman” Frehley wrote of the Satanic allegations in a 2012 memoir, No Regrets.
“I remember some on some of our early tours, there were religious fanatics outside the shows burning our records, saying we were devil worshippers. Give me a fuckin’ break!”
Meanwhile, AC/DC’s Angus Young shrugged, “Just because you call an album ‘Highway to Hell,’ you get all kinds of grief. All we’d done was describe what it’s like to be on the road for four years. When you’re sleeping with the lead singer’s socks three inches from your nose, believe me, that’s pretty close to hell.”
But one rock act of the seventies was more identified with the Occult than any other, and indeed became the prototype for hundreds of Occult-alluding bands that have formed ever since. The English quartet Black Sabbath codified the sound, look, and philosophy of an entire subgenre that could only have arisen during the decade.
It was Black Sabbath that most explicitly introduced topics of mysticism, drug use, and despair into rock ’n’ roll, and it was Black Sabbath who spread the unholy gospel of demonology through the whole pop music scene.
In terms of sheer records and tickets sold, Sabbath were hardly the most successful group of the time, and by the end of the seventies the original lineup had disintegrated in personal acrimony, legal and financial woes, and the inevitable substance issues; they are an obvious target being parodied in the hilarious “mockumentary” This Is Spinal Tap.
But their influence on their own and later generations of rock listeners is unmatched. Neither the Beatles, nor the Rolling Stones, nor Led Zeppelin, nor Alice Cooper, nor Blue Öyster Cult popularized the Occult as much as Black Sabbath.
Black Sabbath, 1970
Sabbath were formed in the decaying English industrial city of Birmingham in 1969. The members - singer Ozzy Osbourne, guitarist Tony Iommi, bassist Terry “Geezer” Butler and drummer Bill Ward - were all barely out of their teens.
Like thousands of artists scuffling around the local club circuits of provincial Britain, they were hopeful semi-professional players of no blinding talent or originality, who needed a career break more than a creative epiphany.
By an amazing chance, they got both at once. Playing and rehearsing fairly derivative electric blues under the name Earth, Iommi brought to the band’s practice session a simple three-note sequence based not on the standard I-IV-V sequence of blues progressions (the chords G, C, and D, for example) but on a dissonant, “wrong” pattern that incorporated a flattened fifth note of the major scale, in this case, G, an octave G, and the errant C-sharp.
In other styles of songwriting, such an interval would have sounded merely off, but the heavily distorted and rhythmic rumble of rock played by Earth (in emulation of prominent bands Cream, the Jimi Hendrix Experience, and Led Zeppelin) made the tonal shift highly effective.
It was compounded in weight by the manner in which Iommi detuned his electric guitar, slackening the strings to accommodate his fretting fingers, the tips of two having been severed in an accident at a sheet metal factory where he had worked. Before any words were put on the music, the fundamental sound of Black Sabbath had been established.
“He came to rehearsal one day,” Ozzy Osbourne remembered of Iommi’s innovation in 2001, “and said, ‘Isn’t it funny how people pay money to watch horror films; why don’t we start playing scary music?’ And then he came up with that ‘Black Sabbath’ riff, which was the scariest riff I’ve ever heard in my life.”
Much has been made of Black Sabbath’s standard device (some called it a formula) of using the flattened fifth note or chord in so many of their songs: the liturgical composers of medieval Europe warned of including this in choral or instrumental works, naming it Diabolus in Musica or the Devil in Music.
The term seems to have had more of a technical rather than religious meaning - a reminder to singers and players that some intervals on the scale produced discord rather than harmony - but in the case of Sabbath the grating tones of their guitar progressions were perfectly suited to the lyrics sung over them.
Ozzy Osbourne (Interesting to note that Osbourne often appears on lists of Illuminati family surnames).
According to one legend, the film that prompted Iommi’s suggestion to play “scary music” was the 1964 Boris Karloff movie Black Sabbath, an Italian-produced anthology of three tales where the aging Frankenstein actor was the chief attraction. But the movie itself was closer to the campy Hammer output of the fifties and sixties than the intensely realistic horror cinema that appeared in the next few years.
The real origins of Sabbath’s Occult leanings lay with Geezer Butler. Butler had received what he later called a “severe Catholic” upbringing and as a young man became interested in sorcery and witchcraft, which he read up on in the British magazine Man, Myth, and Magic, books by Aleister Crowley, and the penny-dreadful novels of British writer Dennis Wheatley, among them The Devil Rides Out and To the Devil a Daughter. Highly imaginative and suggestible, he worked elements of each into the verses he provided for the band.
“I was seeing all kinds of things at the time, and not through drugs,” he explained. “I’d moved into this flat that I’d painted black with inverted crosses everywhere.
Ozzy gave me this sixteenth century book about magic that he’d stolen from somewhere. I put it in the cupboard because I wasn’t sure about it.
Later that night I woke up and saw this black shadow at the end of the bed… I ran to the airing cupboard to throw the book out, but the book had disappeared… It scared me shitless.”
Between 1970’s debut Black Sabbath and the final collection by the original configuration, 1978’s Never Say Die, Sabbath’s music and public image offered a portrayal of demonism and the supernatural unparalleled in their medium. Not all their songs were about the Occult; they also addressed drug abuse, paranoia, loneliness, space travel, and even the rock ’n’ roll staple of young lust.
But a significant portion of Black Sabbath material was openly concerned with cosmic evil that intervened in the affairs of men: terrifying tracks including “Black Sabbath,” “The Wizard,” “NIB,” and “Warning”; the pacifist classics “War Pigs” and “Electric Funeral”; the surprisingly pro-Christian “After Forever”; “Children of the Grave,” the haunting ballad “Changes,” and the humanist “Under the Sun”; “Sabbath Bloody Sabbath,” “Supertzar,” and “Gypsy.”
Later incarnations of the band comprised a parade of different vocalists, keyboardists, and drummers, but they still released “Heaven and Hell,” “Lady Evil,” and “Die Young.”
“It’s a Satanic world,” Geezer Butler was quoted in a dubious Rolling Stone article in 1971.
“The devil’s more in control now. People can’t come together, there’s no equality.”
Visually, the band looked like they meant what they played. Their album covers showed a greenish cloaked woman near an English watermill at dusk (Black Sabbath), a sleeper with dreams infested by demons (Sabbath Bloody Sabbath), and a surreal non-reflective mirror (Sabotage). The inner sleeve of Black Sabbath presented an inverted cross. A winged devil served as the Black Sabbath corporate signature.
Their 1976 compilation album featured only red and white lettering against a black background: We Sold Our Souls For Rock ’n’ Roll. All four original members were photographed together wearing crucifix necklaces, and Iommi customized the usual fretboard dots of his guitars with tiny crosses.
An early TV clip saw them playing their immortal “Paranoid” superimposed against a nightmarish backdrop of an androgynous kohl-eyed face. Promotional pictures showed four unsmiling young men peering out from behind imposing masses of hair.
Critics of the time hated Black Sabbath. Influential American reviewer Lester Bangs wrote them off as a “sub-Zeppelin kozmik behemoth,” the Village Voice’s Robert Christgau called their first album “the worst of the counterculture on a plastic platter,” while Parke Puterbaugh declared that “To attend one of their concerts was about as pleasurable an experience as a Gestapo interrogation.”
Black Sabbath, the cognoscenti said, purveyed cheap “doom rock” to drug-addled teenagers already tripped out on the Occult: very loud, very pretentious, and very dumb. Others reacted with alarm to Sabbath’s overt emphasis on the devil and all his works.
“The church went against us in a big way,” recalled Tony Iommi in 1992. But the band’s admirers may have been more problematic, the guitarist said.
“One night, after finishing a show, we returned to the hotel and found the corridor leading to our rooms completely filled with people wearing black cloaks, sitting on the floor with candles in their hands, chanting, ‘Ahhhhh.’
So we climbed over them to get to our rooms, but we could still hear them chanting… So we synchronized our watches, opened our doors at the same time, blew out the candles and sang ‘Happy Birthday’ to them. Pissed ’em off. You wouldn’t believe some of the letters we’ve received, and some of the people that have turned up.”
On the receiving end of all the condemnation were four working-class Britons whose formal educations had ended well before they became full-time rock musicians in their early twenties. They had found a winning approach that took them to fame and fortune in Britain, Europe, and North America, but they were not out to convert anybody to Satanism; they had not even converted themselves.
Like Alice Cooper with his stage bloodbaths and Kiss with their makeup and platform boots, the allegedly devilish Sabbath players all but conceded that they were only plying a pitch that paid off.
“I’ve done interviews with Christian papers where, if I’m talking about how much I respect Jesus, they’ll say, ‘But you can’t possibly respect Jesus! You wouldn’t be in a rock band if you did!’” Geezer Butler has remembered.
“I mean, yes, we liked the idea of what’s beyond, but as an interest,” Iommi clarified. “Certainly in no way as the practice of such. And that’s as far as it went, really.”
For millions of Sabbath listeners, however, whether or not the group’s members practiced what they seemed to preach was irrelevant. They made the Occult an immediate presence in their headphones, on their t-shirts, and at their concert halls. There was no doubting Black Sabbath.
Occult-oriented acts and music, of course, were not the only trend in the rock ’n’ roll of the sixties and seventies. There were folk and fusion, punk and reggae, the easy listening of Linda Ronstadt and the sexy soul of Donna Summer. But the Rolling Stones’ peak period was roughly between 1968 and 1973, the years of Their Satanic Majesties Request, “Sympathy For the Devil,” and “Dancing With Mr. D.”
Led Zeppelin have sold nearly 300 million records since 1969, and “Stairway to Heaven,” forward or backward, is considered their masterpiece.
From 1972 to 1975 Alice Cooper was an inescapable media presence; ditto Kiss from 1975 to 1979. Blue Öyster Cult’s “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper” was a Top Ten U.S. hit in 1976. AC/DC’s Highway to Hell was the long-lived quintet’s first million-selling album.
Over 20 million copies of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band have been purchased around the planet since 1967, representing 20 million thumbnail advertisements for Aleister Crowley received the world over. Black Sabbath were finally inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2006.
The group has sold 75 million albums worldwide. Their 2013 album 13 led off with the single “God Is Dead.” For the vast Baby Boom demographic aged from their early teens to their late twenties, the Occult had been brought to them in their lingua franca of rock music.
Much of its conveyance - by performers themselves young and questing erratically for personal or philosophical answers - had been expedient or accidental.
But its reception - by people to whom rock spoke deep truths their elders had long withheld - transformed the spiritual outlook of a generation.
And when that generation turned at last down their radios and put their records back in their sleeves, they found that the Occult was not only available to them through pop songs, and that their elders too were undergoing a spiritual transformation of their own.
Excerpted from Here’s to My Sweet Satan: How the Occult Haunted Music, Movies and Pop Culture 1966–1980 by George Case, Quill Driver Books, March 2016. Available from Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and other fine retailers.
Tyranny And Free Speech March 30 2016 | From: BreakingViews Do you support free speech? How about free speech for climate change skeptics? For homophobes? For racists? For sexists? For white males? For even Donald Trump?
Those who defend free speech, as did the American Founding Fathers, understand it is not about defending speech you agree with, but defending speech you disagree with. Without free speech, there is no liberty.
The State Department diversity officer, John Robinson, has just warned the staff that they may be penalized for engaging in “microaggressions,” which include jokes or other comments that someone who hears them may find offensive.
In a recent letter, he referred to a definition of microaggressions as:
"Everyday verbal, nonverbal and environmental slights, snubs or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory or negative messages to target persons.”
In other words, whatever you hear may be considered a microaggression if you choose to be offended.
Such vague and infinitely elastic laws and regulations are the bread and butter of all totalitarian regimes.
Lavrentiy Beria (Joseph Stalin’s head of the NKVD, a predecessor of the KGB) was quoted as saying to Stalin:
"You name the person and I will find the crime.”
The “crime” of microaggression has already been used to stifle and prosecute speech by those who have contrary views in several left-leaning universities, and now it is coming to the federal government.
The climate change lobbyists have been increasingly aggressive in their attacks on free speech.
They seek to silence their critics, who have committed the “sin” of noting their many failed predictions.
George Mason University meteorologist Jagadish Shukla was the lead signatory of the letter sent to the president and attorney general asking them to use RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) laws to prosecute;
"Corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”
Mr. Shukla “paid himself and his wife $1.5 million from government climate grants for part-time work.”
Other prominent global warming fear-mongers, who are on the government teat, have also called for “war crimes trials” and even the “execution” of some critics.
Even Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week she has looked at the possibility of pursuing civil actions against so-called “climate change deniers.”
The message: Don’t look to the Obama administration to protect free speech. Which do you find more offensive, a person advocating socialism or a person telling jokes about one-eyed people?
Socialism is an ideology that has resulted in governments killing more than 200 million of their own citizens in the last century. It is based on coercion rather than liberty. It demands involuntary servitude. Socialist Bernie Sanders promises “free” stuff to his supporters to be paid for by the involuntary servitude of others - to which there will be no end.
Having spent considerable time in socialist countries and seen the human wreckage that results, I am offended by the ignorance or venality of those who engage in the microaggression of advocating socialism. Several decades ago, I lost an eye, and in the years since I have been told hundreds of “one-eyed” jokes, even by people who do not know me.
Rather than being offended, I have chosen to enjoy them. Offensive speech is totally subjective, and making it a crime is incompatible with a free society.
The Guardian, a left-wing British newspaper, published an article last year by a woman author titled;
"Why do women lie more than men?”
It reported on a new poll that “suggests that women are twice as likely to lie as men.”
The article goes on to say: “It may be irritating to be told, yet again, that women are more morally slippery than men (just as in Genesis).”
The article goes on to cite several reasons why this may be true - including differences “between masculine and feminine brains.”
All of this may or may not be nonsense, but in cases of women complaining about men engaging in “offensive” speech, it is most often assumed, without evidence, that the woman is telling the truth and the man is lying. In fact, men are frequently not allowed to know who their accuser is or what she claimed was said.
One of the most basic protections of liberty is the right of the accuser to know the specific charges against him or her and by whom. As a result, many innocent men are not given a fair hearing by the human resource departments in organizations and even sometimes by the courts.
The late well-regarded feminist, Joan Kennedy Taylor, argued in her book “What to Do When You Don’t Want to Call the Cops: Or a Non-Adversarial Approach to Sexual Harassment” (Cato Institute) that it is important to understand that men and women perceive things quite differently, and that non-legal strategies which she describes can be far more effective and less damaging than legal remedies.
Law professor Catherine Ross has just written an important book, “Lessons in Censorship” (to be discussed at a Cato book forum on March 16), in which she argues that “the failure of schools to respect civil liberties betrays their educational function and threatens democracy.”
The popularity of the verbally crude Donald Trump might, in part, be a reaction to the political correctness of the political class and timid leaders of organizations who have failed to defend freedom of speech.
The Food Industrial Complex March 30 2016 | From: Priceonomics In 2011, during a debate over the nutritional guidelines for school lunches, Congress decided that pizza counts as a vegetable. And not for the first time.
The American government first proposed that an unhealthy food - if it contains trace amounts of a healthy ingredient - could count as a vegetable in 1981. Looking for ways to cut the school lunch budget, the Reagan Administration suggested that cafeterias include ingredients in condiments like pickle relish and ketchup toward nutritional requirements.
This was not good politics. Democrats and the press had a field day saying that Reagan had just classified ketchup as a vegetable.
"This is one of the most ridiculous regulations I ever heard of,” Democratic Senator John Heinz, owner of Heinz, told the press, “and I suppose I need not add that I know something about ketchup and relish."
The Reagan Administration dropped the proposal, but it soon became law anyway. When the Obama Administration directed the Department of Agriculture to revise school lunch policies in 2011, experts took aim at the rulethat allowed the tiny amount of tomato paste in pizza sauce to count toward the vegetable requirements of each meal.
Any changes made by the Department of Agriculture could jeopardize huge contracts for companies that supply food for school children’s lunches, so the food industry responded with a $5.6 million lobbying campaign.
According to Margo Wootan, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, two multibillion dollar companies spent the most: Schwan and ConAgra, which each had large contracts for pizzas and fries used in school lunches.
Before the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) could make any recommendations, Congress ensured that the push for healthier lunches did not hurt the manufacturers of unhealthy foods. Congress passed an agriculture appropriations bill that would deny the USDA funding to enforce any policies that prevented the potatoes in french fries or the tomato paste in pizza from counting as nutritional elements.
The press again enjoyed declaring that Congress had classified pizza as a vegetable.
Cynics shrugged at yet another example of the government prioritizing the bottom line of businesses that manufacture sugary and salty processed foods over public health.
Yet the one-sided nature of the food industry’s lobbying is puzzling. Where were the broccoli, spinach, and carrot lobbies?
Why didn’t a member of Congress take to the floor with a set of talking points provided by the leafy green vegetable lobby? Why can’t American farmers, who enjoy huge government subsidies, stand up to the processed food lobby?
Part of the answer lies in the economics of the food industry: the profit margins and scale of processed food makers gives them a heft that growers of healthy foods can’t match.
But it is also because “Big Ag” is not in the healthy food business. American farms with lobbying power don’t grow brussel sprouts; they grow grains used to make the high fructose corn syrup in Coke, the starches in processed foods, and the oil in deep fryers.
This is somewhat inevitable, but it is also a self-inflicted wound: the result of misguided government policy that subsidizes Big Macs and Big Gulps.
The Poor Margins of Broccoli Farmers
The words “food lobby” have become synonymous with unhealthy food.
In 2015, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, processed food manufacturers spent $32 million on lobbying while the fruit and vegetable industry spent a mere $3.7 million. Moreover, top fruit and vegetable contributors include the National Potato Council, which protects potato farmers’ interests in french fries, and a company that grows tomatoes for fast food chains.
To understand why the food lobby is dominated by companies pushing unhealthy foods, a good place to start is the huge imbalance between the amount of fruits and vegetables we should eat and the relative size of the fruits and vegetables market.
According to nutritional guidelines published by the USDA and the Harvard School of Public Health, fruits and vegetables should make up 50% of a healthy diet. But the financial value of the fruit and vegetable market is nowhere near 50% of the food industry.
In 2015, American farmers earned under $50 billion in revenue from fruits and vegetables. In contrast, processed food manufacturers like ConAgra, General Mills, and Kellogg each make around $15 billion in yearly revenue.
The meat and carb heavy American diet partially explains these disparities. The Department of Agriculture estimates that Americans eat roughly 50% less fruits and vegetables and over 20% more grains and meat than recommended by its nutrition guidelines.
But it is the economics of the food industry that really explain why the food lobby pushes unhealthy fare.
Processed foods have high profit margins that fund advertising campaigns and lobbying budgets. The importance of branding also leads to consolidation that supports special interest lobbying.
We can see this in the case of cereal - one of the earliest processed foods.
When John Harvey Kellogg and Charles Post sold the first modern cereals in the 19th century, they worried about competitors. Their product was simply processed wheat or corn, and its production was cheap and easy to replicate.
Their solution was to use advertising to create brand names. Charles Post claimed his “Grape Nuts” could cure malaria. The Quaker symbol of Quaker Oats became the first nationally recognized cereal brand. As cereal manufacturers fought over the expanding market, they differentiated their fare through shapes and flavors - and added hefty doses of sugar to make it more palatable.
These dynamics apply to many processed foods: cheap foods differentiated - and sold at high margins - thanks to brand names and advertising. And in markets where brand recognition is key, a few businesses come to dominate. In 2015, Kellogg’s, which is currently valued at $26 billion, reported that of every $1 consumers spent on its cereal, it earned 35 cents of gross profit. (The most profitable vegetable farms earn 24 cents per dollar.)
Kellogg’s has a $26 billion market capitalization because it does not just make cereal. It also owns Pringles and manufactures a variety of processed foods from Eggo Waffles to Famous Amos chocolate chip cookies.
The entire processed foods industry is similarly consolidated. If you follow your favorite snack up the food chain, you’ll usually find that it is owned by a multinational company. PepsiCo owns Funyuns, Rold Gold pretzels, and Sun Chips.
Ritz crackers, Oreos, and Wheat Thins sell under the Nabisco label, which is owned by Mondelēz International. So whenever a federal agency supports healthy foods, it picks a fight with a collection of the world’s largest companies.
It is possible to similarly market fruits and vegetables and sell them at a markup. Honeycrisp apples, which were designed for that satisfying crunch, enjoy a price premium two to three times that of other varieties. “Organic” has emerged as a powerful marketing tool, and prices of kale increased 25% over the past 3 years.
Distributors use tactics like selling produce in convenient sizes (such as one snack worth of baby carrots) to differentiate their products.
In general, though, consumers don’t know or care who grew a certain apple or cucumber. The honeycrisp apple is a rarity, and trends like kale-mania benefit the entire market rather than a single company. Companies do market veggies, but brand recognition is low.
Brands need a year-round presence in supermarkets so consumers can purchase it routinely, but produce is seasonal. Efforts to link recognized brands with a certain quality level and a higher price point is hindered by the influence of weather on quality and prices.
Farmers and companies that grow and sell produce do so at the going rate, which is a leaner business. Vegetable farms have had boom years and can make good margins. One USDA census has noted that the largest vegetable farms had annual sales of $500,000 on margins of 24%.
But that’s still tiny compared to PepsiCo or General Mills, and the average farm actually loses value and relies on supplemental, non-farm incomes.
The term processed foods also applies to more than just Oreos and Doritos. When we think of pasta sauce, we normally don’t think of junk food. But as Michael Moss writes in the New York Times Magazine, products like Prego pasta sauce contain huge amounts of salt and sugar, just like potato chips and cereal.
The processed food industry, then, is profitable, politically powerful, and more enormous than we realize. Is it any surprise that the food lobby is synonymous with unhealthy foods?
The McDonaldization of the American Farm
While the economics of processed foods can explain their dominance over fruits, vegetables, and healthier fare, it may still seem surprising.
After all, American farmers receive billions of dollars in annual subsidies, and the American Farm Bureau often spends millions of dollars lobbying Congress to protect those subsidies and farmers’ interests. So why aren’t American farmers as successful in pushing legislation that favors fresh produce and “real food” as they are at winning subsidies?
The answer lies in recognizing that the prototypical American farm does not produce healthy food.
The idyllic farms show in Whole Foods advertisements - farms with a variety of crops and livestock - are not representative of American agriculture. As food journalist Michael Pollan has written, America’s large commercial farms are monocultures, meaning they specialize in a single crop, which is usually a grain. Together, corn and soy account for almost 50% of all American crop revenues.
According to Rosamond Naylor and Walter Falcon of Stanford, America’s corn crop is used to produce half of the sweeteners Americans consume every year in beer and soda. The majority of the crop goes toward feeding cattle (46%) and ethanol production (25%). Corn also provides the starchy base for processed foods and the oil for McDonald’s deep fryers.
The dominance of grains in American agriculture is not unusual. Just four grains - corn, wheat, rice, and soy - account for so much of global agricultural output that economists modelling food prices only look at the market for these grains.
Naylor and Falcon note that countries’ agriculture policy (including that of the United States) has been to increase the yields of these grains. After all, higher yields mean more productive farms, wealthier farmers, more food, and less hunger.
The American government has intervened extensively in agriculture since the Great Depression, and as food writer Michael Pollan notes, its subsidies and programs encouraged large farms that specialized in growing a single grain.
The government promoted the research and production of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and higher yield grains, and the Department of Agriculture encouraged farms to “get big or get out.”
The government did not dole out decades of subsidies indiscriminately; it subsidized the production of corn, soybeans, wheat, and rice at a large scale.
In some ways, these policies have been a great success. American farms are profitable and productive: the average corn belt farmer produces enough crops to feed 140 Americans and makes around $200,000 in income. The average American now enjoys half a pound of meat per day - an amount once considered princely.
But the government's calorie-maximizing policies no longer make sense in a country as troubled by obesity as by hunger. In its push for large monocultures, and in order to buy the peace of specialized vegetable farms, the USDA prohibited farms that receive grain subsidies from growing fruits and vegetables. (An ironic example of vegetable farmers flexing their lobbying muscles.)
This puts the government in the insane position of subsidizing the cost of fast food while actively prohibiting more farms from growing fruits and vegetables.
Even farm animals, which are cheaper to raise when they can be fed with subsidized grain, have a mixed nutrition record. Most nutritionists consider meat part of a healthy diet, but they also believe Americans eat too much meat.
In addition, grain subsidies, as well as the lack of any policy prohibiting the regular use of antibiotics in animal feed, enable farmers to raise animals at scale in confined areas. (The antibiotics keep animals alive in the filthy conditions of small cages.) Cheap meat is a great luxury, but this system makes McDonald’s hamburgers and Kentucky Fried Chicken cheaper than healthier foods.
America’s large, profitable farms spend millions on lobbying each year and enjoy substantial access to lawmakers. The problem is that almost none of these farms provide a counterweight to manufacturers of junk and processed foods. Thanks in part to outdated and politically-expedient agricultural policy, farms’ lobbying power protects french fries, Big Macs, and soda rather than leafy greens.
The Food Pyramid’s Corrupt Foundation
With this understanding of America’s food industry and its lobbying prowess, we can understand a certain mystery behind the food pyramid: why it promoted a diet at odds with the advice of nutritionists for nearly 20 years.
In 1992, the United States Department of Agriculture unveiled the food pyramid, its guide to healthy eating.
Thanks to government efforts to publicize it - pushing it into doctors’ offices and home economics classes - the majority of Americans recognize the food pyramid.
The nutritional guidelines behind the food pyramid also inform policy like school lunches and food stamps, making it the country’s most influential nutrition document.
During its 24-year lifespan, the food pyramid has changed significantly. The base of the original pyramid contained loaves of bread, plates of pasta, and bowls of cereal. But in the ‘food plate’, which replaced the pyramid in 2011, grains only take up 20% of the plate, which is dominated by fruits and vegetables.
The changes do not represent a new understanding of nutrition; the story of the food pyramid is the most highly visible demonstration of the food and agriculture sectors’ lobbying prowess.
Dr. Luise Light is a nutrition expert and led the team at the Department of Agriculture that made the original recommendations for the food pyramid. If you review her original recommendations, they sound similar to dietary advice given by nutritionists today: lots of vegetables, more lean sources of protein like fish and nuts, and less dairy and processed foods.
Those guidelines, according to Dr. Light, did not survive their trip to the office of the Head of the Department of Agriculture.
She has described herself as “shocked” by the changes that were made. Her team placed fruits and vegetables at the base of the pyramid and whole-grain breads and cereals further up.
The new guidelines not only switched carbohydrates to the base of the pyramid, they moved processed foods like crackers and corn flakes, which Dr. Light and her team had placed at the top of the pyramid with chocolate, to the base too. Even with all the edits, the food pyramid was not released for another 12 years.
With an understanding of the food lobby, it’s not hard to understand why. The companies that make processed foods and the large American farms that grow grains wanted to see carb-heavy foods promoted at the base of the pyramid; the tiny leafy greens lobby could not make its voice heard.
As in 1992, every five years, when the Department of Agriculture revisits its nutrition guidelines, the food industry gears up by releasing floods of reports, nominating friendly (and on-salary) researchers to be part of the USDA committee reviewing the policies, and appealing to allies in Congress and the White House.
This means that new policies are always a battle between public-interest organizations pushing for healthier guidelines and a food lobby working to subvert them. The result is that improving our food policy - at best - takes a step backward for every two steps forward.
The American government wields enormous influence over our diet. Federal policy shapes our farm system to a remarkable degree and sets the lunch menu for millions of schoolchildren. As long as food lobbyists overwhelmingly represent the makers of unhealthy food, health advocates will always struggle to push policy in a healthier direction.
To some extent, this is inevitable. The profit margins for making a branded bar of sugar are better than for growing brussel sprouts, which creates more money for lobbying against labelling laws, sugar taxes, and so on. But the current status quo, in which American farms grow crops for unhealthy products like high fructose corn syrup, is the result of outdated agricultural policy.
"Good advice about nutrition conflicts with the interests of many big industries,” Michael Jacobson, co-founder of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, has said, “each of which has more lobbying power than all the public-interest groups combined.”
But the real problem is that manufacturers of unhealthy food are so powerful that those interests groups are always the pushing snack foods rather than fruit.
There’s a lot of money to be made selling obesity foods, and you can’t move America [the world] in a healthier direction without confronting the salty, sugary, finger-licking, just-one-more-chip financial firepower of the food industrial complex.
Jay Dyer Exposes The Dark Secrets Of Hollywood March 27 2016 | From: OmniThought
In the video at the end of this article, The Kev Baker Show interviews Jay Dyer about the dirty and dark secrets of Hollywood.
In this interview, Jay Dyer reveals why Hollywood is a tool used by the Controllers (Elites) to brainwash people and control their minds to a large degree.
He also exposes how many popular Hollywood celebrities are working with the New World Order (NWO).
Hollywood is one of the Controllers’ favorite tools to use for manipulating and controlling our minds. When you split the word hollywood into two words, it becomes “holly wood“. The word holly is defined as “any of numerous trees or shrubs of the genus Ilex”.
The wood of the holly tree was used by the Druids to make magic wands. The Druids believed that the holly had magical powers, which was why they used its wood to make magic wands. Today, certain magicians (I am not talking about fake magicians) still create magic wands from the wood of holly trees. Hence, the name Hollywood. To this day, the Druids still exist and they still practice real magic.
Do you know now why the most popular entertainment industry in the USA is called Hollywood. It has to do with magic and mind control. The Controllers are using Hollywood to create movies to cast magic spells on people who are not aware of the power of sacred symbols, sound, mnemonics, and words.
If you do not know who Jay Dyler is, he is a writer and researcher of certain topics related to occult knowledge. Here is an excerpt from JaysAnalysis.com about his background:
"I’m a writer and researcher from the Southern US with a B.A. in philosophy, while my graduate work focused on the interplay of literary theory, espionage and philosophy.
My work is here at JaysAnalysis, and is dedicated to investigating the deeper themes and messages found in our globalist pseudo-culture, illustrating the connections between philosophy, metaphysics, secret societies, Hollywood, psychological warfare and comparative religion."
Here is an excerpt from YouTube.com about the video interview below:
"Jay Dyer is on KBS and we get into the esoteric and dark side of Hollywood. We get into the intelligence connections to the film industry, and how the two are closely intertwined.
That launches us into a fast paced conversation that takes a look at the pentagon connection to movies, the secret societies around the industry, the cults, scientology, predictive programming, sex, Kubrick, Sci-Fi,…"
I am aware of most of the information that Jay reveals in the video interview below. If you are new to this type of information, it may be hard for you to accept most of the information as fact. As always, use your intuition and feelings to help you discern the information in the following video.
Clinton Email Reveals: Google Sought Overthrow Of Syria's Assad + Robert Kennedy Jr. Just Dropped A Truth Bomb: 'Pipeline War' Is At The Roots Of Syrian Crisis
March 23 2016 | From: WashingtonExaminer / Infowars
Google in 2012 sought to help insurgents overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad, according to State Department emails receiving fresh scrutiny this week.
Messages between former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's team and one of the company's executives detailed the plan for Google to get involved in the region.
A story largely ignored by the corporate media reveals the tech company Google offered to help Secretary of State Clinton overthrow Bashar al-Assad by developing an app to track defections from the Syrian government.
Jared Cohen, the head of what was then the company's "Google Ideas" division, wrote in a July 2012 email to several top Clinton officials.
“Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool... that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from."
"Our logic behind this is that while many people are tracking the atrocities, nobody is visually representing and mapping the defections, which we believe are important in encouraging more to defect and giving confidence to the opposition,"Cohen said, adding that the plan was for Google to surreptitiously give the tool to Middle Eastern media.
"Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria," he said.
The message was addressed to deputy secretary of state Bill Burns; Alec Ross, a senior Clinton advisor; and Clinton's deputy chief of staff, Jake Sullivan. Sullivan subsequently forwarded Cohen's proposal to Clinton, describing it as "a pretty cool idea."
Cohen worked as a member of the secretary of state's policy planning staff from 2006 to 2010, when he was hired to lead Google Ideas, but was tied to using social media to incite uprisings even before he left the department.
He once reportedly asked Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to hold off of conducting system maintenance that officials believed could have impeded a brief 2009 uprising in Iran, and Julian Assange, who founded the secret-leaking website WikiLeaks, has for years referred to Cohen as Google's "director of regime change."
In her book No Higher Honor Condoleezza Rice spoke fondly of Cohen, describing him as a “young gun” and said his work in social media;
“Would pay off handsomely… when Twitter and Facebook became accelerants of democratic change in the Middle East.”
Social media played a predominant role in the so-called “Arab Spring,” the concerted effort by the State Department, the Endowment for Democracy, USAID, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House to violently overthrow governments in the Middle East and North Africa.
In addition to Google, Facebook and Twitter were also involved in the effort to undermine governments in the region.
The exchange on Syria was highlighted by Wikileaks on Saturday. Earlier in the week, the site posted more than 30,000 emails that Clinton sent or received during her tenure leading the State Department.
Robert Kennedy Jr. Just Dropped A Truth Bomb: 'Pipeline War' Is At The Roots Of Syrian Crisis
The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst. It rejects even the assumption that human creatures could espouse a philosophy which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent.
Radio Sputnik discusses the origins of the Syrian crisis with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., attorney and nephew of US President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Kennedy writes that the US decided to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power after he refused to back a Qatari gas pipeline project. Sputnik also touched upon US foreign policy, the refugee crisis and why Donald Trump would be a better president than Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.
Helicopter Money: Get Ready To Be Showered March 20 2016 | From: KiwiWatch
Day after day we are insulted by wannabe broadcasters like (in New Zealand) Paul Henry and Mike Hosking, who continue to interview ‘bank economists’ or ‘central bank analysts’ attempting to discover why the global economy is slowing down, what central bankers are doing about it and why our own economy is showing signs of this distress.
Only Luddites would interview the people who are the very cause of the problem hoping to get a glimpse of the solution.
Massive government and private debt that has spiraled hugely since the unresolved 2008 ‘Global Financial Crisis’ is the major cause of the problem. 2008 wasn’t an event with an ending. It’s continuing and just got a whole lot worse in the interim due to massive central bank money printing, zero interest rates (ZIRP), Quantative Easing (QE), now negative interest rates (NIRP) and now a war on cash.
Central bankers are out of time, clueless as to what to do. Everything they try is an experiment, the consequences are unknown. Why bother interviewing the fools causing the problem? Instead why not interview people who can come up with a non bank solution?
Spiraling debt comes from the manner in which banks create money by the Fractional Reserve system that has empowered banks to become the almighty and powerful entities, ‘too large to fail’. That is the cause of the problem along with the now massive deflationary force of an aging baby boomer generation keeping their wallets in the hip pocket, spending less.
Back in the 1970’s a local (N.Z.) politician called Bruce Beetham promoted a political party called Social Credit whose basis was that the government should be the sole creator of credit in a nation disempowering bankers out of this role.
He was maligned as a ‘funny money’ man. In hind sight this solution would have solved the problem of bankers becoming the all powerful and kept our country from being beggars in the global credit markets… controlled by banks.
But maybe, just maybe there are politicians who themselves are going to be attacked and maligned by the powerful bank lobby as ‘nutters’ are thinking about ways governments are going to monetize the debt they can’t repay. Whatever result the lunacy of central bank thinking is past the use by date.
The New Mind Control: “Subliminal Stimulation”; Controlling People Without Their Knowledge March 16 2016 | From: GlobalResearch
The internet has spawned subtle forms of influence that can flip elections and manipulate everything we say, think and do.
Over the past century, more than a few great writers have expressed concern about humanity’s future. In The Iron Heel (1908), the American writer Jack London pictured a world in which a handful of wealthy corporate titans – the ‘oligarchs’ – kept the masses at bay with a brutal combination of rewards and punishments. Much of humanity lived in virtual slavery, while the fortunate ones were bought off with decent wages that allowed them to live comfortably – but without any real control over their lives.
In We (1924), the brilliant Russian writer Yevgeny Zamyatin, anticipating the excesses of the emerging Soviet Union, envisioned a world in which people were kept in check through pervasive monitoring.
The walls of their homes were made of clear glass, so everything they did could be observed. They were allowed to lower their shades an hour a day to have sex, but both the rendezvous time and the lover had to be registered first with the state.
In Brave New World (1932), the British author Aldous Huxley pictured a near-perfect society in which unhappiness and aggression had been engineered out of humanity through a combination of genetic engineering and psychological conditioning.
And in the much darker novel 1984 (1949), Huxley’s compatriot George Orwell described a society in which thought itself was controlled; in Orwell’s world, children were taught to use a simplified form of English called Newspeak in order to assure that they could never express ideas that were dangerous to society.
These are all fictional tales, to be sure, and in each the leaders who held the power used conspicuous forms of control that at least a few people actively resisted and occasionally overcame.
But in the non-fiction bestseller The Hidden Persuaders (1957) – recently released in a 50th-anniversary edition – the American journalist Vance Packard described a ‘strange and rather exotic’ type of influence that was rapidly emerging in the United States and that was, in a way, more threatening than the fictional types of control pictured in the novels.
According to Packard, US corporate executives and politicians were beginning to use subtle and, in many cases, completely undetectable methods to change people’s thinking, emotions and behaviour based on insights from psychiatry and the social sciences.
Most of us have heard of at least one of these methods: subliminal stimulation, or what Packard called ‘subthreshold effects’ – the presentation of short messages that tell us what to do but that are flashed so briefly we aren’t aware we have seen them.
In 1958, propelled by public concern about a theatre in New Jersey that had supposedly hidden messages in a movie to increase ice cream sales, the National Association of Broadcasters – the association that set standards for US television – amended its code to prohibit the use of subliminal messages in broadcasting.
In 1974, the Federal Communications Commission opined that the use of such messages was ‘contrary to the public interest’.
Legislation to prohibit subliminal messaging was also introduced in the US Congress but never enacted.
Both the UK and Australia have strict laws prohibiting it.
Subliminal stimulation is probably still in wide use in the US – it’s hard to detect, after all, and no one is keeping track of it – but it’s probably not worth worrying about.
Research suggests that it has only a small impact, and that it mainly influences people who are already motivated to follow its dictates; subliminal directives to drink affect people only if they’re already thirsty.
Packard had uncovered a much bigger problem, however – namely that powerful corporations were constantly looking for, and in many cases already applying, a wide variety of techniques for controlling people without their knowledge.
He described a kind of cabal in which marketers worked closely with social scientists to determine, among other things, how to get people to buy things they didn’t need and how to condition young children to be good consumers – inclinations that were explicitly nurtured and trained in Huxley’s Brave New World.
Guided by social science, marketers were quickly learning how to play upon people’s insecurities, frailties, unconscious fears, aggressive feelings and sexual desires to alter their thinking, emotions and behaviour without any awareness that they were being manipulated.
By the early 1950s, Packard said, politicians had got the message and were beginning to merchandise themselves using the same subtle forces being used to sell soap. Packard prefaced his chapter on politics with an unsettling quote from the British economist Kenneth Boulding:
"A world of unseen dictatorship is conceivable, still using the forms of democratic government."
Could this really happen, and, if so, how would it work?
The forces that Packard described have become more pervasive over the decades. The soothing music we all hear overhead in supermarkets causes us to walk more slowly and buy more food, whether we need it or not. Most of the vacuous thoughts and intense feelings our teenagers experience from morning till night are carefully orchestrated by highly skilled marketing professionals working in our fashion and entertainment industries.
Yes, New Zealand has a national chain of supermarkets that are actually called New World... where you can take your New World grocery Order - oh the irony
Politicians work with a wide range of consultants who test every aspect of what the politicians do in order to sway voters: clothing, intonations, facial expressions, makeup, hairstyles and speeches are all optimised, just like the packaging of a breakfast cereal.
Fortunately, all of these sources of influence operate competitively. Some of the persuaders want us to buy or believe one thing, others to buy or believe something else. It is the competitive nature of our society that keeps us, on balance, relatively free.
But what would happen if new sources of control began to emerge that had little or no competition? And what if new means of control were developed that were far more powerful – and far more invisible – than any that have existed in the past? And what if new types of control allowed a handful of people to exert enormous influence not just over the citizens of the US but over most of the people on Earth?
To understand how the new forms of mind control work, we need to start by looking at the search engine – one in particular: the biggest and best of them all, namely Google. The Google search engine is so good and so popular that the company’s name is now a commonly used verb in languages around the world.
To ‘Google’ something is to look it up on the Google search engine, and that, in fact, is how most computer users worldwide get most of their information about just about everything these days.
They Google it.
Google has become the main gateway to virtually all knowledge, mainly because the search engine is so good at giving us exactly the information we are looking for, almost instantly and almost always in the first position of the list it shows us after we launch our search – the list of ‘search results’.
That ordered list is so good, in fact, that about 50 per cent of our clicks go to the top two items, and more than 90 per cent of our clicks go to the 10 items listed on the first page of results; few people look at other results pages, even though they often number in the thousands, which means they probably contain lots of good information.
Google decides which of the billions of web pages it is going to include in our search results, and it also decides how to rank them. How it decides these things is a deep, dark secret – one of the best-kept secrets in the world, like the formula for Coca-Cola.
Because people are far more likely to read and click on higher-ranked items, companies now spend billions of dollars every year trying to trick Google’s search algorithm – the computer program that does the selecting and ranking – into boosting them another notch or two. Moving up a notch can mean the difference between success and failure for a business, and moving into the top slots can be the key to fat profits.
Late in 2012, I began to wonder whether highly ranked search results could be impacting more than consumer choices. Perhaps, I speculated, a top search result could have a small impact on people’s opinions about things. Early in 2013, with my associate Ronald E Robertson of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology in Vista, California, I put this idea to a test by conducting an experiment in which 102 people from the San Diego area were randomly assigned to one of three groups.
In one group, people saw search results that favoured one political candidate – that is, results that linked to web pages that made this candidate look better than his or her opponent. In a second group, people saw search rankings that favoured the opposing candidate, and in the third group – the control group – people saw a mix of rankings that favoured neither candidate. The same search results and web pages were used in each group; the only thing that differed for the three groups was the ordering of the search results.
To make our experiment realistic, we used real search results that linked to real web pages. We also used a real election – the 2010 election for the prime minister of Australia. We used a foreign election to make sure that our participants were ‘undecided’. Their lack of familiarity with the candidates assured this. Through advertisements, we also recruited an ethnically diverse group of registered voters over a wide age range in order to match key demographic characteristics of the US voting population.
All participants were first given brief descriptions of the candidates and then asked to rate them in various ways, as well as to indicate which candidate they would vote for; as you might expect, participants initially favoured neither candidate on any of the five measures we used, and the vote was evenly split in all three groups.
Then the participants were given up to 15 minutes in which to conduct an online search using ‘Kadoodle’, our mock search engine, which gave them access to five pages of search results that linked to web pages. People could move freely between search results and web pages, just as we do when using Google. When participants completed their search, we asked them to rate the candidates again, and we also asked them again who they would vote for.
We predicted that the opinions and voting preferences of 2 or 3 per cent of the people in the two bias groups – the groups in which people were seeing rankings favouring one candidate – would shift toward that candidate. What we actually found was astonishing.
The proportion of people favouring the search engine’s top-ranked candidate increased by 48.4 per cent, and all five of our measures shifted toward that candidate. What’s more, 75 per cent of the people in the bias groups seemed to have been completely unaware that they were viewing biased search rankings. In the control group, opinions did not shift significantly.
Google's own by-line was a piss take
This seemed to be a major discovery. The shift we had produced, which we called the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (or SEME, pronounced ‘seem’), appeared to be one of the largest behavioural effects ever discovered. We did not immediately uncork the Champagne bottle, however. For one thing, we had tested only a small number of people, and they were all from the San Diego area.
Over the next year or so, we replicated our findings three more times, and the third time was with a sample of more than 2,000 people from all 50 US states. In that experiment, the shift in voting preferences was 37.1 per cent and even higher in some demographic groups – as high as 80 per cent, in fact.
We also learned in this series of experiments that by reducing the bias just slightly on the first page of search results – specifically, by including one search item that favoured the other candidate in the third or fourth position of the results – we could mask our manipulation so that few or even no people were aware that they were seeing biased rankings. We could still produce dramatic shifts in voting preferences, but we could do so invisibly.
Still no Champagne, though. Our results were strong and consistent, but our experiments all involved a foreign election – that 2010 election in Australia. Could voting preferences be shifted with real voters in the middle of a real campaign? We were skeptical. In real elections, people are bombarded with multiple sources of information, and they also know a lot about the candidates. It seemed unlikely that a single experience on a search engine would have much impact on their voting preferences.
To find out, in early 2014, we went to India just before voting began in the largest democratic election in the world – the Lok Sabha election for prime minister. The three main candidates were Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, and Narendra Modi. Making use of online subject pools and both online and print advertisements, we recruited 2,150 people from 27 of India’s 35 states and territories to participate in our experiment. To take part, they had to be registered voters who had not yet voted and who were still undecided about how they would vote.
Participants were randomly assigned to three search-engine groups, favouring, respectively, Gandhi, Kejriwal or Modi. As one might expect, familiarity levels with the candidates was high – between 7.7 and 8.5 on a scale of 10. We predicted that our manipulation would produce a very small effect, if any, but that’s not what we found.
This prick is all over the place
On average, we were able to shift the proportion of people favouring any given candidate by more than 20 per cent overall and more than 60 per cent in some demographic groups. Even more disturbing, 99.5 per cent of our participants showed no awareness that they were viewing biased search rankings – in other words, that they were being manipulated.
SEME’s near-invisibility is curious indeed. It means that when people – including you and me – are looking at biased search rankings, they look just fine. So if right now you Google ‘US presidential candidates’, the search results you see will probably look fairly random, even if they happen to favour one candidate. Even I have trouble detecting bias in search rankings that I know to be biased (because they were prepared by my staff).
They can't get rid of you Donald
Yet our randomised, controlled experiments tell us over and over again that when higher-ranked items connect with web pages that favour one candidate, this has a dramatic impact on the opinions of undecided voters, in large part for the simple reason that people tend to click only on higher-ranked items.
This is truly scary: like subliminal stimuli, SEME is a force you can’t see; but unlike subliminal stimuli, it has an enormous impact – like Casper the ghost pushing you down a flight of stairs.
We published a detailed report about our first five experiments on SEME in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in August 2015. We had indeed found something important, especially given Google’s dominance over search.
Google has a near-monopoly on internet searches in the US, with 83 per cent of Americans specifying Google as the search engine they use most often, according to the Pew Research Center. So if Google favours one candidate in an election, its impact on undecided voters could easily decide the election’s outcome.
Keep in mind that we had had only one shot at our participants. What would be the impact of favouring one candidate in searches people are conducting over a period of weeks or months before an election? It would almost certainly be much larger than what we were seeing in our experiments.
Other types of influence during an election campaign are balanced by competing sources of influence – a wide variety of newspapers, radio shows and television networks, for example – but Google, for all intents and purposes, has no competition, and people trust its search results implicitly, assuming that the company’s mysterious search algorithm is entirely objective and unbiased.
This high level of trust, combined with the lack of competition, puts Google in a unique position to impact elections. Even more disturbing, the search-ranking business is entirely unregulated, so Google could favour any candidate it likes without violating any laws. Some courts have even ruled that Google’s right to rank-order search results as it pleases is protected as a form of free speech.
Does the company ever favour particular candidates? In the 2012 US presidential election, Google and its top executives donated more than $800,000 to President Barack Obama and just $37,000 to his opponent, Mitt Romney.
And in 2015, a team of researchers from the University of Maryland and elsewhere showed that Google’s search results routinely favoured Democratic candidates.
Are Google’s search rankings really biased? An internal report issued by the US Federal Trade Commission in 2012 concluded that Google’s search rankings routinely put Google’s financial interests ahead of those of their competitors, and anti-trust actions currently under way against Google in both the European Union and India are based on similar findings.
In most countries, 90 per cent of online search is conducted on Google, which gives the company even more power to flip elections than it has in the US and, with internet penetration increasing rapidly worldwide, this power is growing.
In our PNAS article, Robertson and I calculated that Google now has the power to flip upwards of 25 per cent of the national elections in the world with no one knowing this is occurring.
In fact, we estimate that, with or without deliberate planning on the part of company executives, Google’s search rankings have been impacting elections for years, with growing impact each year. And because search rankings are ephemeral, they leave no paper trail, which gives the company complete deniability.
Power on this scale and with this level of invisibility is unprecedented in human history. But it turns out that our discovery about SEME was just the tip of a very large iceberg.
Recent reports suggest that the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is making heavy use of social media to try to generate support – Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Snapchat and Facebook, for starters. At this writing, she has 5.4 million followers on Twitter, and her staff is tweeting several times an hour during waking hours. The Republican frontrunner, Donald Trump, has 5.9 million Twitter followers and is tweeting just as frequently.
Is social media as big a threat to democracy as search rankings appear to be?
When new technologies are used competitively, they present no threat. Even through the platforms are new, they are generally being used the same way as billboards and television commercials have been used for decades: you put a billboard on one side of the street; I put one on the other. I might have the money to erect more billboards than you, but the process is still competitive.
What happens, though, if such technologies are misused by the companies that own them? A study by Robert M Bond, now a political science professor at Ohio State University, and others published in Nature in 2012 described an ethically questionable experiment in which, on election day in 2010, Facebook sent ‘go out and vote’ reminders to more than 60 million of its users.
The reminders caused about 340,000 people to vote who otherwise would not have. Writing in the New Republic in 2014, Jonathan Zittrain, professor of international law at Harvard University, pointed out that, given the massive amount of information it has collected about its users, Facebook could easily send such messages only to people who support one particular party or candidate, and that doing so could easily flip a close election – with no one knowing that this has occurred. And because advertisements, like search rankings, are ephemeral, manipulating an election in this way would leave no paper trail.
Are there laws prohibiting Facebook from sending out ads selectively to certain users?
Absolutely not; in fact, targeted advertising is how Facebook makes its money.
Is Facebook currently manipulating elections in this way? No one knows, but in my view it would be foolish and possibly even improper for Facebook not to do so. Some candidates are better for a company than others, and Facebook’s executives have a fiduciary responsibility to the company’s stockholders to promote the company’s interests.
The Bond study was largely ignored, but another Facebook experiment, published in 2014 in PNAS, prompted protests around the world. In this study, for a period of a week, 689,000 Facebook users were sent news feeds that contained either an excess of positive terms, an excess of negative terms, or neither.
Those in the first group subsequently used slightly more positive terms in their communications, while those in the second group used slightly more negative terms in their communications. This was said to show that people’s ‘emotional states’ could be deliberately manipulated on a massive scale by a social media company, an idea that many people found disturbing. People were also upset that a large-scale experiment on emotion had been conducted without the explicit consent of any of the participants.
Facebook’s consumer profiles are undoubtedly massive, but they pale in comparison with those maintained by Google, which is collecting information about people 24/7, using more than 60 different observation platforms – the search engine, of course, but also Google Wallet, Google Maps, Google Adwords, Google Analytics, Chrome, Google Docs, Android, YouTube, and on and on.
Certainly, if Google set about to fix an election, it could first dip into its massive database of personal information to identify just those voters who are undecided. Then it could, day after day, send customised rankings favouring one candidate to just those people. One advantage of this approach is that it would make Google’s manipulation extremely difficult for investigators to detect.
Extreme forms of monitoring, whether by the KGB in the Soviet Union, the Stasi in East Germany, or Big Brother in 1984, are essential elements of all tyrannies, and technology is making both monitoring and the consolidation of surveillance data easier than ever.
By 2020, China will have put in place the most ambitious government monitoring system ever created – a single database called the Social Credit System, in which multiple ratings and records for all of its 1.3 billion citizens are recorded for easy access by officials and bureaucrats. At a glance, they will know whether someone has plagiarised schoolwork, was tardy in paying bills, urinated in public, or blogged inappropriately online.
As Edward Snowden’s revelations made clear, we are rapidly moving toward a world in which both governments and corporations – sometimes working together – are collecting massive amounts of data about every one of us every day, with few or no laws in place that restrict how those data can be used.
When you combine the data collection with the desire to control or manipulate, the possibilities are endless, but perhaps the most frightening possibility is the one expressed in Boulding’s assertion that an ‘unseen dictatorship’ was possible ‘using the forms of democratic government’.
Since Robertson and I submitted our initial report on SEME to PNAS early in 2015, we have completed a sophisticated series of experiments that have greatly enhanced our understanding of this phenomenon, and other experiments will be completed in the coming months. We have a much better sense now of why SEME is so powerful and how, to some extent, it can be suppressed.
We have also learned something very disturbing – that search engines are influencing far more than what people buy and whom they vote for. We now have evidence suggesting that on virtually all issues where people are initially undecided, search rankings are impacting almost every decision that people make.
They are having an impact on the opinions, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours of internet users worldwide – entirely without people’s knowledge that this is occurring.
This is happening with or without deliberate intervention by company officials; even so-called ‘organic’ search processes regularly generate search results that favour one point of view, and that in turn has the potential to tip the opinions of millions of people who are undecided on an issue. In one of our recent experiments, biased search results shifted people’s opinions about the value of fracking by 33.9 per cent.
Perhaps even more disturbing is that the handful of people who do show awareness that they are viewing biased search rankings shift even further in the predicted direction; simply knowing that a list is biased doesn’t necessarily protect you from SEME’s power.
Remember what the search algorithm is doing: in response to your query, it is selecting a handful of webpages from among the billions that are available, and it is ordering those webpages using secret criteria.
Seconds later, the decision you make or the opinion you form – about the best toothpaste to use, whether fracking is safe, where you should go on your next vacation, who would make the best president, or whether global warming is real – is determined by that short list you are shown, even though you have no idea how the list was generated.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, a consolidation of search engines has been quietly taking place, so that more people are using the dominant search engine even when they think they are not. Because Google is the best search engine, and because crawling the rapidly expanding internet has become prohibitively expensive, more and more search engines are drawing their information from the leader rather than generating it themselves.
Looking ahead to the November 2016 US presidential election, I see clear signs that Google is backing Hillary Clinton. In April 2015, Clinton hired Stephanie Hannon away from Google to be her chief technology officer and, a few months ago, Eric Schmidt, chairman of the holding company that controls Google, set up a semi-secret company – The Groundwork – for the specific purpose of putting Clinton in office. The formation of The Groundwork prompted Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, to dub Google Clinton’s ‘secret weapon’ in her quest for the US presidency.
We now estimate that Hannon’s old friends have the power to drive between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes to Clinton on election day with no one knowing that this is occurring and without leaving a paper trail. They can also help her win the nomination, of course, by influencing undecided voters during the primaries. Swing voters have always been the key to winning elections, and there has never been a more powerful, efficient or inexpensive way to sway them than SEME.
We are living in a world in which a handful of high-tech companies, sometimes working hand-in-hand with governments, are not only monitoring much of our activity, but are also invisibly controlling more and more of what we think, feel, do and say.
The technology that now surrounds us is not just a harmless toy; it has also made possible undetectable and untraceable manipulations of entire populations – manipulations that have no precedent in human history and that are currently well beyond the scope of existing regulations and laws. The new hidden persuaders are bigger, bolder and badder than anything Vance Packard ever envisioned. If we choose to ignore this, we do so at our peril.
UK Minister Holds Top-Level Defence Talks In Wellington + MP Gareth Hughes Calls New Zealand Prime Minister John Key On Poor Leadership February 19 2016 | From: NationalBusinessReview
A British Foreign Office Minister is visiting New Zealand in the first top-level meeting since Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond was here a year ago.
Hugo Swire, Minister of State for Asia-Pacific, will hold talks with Foreign Minister Murray McCully, Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee and Climate Change and State Services Minister Paula Bennett.
He will also address business leaders at a Trans-Tasman Circle function and discuss the UK’s expertise in infrastructure, innovation and Smart Cities in a roundtable with the regional “metro mayors.”
While in Wellington, Mr Swire will lay a wreath at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park and visit the site of the proposed UK memorial there.
At Weta Workshops, he will inspect design and engineering plans for the UK memorial and also visit the Great War Exhibition, designed by Sir Peter Jackson.
Mr Swire will attend the opening night on Friday of the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo in Wellington before visiting Christchurch to meet Mayor Lianne Dalziel to hear about the rebuild on the eve of the five-year anniversary of the February 22, 2011, earthquake.
Gareth Hughes On The NZ Prime Minister's Poor Leadership
Shame on the politicians (esp. PM Key) who weren't in Parliament to hear this epic speech.
Everyone should hear Gareth's wise words.
The Control-Matrix Is Crashing Because The Truth-Seekers Are Winning
February 17 2016 | From: ZenGardner
The way the masses view the world is a farce. Every single mainstream perspective is either purposely deceptive, or completely misses the point. Even the people in places of influence who we’re meant to trust have either sold out, or are just plain ignorant to the facts.
There’s no need to have a heavy heart though; the matrix of control is crashing because the truth-seekers are dealing heavy blows to the false narratives that have for too long shaped the collective mindset of humanity. Of course the internet can be celebrated for being the primary mechanism which has amplified the sharing of information across location, race, culture and belief systems. In retrospect, the powers-that-will-no-longer-be would be kicking themselves for not trying harder to institute their insidious plan for humanity prior to the birth and growth of the world-wide-web.
Make no mistake though; they have been very successful on many fronts. For example, try to imagine a world where:
Most journalists don’t report the real news;
The majority of doctors don’t truly understand the causes of poor health and how to legitimately resolve it;
high proportion of politicians don’t know how the money supply works and what the agenda is of those who control it;
Many so-called expert scientists ‘believe’ in a discredited philosophy which resembles a dogmatic religion;
The majority of teachers don’t realize they’re teaching a system of indoctrination that nowhere near gets close to the information and critical thinking that should be afforded our kids; and
The masses are not only ill-informed, divided and feverishly fighting against each other over small and irrelevant topics, but they’re also sleepwalking through one of the most majestic and reverent realities that could have ever been conceptualized.
Well, welcome to our world.
Example One: TVNZ 'News' at 6pm has degenerated to half an hour of
agenda-spun cherry-picked utter bullshit, followed by half an hour of Bread-and Circus distractionary sports in order to further placate the fluoridated, chemtrailed masses. This is the first of two examples of the laughable unbridled investigative journalism that spoon-feeds the sheeple here in New Zealand today. But don't worry - because after that there are hours and hours of cheap and nasty, brain-numbing 'talent', cooking and home renovation embarrassments too.
As we begin what we call the 21st Century, every system that should be designed to facilitate the health and vitality of the people has been hacked with lies, deception, dysfunction and disharmony. It’s easy to think that this is an embarrassment for our species because it’s beneath our intelligence and ethical capacity, yet there’s no need to lose faith in the inevitable betterment of humanity, including the way in which we organize and economize our societies.
Why? Because all of this dysfunction has been an effective driver of the collective awakening that is rising in the hearts and minds of humanity.
The inspiring fact is that more and more people are slowly waking up and realizing we all have the opportunity to come to our own, informed opinion on the truth, pertaining to both the spiritual and systemic realities. So many more people now understand the mainstream news is not to be taken seriously as its not where we can find information which is aligned with the deeper truths.
Example Two: TV3 'Newshub' at 6pm has degenerated to half an hour of
agenda-spun cherry-picked utter bullshit, followed by half an hour of Bread-and Circus distractionary sports in order to further placate the fluoridated, chemtrailed masses. For desert, another half hour of 'infotainment' twaddle follows.
They’re also acknowledging that we have the choice on what we decide to personally stand and fight for, as well as the legacy we leave for our children and our future generations.
Beware though; once we exit the matrix of control we’re faced with some serious challenges. We have a lot of inner work to do, such as designing a philosophy that ensures we’re at peace, as well as exercising patience in the quest to take back our liberties and design a legitimate and honorable future for humanity.
That’s why we’ve got to feel for those who have been long aware of the many dysfunctions of our world, especially those who have not learned peace and patience. Slowly they’ve watched:
The military-industrial-media-politico-banking complex increase their power and continue their pillage across the world;
Pharmaceutical monopolies amplifying the drugging of society, as well as keeping many of us sick so that they maximize their profits;
Movements rise up only to be vilified and disassembled, such as the Occupy Movement;
Science turned into a corporate institution, as well as further hijacked by an inaccurate and small-minded philosophy of reality;
Wars purposely created with millions of people dying for the whims of the shadow empire;
Radical extremists massaged into proxy armies to do dirty work for the collapsing power structure;
Air, medicine, food and water becoming purposely more toxic;
Governmental policy increasingly being determined by corporate/elite interests;
Police being militarized all around the globe;
The education model struggling to become less of an indoctrination system; and
The agenda of global governance becoming closer to fruition.
Some people have known about much of this for decades, so we should commend them for continuing to fight the good fight.
They might have witnessed some disheartening developments, yet as much as all this sounds dire, they’ve also seen millions of people disengage from the propaganda narratives and align themselves with the systemic and spiritual pathways that will be the next stage of our evolution.
The point is that even though we need to be patient and persevere, we should recognize and celebrate the achievements that have been made so far.
Economists who want to transform the Keynesian model to legitimate alternatives;
Teachers who understand the massive holes in the indoctrination system called public education;
Scientists who want to evolve the way energy is created and shared;
Health practitioners who see the limits of mechanistic and pharmacological medicine and the need for the reintroduction of natural and plant-based therapies;
Journalists who demand that the media monopolies need to be disassembled;
Environmentalists who want to transition the way food is grown and distributed;
Community leaders who aim to reintegrate them to better support its members;
Politicians who understand the democratic system has been hijacked by big money;
Activists who campaign for revolutions in our value systems; and
Futurists who want to change the systemic template for our societal health and well-being.
There are many beautiful souls who are leading the charge by attempting to redesign our society back into alignment with the natural laws of our universe. We should be one of them, regardless of which way we personally decide to contribute.
To do that, we all need to be super clear within ourselves what we believe and what we want to change. There are many ways to do it too, so finding our passions and strengths is critical to playing our own small part in the shift.
It is simply no longer acceptable to keep our heads in the sand; either we’re a minion of the system or we’re not.
Of course its difficult to completely disconnect from the way resources flow through the control channels, yet that needn’t stop us from talking about it, sharing information online and somehow contributing, no matter how small, to local and global movements which aim to transition humanity into the new paradigm of abundance.
After all, the truth is what it is, and it is exposing itself to the world by powerfully flowing through all of us.
Ultimately, we needn’t wait for the zombie apocalypse because its already arrived. Most people are good people, yet the masses have been brainwashed into thinking in ways that are absolutely nowhere near aligned to the truth.
They might be sleepwalking through a time where the tipping point for the conscious society builds, but that doesn’t mean they’re not salvageable.
That’s why we all have a responsibility to help facilitate waking up the collective so that together we’re more empowered and informed to really bring about a future of justice and honor that we can all be proud of.
To do so, let me give you some advice. Don’t get frustrated, don’t be rude, don’t belittle, don’t condemn. We all had to wake up at one stage so its hypocritical if we are.
Instead, be calm, be cool, be real, be articulate.
Know the information that you advocate like the back of your hand. If we want to be successful in helping others to face the delusions then we need to ensure their defense mechanisms aren’t raised so they’re more likely to be open and receptive to embrace the truth.
And one more thing; hang in there guys and be patient, we’ve still got a long, arduous way to go but we know all the effort will be worth every second.
Central Banks Are Trojan Horses, Looting Their Host Nations February 17 2016 | From: GlobalResearch
"The EU should have the power to police and interfere in member states’ national budgets.
I am certain, if we want to restore confidence in the eurozone, countries will have to transfer part of their sovereignty to the European level.
Several governments have not yet understood that they lost their national sovereignty long ago. Because they ran up huge debts in the past, they are now dependent on the goodwill of the financial markets."
Threw money at “several billionaires and tens of multi-millionaires”, including billionaire businessman H. Wayne Huizenga, billionaire Michael Dell of Dell computer, billionaire hedge fund manager John Paulson, billionaire private equity honcho J. Christopher Flowers, and the wife of Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack
Artificially “front-loaded an enormous [stock] market rally”. Professor G. William Domhoff demonstrated that the richest 10% own 81% of all stocks and mutual funds (the top 1% own 35%). The great majority of Americans – the bottom 90% – own less than 20% of all stocks and mutual funds. So the Fed’s effort overwhelmingly benefits the wealthiest Americans … and wealthy foreigninvestors
Allowed the giant banks to grow into mega-banks, even though most independent economists and financial experts say that the economy will not recover until the giant banks are broken up. For example, Citigroup’s former chief executive says that when Citigroup was formed in 1998 out of the merger of banking and insurance giants, Greenspan told him, “I have nothing against size. It doesn’t bother me at all”
Preached that a new bubble be blown every time the last one bursts
Had a hand in Watergate and arming Saddam Hussein, according to an economist with the U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee for eleven years, assisting with oversight of the Federal Reserve, and subsequently Professor of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. See this and this
Tim Geithner – as head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York – was complicit in Lehman’s accounting fraud, (and see this), and pushed to pay AIG’s CDS counterparties at full value, and then to keep the deal secret. And as Robert Reich notes,
Geithner was “very much in the center of the action” regarding the secret bail out of Bear Stearns without Congressional approval. William Black points out:
"Mr. Geithner as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since October 2003, was one of those senior regulators who failed to take any effective regulatory action to prevent the crisis, but instead covered up its depth”
They also say that the Fed does not help stabilize the economy. For example:
"Thomas Sargent, the New York University professor who was announced Monday as a winner of the Nobel in economics … cites Walter Bagehot, who “said that what he called a ‘natural’ competitive banking system without a ‘central’ bank would be better…. ‘nothing can be more surely established by a larger experience than that a Government which interferes with any trade injures that trade. The best thing undeniably that a Government can do with the Money Market is to let it take care of itself.’”
Earlier U.S. central banks caused mischief, as well. For example, Austrian economist Murray Rothbard wrote:
"The panics of 1837 and 1839 … were the consequence of a massive inflationary boom fueled by the Whig-run Second Bank of the United States.
Indeed, the Revolutionary War was largely due to the actions of the world’s first central bank, the Bank of England.
When he arrived, he was surprised to find rampant unemployment and poverty among the British working classes… Franklin was then asked how the American colonies managed to collect enough money to support their poor houses. He reportedly replied:
“We have no poor houses in the Colonies; and if we had some, there would be nobody to put in them, since there is, in the Colonies, not a single unemployed person, neither beggars nor tramps.”
In 1764, the Bank of England used its influence on Parliament to get a Currency Act passed that made it illegal for any of the colonies to print their own money. The colonists were forced to pay all future taxes to Britain in silver or gold. Anyone lacking in those precious metals had to borrow them at interest from the banks.
Only a year later, Franklin said, the streets of the colonies were filled with unemployed beggars, just as they were in England. The money supply had suddenly been reduced by half, leaving insufficient funds to pay for the goods and services these workers could have provided.
He maintained that it was “the poverty caused by the bad influence of the English bankers on the Parliament which has caused in the colonies hatred of the English and . . . the Revolutionary War.” This, he said, was the real reason for the Revolution: “the colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction.”
And things are getting worse … rather than better. As Professor Werner tells Washington’s Blog:
"Central banks have legally become more and more powerful in the past 30 years across the globe, yet they have become de facto less and less accountable. In fact, as I warned in my book New Paradigm in Macroeconomics in 2005, after each of the ‘recurring banking crises’, central banks are usually handed even more powers.
This also happened after the 2008 crisis. [Background here and here.] So it is clear we have a regulatory moral hazard problem: central banks seem to benefit from crises. No wonder the rise of central banks to ever larger legal powers has been accompanied not by fewer and smaller business cycles and crises, but more crises and of larger amplitude."
"Nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.”
This system is to be controlled “in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements,” central banks that “were themselves private corporations.”
Given the facts set forth above, this may be yet another conspiracy theory confirmed as conspiracy fact.
In Syria, If You Can’t Find Moderates, Dress Up Some Extremists February 16 2016 | From: LandDestroyer
The BBC’s latest production is as absurd as it is transparent and abhorrent.
Upon reading the increasingly desperate headlines pumped out by the Western media as Western-backed terrorist forces begin to fold under an effective joint Syrian-Russian offensive to take the country back, readers will notice that though the term “moderate rebels” or “moderate opposition” is used often, the Western media is seemingly incapable of naming a single faction or leader among them.
“The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda."
The “catastrophe” the Western media constantly cites in its increasingly hysterical headlines is the predictable manifestation of not Syrian and Russian security operations ongoing in Syria today, but of the conspiracy described by Hersh in 2007 that has indisputably been put into play, starting in 2011 under the guise of the so-called “Arab Spring.”
If Major Yaser Abdulrahim looks like he’s never wore his FSA uniform out into the field, that’s because he hasn’t. He is not a member of the FSA at all, and is instead a commander of the Fatah Halab, an umbrella group for Al Qaeda affiliates armed and funded by both the US and Saudi Arabia.
When the West does attempt to give names and faces to these so-called “moderates,” it is a simple matter to trace them directly back to Al Qaeda.
The alleged “remote” interview was covered in both locations by professional camera crews, despite Sommerville claiming the situation was so bad, the rebels could not be reached. The “senior rebel commander inside Aleppo” interviewed by the BBC was none other than Yaser Abdulrahim.
Faylaq Al-Sham’s flag is clearly seen in the video of the BBC’s fake FSA commander when out in the field. Yaser Abdulrahim is seen out among other terrorists, missing his crisp, brand new FSA uniform and devoid of any FSA insignia.
Despite appearing in a brand new, crisp “Free Syrian Army” uniform never worn once into the field, and sitting beside an equally pristine “Free Syrian Army” French colonial flag, Yaser Abdulrahim has absolutely no affiliations with the otherwise nonexistent “Free Syrian Army.”
Despite appearing in a brand new, crisp “Free Syrian Army” uniform never worn once into the field, and sitting beside an equally pristine “Free Syrian Army” French colonial flag, Yaser Abdulrahim has absolutely no affiliations with the otherwise nonexistent “Free Syrian Army.”
Syria: Before and after US / NATO 'intervention'
Instead, he is a commander of Faylaq Al-Sham, composed of Al Qaeda terrorists and Muslim Brotherhood extremists.
Faylaq Al-Sham and its commander Yaser Abdulrahim, according to Sommerville himself, are part of the larger Fatah Halab umbrella group which also includes Al Qaeda affiliates Ahrar ash-Sham and Jaysh al-Islam – the latter of which literally placed civilians in metal cages on rooftops to use as human shields against Syrian-Russian airstrikes.
“In the course of fighting between armed groups and government forces in the nearby `Adra al-`Omalia in December 2013, Jabhat al-Nusra and Jaysh al-Islam abducted hundreds of civilians, mostly Alawites, according to the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Syria.
The hostages, many of them women and children, are being held in unidentified locations in Eastern Ghouta. The concern is that they are among those in these cages."
The Human Right Watch report is also very alarming, considering it implicates Jaysh al-Islam, a member of Yaser Abdulrahim’s Fatah Halab, as collaborating and fighting alongside US State Department listed terrorist group, Jabhat al-Nusra.
“Since November 2011, al-Nusrah Front has claimed nearly 600 attacks – ranging from more than 40 suicide attacks to small arms and improvised explosive device operations – in major city centers including Damascus, Aleppo, Hamah, Dara, Homs, Idlib, and Dayr al-Zawr.
During these attacks numerous innocent Syrians have been killed. Through these attacks, al-Nusrah has sought to portray itself as part of the legitimate Syrian opposition while it is, in fact, an attempt by AQI to hijack the struggles of the Syrian people for its own malign purposes."
It appears, ironically enough, that through the deception of the Western media, al Nusra has been amply assisted in fully hijacking “the struggles of the Syrian people for its own malign purposes.”
BBC’s “US-backed rebel commander” heads a faction that includes the terrorist Jaysh al-Islam faction who caged civilians and used them as human shields outside of Damascus. The US insists that Syria and Russia must negotiate with such organizations and that such organizations should play a role in Syria’s future.
The BBC’s abhorrent dressing-up of literal members of Al Qaeda and their affiliates in their recent interview fits into a larger pattern of deceit aimed at salvaging the conspiracy described by Hersh in 2007, but upended when in late last year, the Russian Federation upon the invitation of the Syrian government, intervened in the conflict.
With Aleppo teetering at the edge of liberation from what are clearly terrorist forces – the BBC’s propaganda and propaganda like it being propagated by the West represents a cynical attempt to perpetuate – not end – the suffering of the Syrian people.
What is worse still, is that the BBC claims their Fatah Halab-Al Qaeda umbrella group commander dressed as a member of the “Free Syrian Army,” is “US-backed.”
This is either an attempt by the BBC to further deceive their audiences as to who the man they interviewed really was, or an inadvertent admission that the United States is in fact funding the very terrorist groups and their associates, populating their own US State Department list of foreign terrorist organizations.
Whatever the case, the fact that even a carefully staged production like the one published by the BBC is easily exposed as a deliberate attempt to cover up the terroristic identity of what’s left of the West’s “rebels,” adds further imperative to the Syrian government and their Russian, Lebanese, Iraqi, and Iranian allies to end the war and fully restore order to the entirety of Syria’s territory.
To negotiate with “rebels” who are clearly terrorists dressed in literal costumes, is an absurdity the West would never accept foisted upon them – thus, no other nation on Earth should accept the West foisting such terms upon them.
Radio Station George FM Warns Staff About Max Key February 12 2016 | From: NZHerald
Radio DJs at George FM have been warned they will be taken off air if they say anything negative about the station's newest host, Max Key [son of Prime Minister John Key].
Key's new role at the station was unveiled last week, hosting a one-hour show on Tuesday nights. He will unveil his debut single Forget You on his first show next week.
Obviously Max Key becoming a night time host for a show on George FM has stirred up some controversy. I know I sent them an email saying what a stupid decision it was and that I would never listen again to heir station as long as he was on it. It seems their management (Media Works owned by Rupert Murdoch) have instructed all their staff to stay mum about this on air and on social media. What are you scared of George? The truth?
An unverified email reportedly sent to all George FM staff warned staff that "all social media relating to the new night George FM Night time residents must be positive.
"We will not tolerate any negativity relating to any of our new roster," the message continued. "Anyone who cannot adhere to this requirement will be taken off air instantly."
Mediaworks didn't respond to requests for comment about the statement.
When contacted by the Herald last week, Max Key said he "wasn't doing media" and didn't want to comment.
George FM founder Thane Kirby
But George FM DJ Aroha Harawira spoke out in support of Key, saying he should be judged on his musical ability and not his father's politics.
"I haven't met Max Key yet myself, I've never seen him DJ, but I heard him on George FM last night and I thought he played a pretty sweet set," Harawira wrote on her blog site.
"I value my friends' opinions and I'll give the guy a chance. I think you should too ... Say what you want about John Key, but leave his kids out of it."
Max Key's first show on George FM is on February 16, where he'll unveil his new single, Forget You, rumoured to be about his recent split from Amelia Finlayson.
In an interview on the station, Key said he'd been working on his material on his own, and he was "super excited" to release it. Co-host Jay Bulletproof said he had heard the song, and it was an "absolute banger".
"I'm proud to say I'm releasing my first single Forget You. Previewing on my first show on George fm nights, Tuesday the 16th at 10pm ... I can't wait to drop this," he wrote on Instagram.
Conspiracy: This Is Why Brazil Is Ground Zero For The Latest Bio-Engineered Pandemic February 11 2016 | From: TheMilleniumReport
Every Major Disease Outbreak Has Been Manufactured in the Biological Weapons Laboratories of the Western Powers.
The U.S. and U.K. possess the most advanced scientific knowledge and applied technology for producing bio-weaponry, which they routinely utilize to create bio-weapons of mass destruction.
Decades ago the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) of the United States of America (in collaboration with their British counterparts) committed itself to the deliberate path of exerting full-spectrum dominance over the entire planetary realm.
The essentially Anglo-American Military-Industrial Complex undertook various and sundry endeavors simultaneously in order to fulfill this ‘critical’ mission to attain and maintain world domination.
Not only did the MIC achieve nuclear superiority within the world community of nations, the U.S. Armed Services also created a global network of military bases unrivaled in world history.
One of the key pillars of attaining full spectrum dominance is the capacity to execute bio-weaponry programs surreptitiously, quickly and efficiently… anywhere on Planet Earth.
Toward that end the many bio-weapons laboratories which now dot the landscape of the USA have worked assiduously to fabricate the perfect biological weapons for the ‘right’ applications and ‘perfect’ situations.
It’s important to understand that the USA and UK form the very backbone of a supranational entity known as the Anglo-American Axis. This large group of countries, which is dedicated to maintaining the Anglo-American Empire - by every means possible - has been locked in a century-long war against the BRICS nations.
As a matter of fact, the First and Second World Wars were both waged in an effort to establish the USA as the military arm of the New World Order.
NATO is merely an extension of the Anglo-American military juggernaut.
Although it has not been declared, a full-blown World War III has been and is being waged under the radar between the AAA and the BRICS.
The entire Middle East is obviously just one major military theater of this ongoing global conflict. So are Africa and South America. Only on those two continents the preferred weapons of mass destruction are of a biological nature.
History of Genocide via Bio-Weapons
You see, the white man learned long ago that the people of the African continent are deathly afraid of contagious diseases and infectious epidemics. The populations of many of the South American countries suffer from the very same phobia.
They don’t understand illness and disease the way that the educated and industrialized nations of the Northern Hemisphere do. There is much superstition which still surrounds any kind of disease outbreak, especially throughout the rural areas. The resulting taboos run very deep throughout society.
With this hidden knowledge it is now quite easy to understand why so many disease outbreaks first occur in either Africa or South America. Whether it is Ebola in West Africa or the West Nile Virus in East Africa, HIV/AIDS in West Central Africa or Malaria anywhere in Africa, Chagas disease in South America or Dengue fever throughout the whole Southern Hemisphere, so many ‘pandemics’ find their origins “south of the border”.
No one denies that the southern climes and predominant biota cultivate an extremely conducive environment for mosquito-borne diseases and the like. This scientific fact is quite well established.
The point here is that because these ‘scary’ diseases are well known among the local populations, they can be furtively spread by those who wish to do them harm by their silent enemies to the north.
The deliberate vector of disseminations are many to include stealth vaccinations, GMO mosquitoes, tainted prescriptions, contaminated water supplies, infected farm animals, toxic produce, corrupted restaurant food, chemtrail aerosols, etc.
This is a subtle but very important point. These diseases are known to be common in these regions of the world; therefore, no one suspects that they have been meticulously weaponized to make them much more deadly.
They have also been precisely bio-engineered to target specific gene pools and bloodlines.
In this fashion the Indigenous Peoples can be gradually killed off so that they no longer pose an obstacle to giving up their lands to the covetous Anglo-American corporate interests.
This very same tactic was of course used against the Native American Indians by the U.S. Federal Government that was determined to wipe out the tribes across America in order to steal their lands. That strategy really worked like a charm for them. And they have never forgotten it.
After all, how could the Indian warriors, who contracted smallpox from the blankets provided to them by the ‘friendly’ white brothers, ever fight on the harsh battlefields?
As for the Indigenous Peoples of Brazil, how are they expected to respond to a terrible disease that shrinks the human head and arrests brain development. Yes, that is what the Zika virus does, unless the public is being misled about the true source of this medical crisis.
Fast Forward to the 2016 Olympics in Brazil
Whenever bio-weapons of mass destruction are used with such great effect there are always several goals on the agenda of the perpetrators. The Zika virus outbreak is no exception.
Because of where the exact ground zero of this explosive epidemic is located in Brazil, it is certain that this public health disaster was quite purposefully manufactured there to disrupt the 2016 Summer Olympics.
Brazil has already been under continuous assault by the AAA, as it represents the South American cornerstone of the BRICS economic union. The Brazilian economy is also the largest in South and Central America, therefore, it provides a much-needed financial engine to keep the BRICS momentum going throughout the world.
The AAA knew that if they took down Brazil economically, as they have been doing relentlessly on the political front, the BRICS union would be weakened considerably. The new world reserve currency would then likely stay with the still dominant petrodollar during this crucial period where it is also under serious assault.
Both Russia and China have already undermined the petrodollar in profound and irreparable ways. So have Iran and India and other quieter BRICS-aligned nations
The important point about Brazil is that a substantial amount of public money and resources have been allocated to this formidable and demanding enterprise known as the Summer Olympics. The private sector, as always, has also dedicated much investment to making the Olympics a commercial success.
With the Zika virus and ensuing epidemic raging in the back yard of Rio de Janeiro, what else could be expected but the second prong of the AAA strategy to sabotage the 2016 Summer Olympiad.
What better way to further destroy the fragile Brazilian economy and sap the spirit of the nation?!
The Anglo-American corporatocracy has enjoyed the status of global hegemon since the advent of the Industrial Revolution. Because of the rapacious nature of the predatory capitalism that it systematically employs, it only knows how to take from those who have what they want. This is the way it has always been since the incorporation of the East India Company in London in 1600.
The Huge difference between now and when India was pillaged, China was plundered and Africa was raped is that the BRICS are now well aware of the true enemy and its unrelenting tactics.
Russia and China, India and Brazil, Iran and South Africa are under constant attack by the AAA. However, they now have a very secret weapon that is being trained on the City of London and Washington, D.C.
More accurately, the BRICS have a number of secret weapons which will be employed with great consequence and awesome effect on the primary nations of the AAA. Part II of this series will further discuss those secret weapons. In the meantime, the reader is encouraged to contemplate the overwhelming repercussions of just one of those weapons known as: Free Enegy
It has been rightly pointed out by many that the looming Zika virus ‘pandemic’ may be to a great extent based on fraudulent data and false information. Inasmuch as it is being reported by those agencies like WHO which are completely controlled by the AAA, why should the MSM ever be believed?
Because of all the fake false flags and fictitious disease outbreaks occurring over many decades such as the recent Ebola scare, it’s clear that these trumpeted pandemics have a huge component of purposefully deceptive reporting.
However, it is virtually impossible to ferret out the truth about a manufactured and bogus pandemic. To what degree is there a real mosquito-borne Zika virus causing the profiled symptoms is extremely difficult to say. Especially given the typical demographics of these types of mosquito-borne public health disasters, it’s even more challenging to arrive at the truth. After all, they ALL occur in virtually the same geographic areas.
With that said, we leave it up to the reader to decide how much of this fastidiously ZIKA health scare is real disease and how much is phony baloney.
We almost forgot to mention what the original source of the Zika virus was, as well as who originally deposited it in 1947 - the Rockefeller Foundation.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
The Anglo-American Axis is represented, first and foremost, by the major English-speaking countries of the world: USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel. The European member nations of NATO, such as Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands are also closely aligned with the AAA as are all the Scandinavian countries. So are the Asian Pacific Rim nations of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines.
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, and Qatar also owe their allegiance to the AAA but some of these may be changing. The World Shadow Government is an ultra-secret, supranational organization which completely controls the Anglo-American Axis, as well as the European Union, NATO, among many other institutional entities which constitute the Global Control Matrix.
Hidden Truths About The Mainstream News Media February 10 2016 | From: Sott
There is a growing trend of skepticism on the internet right now as people start to call out mainstream media for its honesty (or rather, lack thereof).
It's an important move for people in general, as there are good reasons to question the talking heads that are gifted with such a reach and influence, via a brand whose survival is based upon getting and keeping your attention.
To give someone, or some brand, the authority to tell you what is true, is one of the greatest mistakes a human being can make. Here's why.
Yes, of course, I know I'm about to tell you how to think in this article, being written on a brand you recognize, that survives on getting and keeping your attention. But at least I'm honest about that. I'm not going to attempt to prove that I know everything about every newsroom on the planet. I can only tell you about some of the common things that I have seen, in the newsrooms I have been in.
I worked in television news for 10 years from 2004 to 2015, working for primarily the finance channel of Canada, Business News Network, and since 2011, the now-deceased Sun News Network, which was an attempt at a conservative slanted broadcast in the Canadian market. It was called the 'Fox News North' by many critics, and rightfully so, to some degree.
Through this career, and especially at Sun News Network, I was privy to many off-camera conversations which really helped me see through the illusory idea that, just because you're on TV, you know what you're talking about. In fact, I grew terrified to keep producing it for that reason.
Here's the first thing that many people don't truly understand about the news media. It is biased to those that fund it.
There were many times when we were forced to cut an advertisement or cut a story or remove something from the website because an advertiser didn't want to be associated with it and, as a result, our financial livelihoods were threatened.
TV is literally at the mercy of those that fund it because it's a business. TV, as it is, has no other way to survive except for advertising revenue, which depends on getting and keeping your attention. In effect, news media is a marketing tool for advertisers, and its content is sometimes designed to match the next best product coming out of these advertisers.
The second thing that many people don't really respect is that TV and mainstream news are almost always tied to political or religious agendas. Whether Liberal or Conservative, Republican or Democrat, there are news media outlets designed to serve the flavor of the person watching. This essentially means that the same story will be told two distinctly different ways, to match the audience watching.
This means that the concept of non-media-bias is irrelevant in 2016. The moral idea of non-bias reporting has been thrown out, necessarily, because TV survives off money and that money often comes from large companies who are funding certain political sides, who require their side to win.
News isn't about news anymore, it's a marketing tool for politicians and larger corporations looking to buy votes through fear and buy customers with stupidity.
I can't count the number of times I saw story after story being put out about how bad things are in the world, only to see the supporting political party start to speak about how they are going to solve these issues.
It's like walking up to someone and throwing coffee on them, staining their shirt, knowing full well that your buddy next to you has a shirt to sell to them. It's easy to win an election when you've already primed the people to believe in what you're saying, without ever saying it.
The third thing that plagues the news media is sensationalism, and headlines that polarize audiences. It's important to 'tell it like it is and report the facts,' but often these facts are not fact checked enough and headlines get published that are later apologized for.
One of my favorite games is to re-read the news to tell what actually happened, without the extra, juicy details. As an example, this headline - 'Councillors reject salary freeze for themselves' - could really be read as 'Councillors reject salary freeze.'
Once you start taking out all of the descriptors and judgments, you realise that the world is a lot simpler to look at.
Media can easily make us believe that we should judge each other. I've seen this firsthand. Once you see, hear, or read something enough times, you start to think it's actually true. The truth is, by taking out the judgments, we can re-engage our curiosity instead of instantly activating our condemnation and resentment towards each other and the world.
However, the media is again kept alive by your attention, and the fact is, most of us will pay more attention to things that make us hate than we will pay attention to things that make us love. The media knows this, and it's playing you like a violin, if you're paying attention.
The fourth thing that occurs, almost daily, in the newsrooms is that people are constantly shifting roles. Yesterday, John (as an example) is an expert on social media.
Today, John is now an expert on terrorism, since 8am this morning, and yet, even though John has no expertise in this field whatsoever, he's given the credibility of people who can't see the truth behind the camera. Or in another example, we'll hear from the financial executive coming to tell you how to invest your stocks despite having a bottle of Jack Daniels in his coat pocket and who is himself losing money behind the scenes.
This is a huge challenge in our culture, in my perception, and I'm glad it's slowly being called out. Giving power to a talking head who hates his or her life just as much as you, has no interest in anyone else's well-being except their own, and especially doesn't care about you, and who isn't truly doing what they really love or want to do, is delusional.
Why would you pay attention to the lives of others who don't have your life's best interests in mind? This is like going to a 10 times divorcee for advice on how to stay in a marriage.
And with that said, the fifth thing is that news media rarely actually matters in your life. With all honesty, what does the life of Jian Ghomeshi, for example, have to do with you? Does it really matter to you to know that Miley Cyrus moved in with her boyfriend? Does knowing these things actually help you live a better life?
If there's one thing I am certain of it's this - the more successful you are, the less you care about the lives of anyone except those that you serve, because you're too busy caring about your customers to care about people who aren't invested in your well being. My advice is this:
Reword the headlines so that you see the facts, simply, without editorially presented emotion or judgment. This can keep you from adopting the judgments of someone who might have a life fulfillment level that's way worse than yours.
Never take what is said as the full truth. Investigate for yourself what's really happening and see both sides.
Pay attention to what actually matters to you. If you want to be successful, start paying attention to your own life.
Start telling your own evening news about what you accomplished today. Get interested in yourself and your experience here on this planet, with the time you have. This is the only way to keep yourself sane and out of the clutches of those who want to manipulate your mind for their interests.
Watch only what inspires you and helps you live and express your true calling. It's your choice to watch a worldview that's distorted by distorted people, or engage in creating a worldview that inspires you to act in it. Just because there are 'perceived problems' in the world, doesn't mean you don't have a role in doing something in it.
The Big Squeeze vs. Khazarian Mafia January 22 2016 | From: Geopolitics
The result of the well-coordinated operation to cut-off the Khazarian Mafia from the rest of the global economy is now undeniable.
The fiat FED dollar denominated economy is effectively shut down as indicated in the free-falling Baltic Dry Index.
Again, we are featuring another summary of the information that’s already been in this site and some new information detailing the personalities involved that should facilitate the understanding of what’s been going on for at least the last eight years.
Big Squeeze Now On Khazarian Mafia
This article builds on past articles on this subject. For those who haven’t read those, reading this article is likely a waste of time and it will be difficult to fit this information into their heads.
This is a long article and is written as a two-tiered piece. Those short of time can read the bold print and pass over the rest, and then finish with the conclusion. Many thanks to my sources, some still living but most passed. None have been associated with Veterans Today in any way. I do not enjoy writing this type of article for a number of reasons not appropriate to be discussed here. But I do feel an obligation to get this information out. ]
Numerous nations around the World have now ganged up on the Khazarian Mafia (KM).
It is cornered and it is losing power by the day. Expect increased surveillance and harassment by local police who take orders from Homeland Security (DHS) and receive their ridiculous conjured up Domestic Terror Watch Lists.
How much real power does the Khazarian Mafia have left and for how long can it hold out? Is the Khazarian Mafia still powerful enough to start another major war in the Mideast, or even a nuclear WW3 to serve as a covering event for their impending loss of World hegemony?
There are recent reports from China that the Chinese Government has ordered that its international cargo shipping in both the Pacific and the Atlantic be restricted.
One source with connections to mainland Chinese sources has verified this claim that China has given an ultimatum that there will be a big reduction in their cargo ships unloading any products until the USG begins to honor the Secret Reset Agreement they entered into in 2013 during G-20 meetings.
The Baltic Dry Shipping Index is way down, less than half of what it was at its peak. Crude oil has dropped to $30 a barrel or less, and in Canada shale oil is even as low at $10 a barrel. American retail sales were low during Christmas and many retail chains plan to close stores at multiple locations, including the notorious Walmart.
And oil derivatives of the big Wall Street Banks are under extreme stress due to these oil prices which has now placed several of the largest in jeopardy. The US Petro Dollar is now under stress as never before and the massive continued issuing and printing after the bailouts (repetitive Quantitative Easings, #7 and counting), the secret US Treasury Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF) direct foreign bank bailouts of trillions, and the secret direct USG Plunge Protection Team stock purchases in mass no longer seem to mitigate this slide.
Several foreign nations have asked for their Gold back that has been stored at the Federal Reserve, but only a portion has been shipped because the vaults are now apparently empty.
Chinese and Russian purchases of massive quantities of Gold and Silver are fact, not theory, giving them a huge advantage as the Federal Reserve System’s Ponzi scheme approaches collapse.
Comex paper Gold which is supposed to be backed 100% by real Gold is not. This is just another part of the Federal Reserve System’s massive Ponzi scheme which has probably already hit the iceberg and is taking on water.
The Khazarian Mafia’s top leadership is being squeezed and now seems cornered. They claim to each other to work directly for Lucifer who they describe as their new “rising god” (they call this “Lucifer Rising”). Others in this small circle describe Lucifer as a renegade Third Force who will cut these folks loose in a NY Minute as soon as they serve no useful purpose anymore. And that is what now seems to be happening. Looks like their “god” is going to let them down. Oh well, should they have expected less from pure evil?
When you dance with the devil, you are going to get burned. That’s the function of Doofus Cutouts that are propelled to the top and given power, status and riches beyond imagination. They are there to serve as disposables when it’s all said and done and they are no longer needed. They will never see it coming when they are abandoned and “cut-loose”.
If there is going to be new monetary system set up for the World and that’s the way it looks, and it likely will not include the Khazarian Mafia Kingpins.
As best we can determine before Chinese cargo shipping decreased, China was demanding that their Renminbi be included in a basket of currencies.
And we know that the Renminbi will be backed by Gold and this basket of currencies will replace the current exclusiveness of the US Petro Dollar which functions as the World’s Reserve Currency.
This same source has claimed that the Japanese Government has just agreed to be part of the Chinese created Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). If these reports are accurate then this means that Khazarian Mafia is being squeezed economically.
For the G-20 nations and especially the USA to honor this Secret Reset Agreement made in 2013, the Khazarian Mafia must be removed from its position controlling the World’s Central Banking.
It also apparently requires the acceptance of the Chinese Renminbi based on Gold and Silver as a part of an international basket of currencies and the removal of the US Petro Dollar as the World’s Reserve Currency.
Looks like the Khazarian Mafia is now being squeezed from many directions. And it is rapidly losing control which makes it desperate and dangerous.
When the World’s largest Organized Crime Syndicate the Khazarian Mafia feels cornered one would expect that it would become desperate to re-establish control and take even more drastic actions that it has in the past, unless too much force is arrayed against them from more than one enemy.
And now for the first time numerous enemies have arisen against the Khazarian Mafia. And two of them are quite powerful.
The first and most powerful enemy appears to be the Russian Federation.
Putin and the Russian Federation have now completely checkmated the Khazarian Mafia both in the Ukraine and in Syria and is now annihilating ISIS by deployment of its superior air power.
The second most powerful appears to be the American People, a very well-armed sleeping giant that is now rapidly awaking.
This new exigent power of the American Masses is due to the Alternative Media of the Internet. The Internet has provided incredible speed and the fact that so many Americans are finally figuring out everything out of our elected Politicians’ mouths via the CMMM is their propaganda, big lies and false-narratives.
And the recent dire economy, and massive unemployment since 2008 brought about by all these traitorous Free Trade Agreements and two illegal, unConstitutional “Wall Street Bailouts” have created a spontaneously emerging populism in the American Masses.
This massive populism is not only unprecedented but it is now accompanied by a rising anger towards the DC “doofus” career politicians and this new populism is increasingly powerful.
The Khazarian Mafia has deployed false-flag attacks all around the World and in America using Cutouts. Some were mass-shootings in gun-free zones hyped in the Controlled Major Mass Media (CMMM), and others were major bombings like at the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995 or the World Trade Center in NYC on 9-11-01.
The purpose is always to justify more power to central government in order to help the Khazarian Mafia protect itself and its Evil Agenda.
But now that the Khazarian Mafia is being squeezed from all sides, will we see increased harassment of investigative journalists, known truth tellers and dissidents who run counter to the Khazarian Mafia’s propaganda, big lies and false-narratives they dispense through their CMMM?
Might we start seeing mysterious and increasingly frequent disappearances like what occurred in the South American Death Squads? After all these Death Squads were all trained by the US Military and the CIA inside the USA, and these schools for torture and murder are still active.
And recently Chicago was caught running a black site for DHS to disappear Targeted Individuals. Other cities have these too. And the Pentagon and the CIA still run the Black Prison sites in East European nations and also have black prison ships which are still active. Check this for more information.
We should expect the DHS to put out increasingly negative smear reports to the local Police Departments creating increased fear of known truth tellers, dissidents, patriots and gun owners? This will include folks who have been illegally placed on Domestic terror Watch lists with instructions to begin increased surveillance and harassment against them?
We now know for certain that the Khazarian Mafia’s actions in the past in America have included the Bombing of the Murrah Building, first attempted bombing of the NYC Twin towers by the FBI setting up and supplying the Blind Sheikh. This was actually an acoustics test to establish needs for the devices the Khazarian Mafia used in Twin Towers attack on 9-11-01.
And the FBI (with help of the CIA and crooked US Customs agents) placed a stolen barrel of cyanide stolen from Louis Champon’s Natural Cherry Flavoring Company in Boca Raton Florida through a tunnel under the street by Wackem’out World Security.
This was done to see what the effects on folks near the blast in the basement parking ramp would be. Actually the blast destroyed the toxicity of the cyanide.
Naturally the FBI tried to secretly and wrongly frame Louis Champon for this and only failed through the incredible detective work of James Rothstein (NYCPD Gold Shield, police Intel and key part of the infamous NY State Crime Commission Secret 15 man Intel Task Force - now long retired for arresting Frank Sturgis aka Frank Fiorini in NYC for trying to terminate Marita Lorenz right before her secret appearance at the HSCA and turning over of photos with Ruby, Sturgiss, Oswald at the motel the night before the JFK Assassination and more).
Detective Rothstein, a German Catholic, is the only member of this secret 15 man task force who has survived (most were terminated with extreme prejudice by the CIA) to suppress what they found out. Detective Rothstein is one of the greatest American Heroes in Law Enforcement we have ever had anywhere in America.
His investigations led to more prosecutions of CIA pedophiles, their pedophile murders, and the CIA drug dealers than any other LE person in the history of America and his record still stands.
None of this ever was allowed into the CMMM of course. Rothstein’s astoundingly frank book is expected to be published this year and it will be very interesting. His long term efforts to bring St. John’s Abbey to justice for the pedophile sheep-dipped, rat-lined ex-Nazi priests that have been kept there and protected from prosecution are well known, and he is still at it.
Too bad the local police are crooked, and the FBI continues to look the other way and do their usual assigned job, cover up for the “Process”.
So this World’s largest organized Crime Syndicate the Khazarian Mafia is truly capable of untold evil against the American people as well as the whole World as long as it is allowed to exist and occupy and parasitize the USG for its own purposes.
Every large urban police dept. and the alphabets, especially the FBI has an Intel plant embedded there to run cover-ups for the “Process” Satanic Cult and the CIA drug trafficking, both protected by being deputized as agents of National Security”.
Inside America the Khazarian Mafia has controlled the Alphabets including the FBI, its main cover up agency and entrapment/setup agency and the BATF, as well as the CIA; and they have always done a lot of the Khazarian Mafia’s illegal dirty work.
And of course after the Khazarian Mafia attacked America on 9-11-01 to create a New Pearl Harbor event, they were now in a position to establish Homeland Security (DHS) the foundation of the long planned American Police State.
This plan to establish DHS was already written and ready to push through Congress awaiting a major catalytic event such as the major terrorist attack of 9-11-01 which was run by the Khazarian Mafia and its stateside assets deep inside the Administration and the Pentagon.
The attack on America of 9-11-01 was designed to consolidate all American Law Enforcement under one central command directly controlled by the Khazarian Mafia, a known foreign based power, and justify becoming a nation based on preemptive wars of aggression.
The secret agenda of DHS is to transform America into a total surveillance society, a Police State rivaling East Germany under the Stasi. That is why Marcus Wolfe (former head of the Stasi) was hired as a consultant to set up DHS two years before he mysteriously died.
The ultimate end game here is for the Khazarian Mafia to use DHS to transform America into GAZA II, the World’s largest open-air prison camp and to make Americans the New Palestinians. This is all part of the “Greater Israel Plan” which is no longer theory but established fact.
And the “Greater Israel Plan” is the cover story used by the Khazarian Mafia’s top leadership (aka the “Select Few”) to use its Cutouts and main action agent the American-Israeli “Israeli-first” Dual Citizen Traitors and the Likudists in Israel to do their dirty work.
The American Controlled Major Mass Media (CMMM) has been losing its credibility for years, and its popularity is at an all-time low.
Since the CMMM is the main mouthpiece and propaganda/mind-kontrol agent for the Khazarian Mafia, its demise poses a big loss of power for the Khazarian Mafia. And we now know for certain its demise is being engendered by the increasing popularity of the Alternative News of the Internet.
The Khazarian Mafia is now cornered and you can bet that Homeland Security (DHS) is busy at work creating smear reports at their fusion centers to send to local police with the instructions to increase the harassment of suspected domestic terrorists.
Expect greatly increased surveillance and spying on all Americans even the Khazarian Mafia’s underling yes men and women and major doofuses who have been appointed to high positions of power and to provide a twisted sort of inside humor to the very top controllers that run the Khazarian Mafia System.
Spying and Intel collection has become remarkably advanced and will continue to increase in frequency, scope and intrusiveness.
Much of it is used for banal entertainment by bored “no longer give a damn” NSA and NRO employees who dig watching and listening to bedroom type scenes. The NSA and NRO are collecting far more raw data than they can adequately process effectively, and it has become mostly a money-making means to asset strip more and more money from We The People and make a big show of power by the Khazarian Mafia.
Some deep black and top secret technologies include; use of one’s own AC house wiring, smart TV’s, personal especially laptop and handheld computers, cell phones, wired phones, remote phones, smart TV’s and smart appliances; remote outdoor to indoor thermometers and weather meters and stations for homeowners; some TV remote controls with voice activation; really spooky new methods like driving by and shooting a special micro-transceiver nail in the siding that is matched for color and texture; wall penetrating drive-by radar systems (also used along major highways in unmarked white step vans and 18-wheelers; vehicle, aircraft, and satellite based special infrared sensors); high powered close-by receivers for picking up brain waves and decoding thought and emotional states; …
…embedded transceiver chips in all cell phones ad auto GPS and blue-tooth communication and “seek help” systems which can be remotely activated and easily traced and used a GPS tracking and used for microphones; orbital super HD electronic day and night vision cameras than can sense an ant on the ground and many license plates; deep black variable and synthetic aperture ground penetrating radar, advance gamma ray and neutron particle sensors and other even more secret means involved ground, truck, tower and satellite antennas designed to pick up brainwave transmissions which have been altered by ingested nano-particles in the atmospherically sprayed aerosol chem-trails and gasoline which include nano-particles of aluminum and barium and other magnetic and electrical compounds which can be flashed, id’ed and used to alter brainwave transmissions for external monitoring (referred to as the “prime freak”).
There are other even more advance psi-power means that are so far down the rabbit-hole they would be too discrediting to discuss in this article. But they do exist and can be effective in many situations.
More on those in another article perhaps.
But even worse DHS uses the special deniable contractor squads and retired miltel, FBI and CIA to gang-stalk, do personal surveillance, walk-bys, and moving in next door or as close as possible to key targeted individuals who are deemed as first line threat to their system of lies.
Paranoid yet? Haha
And as if that wasn’t enough, these special squads have specialists that deploy advanced psychotronic warfare against USG, Intel, military and corporate whistle-blowers on behalf of the Khazarian Mafia kingpins that is designed to cause chronic health problems, lethal medical disorders and suppression of thinking and acting.
Some of these devices are cell tower activated, some by doppler weather radar, some closely custom placed transmitters triangulated in from close-by spy cell and corporate proprietaries. For those that claim this is all pure fantasy and bs I can strongly reply you are wrong, dead wrong. How can I say that?
Well I have personally swept Mark Novitsky’s residence with sensors used by the German Health Department and found it way over the allowable European accepted limits with some equipment red-lined. Some sources inside the home were disabled or removed, and we found strong external sources.
As we started tracing and triangulating their location of external transmissions, they were suddenly turned off preventing location. Novitsky is as important in what he knows and has attempted to disclose as Snowden. 60 Minutes was going to do a big story on him but backed out at the last minute because they said it had become too complicated.
Other top Federal and Intel whistle-blowers have told Novitsky what he knows about is above their pay grade. Most avoid him like the plague. All his local Senators and Congresspersons were notified by Novitsky (evidence in writing I have seen) and all deny it and did nothing, except for Governor Mark Dayton who was a Senator at the time.
Dayton has a good reputation with his staff and when terrorism struck in DC he immediately placed the safety of his staff first. He did what he could for Novitsky and We The People but was stepped on hard.
Now Dayton is the Governor of Minnesota and appears to be doing his best to get the the states decaying infrastructure repaired. Novitsky has been placed on the top secret DHS “No Work under any Circumstances List” by the FBI, which follows him around and tells any employer where he applies that he is a Domestic Terrorist, “please do not hire him, he is on our Domestic Terror Watch List and under surveillance - you wouldn’t want to be put on our Watch List now, would you?”
The one good job Novitsky had in a non-Intel related area after leaving the Teletech Holdings related company he worked for was ruined when the FBI showed up and delivered a National Security Letter (NSL) which his employer was allowed to read but not keep, and which threatened a $10,000 fine and up to 10 years in a federal prison if he ever disclosed anything about this NSL letter or why he was going to have to separate Novitsky.
And Mark has had strange but very real recent medical problems and his first doctors were either dirty, Khazarian Mafia worker bees, Sayanims or just plain uncaring and medically lousy.
The lab was either dirty or had folks inside that tampered with his blood work. Finally, he was able to find a top physician who is 100% ethical with a top academic reputation and will not kowtow to illegal government manipulations.
And who are DHS’s listed domestic terrorists? Gun owners, Ron Paul supporters, Veterans, libertarians, Christians, Islamics, Patriots, anti-war activists, dissidents and alternative media reporters and journalists and many many more individuals and groups that can be placed on the list by any supervisory agent after even one complaint of any kind and these watch lists have no oversight or appeal process. Once you are on these Watch Lists you are doomed to be on forever.
Even Senator Ted Kennedy was put on the “No Fly List” by mistake and despite expensive legal efforts and big political muscle he could never get off of it. Why you wonder?
Because these Terror Watch lists are creations of the Khazarian Mafia Kingpins. They are visible indicators of their unbridled twisted, sick, evil power produced by their infiltration and hijacking of America through their private pernicious usury debt-note private Fiat counterfeit Ponzi-type central banking system.
We may see increased harassment and abuse of phony domestic terror watch lists.
We may see increased harassment by local police, alphabets as ordered by DHS, according to their whacked out “watch lists” that include almost everyone but the real domestic terrorists who are the Khazarian Mafia leaders and the top officials of DHS, whose job is to terrorize Americans into subservience and compliance and take away all our Constitutional Rights.
On the other hand, we may see such a rapid loss of functional day to day power by the Khazarian Mafia and their police state mechanism, DHS, that we do not see a big increase in surveillance and harassment. Maybe we will even see less now that the Khazarian Mafia is cornered and being pressed from all sides by the World and by We The People.
The confidential domestic terror “Watch Lists” lists were personally prepared under the watchful direction of Janet Napolitano while she was head of DHS.
These were leaked and published on the Internet by DHS insiders who thought she and DHS was a joke but wanted to keep their pay and benefits, so we know for certain they exist and what is on them. Even though she resigned her position at DHS, she is being sued by subordinate men for sexual harassment and for moving their office into the men’s lavatory, among other things.
A couple of nights ago while driving at night in the early evening, I was pulled over and needlessly rousted by a local police Officer, who claimed I crossed over the line three times on a stretch of road with no other traffic close by.
This fine very young lady police officer tailed me for a couple miles and then pulled me over. I don’t drink, use drugs, speed or drive carelessly, nor did I did not cross over any lines.
After the usual license and insurance check, the Officer let me go with no ticket. But she asked me a question about something irrelevant that could she have only known about from information gained by a local stingray tap or from the local DHS Fusion Center. Not very professional. She was rousting me, and it was a message that I received and am now responding to.
A Deal with the Devil at Langley?
In this same Department some years back, the prior Police Chief was provided a free trip to Langley for a special meeting. During that meeting, he was asked by the CIA to sign a secret Jurisdictional Agreement on behalf of his Department in which he agreed to submit jurisdiction on any case to the Feds that they requested.
Major amounts of military grade equipment was to be provided in exchange, including two armored cars, grenade launchers, full-auto real assault rifles and machine guns, body armor, bullet proof barriers and lots of military grade ammo.
The Chief was an honorable man with integrity and refused to sign the agreement. Did he develop a strange neurological condition soon after that and have to resign?
Did the CIA keep secretly working with a couple corrupt officers to distribute illegal drugs to high school kids from “DEA controlled deliveries”, a local smaller “feeder airport” through a seafood import “proprietary”, with a local drug task force (with special license plates to identify each other) either looking the other way or involved. Betcha this hasn’t stopped.
The department got a new Chief and now has the equipment offered. You can be sure that this secret transaction has already been successfully made in almost every large Urban Police Department. So far, a significant number of Sheriff’s offices have refused. The County Sheriff is the supreme law enforcement officer in any county and has authority even over the Feds.
Be clear about this, these deals with the Devil at Langley to get jurisdiction over your local police are all driven by the Khazarian Mafia Kingpins who are Neo-Bolsheviks who plan to use DHS and our local Police to terrorize us, tyrannize us, completely asset strip us and then mass-murder us.
Supposedly all these “1033 Program” military equipment transfers for the big stuff have been stopped. Don’t believe it, that is mere propaganda, and the only big stuff going back is for updated electronic warfare systems, new advanced weaponry or for repair and major maintenance.
For now until the Khazarian Mafia’s back is broken, expect increased surveillance and harassment by local police if you are in one of the categories on their watch lists (which is about half of the American people).
This is the kind of surveillance and increased harassment Gun owners, Ron Paul supporters, Veterans, libertarians, Christians, Islamics, Patriots, anti-war activists, dissidents and alternative media reporters and journalists can expect more of as the Khazarian Mafia’s power is choked off by the whole World that is now ganging up on it.
DHS is here to militarize the American Police and turn America into a Neo-Bolshevik Stasi-style Police State and transform it into GAZA II with all Americans the New Palestinians. Once that is accomplished the Khazarian Mafia plans to treat Americans the same way Bolsheviks treated innocent Russian civilians.
It raped, tortured and mass murdered 100 million of them. The Khazarian Mafia is Neo-Bolshevik and its top Policy-Makers are from the same age old bloodlines. They have recorded their intentions in stone at the Georgia Guidestones so we know this for certain.
But here’s the deal. America is not Russia in 1917 and is the most armed up populace in the World. Despite all the recent efforts of the Khazarian Mafia to force our so-called “elected politicians” to disarm Americans, it will never happen. Americans have been buying guns at an increasing rate ever since the Khazarian Mafia deployed all these mass-shootings in gun free zones and major efforts to grab our guns began in earnest.
Of course, most County Sheriffs in America are populist oriented and part of their local communities and elected because of the respect they have gained and maintained. But even large urban police are starting to wake up.
They have a dangerous enough job already thanks to the CIA drug trafficking into urban cities for black ops money and theirs and the BATF’s continuing gun sales to gangs, especially MS 13 and the Las Zetas who were trained by the US Military inside the USA.
Most American urban police officers have no intention of going door to door to fulfill some crazy unConstitutional Presidential PDD or even a new Congressional law passed. They do not want to turn honest law-abiding American Gun-owners, hunters and Veterans into a Solzenitzen-type spontaneously erupting vigilante counter-force that shoots with bigger bore, more accurate, longer reaching rifles than they can.
Most police officers want to go home to their families at the end of the day, and they know that the anger of the average American is now growing against the out of control militarized swat teams that attack the wrong homes and often kill and maim innocent women and young children.
Smart Officers and chiefs want to establish good community relations and be seen as the community as helpers and public servants, not their oppressors working for the ADL and DHS. By the way, most large urban police departments are trained by the ADL to view the average civilian as real or potential domestic terrorists, especially gun owners.
Now because of the recent public concern for increased mass-shootings and terrorism, many police are changing their minds on gun control and actually favor conceal-carry by law abiding citizens who have met the standards and have proper training.
Too many Chiefs of big urban departments are given free junkets to Israel for such training, and while there are served some very special Koolaide in their drinks and given some sophisticated psychotronic mind-kontrol indoctrination training.
Take the recent case when a dumb swat team broke in the wrong home with no proper warrant and threw a stun grenade into a baby’s crib, burning and blowing off part of the young child’s face. Or the many cases where the wrong homes are stormed by out of control savage swat looking for a few $10 rocks, and innocent life is criminally taken in an instant.
Or all the illegal, unConstitutional seizures of cash and autos from innocent non-drug dealers, taken and placed into police and Federal coffers often into the private pockets of corrupt supervisors and chiefs and judges.
And many Americans are starting to catch on to the fact that some of these mass-shootings in gun-free zones are real with real dead victims, while others like Sandy Hook are faked.
But that all are engineered, staged false-flag attacks on the Second Amendment. This has kept folks confused up until now, but thanks to the efforts of hundreds of tireless researchers the truth is now being published all over the Internet and is now readily available for all.
One thing is certain, the Khazarian Mafia is now cornered and its hegemony is rapidly being eroded. Its false-flag efforts to disarm Americans and any other efforts to do so will fail.
The Khazarian Mafia is now doomed by the whole World which is building massive financial firewalls against it and ganging-up on it. The Khazarian Mafia is being deconstructed bit by bit and you can expect they will have a hard landing and because they are such two-faced psychopaths, they will keep lying and murdering until the end.
Undoubtedly the Big Squeeze is now on the Khazarian Mafia, they are cornered and increasingly desperate and their private Fiat pernicious usury debt-based counterfeit money system has become a Ponzi scheme nearing collapse.
And the BRICS System is just one of many new financial firewalls being built up against the Khazarian Mafia’s financial hegemony which is now destined to fail.
There are certain factions in the Pentagon and American Intel which have so far been strong enough to place strong limits on what the Khazarian Mafia can do to retaliate, and they have been blocked from starting a nuclear WW3 with Russia as intended.
Efforts by Senator John McCain and other Traitors like the retired General commanding ISIS have also failed.
And all their recent efforts to attack Russia through Crimea and to destroy Syria and Iran have also failed because of the new military power and technological supremacy of the Russian Federation under the dynamic leadership of President Putin.
If these reports are true that China is severely restricting their container shipping companies until the Khazarian Mafia honors the Secret Reset Agreement, this is indeed a very interesting development. And if true it suggests that all the hype in the CMMM that China’s economy is worse than ours is likely exaggerated.
A better guess is that China has prepared for this for quite a while and is no longer so dependent on American sales, perhaps already having established some lucrative new markets with Russia, South America, Malaysia and other trading partners. Is this part of a major economic trap for the Khazarian Mafia and its US Petro Dollar? In time we shall find out, and it make not take too long.
How Mnemonic Is Used To Program And Control Your Mind January 20 2016 | From: Omnithought
The adjective definition of the word mnemonic is “assisting or intended to assist the memory.” As for the noun definition, mnemonic means “something intended to assist the memory, as a verse or formula.”
The word mnemonic originated from the Greek word mnemonikos, meaning “of or pertaining to memory”. Based on these definitions, mnemonic is something that affects the memory.
Mnemonic is used in many different media, such as video games, TV commercials, cell phone apps, computers, and movies. The techniques used in mnemonic can be used for good or evil purposes. Unfortunately, most mnemonics of today are used to program our minds in negative ways and control how we think to a large degree. One of the most popular media used for mnemonic is television (TV).
Have you ever wondered why TV shows are sometimes called TV programs?
They are called TV programs because they are using them to program your mind with mnemonics and subliminal messages.
They did not call them TV programs for no reason. It is right in your face and hidden in plain sight.
Do you need more evidence that TV shows are being used to program your mind? TV is the acronym for the word television. Phonetically, the word television sounds like tell-a-vision. They are using TV programs to “tell you a vision,” so they can brainwash you to think the way that they want you to think.
Mnemonics are effective for manipulating your mind because they utilize sacred geometry, sigil, sound, and light to create magic effects to control your thought patterns. Because of their effectiveness, many corporations are replacing conventional subliminal messages with mnemonics in their advertising campaigns.
One of the most effective ways to prevent mnemonics from affecting your mind is to become aware of how they are being used to program your mind. The video at the end of this article will show you how to do this. In addition, learn to strengthen your awareness and free your mind.
Below is a summary of a great video from YouTube about mnemonic titled “Mnemonic Mind Control – Who Owns Your Thoughts?”
Presentation by Bonnie and John Mitchell for the 3rd Free Your Mind Conference 2015
This presentation by John and Bonnie Mitchell looks at the technology now being used against all people who watch television, mainstream movies, play video games, use cell phones and computers. This is the culmination of the illuminati’s mind control and behavioral research programs; the easiest way to hypnotize and program a human being’s subconscious mind.
It combines electromagnetic pulsing, manipulation of sound and light frequencies, hypnotic trance induction, brainwave entrainment, and digital dark sigil magick. This tool is being used to keep the majority of people in a constant trance state, rewrite memories, control behavior, and insert demonic energy. Ultimately, it aids in the manifestation of the dark, fear-based reality the illuminati desire.
Quotes from the film “Mnemonic Mind Control – Who Owns Your Thoughts?”
“The subconscious mind is the data storage center of the brain. It recognizes simple shapes and colors and takes in any information the conscious mind cannot figure out.
The subconscious is not just a storage center, however; it is in control of our five senses and it makes important decisions even before the conscious mind becomes aware of them. The subconscious mind is what determines our view of reality and how we manifest it.”
“Sigils are everywhere; our subconscious mind recognizes the meanings of the sigils, having seen them over and over again. Sigils that have been around a long time have more power, especially if they are seen by millions of people every day.
This is why advertisers and others who want to program your mind with their wishes use sigils on television, in the movies, on cell phones, on the Internet, in video games, on billboards, in magazines…everywhere.”
“The neural pathways of the brain are constantly reforming themselves, based on the information that comes in; the pathways are set according to what your daily habits are. When you change your habits or just change your mind, you begin to form new pathways; you can actually “train your brain” this way.
However, if you are allowing someone else to train your brain, you are giving them the ability to reform and reshape the neural pathways of your brain for you. You begin to accept new perceptions as your own, not realizing it was an outside source that programmed your thoughts.”
Official Science: The Grand Illusion January 16 2016 | From: JonRappoport
Since 1987, one of my goals as a reporter has been to educate the public about false science.
Between then and now, I have found that, with remarkably few exceptions, mainstream reporters are studiously indifferent to false science.
They shy away from it. They pretend “it couldn’t be.” They refuse to consider facts. They and their editors parrot “the experts.”
“Government science exists because it is a fine weapon to use, in order to force an agenda of control over the population. We aren’t talking about knowledge here. Knowledge is irrelevant. What counts is: ‘How can we fabricate something that looks like the truth?’
I keep pointing this out: we’re dealing with reality builders. In this case, they make their roads and fences out of data, and they massage and invent the data out of thin air to suit their purposes. After all, they also invent money out of thin air.”
- The Underground, Jon Rappoport
Official science has a stranglehold on major media. It has the force of a State religion. When you stop and think about it, official science is, in a significant sense, a holy church. Therefore, it is no surprise that the church’s spokespeople would wield power over major information outlets.
These prelates invent, guard, and dispense “what is known.” That was precisely the role of the Roman Church in times past. And those professionals within the modern Church of Science are severely punished when they leave the fold and accuse their former masters of lies and crimes. They are blackballed, discredited, and stripped of their licenses. At the very least.
Totalitarian science lets you know you’re living in a totalitarian society.
The government, the press, the mega-corporations, the prestigious foundations, the academic institutions, the “humanitarian” organizations say:
“This is the disease. This is its name. This is what causes it. This is the drug that treats it. This is the vaccine that prevents it.”
“This is how accurate diagnosis is done. These are the tests. These are the possible results and what they mean.”
“Here are the genes. This is what they do. This is how they can be changed and substituted and manipulated. These are the outcomes.”
“These are the data and the statistics. They are correct. There can be no argument about them.”
“This is life. These are the components of life. All change and improvement result from our management of the components.”
“This is the path. It is governed by truth which our science reveals. Walk the path. We will inform you when you stray. We will report new improvements.”
“This is the end. You can go no farther. You must give up the ghost. We will remember you.”
We are now witnessing the acceleration of Official Science. Of course, that term is an internal contradiction. But the State shrugs and moves forward.
The notion that the State can put its seal on favored science, enforce it, and punish its competitors, is anathema to a free society.
For example: announcing that the science of climate change is “settled,” when there are, in fact, huge numbers of researchers who disagree. —And then, drafting legislation and issuing executive orders based on the decidedly unsettled science.
For example: declaring and promoting the existence of various epidemics, when the viruses purportedly causing them are not proven to exist and/or not proven to cause human illness (Ebola, SARS, West Nile, Swine Flu, etc.)
A few of you reading this have been with me since 1988, when I published my first book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century. Among other conclusions, I pointed out that HIV had never been shown to cause human illness; the front-line drug given to AIDS patients, AZT, was overwhelmingly toxic; and what was being called AIDS was actually a diverse number immune-suppressing conditions.
Others of you have found my work more recently. I always return to the subject of false science, because it is the most powerful long-term instrument for repression, political control, and destruction of human life.
As I’ve stated on many occasions, medical science is ideal for mounting and launching covert ops aimed at populations - because it appears to be politically neutral, without any allegiance to State interests.
Unfortunately, medical science, on many fronts, has been hijacked and taken over. The profit motive is one objective, but beyond that, there is a more embracing goal:
In other words, parents are propagandized to think of themselves a kind of synthetic artificial “community.”
“Here we are. We are the fathers and mothers. We must all protect our children against the outliers, the rebels, the defectors, the crazy ones who refuse to vaccinate their own children. We are all in this together. They are the threat. The enemy. We are good. We know the truth. They are evil.”
This “community of the willing” are dedicated to what the government tells them. They are crusaders imbued with group-think. They run around promoting “safety and protection.” This group consciousness is entirely an artifact, propelled by “official science.”
The crusaders are, in effect, agents of the State.
They are created by the State. Androids.
They live in an absurd Twilight Zone where fear of germs (the tiny invisible terrorists) demands coercive action against the individuals who see through the whole illusion.
This is what official science can achieve. This is how it can enlist obedient foot soldiers and spies who don’t have the faintest idea about how they’re being used.
This is a variant on Orwell’s 1984. The citizens are owned by the all-embracing State, but they aren’t even aware of it.
That’s quite a trick.
One of my favorite examples of double-think or reverse-think is the antibody test. It is given to diagnosis diseases. Antibodies are immune-system scouts sent out to identify germ-intruders, which can then be wiped out by other immune-system troops.
Prior to 1985, the prevailing view of a positive test was: the patient is doing well; his body detected the germ and dispensed with it. After 1985, the view was suddenly: this is bad news; the patient is sick or he is on the verge of getting sick; he has the germ in his body; it does harm.
Within the medical community, no one (with very few exceptions) raised hell over this massive switch. It was accepted. It was actually good for business. Now, many more people could be labeled “needs treatment,” whereas before, they would have been labeled “healthy.”
While I was writing my first book, AIDS INC., in 1987-8, I wrote the FDA asking about a possible AIDS vaccine. I was told the following: every person given such a vaccine would, of course, produce antibodies against HIV. That is the whole purpose of a vaccine: to produce antibodies.
However, I was informed, patients receiving this vaccine would be given a letter to carry with them, in case they were ever tested for HIV and came up positive. The letter would explain that the antibodies causing the positive test were the result of the vaccine, not the result of “natural” action inside the patient’s body.
In other words, the very same antibodies were either protective against AIDS (good) or indicative of deadly disease (bad).
This was the contradictory and ridiculous and extraordinary pronouncement of official science.
Extrapolated to a more general level, the Word is: synthetic medical treatment is good; the action of the body to heal itself is incompetent.
This is a type of superstition that would astonish even the most “primitive” societies.
It no longer astonishes me. I see it everywhere in official science. From the medical establishment’s point of view, being alive is a medical condition.
We are now living in a society where an incurable itch to meddle everywhere and at all times is the standard. A new definition of Reality emerges: “that which needs to be monitored and surveilled.”
Six Huge Stories The Mainstream Media Don’t Want You To Know About January 13 2016 | From: TrueActivist
You might have heard about a few of them, but not as much as you should. Here's our pick of the last 12 month's top news stories, all pretty much ignored by the corporate press.
Whistleblowers, Ecocide, top secret trade deals, and shady ties between the Islamic State and the West’s closest allies…here are a few hot topics the mainstream media barely covered in 2015.
1. Any Tragedy That’s Not Western-Centric
The outpouring of fury, despair and grief by the corporate press over the November 13 Paris attacks highlighted the bias of the mainstream media towards western victims of terrorism. There were two suicide bombings in Lebanon the day before the events in Paris, killing 37 and wounding 180, but they were not mentioned much in the sensationalist coverage of France’s tragedy, nor were they mentioned in the minutes’ silences and vigils conducted across the Western world in the aftermath.
From the horrors of the Congo’s bloody civil war to Erdogan’s persecution of Turkish Kurds, from Boko Haram’s ongoing reign of terror in Nigeria, Chad, and Cameroon to the plight of Sudanese refugees, the mainstream media seems to pick and choose which human lives deserve our empathy and which aren’t quite so important.
2. Indonesia Burning
As we previously reported, the Indonesian wildfires that caused devastation to the country’s people and wildlife last year were largely ignored by the mainstream media until several months after the devastating event began. The fires were started by loggers to clear the way for controversial palm oil plantations and caused health problems for over one million people.
The World Bank estimates that the fires destroyed 2.6 million hectares (6.4m acres) of rainforest between June and October, costing $16.1bn and causing untold loss of life to the endangered animals who depend on the forests for their survival. Terrified orang-utans fleeing the disaster were abused in a sickening way by some Indonesian villagers.
Ecocide on this scale should have been one of the biggest stories of 2015, but with the exception of Guardian columnist and environmental activist George Monbiot (who attacked his industry for censorship of the event), the tragedy was largely ignored to protect corporate interests.
3. France’s Slip Into Martial Law
The terrorist attacks in Paris were used as justification by the French, British and German governments to join military strikes in Syria. They were also used as justification by the French government to severely restrict freedoms at home. As we reported, immediately after the terrible events of November 13, the French government began closing down alternative news sites.
The President also declared that anyone’s house could be searched without a warrant, websites could be blocked without warning, and citizens could be put under house arrest without a trial. Activists hoping to march in Paris at last month’s Climate Conference were disappointed to learn that France’s state of emergency also included a ban on protests.
Some French politicians are pushing to install GPS trackers in rental cars, re-write the Constitution to allow for martial law, block free wifi and Tor, and combine state databases, which would give the state access to citizens’ personal medical records.
Amnesty International, along with many French bloggers, expressed concern that the Government had imposed martial law in response to the terrorist attack. They have a point: Isn’t a restriction of freedoms at home exactly what extremists would want? John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International’s Director of Europe and Central Asia, said in November: “It is a paradox to suspend human rights in order to defend them.”
Many bloggers agreed and said they were scared about the situation in France. One wrote:
“I’m currently living in Paris, the city where some fanatics killed people because they were listening to music, watching a football match, or simply enjoy beers in a bar. I was living in the neighbourhood of where those tragic event happened. Now I’m scared.
I’m not scared of terrorists.
I’m scared of my own country.
I’m scared because different is now starting to mean dangerous.”
The anonymous man goes on:
“It seems that being an ecologist is enough to get house arrest. Before its 20th November reform, this sentence was reserved to people ‘whose activity is dangerous’, now it’s ‘serious reason to believe that his behaviour constitutes a threat’. We’re almost at the thought crime.”
France’s emergency measures were reported by the mainstream media, but there was little analysis or debate about whether they are justified: the myth we have to trade in our freedoms to get security has become a normal part of everyday life.
4. The Truth About ISIS
In 2015, True Activist reported on a growing body of evidence that strongly suggests the Islamic State:
Would not exist at all if it weren’t for the Pentagon’s terrible handling of the illegal 2003 Iraq invasion
Is funded and armed by Western allies Turkey and Saudi Arabia
The mainstream media continues to peddle the tired old narrative that the Western coalition are in Syria specifically to fight the I.S. If this were true, it would be logical for these countries to support Russia in its war against the terrorist organization.
Yet coverage of VladimirPutin in the corporate press continues to be entirely negative, despite the fact Russia single-handedly took out 40% of the Islamic State’s infrastructure in just one week. The revelations above have been completely censored by the corporate press, which is becoming less credible by the day.
5. The British Parliament Voted Against Democracy
Last month, an English politician stood up in the Houses of Parliament and gave a speech calling for electoral reform. His request, backed by thousands of citizens, was blocked. The UK has an archaic system of voting which is unfit for purpose and entirely undemocratic: after unpopular Prime Minister David Cameron won the 2015 election with just 36% of the vote, millions of British people felt cheated.
A petition was launched to demand proportional representation rather than the co-called ‘first past the post’ system, which benefits the major political parties but never the alternatives. In short, Britain is not the fair, democratic nation it pretends to be. News that Jonathan Reynold’s request (video here) for a fairer system was rejected should have been a big story in the UK, but the British media barely covered it.
6. The Reality Of Top-Secret Free Trade Deals
The TTIP (Trans-Atlantic Partnership Agreement) TISA, (Trade in Services Agreement) and TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement) are highly controversial and top secret deals that will affect the lives of every citizen of the planet, yet we apparently have no right to decide whether we want them- or even to know the exact details of the draft legislation.
TTIP, in particular, is of huge concern. As we have reported, the deal threatens to allow corporations to sue governments who don’t do as they are told, kill online privacy, make fracking standard procedure across 28 countries, privatise European health systems, force GMO food on unwilling citizens, strip us of our civil liberties, and ensure that corporations have control over the European parliament.
JulianAssange called TTIP “The most important thing happening in Europe right now,” which is why Wikileaks is raising a 100,000 euro reward for any information relating to the deal. The site says of TTIP:
“It remains secret almost in its entirety, closely guarded by the negotiators, and only big corporations are given special access to its terms. The TTIP covers half of global GDP and is one of the largest agreements of its kind in history.
The TTIP aims to create a global economic bloc outside of the WTO framework, as part of a geopolitical economic strategy against the BRICS countries of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.”
Considering the impact all three of these trade deals will have on democracy, human rights, food safety and the environment, public awareness should be widespread. Worryingly, a huge number of people know next to nothing about TTIP, TISA and TPP.
Far from questioning the secrecy of such important agreements or inciting a crucial public debate about whether these deals are ethical and democratic, mainstream coverage has glossed over the negatives and generally provided a biased view of the benefits of this corporate take-over of the world.
Political Correctness Is Really Just Herd Psychology Pushed By Insecure People Who Desperately Seek Social Conformity
January 2 2016| From: NaturalNews
Thanks to the hilarious emergence of an entire new vocabulary of P.C. victimization and whining - based on brain-warping concepts like "microaggressions" and "safe spaces" - the very nature of P.C. is now being scrutinized by more and more people.
Thanks to the hilarious emergence of an entire new vocabulary of P.C. victimization and whining - based on brain-warping concepts like "microaggressions" and "safe spaces" - the very nature of P.C. is now being scrutinized by more and more people.
Today I encountered a brilliant essay that answers those questions. Not surprisingly, I found it on Mises.org, a libertarian website that ranks among my favorite sites for informed education on economics and finance.
So here's the full essay by Jeff Deist. It's from the Nov-Dec 2015 issue of The Austrian:
PC Is About Control, Not Etiquette
I'd like to speak today about what political correctness is, at least in its modern version, what it is not, and what we might do to fight against it.
To begin, we need to understand that political correctness is not about being nice. It's not simply a social issue, or a subset of the culture wars.
It's not about politeness, or inclusiveness, or good manners. It's not about being respectful toward your fellow humans, and it's not about being sensitive or caring or avoiding hurt feelings and unpleasant slurs.
But you've heard this argument, I'm sure. PC is about simple respect and inclusiveness, they tell us. As though we need progressives, the cultural enforcers, to help us understand that we shouldn't call someone retarded, or use the "N" word, make hurtful comments about someone's appearance, or tolerate bullies.
If PC truly was about kindness and respect, it wouldn't need to be imposed on us. After all, we already have a mechanism for the social cohesion PC is said to represent: it's called manners. And we already have specific individuals charged with insuring that good manners are instilled and upheld: they're called parents.
Political Correctness Defined
But what exactly is PC? Let me take a stab at defining it: Political correctness is the conscious, designed manipulation of language intended to change the way people speak, write, think, feel, and act, in furtherance of an agenda.
PC is best understood as propaganda, which is how I suggest we approach it. But unlike propaganda, which historically has been used by governments to win favor for a particular campaign or effort, PC is all-encompassing. It seeks nothing less than to mold us into modern versions of Marx's un-alienated society man, freed of all his bourgeois pretensions and humdrum social conventions.
"Political correctness is tyranny with manners."
- Charlton Heston.
Like all propaganda, PC fundamentally is a lie. It is about refusing to deal with the underlying nature of reality, in fact attempting to alter that reality by legislative and social fiat. A is no longer A.
To quote Hans-Hermann Hoppe:
"[T]he masters … stipulate that aggression, invasion, murder and war are actually self-defense, whereas self-defense is aggression, invasion, murder and war. Freedom is coercion, and coercion is freedom. …
Taxes are voluntary payments, and voluntarily paid prices are exploitative taxes. In a PC world, metaphysics is diverted and rerouted. Truth becomes malleable, to serve a bigger purpose determined by our superiors."
But where did all this come from? Surely PC, in all its various forms, is nothing new under the sun. I think we can safely assume that feudal chiefs, kings, emperors, and politicians have ever and always attempted to control the language, thoughts, and thus the actions of their subjects. Thought police have always existed.
To understand the origins of political correctness, we might look to the aforementioned Marx, and later the Frankfurt school. We might consider the work of Leo Strauss for its impact on the war-hungry think tank world. We might study the deceptive sloganeering of Saul Alinsky. We might mention the French philosopher Foucault, who used the term "political correctness" in the 1960s as a criticism of unscientific dogma.
But if you really want to understand the black art of PC propaganda, let me suggest reading one of its foremost practitioners, Edward Bernays.
Bernays was a remarkable man, someone who literally wrote the book on propaganda and its softer guise of public relations. He is little discussed in the West today, despite being the godfather of modern spin.
He was the nephew of Sigmund Freud, and like Mises was born in Austria in the late nineteenth century. Unlike Mises, however, he fortuitously came to New York City as an infant and then proceeded to live an astonishing 103 years.
One of his first jobs was as a press agent for President Woodrow Wilson's Committee on Public Information, an agency designed to gin up popular support for US entry into WW1 (German Americans and Irish Americans especially were opposed). It was Bernays who coined the infamous phrase "Make the World Safe for Democracy" used by the committee.
After the war, he asked himself whether one could "apply a similar technique to the problems of peace." And by "problems," Bernays meant selling stuff. He directed very successful campaigns promoting Ivory Soap, for bacon and eggs as a healthy breakfast, and ballet. He directed several very successful advertising campaigns, most notably for Lucky Strike in its efforts to make smoking socially acceptable for women.
The Role of "Herd Psychology"
Bernays was quite open and even proud of engaging in the "manufacturing of consent," a term used by British surgeon and psychologist Wilfred Trotter in his seminal Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War published in 1919.
Bernays took the concept of herd psychology to heart. The herd instinct entails the deep seated psychological need to win approval of one's social group. The herd overwhelms any other influence; as social humans, our need to fit in is paramount.
But however ingrained, in Bernays's view the herd instinct cannot be trusted. The herd is irrational and dangerous, and must be steered by wiser men in a thousand imperceptible ways - and this is key. They must not know they are being steered.
The techniques Bernays employed are still very much being used to shape political correctness today.
First, he understood how all-powerful the herd mind and herd instinct really is. We are not the special snowflakes we imagine, according to Bernays. Instead we are timorous and malleable creatures who desperately want to fit in and win acceptance of the group.
Second, he understood the critical importance of using third party authorities to promote causes or products. Celebrities, athletes, models, politicians, and wealthy elites are the people from whom the herd takes its cues, whether they're endorsing transgender awareness or selling luxury cars. So when George Clooney or Kim Kardashian endorses Hillary Clinton, it resonates with the herd.
Third, he understood the role that emotions play in our tastes and preferences. It's not a particular candidate or cigarette or a watch or a handbag we really want, it's the emotional component of the ad that affects us, however subconsciously.
What We Can Do About It
So the question we might ask ourselves is this: how do we fight back against PC? What can we do, as individuals with finite amounts of time and resources, with serious obligations to our families, loved ones, and careers, to reverse the growing tide of darkness?
First, we must understand that we're in a fight. PC represents a war for our very hearts, minds, and souls. The other side understands this, and so should you. The fight is taking place on multiple fronts: the state-linguistic complex operates not only within government, but also academia, media, the business world, churches and synagogues, nonprofits, and NGOs. So understand the forces aligned against you.
"It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?"
- Stephen Fry
Understand that the PC enforcers are not asking you, they're not debating you, and they don't care about your vote. They don't care whether they can win at the ballot box, or whether they use extralegal means. There are millions of progressives in the US who absolutely would criminalize speech that does not comport with their sense of social justice.
One poll suggests 51 percent of Democrats and 1/3 of all Americans would do just that.
The other side is fighting deliberately and tactically. So realize you're in a fight, and fight back. Culturally, this really is a matter of life and death.
We Still Have Freedom to Act
As bad as PC contamination may be at this point, we are not like Mises, fleeing a few days ahead of the Nazis. We have tremendous resources at our disposal in a digital age. We can still communicate globally and create communities of outspoken, anti-PC voices. We can still read and share anti-state books and articles. We can still read real history and the great un-PC literary classics. We can still homeschool our kids. We can still hold events like this one today.
This is not to say that bucking PC can't hurt you: the possible loss of one's job, reputation, friends, and even family is very serious. But defeatism is never called for, and it makes us unworthy of our ancestors.
Use humor to ridicule PC. PC is absurd, and most people sense it.
And its practitioners suffer from a comical lack of self-awareness and irony. Use every tool at your disposal to mock, ridicule, and expose PC for what it is.
Never forget that society can change very rapidly in the wake of certain precipitating events. We certainly all hope that no great calamity strikes America [Read: anywhere, and again I wish these writers would have more of a focus on the world as a whole and that it is NOT all about bloody America], in the form of an economic collapse, a currency collapse, an inability to provide entitlements and welfare, energy shortages, food and water shortages, natural disasters, or civil unrest. But we can't discount the possibility of these things happening.
It's time for us, we the people; to circle our wolves and our wagons
And if they do, I suggest that PC language and PC thinking will be the first ornament of the state to go. Only rich, modern, societies can afford the luxury of a mindset that does not comport with reality, and that mindset will be swiftly swept aside as the "rich" part of America frays.
Men and women might start to rediscover that they need and complement each other if the welfare state breaks down. Endless hours spent on social media might give way to rebuilding social connections that really matter when the chips are down.
More traditional family structures might suddenly seem less oppressive in the face of great economic uncertainty. Schools and universities might rediscover the value of teaching practical skills, instead of whitewashed history and grievance studies. One's sexual preferences might not loom as large in the scheme of things, certainly not as a source of rights. The rule of law might become something more than an abstraction to be discarded in order to further social justice and deny privilege.
Play the Long Game
I'm afraid it might not be popular to say so, but we have to be prepared for a long and hard campaign. Let's leave the empty promises of quick fixes to the politicians. Progressives play the long game masterfully. They've taken 100 years to ransack our institutions inch by inch. I'm not suggesting incrementalism to reclaim those foregone institutions, which are by all account too far gone - but to create our own.
PC enforcers seek to divide and atomize us, by class, race, sex, and sexuality. So let's take them up on it. Let's bypass the institutions controlled by them in favor of our own. Who says we can't create our own schools, our own churches, our own media, our own literature, and our own civic and social organizations? Starting from scratch certainly is less daunting than fighting PC on its own turf.
PC is a virus that puts us - liberty loving people - on our heels. When we allow progressives to frame the debate and control the narrative, we lose power over our lives. If we don't address what the state and its agents are doing to control us, we might honestly wonder how much longer organizations like the Mises Institute are going to be free to hold events like this one today.
Is it really that unimaginable that you might wake up one day and find sites with anti-state and anti-egalitarian content blocked -- sites like mises.org and lewrockwell.com?
Or that social media outlets like Facebook might simply eliminate opinions not deemed acceptable in the new America?
In fact, head Facebook creep Mark Zuckerberg recently was overheard at a UN summit telling Angela Merkel that he would get to work on suppressing Facebook comments by Germans who have the audacity to object to the government's handling of migrants.
Here's the Facebook statement:
"We are committed to working closely with the German government on this important issue. We think the best solutions to dealing with people who make racist and xenophobic comments can be found when service providers, government, and civil society all work together to address this common challenge."
Chilling, isn't it? And coming soon to a server near you, unless we all get busy.
60% distrust rating is a critical mass achieved by the Americans. But it’s one thing to know that your government is lying. It’s another when one begin t contemplate what to do about it.
As Edmund Burke once said, “Evil prevails when Good Men do nothing.”
“WASHINGTON, D.C. — Less than half of Americans (45%) say they have a great deal or fair amount of confidence in the media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly — on par with last year’s record-low 43%. About 2 in 10 Americans (18%) have no confidence in the media at all — which is also among the worst grades Gallup has recorded.
The findings are from the same Gallup survey, conducted Aug. 31-Sept. 2, 2009, that found more Americans following political news very closely than in any other recent year without a presidential election. Despite the relatively high level of interest in political news in particular, many Americans appear to be consuming their news skeptically. Ten percent say they have a great deal of confidence in the media’s reporting and 35% have a fair amount, but 37% do not have very much confidence and 18% have none at all.”
In 2015, those negative figures aggravated as only 4 out of 10 Americans fairly trust the mainstream media…
“WASHINGTON, D.C. - Four in 10 Americans say they have “a great deal” or “a fair amount” of trust and confidence in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly. This ties the historical lows on this measure set in 2014 and 2012. Prior to 2004, slight majorities of Americans said they trusted the mass media, such as newspapers, TV and radio.
Americans’ confidence in the media has slowly eroded from a high of 55% in 1998 and 1999. Since 2007, the majority of Americans have had little or no trust in the mass media. Trust has typically dipped in election years, including 2004, 2008, 2012 and last year. However, 2015 is not a major election year.
Trust in the Mass Media Has Fallen More Sharply Among Those Younger Than 50
Trust in the media continues to be significantly lower among Americans aged 18 to 49 than among those 50 and older, continuing a pattern evident since 2012. Prior to 2012, these groups’ trust levels were more similar, with a few exceptions between 2005 and 2008.”
Gallup polls is of course conservative in favor of the establishment. The level of distrust could be higher than that. But the figures above showing consistency of descending trust trend is enough for us to say that the establishment media is in a decline.
Also, the data are only showing American viewers.only The European population, however, is more politically aware, judging from there periodic street protests on global issues like the UK planned enhanced engagement in Syria.
The declining trajectory of media trust will be further enhanced once the mainstream audience become more aware of the following facts:
Cable News Network (CNN)
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Politics: Jokingly known as ‘Clinton News Network’ in the ’90s, CNN’s worldview can best be deciphered from studying the speeches of Hillary Clinton. The station oscillates between currently fashionable neoliberal causes.
Owned by Time Warner, a publicly-traded company. In the second quarter of 2015, the media conglomerate’s revenues were $7.3 billion, of which $2.8 billion came from Turner, CNN’s parent company. Turner is comprised of CNN, HLN, TBS, TNT, Adult Swim, Cartoon Network and truTV. In addition, the company manages several sports websites. Revenue for that operating division comes from content, subscriptions, advertising and delivery.
CNN, the brainchild of Ted Turner, made its debut on June 1, 1980, from its headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. Competing with ABC, CBS and NBC, CNN became the first channel to provide news 24/7. Despite its humble beginnings, the network earned its reputation in the early 1990s during its live coverage of the Persian Gulf War.
CNN was also the first channel to report the 9/11 attacks. While CNN strives for political impartiality, Pew research has revealed that its audience leans slightly to the left. The channel is currently available in 100 million households across the US. CNN has also expanded abroad with channels broadcasting in Turkish, Japanese and Spanish.
With news operations in Hong Kong, Abu Dhabi and London, CNN International reaches over 290 million households further afield. Its coverage is carried by more than 1,000 affiliates worldwide.
Mainstream Media Manipulation / Controlling The Narrative
+ Mosaic Of Facts: Inside The Information War December 26 2015 | From: RTD
Can you tell truth from lies in mass media?
“The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses."
- Malcolm X
The following is a excerpt from the documentary: Mosaic Of Facts: Inside The Information War
The full documentary is below this trailer:
Mosaic Of Facts: Inside The Information War
RTD’s Miguel Francis-Santiago delves deep to try to understand the intricacies of information war. He meets media experts and puts together the Mosaic of Facts, showing how public opinion is manipulated, not just over the Ukrainian Crisis but throughout the world.
Propaganda And The Rhetoric Of The Ruataniwha Dam December 14 2015 | From: ChrisPerley
“Political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” - George Orwell
I was taught propaganda at school. Our English master, Mr Brown, liked words. He had an inspirational way of making us pause in admiration at the bon mot.
He once stopped boys in the quad by calling some poor litterer a Philistine mixed up with other adjectives, verbs and the occasional noun.
“The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses."
- Malcolm X
When I read things coming out of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council advocating the wonders of the Ruataniwha Dam– the latest by Andrew Newman (18th August) – I think of Mr Brown. We were taught how you can if you wish construct a rhetorical argument to deliver a twisted message. We all do it to some extent because we are emotional beings, but knowing the techniques allowed us to better critique any bias.
The most basic propaganda is to use words that are loaded in either a positive or a pejorative way; adverbs and adjectives particularly. Words and phrases like ‘major boost’, ‘deepen its economic resilience’, ‘improve water quality’, ‘strengthen the social fabric’, ‘a better Tukituki’, and ‘for the benefit of the region and the nation.’
Patriotic that last. I wanted to put my hand on my breast and swear allegiance. Who could possibly be against?
A more sophisticated propaganda technique is called the Sin of Omission. This is more powerful that the Sin of Commission – a bare-faced lie – because with an Omission there is often a partially-redeeming document or half-truth to fall back on. For instance, it is true that in 70 years the dam if constructed will be “transferred into the hands of the Regional Council,” after “all the investors walk away.”
Well, half true. Yes, the ‘asset’ will be transferred, but by that stage the dam may well be filled with shingle, and we the public – our children’s children – will be charged with decommissioning the dam, at much greater cost than construction by some estimates.
It’s called ‘privatising the gain and socialising the cost’ and it is the oldest game in the book.
The Proposed Ruataniwha Dam:
Before and after the destruction
Another statement with a tiny shred of truth is “resilience in a world where the climate is drying and warming.” Drought relief was never a feature of this scheme, but it is continually trotted out to create some warm fuzzy feeling. Facts: there are 25 to 28 thousand hectares proposed in the scheme with about 160 farms.
The plains areas to be irrigated already has some access to ground water. Hawke’s Bay has 1.42 million hectares, mostly hill country, and it is the southern hill country that is most exposed to drought, not the plains. We have continually pointed out that their drought argument is a nonsense, yet they continue to use it because it resonates.
Then there is the Argument from Authority; a report perhaps with number estimates based on a number of assumptions that are neither discussed nor open to critique. Speculative figures of let’s say $200 million in GDP, 2000 jobs in servicing and processing, a rate of return of X. Anyone who has had anything to do with models knows their severe limitations, particularly when there is apparently no understanding of primary sector trends, and whether the scheme will involve a structural shift away from such trends, or simply accelerate them.
I am talking here about the trends of reducing commodity prices, more farm amalgamations to achieve cost reductions, more absentee owners, processing centralised to a few large plants outside the region, less people employed per farm, the increase in migrant labourers who repatriate much of their earnings, and all the loss of local supporting population, spend and servicing that multiplies from the primary sector base.
The underlying process whereby customers systematically eliminate everything you perceive as being different or special about your firm or your offerings; reducing you and your competition to the lowest common denominator, typically, though not always, price.
None of these structural problems are addressed in any of the HBRIC reports. Large corporate-designed dams will not shift those trends, they will only make them worse. But the ‘expert’ reports generate numbers, so let us publish them to applause and fanfare.
What we won’t hear is any discussion about the effect of high capitalisation and risk related to farm investment encouraging family farms to realise their free capital gains by selling. The buyers will follow the trend of being large absentee owners who will not spend either their profits or much of their operational expenditure locally. Something like three times the regional money spend and employment is generated by local firms compared with syndicated firms coming in from outside.
Ruataniwha Dam thinking locks us into the lower left quadrant, and the dominant buyer takes the cost savings in a lower price … and so we cut costs again … and again …
All we need do is look to the US agribusiness trends in the mid-west to see it. It is well documented in both fiction and non-fiction, and involves a local social, environmental and economic decline, with the gains made elsewhere.
It is effectively a new type of colonisation, where the locals end up as the colonised, by the new Philistines. And with it, more commoditisation and homogenisation of our land, our people and our economy.
It actually creates far less resilience, the opposite of Andrew Newman’s claims.
Perhaps the most incredible and bare-faced conjecture is that there will be a ‘better’ river and a stronger ‘social fabric’.
This represents either naïve blind hope that technology will protect us from pollution, or wilful disinformation by those whose short-term interests and egos are far more important than creating a better Hawke’s Bay in the long-term.
Darth Vader And The New World Order - Interesting Parallels December 10 2015 | From: PrisonPlanet
The Star Wars story has had, without a question, the greatest impact on popular culture of any movie in world history. We will now explore why it has resonated so strongly with so many people across generations.
At last, the mainstream media is picking up on something we’ve been talking about for years. The plot lines of George Lucas’ six Star Wars films mirror, in many respects, the activities of western governments.
George Lucas, the creator of the Star Wars saga, has said over and over again that he simply plays on subconscious archetypal symbols that evoke primeval fears and passions. Lucas has also stated on many occasions that he draws from historical examples of imperial leaders’ lust for war and total power.
Lucas has said that that is why his films have such a powerful effect of people. Deep down, everyone knows that the greatest threat to life and liberty isn’t the average criminal on the street, but the monolithic, all-powerful state.
The human desire to resist tyranny is one of the strongest drives we have and Lucas plays upon that instinct masterfully.
While premiering his film, Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, at the Cannes Film Festival George Lucas was asked if his new film was a social commentary on George Bush and the Iraq invasion (which even our own government admits is part of America’s new “kindly, helpful and loving” imperialism).
How can they not ask this when Darth Vader says to his former teacher Obi-Wan Kenobi, “if you’re not with me, then you’re my enemy.” Remember that Lord Bush, after the 9/11 attacks said, “either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.”
“The issue was, how does a democracy turn itself into a dictatorship…
When I wrote it, Iraq (the U.S.- led war) didn’t exist.. but the parallels of what we did in Vietnam and Iraq are un believable …
I didn’t think it was going to get this close.”
Speaking about present day America he said, “I hope this doesn’t come true in our country.”
When I first saw Episode I, I instantly understood the plot. Being a student of history, it made total sense. But, I was amazed, time and time again, when talking to educated adults who were also Star Wars fans that they didn’t get it. They’d say, “it doesn’t make any sense.”
This phenomenon got even worse when Episode II came out. People were totally confused. They didn’t understand a plot that children could grasp.
For those who are still confused, here’s a plot synopsis in a nutshell:
In Episode I, Senator Palpatine is an obscure politician from the peaceful world of Naboo. Palpatine influences Naboo not to pay its Trade Federation taxes. The corrupt mercantile Trade Federation cartel then blockades the Naboo system and begins a ground invasion of its capitol, taking its orders from the sinister leader Darth Sidious, Lord of the Sith, who is one and the same with Senator Palpatine.
By manipulating the outcome of the Naboo police action, Palpatine (who then plays the part of resisting an operation that he has launched) is able to springboard into the Chancellery of the Galactic Senate.
Episode II begins with a widening conflict that threatens to destroy the hundred thousand-year-old Republic. The newly- elected Chancellor (Palpatine) is able to use the expanding crisis as a pretext to pass police state legislation and to launch a mammoth military buildup.
As in Episode I, Darth Sidious is in control of the separatists led by the charismatic Count Dooku, who is his secret apprentice, Darth Tyrannus. Darth Sidious uses his agent (Count Dooku) to create a crisis that threatens to destroy the Republic, thus threatening the Republic’s very existence and manipulating the Senate into giving him the powers of a dictator.
This is the classic use of problem-reaction-solution. Create a crisis, get the reaction of fear from the population, and offer the solution of a police state that you control.
Real-world examples of this through history are:
Adolph Hitler, two months after being elected Chancellor, firebombed the German Parliament (Reichstag) building, blamed it on his political enemies and declared martial law in the Reich.
Most historians now believe that the US government bombed its own ship in Havana harbor as a pretext to launch the Spanish-American war in 1898.
The LBJ Presidential library in 2003 released taped conversations between President Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara in which they discussed how the Gulf of Tonkin attack never really took place and how to use it to officially kick of the Vietnam War which resulted in the deaths of over 58,000 US troops and over a million Vietnamese.
In early 2001, the Baltimore Sun and ABC News reported on a newly-declassified operation code-named Northwoods, where the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed hijacking jets by remote control and crashing them, bombing DC, committing sniper attacks in Miami and DC, having the CIA attack the Guantanamo Bay Marine Corps base with mortars, and how to blame all of this terrorism on Cuba and the Soviet Union, giving the Pentagon the pretext to start World War III.
The plan was green-lighted all the way up to President Kennedy who vetoed the plan. The bottom line is that the US government planned to terrorize its own cities as a pretext for war.
In Episode III, the surviving Jedi realize, when its too late, that the Clone Wars have been systematically engineered by the Lord of the Sith to destroy the Republic and the Jedi.
In the end, the Emperor dispatches his dark apprentice, Darth Vader, to exterminate the Jedi and the leaders of the separatist movement (that the Chancellor controlled), leaving the enemies of the Sith dead and the Sith in control of the Central Government. The despotic Galactic Empire is born.
George Bush: Problem-Reaction-Solution
We look at the real world and the military-industrial-complex that controls George Bush, and it is clear that the government is using the problem-reaction-solution system to bring in their own empire.
Using the threat of terrorism, the Executive Branch has declared authoritarian powers unto itself. At the same time, they tell the people that they won’t be safe until every “rogue” nation (nations that are sovereign) are under World Government control.
Think about who really has the motive for the September 11th attacks. None of the Arab nations have taken responsibility, although they’ve been falsely accused of carrying out the attacks. Who in their right mind would attack the heart of an unmatched military juggernaut with seven times superiority of any military on earth?
Who stands to gain? Who gets trillions of dollars in Iraqi and Afghan oil? What group gets to sell hundreds of billions in weapons systems?
Who gets to be our hero and silence all political opposition? What group is now turning America into a high-tech police state? In the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) documents, Dick Cheney told us in 2000 that the neo-cons and their backers gain.
PNAC documents written by Dick Cheney and other top neo-cons call for a helpful Pearl Harbor-like attack to mobilize the American people in a war for empire. One of the Pentagon’s chief strategists, Tomas Barnett, openly calls America an empire and has a laundry list of nations that need to be invaded immediately.
The bin Laden family has been in business with Bushes for over thirty years. Bush Senior and the bin Ladens vacation together. The Bushes and the bin Ladens are on the board of the armament dealing consortium, the Carlyle group whose profits have quadrupled since 9/11.
The press has been forced to admit that the hijackers had their houses, cars and credit cards paid for by the Federal government. They were trained on US military bases. When US Embassies tried to block their entry into the US, the CIA ordered them to allow entry.
There are over 600 pieces of evidence that show that bin Laden is George Bush’s Count Dooku, which are covered in detail in my three films on 9/11, the newest being Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State.
Hollywood Movies: Art Imitates Life
I’ve noticed with fantasy people have trouble understanding the concept of would-be tyrants creating crises so they can offer the solution. We see popular Hollywood films peppered with this idea. For example:
In the blockbuster, The Incredibles, the evil genius, Syndrome, wants to be worshipped as a super hero, so he stages a robotic attack on a US city which he plans to then foil and become the people’s savior.
In the film, Final Fantasy, a General who wants to be given dictatorial powers opens the gates so the enemy can attack New York and then discredit his peacenik opponents.
There are countless examples of this, and I’ve noticed that when I talk to adults who have seen these films they don’t understand the plots. But, when I talk to children they completely grasp it.
From a sociological/psychological perspective, why is there this blind spot in adults? Is it being engineered into us? Are we in denial? If so many intelligent people can’t grasp a children’s plot line, no wonder they can’t really understand what’s behind 9/11.
Missing the Big Picture
Infowars.com has seen scores of mainline publications from CBS News to Japan Today drawing parallels between America’s predatory militarism and the grasping empire of the Star Wars universe.
What they’ve missed is the central point that Lucas makes time and time again. Criminal elements within the government that seek to overthrow freedom and replace it with slavery get their power through carrying out terrorist attacks and manufacturing enemies that they fund and control.
In some cases, as with the separatists in Star Wars, they don’t even know who they are controlled by, just as an Arab suicide bomber might not know that the funds and training that he received came from a western intelligence agency.
He doesn’t know that his attack will be used to crack down on entire populations and stop any real peace process, because the weapon dealers have no interest in peace. Chaos is the ether in which they swim.
The dominant press also misses the boat on how much Star Wars itself has been influenced by the Third Reich. The uniforms worn by imperial officers are almost identical to the German military staff. Political officers in the empire wear the black uniforms that even more closely resemble the dreaded garb of the German political police, the SS.
Star Wars also acts as a type of cultural feedback loop. Star Wars’ villains are modeled after the Nazis (Darth Vader’s helmet is simply a slightly more pronounced German artillery solder’s head piece), and, in turn, modern governments are themselves influenced by the visigothic-style of Star Wars.
The press reported in the early 1980’s that while Ronald Reagan was campaigning for President in 1979 he was camping at Bohemian Grove in Northern California with business leaders. They came up with the idea to give the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) the catchy name “Star Wars.” ‘
Out of SDI grew the US Space Command. Today all US military forces are under the control of the ultra-secretive US Space Command.
In the 1980’s military and law enforcement planners wanted to come up with intimidating uniforms for SWAT teams and militarized riot police. They came up with a design which has now been adopted thanks to federal grants in almost every major city. The uniform, which they admit is meant to strike fear into the public, is extremely similar to the suit worn by the Dark Lord of the Sith, Darth Vader.
A Seattle Riot Cop
Of course, long before Darth Vader existed in our minds, every culture had a dark totem representing evil and domination that manifested itself as a tall, pitch-black hooded or helmeted sorcerer. Similar to the ringwraiths of J.R. Tolkein’s Lord of the Rings trilogy.
We should all be concerned that our government is choosing to clothe our police in these macabre get-ups. Throughout history, secret police, torturers, inquisitors, executioners, terrorists, bank robbers and every other form of scum has worn the black mask. Of course, in the Klu Klux Klan, the black mask is only worn by the Supreme Grand Dragon.
A New World Order is a worldwide dictatorship. At least that is what the encyclopedia said up until the 1960’s. Now resource books, especially those for children tell you that it is a loving, wonderful thing that will keep us all safe from terror.
In the Star Wars universe, the Sith are members of a self-centered secret society that has been passing down its knowledge for thousands of years. The religion revels in death and destruction. War is its sacrament, death stars and war ships its cathedrals. This is one of the central threads that runs throughout the entirety of Star Wars lore.
For over a decade, I have been studying civilization and time and time again in my research I run into the occult, secret societies and, at the top of it all, the Order of Death, known by the public as the order of Skull and Bones.
The only widely known manifestation of the Order of Death is one of its chapters based at Yale University, the Order of Skull and Bones, Chapter 322, of which both George W. Bush and his father are members.
Three Presidents have been members of Chapter 322 alone. Eight CIA directors were members. George W. Bush’s administration has 11 members currently at the highest levels. And 322 is only one chapter.
While I was inside, I was able to secretly film the bizarre annual ritual, the Cremation of Care, which takes place at the Bohemian Grove every year. The footage I took aired nationally on the Trio Network.
Now, we have come full circle. Why is all of this important? Because, since infiltrating, I have become aware of and have obtained publicly available annals of Bohemian Grove and its correspondence with Skull and Bones. Many of these documents are posted on infowars.com in the Bohemian Grove section.
What we learned shocked me to my very core. Skull and Bones and Bohemian Grove are nothing but US extensions of a germanic death cult that has been operating for thousands of years. This same group, that calls itself the Order of Death, is mentioned as the Tooley and Thule society and respected, mainstream works on the rise of the Third Reich detail how Adolph Hitler was a member of his group, and how they supported his rise to power and his subsequent actions in World War II.
In my new film, Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State I detail these facts with documents from the National Archives, the London Guardian, the New Hampshire Gazette, and Skull and Bones and Bohemian Grove’s own annals.
I’ve really got to hand it to George Lucas. He really did his homework. It took me a decade of intense research to discover the fact that our world is dominated by members of a secret society that give themselves names like “Lord Death,” “Lord Longtooth,” “Lord Dragon,” and “Long Devil.”
Lucas was able to expose, if you think he’s doing it for good, or desensitise, if you think he’s doing it for bad, the entire public to the reality of what is going on, projected onto the backdrop of fantasy.
Take away the light sabers and levitation and you’re left with what our world leaders really believe in, what their religion really is, what makes them tick. The global controllers, of whom Bush is just a puppet, are using the same tactics to control populations employed by the Dark Lords of the Sith.
I know this is hard to believe, but if you just research their own publications they brag about it. German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt in his own autobiography, 'Men and Powers, A Political Retrospective' bragged that they had their own secret society meeting places in German where they did rituals, but his favorite place was Bohemian Grove.
I probably shouldn’t be surprised by George Lucas’ insight, his understanding of this greatest of secrets. By telling his Star Wars story and interlacing it with the truth, he touched all of our subconscious minds where we deep down know the truth about the world but don’t have the courage to consciously admit it.
In doing so, Lucas has made over 10 billion dollars with his films and merchandise. By telling the truth even in a screened way, he has tapped into our collective unconscious and told us a story that we know is true.
In closing, it’s important to see George Lucas’ first feature film, THX-1138, based on a student film he produced in college. THX, which has become Lucas’ signet, appearing in all of his films and most of his products, tells the story of man totally dehumanized in a forced-drugged, shaved-head police state and how one man stands up and breaks free of that system.
That’s the heart of why the public loves Lucas. Not just that he tells the truth in a way that gets past the censors, but that he reminds us that the individual can stand up against organized evil and win.
The following video explains the theory and reasoning that Jar Jar Binks was actually originally written to be the high Sith Lord.
This sounds ridiculous but the video makes many valid observations, particularly that - because of the enormous aversion by the Star Wars audience worldwide to the character Jar Jar
- that the Sith Lord part was written out and hence Count Dooku was invented.
Whether this theory is true or not does not matter, the point it illustrates is that this is exactly how the cabal operate; when one of their
puppets is not performing, they whip up another one and chuck them in.
Channel 4 News Cancels Prince Charles Interview Due To 'Draconian' Demands December 8 2015 | From: TheGuardian
Broadcaster refused terms of contract insisted upon by Clarence House.
Prince Charles delivers a speech as part of the United Nations conference on climate change
Channel 4 News has turned down an interview with the Prince of Wales after refusing to sign a “draconian” contract with a string of demands including the pre-vetting of all questions and right to control editing.
Channel 4 News has turned down an interview with the Prince of Wales after refusing to sign a “draconian” contract with a string of demands including the pre-vetting of all questions and right to control editing.
This hapless fumbling clown is actually still believing / hoping we are all ignorant fluoridated serfs as he whores himself about, trotting out more of the party line bollocks. Even if his drought theory were correct - he and his cronies are the ones responsible for it in the first place.The clock is ticking you muppet...
However, Channel 4 News felt that it could not conduct an interview under such terms, which included a 15-page contract full of limitations and restrictions. It cancelled an interview with Prince Charles that was due to be conducted by Jon Snow on Sunday at the British ambassador’s residence in Paris, on the eve of the Paris climate change talks.
The decision to pull out of the interview would have ultimately been made by Ben de Pear, the editor of Channel 4’s flagship news programme.
Channel 4 News said it would be happy to carry out an interview but not with such a restrictive contract.
"We do not sign pre-interview agreements, and interviewees appear on Channel 4 News on that basis,” said a spokesperson.
“We would still be delighted to interview Prince Charles.”
It is not clear if other media outlets, such as ITV News and BBC News, have agreed to run interviews with Prince Charles.
The contractual stipulations surrounding Prince Charles were first made public by the Independent, which cited clauses in the contract such as: if the interviewer goes off script, Clarence House staff present have the right to “intervene and halt filming”.
A spokeswoman for Clarence House said the Prince of Wales received hundreds of requests for interviews and no media outlet was obligated to sign the standard contract.
"The issuing of broadcast contracts is standard practice across the royal households,” said the spokeswoman.
“The Prince of Wales receives hundreds of requests for interviews from media organisations around the world. No media organisation is under any obligation to approach the Prince of Wales for an interview or enter into a contract negotiation.”
She added that the restrictions were to ensure “factual accuracy”.
“All broadcasters that do [an interview], are keen to ensure that they do not breach any of the relevant broadcast rules and go to great lengths to protect their independence in this regard,” she said.
“The contracts are put in place to ensure factual accuracy and protect the broadcaster as well as the interview subject.”
Former CBS Reporter Exposes Media Lies, Internet Shills & Astroturfing December 7 2015 | From: TedX
In this eye-opening talk, veteran investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson shows how astroturf, or fake grassroots movements funded by political, corporate, or other special interests very effectively manipulate and distort media messages.
Sharyl Attkisson is an investigative journalist based in Washington D.C. She is currently writing a book entitled Stonewalled (Harper Collins), which addresses the unseen influences of corporations and special interests on the information and images the public receives every day in the news and elsewhere.
For twenty years (through March 2014), Attkisson was a correspondent for CBS News. In 2013, she received an Emmy Award for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for her reporting on “The Business of Congress,” which included an undercover investigation into fundraising by Republican freshmen.
She also received Emmy nominations in 2013 for Benghazi: Dying for Security and Green Energy Going Red. Additionally, Attkisson received a 2013 Daytime Emmy Award as part of the CBS Sunday Morning team’s entry for Outstanding Morning Program for her report: “Washington Lobbying: K-Street Behind Closed Doors.” In September 2012, Attkisson also received an Emmy for Oustanding Investigative Journalism for the “Gunwalker: Fast and Furious” story.
She received the RTNDA Edward R. Murrow Award for Excellence in Investigative Reporting for the same story. Attkisson received an Investigative Emmy Award in 2009 for her exclusive investigations into TARP and the bank bailout. She received an Investigative Emmy Award in 2002 for her series of exclusive reports about mismanagement at the Red Cross.
Key Influence Of Belief November 26 2015 | From: Eucadia
Your existing beliefs are so powerful, they colour everything - especially everything you will read on this website and related sites.
You filter everything you read on Ucadia and related sites by your pre-existing beliefs
An example of how belief affects everything we do is how you naturally approach any new or controversial content you discover. If the new information is consistent with your pre-existing beliefs, then the information is more likely to be accepted as true - if it clashes in any way, then the information you have read is more likely to be rejected.
So strongly do we rely upon our "belief system" to filter information, sometimes we may simply judge an entire body of information as true or false, simply on a single sample, or recommendation from a trusted source.
Such assumptions are far from logical. Taking a single sentence or paragraph from a body of information may cause it to be analyzed completely out of context - resulting in a false conclusion, yet many of us make up our minds on such small samples of data on a wide range of subjects each and every day.
The answer "in theory" as to how our trust in our belief system works is to be found in the claimed original definitions for belief being from the early medieval English word bileafe, a translation of the Old English word geleafa , just one of the many translations in old European languages of the ancient Germanic celtic word- zlaubjan (hold dear, cherish, trust in). In other words, belief appears just another way of saying "to trust something".
But is this etymology of the word belief wholly accurate? Belief appears to be more than simply trust, but more akin to faith. In fact this is precisely the second seven hundred year old ancient definition attributed to belief as "absolute trust in God; the virtue of faith" (with the word faith replacing the Latin word for trust fides.
In other words, belief in its original form is better defined as a kind of "blind faith" as oppossed to any process involving conscious decision making. If anything, the use of belief filters true to these alleged original definitions demand a man or woman not engage in any kind of critical analysis but dismiss any information immediately out of hand if it does not come from a trusted "official" source.
Belief therefore has more to do with a kind of religious orthodoxy and dogma than any natural mechanism for making sense of the daily overload of information. So what is the true origin of this word?
Belief and the Roman College of Abbreviators
It has been known by linguists and language architects for millenia that by shortening (abbreviating) old words and then combining them that new words represented compressed sentences may be created.
This is precisely what the Roman Cult College of Abbreviators under the command of Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) did in establishing a legal framework of control through the creation of thousands of new words through medieval Latin that later were transported into other manufactured languages such as Anglaise and later English, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish etc.
One of those key words was the creation of the word "be-li-ef" through the abbreviation of three Latin words:
be = bestia : animal, beast.
li = ligo : to bind, tie.
ef = efficio : to do, produce, effect, make / bring about, cause / prove.
In other words, the true personality and meaning of Belief is "to cause the binding of animals".
To truly understand the implication of this meaning, the reader needs to understand that the Roman Cult considered all men and women, not members of the Cult to be nothing more than animals and therefore the property of the Roman Catholic Cult, like any other goods and chattel.
The clearest example of this is evidenced in the Papal Bull Unum Sanctum by Pope Boniface VIII in 1302 which stated:
"Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff".
As this original law has never been repealed, it stands today that the Roman Catholic Church still considers all men and women not bona fide members of the Roman Cult as "creatures" and animals - hence the importance of promoting "belief".
Many may reject this true original definition of "belief"
Many who read this page will refuse to believe this true and original definition of belief - an excellent example of the power of the "blind faith" of belief in action. For some, the argument will be through the lack of "hard evidence" and citations -a parallel system also created by the Roman Cult to "end the proof of truth through argument" and force all evidence of truth in discussion to be based on referred sources.
As the Vatican has remained the greatest source of ancient forgeries for over 1,000 years, this citation system has been a priceless tool in reinforcing belief and stopping even the most educated of minds from considering a logical and well formed argument as being its own proof.
In today’s society, we have to ask ourselves... ”Are my thoughts my own?” Do we REALLY think for ourselves or make our own decisions?
Even things as simple as what toothpaste to use, what to have for lunch or what to wear might be decided for you.
If you watch TV (yes, even if the sound is muted) you are being hypnotized and influenced without even knowing it. When you watch movies, talk shows, the news, commercials, listen to music, or read ANYTHING you are being hypnotized, influenced……and YES…..mind-controlled. There are even patents on the frequencies used by Televisions. It is KNOWN that they induce hypnosis within minutes of exposure.
How do I know so much about mind-control?
I know about mind- control because I am an NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming) Master Practitioner and a Master Hypnotist. In other words, I have been highly trained in mind-control by none-other than Richard Bandler, the genius co-creator of NLP. He could make you do or say anything.
He is that good. He also said:
“You can use NLP to do really good things, or you can be an Asshole.”
My choice was always to do good things with NLP, but unfortunately many highly trained NLP specialists use their skills for what I consider to be unethical, inexcusable, and unadulterated EVIL.
Mind control is all about bypassing the critical thinking part of your brain with distraction, or hypnosis. Once this is accomplished, your subconscious mind is wide open to accept whatever outlandish suggestion they want to put in there. Your brain is wired to accept these things, no questions asked.
This is especially true with children. Young children are ALWAYS in a state of hypnosis, so pay attention to what they are watching, reading and to who might be influencing them.
How NLP is used in Advertising
Every single commercial is specially designed by a horde of brain-washing specialists whose only concern is to convince you to buy their product, and they will use any means possible to do this. If they need to sell pharmaceuticals that will kill you (which would be just about ANY OF THEM), they will do so without a fleck of conscience whatsoever.
They only care about two things: Selling their product and getting money from you. The music and lyrics used in commercials are chosen to influence the right demographics.
Sixties music is played to influence baby-boomers, while current music is played to control the younger population. Everything is controlled from tempo, beat and lyrics. The pictures and videos flash on the screen at just the right rate to put you into an automatic state of hypnosis.
The more distracted you are, the better it works. Suggestions are thrown into your subconscious mind so fast you don’t even have a clue it’s happening. Even if you are watching a movie or television show on which the TV is playing quietly in the background, you can be influenced by whatever they are saying.
Subliminal advertising (flashing words and statements on the screen so briefly they aren’t detected by the conscious mind) is illegal in other countries, such as Australia and England, but in the United States there is no law on the books against it. It is however controlled by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission).
They will revoke a company’s broadcast license if it can be proven, but by its very nature, it can often be difficult to detect and prove. I have found subliminal advertisements myself while rewinding television shows on my DVR player. They are still there, they will try to influence you, and you won’t even know it.
“Subliminal programming is designed to be perceived on a subconscious level only. Regardless of whether it is effective, the use of subliminal perception is inconsistent with a station’s obligation to serve the public interest because the broadcast is intended to be deceptive. (Federal Communications Commission Record, 2001)”
- From FCC Manual for Broadcasters
Television Shows, Cartoons And Movies
Everything I have said about advertising also applies to television shows, cartoons and movies.
Do we care if our children are being influenced daily by subliminal messages in the cartoons and children’s programs they are watching? I’m sure your answer to this question is a resounding “YES!” Perhaps the only way we can protect our children is to pass a law against subliminal programming.
Even if there are no subliminal messages in a show or movie, there are still plenty of other techniques used to sway you to their viewpoint. The hypnosis we are under when watching these things makes us extremely susceptible to their suggestions.
Because children are more susceptible to hypnosis, family films are notorious for brainwashing when you least expect it. Take for instance the movie WALL-E.
According to Christopher Tucker “Wall-E fools you into thinking that robots are cute and lovable. We should trust them. We should listen to show tunes with them. That way, our defenses are nice and lowered, which will enable Skynet to commence Judgment Day. If you haven’t already, please don’t let your children watch Wall-E.
The resistance is going to need all the hardcore robot hating soldiers it can get. Please, consider the future of our planet.”
“News channels and political parties often repeat a consistent message when they want to get their point across. Short snippets of information is also a common tactic on news networks.”(sic)
One very effective method of brainwashing is to repeat the same information over and over again until it starts to penetrate your subconscious mind, convincing you that it must be the truth. Another way to bypass the conscious mind is to flash headlines at you.
Most people only read the headlines when they are scanning the newspaper and these quick flashes of information tend to stick better than an entire article on the subject. This is also true with news programming. The less attention you pay the more you are brainwashed. It seems that the only thing you can do to avoid being brainwashed by the news would be to stop watching it.
It isn’t practical to stop watching or reading everything. So what do we do? PAY ATTENTION to what you read and watch. Be aware of the techniques being used on you, and most importantly question your own thoughts. Take nothing for granted and stop assuming that you are being told the truth or that “they” have your best interests at heart.
In most cases they do not. Most importantly, be aware of what your children are watching and reading, because they are being affected much more than you ever thought possible.
The Connection Between 9/11, JFK And The Global Collateral Accounts November 12 2015 | From: TheMindUnleashed
The purpose of this article is to shed light on some topics that have garnered considerable attention over the years and to identify the underlying thread, that surprisingly connects them all.
With the facts that will be presented, we can move forward with hope and optimism that there are indeed great things happening in our world and that there are those out there continuing to ensure the truth is known. Great times for us are at hand.
On November 22nd, 1963, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, one of the most beloved and famous US president’s was assassinated in Dallas, Texas. Though there are many theories as to who killed him, to get closer to the truth we must ask why he was killed. In any murder investigation, the victim’s enemies are often looked at first. In this respect, it was well known that Kennedy strongly opposed the military-industrial complex, which included The Federal Reserve and the C.I.A.
In a speech on April 27th, 1961 before the American Newspaper Publishers Association in New York City, Mr. Kennedy openly stated opposition to “secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings.” He stated further opposition to a “ruthless conspiracy…a highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.”
Creating considerable dissent with the status quo and more specifically with The Federal Reserve and C.I.A., Kennedy signed Executive Order 11110 into law on June 4th, 1963, which gave the president the right to issue gold-backed currency, and completely without permission from The Federal Reserve. But where was Kennedy going to receive such large amounts of gold to back a new Treasury note?
A Little History
In the 1930's, royal Asian families had seen that some of their gold and silver holdings in Southeast Asia were being plundered by the Japanese and needed to do something about it. In 1938, the Chinese Kuomintang government sent 7 warships loaded with gold and silver to the US Federal Reserve for safekeeping.
In return, the Chinese were given 60 year gold bonds–a subject we will return to further down. A few years later in 1944, the infamous Bretton Woods Conference took place in which the US, France and Britain were given a 50 year mandate to modernize and transform the world for the better. Backing this new global financial system that had just been set up was a now estimated 2 million metric tons of gold, held by this group of royal Asian families, which is also known as the Dragon Family.
By August 17th, 1945, President Soekarno of Indonesia had been elected “M1″ or Monetary Controller of this large cache of assets, granted under United Nations Resolution MISA 81704, Operation Heavy Freedom.
These assets are better known as the Global Collateral Accounts and were originally intended to be used for the modernization of the world through several humanitarian projects. The Dragon Family are the legitimate Depositors of these accounts.
By 1955, it was shown that the International Monetary Fund, which was also created at Bretton Woods, was not living up to its word and was instead serving only the interest of the banking and political elite. It was at this time that a growing alliance began to see that these funds were being used to fuel the Cold War tension and decided to strongly oppose the shady banking cabal.
By 1963, this alliance pooled their financial resources together to create the Green Hilton Memorial Agreement, which was signed by John F. Kennedy and President Skoearno and was finished on November 14, 1963.
This agreement was to utilize the Global Collateral Accounts for global development and humanitarian projects (along with a new US Treasury Note, a new supernational/international note backed by gold and would bring an end to The Federal Reserve system and the CIA). Just 8 days later, JFK was assassinated.
The above pictures show The Green Hilton Memorial Agreement and signatures of President Soekarno and President John F. Kennedy along with several others with listed amounts of gold-backed certificates.
A short time following Kennedy’s passing, President Soekarno was driven from power by way of a coup. By 1968, the Bush, Kissinger, Rockefeller and other influential families created a fake heir to the rights of the Global Collateral Accounts. Up until the writing of this article in November of 2015, these accounts have been illegally and fraudulently used by the central banking system.
The 9/11 Connection
In 1998, 60 years after the Federal Reserve Board and the Chinese swapped gold for gold bonds, the Chinese requested their gold back. After refusal from the Fed, the Chinese Kuomintang government followed with a lawsuit. The International Court of Justice ruled that the Fed needed to return the gold, which was later agreed upon by the Fed. The first payment was scheduled to be delivered September 12th, 2001.
Interestingly, on September 10th, 2001, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced that 2.3 trillion dollars went missing from the Pentagon defense budget. Even more conspicuous, Cantor Fitzgerald Securities, the company that was handling the paper work for the gold to be delivered back to the Chinese, was inside One World Trade Center on floors 101-105. All 658 of their employees were murdered on that day as the towers fell and the gold was not returned to the Chinese.
The Monaco Accords, The Trillion Dollar Lawsuit and the BRICS
In August of 2011, representatives from 57 nations (none were invited from the West) came together off the coast of Monaco to create an alliance designed to legally take down the central banking cabal and create a new global financial system using the Global Collateral Accounts for many development and humanitarian projects.
Neil Keenan (right) with Count Albert of the Dragon Family
Reports from Neil Keenan, who helped arrange this historic meeting and has been entrusted with protecting and restoring the legal rights back to the Dragon Family and settling the Global Collateral Accounts for the benefit of humanity, has stated that this Monaco meeting alliance has now swelled to 182 countries and is being spearheaded by the BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).
Neil also filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York on November 23, 2011 to the tune of over a trillion dollars against the United Nations, the Office of International Treasury Control, Silvio Berlusconi, Ban Ki-Moon, the World Economic Forum and several others.
For those that want proof of this lawsuit, here is a screenshot of the filed case. This comes from pacer.gov, which is used to look up filed cases. Take a look at the plaintiff and defendants.
Since that time, Neil has withdrawn the suit (Obama’s economic advisor’s brother became the judge and he previously had never been a judge before) to refile in an even more effective jurisdiction and plans to do this in the very near future. This new lawsuit will be bigger and will expose the EU, the Federal Reserve and all the parties mentioned above, plus much more.
Neil Keenan has also filed liens and a Cease and Desist order against all twelve central banks in the U.S. and a Cease and Desist order on behalf of the Dragon Family against names like Queen Elizabeth II, Hilary Clinton, George Herbert Walker Bush, George W. Bush, David Rockefeller and several other well known names.
Above is the official Cease and Desist order. To download this pdf file, click here
Is Our World to Be Set Free?
Is this massive alliance about to make it’s move on the banking and political cabal? Is Neil Keenan and his team about to finish what JFK, President Sukarno and many others were trying to accomplish? Will the 9/11 connection to the Global Collateral Accounts finally come to light? To these questions, Neil Keenan has a statement for the world:
“JFK, Soekarno, 9-11 and everything surrounding it all boils down to one and the same groups or organizations etc., that being what is known as the Cabal or NWO. Look no further than Rothschild’s, Rockefeller’s, and on a lesser scale Bush’s, Netanyahu’s …etc. We must always remember that according to these people we the “goyim” are the enemy and furthermore we must understand not only are they Khazars (read Khazars and their empire) but Satanists and clearly want us all dead.
They want the world, this planet and everything they touch. They taint everything they make, put together, manufacture, and one way or another are taking precious seconds and minutes away from our lives. They go so far as to poison baby food (Johnson and Johnson’s most recently caught, simply stated we are sorry and will take the toxins out of the baby food) but when caught they simply walk away leaving a path of utter destruction for many families.
It is time we defend our families, our planet, our friends and those who will soon be life long friends. It is time to bring our planet together as one, to fight these evil criminals disguising themselves as politicians. It is time to fight them as they fight us and stop talking about it.
The road to the collateral accounts was initially filled with litter. From OITC (Ray Dam), OPPT (Heather Tucci), Swiss Indo (Sino), Karen Hudes (who never did understand the collateral accounts and had never heard of the Dragon Family when she requested my help), Red Dragon Family, World Economic Forum (Davos and Giancarlo Bruno), the UN, and many others I have never mentioned all decided at one time or another they owned or managed the accounts when in fact not a one ever had any of the DEPOSITORS permissions to represent said accounts.
We took them all down and we laid them to rest but similar to a film script they often return to life and take a second shot at things after taking a deep breath but… they are all just fiction.
We are on the road to the accounts. The litter has been tossed into the garbage where it belongs and upon completing this road the accounts will be open. The big question, even one from the Dragon Family is… will I be able to move the notes and the answer is YES! We will be able to complete this impossible task and release the funds as initially planned for humanitarian purposes. I need a little more time to get to where we must be but we will be there and when so, the Cabal is finished... FRODO LIVES... ha ha
BBC Journalist Comes Clean, Says “Trust Nothing You Read Or Watch” November 12 2015 | From: TheCanary
A BBC journalist, John Darvall, has lambasted his own career at the BBC.
The insensitive way the tragic death of his daughter, Polly, has been handled by several outlets led him to lay bare his thoughts about the BBC and the British media industry as a whole, in a heartfelt blog post.
“This poor piece of journalism made Tuesday probably the worst day of this whole episode so far."
This provoked wider criticism of traditional media from Darvall.
“This week TV and newspapers have proven to me why they are not the future of news."
Darvall then hailed the internet as the bastion of real media.
“The internet allows us to come to our own conclusions by checking our own facts. We really can’t trust the traditional outlets to do it right or properly."
He specified social media as the future of of news.
“If they can’t even get their facts right, be trusted with clear information and then report it accurately is it any wonder that we are all turning to Facebook, Twitter and other internet sources for our news and information?"
He said this of his own career:
“I am ashamed to be a journalist."
And left us with a piece of advice:
“Trust nothing you read or watch."
Can we trust the BBC?
The BBC is the envy of much of the world: a media free from vested interest; free to serve the public for the greater good. We observe the likes of Fox News in the USA and are thankful. A properly informed public is the foundation of any meaningful democracy, and a publicly owned media outlet can circumvent the position of the powerful as the ‘gatekeepers’ of information.
This is the concept of the BBC, but the reality is far from it. A major content analysis from Cardiff University reveals the BBC is in fact pro-business and conservative leaning in its coverage, contrary to George Osborne’s claims that the BBC has an ‘anti-business’ slant.
The study found that on BBC News at Six, business representatives outnumbered trade union spokespersons by a ratio of more than 5-to-1 in 2007, and of 19-to-1 in 2012. Research into the BBC coverage of the 2008 financial crisis revealed similar pro-business sentiment. Opinion was almost completely dominated by investment bankers, stockbrokers and other city voices.
Not only does the corporation give disproportionate voice to big business, but it gives Tories more airtime than Labour. When Gordon Brown was in power in 2007, his coverage exceeded that of David Cameron by a ratio of 2-to-1. This is to be expected: the current Prime Minister will get more airtime. But, in 2012 Cameron’s coverage exceeded that of Ed Miliband by double that ratio (4-to-1).
One might say Labour’s reluctance to put Miliband front and centre is the reason for this. However, the study found much the same disparity when comparing cabinet members and ministers to their counterparts in the shadow cabinet.
Under a Conservative government in 2012, coverage of Tory ministers exceeded that of their Labour counterparts, again by more than 4-to-1. Meanwhile, under the 2007 Labour government, Labour ministers’ exceeded that of their Conservative counterparts, again by only 2-to-1. Factoring in who is presently in power, the Tories still get double the airtime Labour do.
A root cause of this is the way members of the BBC Trust are selected. The BBC Trust is the body that governs and regulates the corporation. Currently, the monarch appoints BBC Trust members on the advice of government ministers. This has led to a public service run by people with strong business and political affiliation.
Rona Fairhead was made Chairwoman of the BBC Trust on the recommendation of former Conservative culture secretary Sajid Javid. She serves on the board of directors of several large corporations, including PepsiCo and HSBC. She is also the business ambassador for the UK Trade and Investment governing body.
The Vice-Chairwoman, Diane Coyle, sits on the advisory panel for EDF and is managing director of ‘Enlightenment Economics’, an economic consultancy for large corporate clients, such as Vodaphone.
The presenter for the BBC’s flagship political programme Daily Politics is Andrew Neil, chairman of the conservative news outlet ‘The Spectator’ and publisher of London global business magazine, ‘The Business’.
The business editor is Kamal Ahmed of the right-wing Sunday Telegraph, who was rebuked by the Guardian’s Nick Davies for ‘banging the war drums’ over the invasion of Iraq.
We might avoid such disproportionate coverage were the regulatory body not spearheaded by tycoons. While they may not actively seek to advance a particular agenda, they are predisposed to the ideology behind their affiliations.
The BBC is worth fighting for. The concept is incredible, but it needs huge reform. The government should not simply dictate who sits on the regulatory body. The BBC Trust should be representative of the public it is supposed to serve, not the vested interest it is supposed to bypass.
When Darvall tells us to trust nothing we read in the media, his advice penetrates even the BBC, which is often considered the global standard of honest journalism.
Corporate Media Really Is Dying: Check Out these New Statistics October 31 2015 | From: RingOfFireRadio
Recently, the BBC slashed another 1,000 jobs. Viewership on US news networks like Fox, CNN and MSNBC has dropped 19 percent since 2009. Newspapers have cut more than a third of their workforce in the last 25 years.
The former Corporate Media audience isn’t abadoning the news. Just the opposite, they are moving to social media news.
The majority of Twitter users (63 percent) and Facebook users (63 percent) now get their news from social media. Facebook now drives more traffic to news sites than Google. With nearly 1.5 billion users globally, Facebook clearly is in the position to become the largest news source in the world, along with Twitter and YouTube.
Watch Mike Papantonio’s commentary on the death of corporate media:
Cultural Imperialism And Perception Management: How Hollywood Hides 'US Government' War Crimes September 17 2015 | From: GlobalResearch
There is an unspoken, yet very clear, bond between Hollywood and the US government that overtly supports US foreign policy.
The movie industry in Hollywood has been active in hiding US war crimes and sanitizing the US military campaigns in NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan, Anglo-American occupied Iraq, and elsewhere in the world.
Moreover, the dominance of Hollywood as a tool of cultural imperialism in Europe and the rest of the world make Hollywood films an excellent tool for getting Washington’s ideas out internationally and sedating global audiences with misleading narratives
Hollywood as a Tool of Cultural Imperialism and Perception Management
Aside from news media outlets, it should come as no surprise that most the ideas and notions that the general public in the US and elsewhere have about wars come from movies, television sets, radio programs, video games, and the entertainment industry.
Movies and the entertainment industry are ideal for identifying roles for audiences. In many instances movies and the entertainment industry surpass media outlets in shaping the perceptions of audiences about wars and conflicts.
Movies are used to identify which individuals, groups, peoples, and nations are heroes, victims, aggressors, and villains. In this regard Hollywood vilifies countries like Iran, China, Russia, Cuba, and North Korea while it lionizes the United States.
Hollywood also warps historical narratives and reifies revisionist narratives of history.
In a far stretch from the historical facts and reality, this is why most US citizens and many Western Europeans believe that the outcome of the Second World War in Europe was decided in the Atlantic by the US and not in Eastern Europe and Central Asia by the Soviet Union.
The perceptions of most people in the US and Western Europe are influenced by Hollywood and the entertainment industry and not history textbooks or scholarly works. Polls taken in France by the French Institute of Public Opinion about the Second World War demonstrate how US cultural imperialism by means of Hollywood’s influence has played out.
57 % of the French citizens polled in 1945 believed that Germany was defeated in the Second World War because of the Soviet Union whereas 20% believed it was due to the US and 12% thought it was because of the British.
These views become distorted by 1994 when 25% of the French citizens polled believed that it was because of the Soviets that Hitler was defeated whereas 49% believed it was because of the US and 16% believed it was because of Britain.
By 2004 only 20% of the French citizens surveyed recognized the Soviet Union as the main force for ending the Second World War in Europe whereas 58% believed it was the US and 16% thought it was Britain.
We can infer that the younger generations or birth cohorts that did not experience the Second World War are having their perceptions shaped by modern mass media, specifically movies and the entertainment industry.
This is why CNN’s Christiane Amanpour was able to boldly declared on June 6, 2014 at the Seventieth Anniversary of D-Day from the Chateau de Benouville in France that;
"The American effort - the supremely heroic effort of the United States - under General Eisenhower and President Roosevelt during World War II has been one that the whole continent [meaning, Europe] has thanked America for the last seventy years".
While taking a swipe at Russia and undermining its role in the Second World War, CNN’s Amanpour also said that the French government has emphasized:
"That this is a day to thank the United States" and thank the US "most particularly for turning around the course of history".
The Vertical Integration of Hollywood with the Military-Industrial Complex
The recognized establishment of ties between Hollywood and the US government began with the production of the silent war movie Wings in 1927. The silent movie was about the First World War and relied heavily on the United States Army Air Corps, which is the aerial wing of the US Army.
Ever since the making of Wings in 1927 there has been a close partnership between the Pentagon and Hollywood that has expanded and blossomed to include other government bodies and agencies, including members of the sixteen-member US intelligence community, such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
This has led to the vertical integration of Hollywood and the entertainment industry into the military-industrial complex, which has in essence reduced Hollywood movies to tools of cultural imperialism and camouflaged US propaganda.
The US government began to increasingly manipulate the contents of Hollywood movie script and to glamorize and lionize the US military and its campaigns. The Pentagon and US government will not assist movie or television productions that reveal the true malevolent role of US wars.
Financial and material assistance is only given to productions that make wars and US foreign policy look like a heroic and noble solution. The author of the book Operation Hollywood, Dave Robb, does an excellent job of documenting this.
For example, the Pentagon had the entire plot and script changed in the 1961 episode of Lassie named Timmy and the Martians. The episode was originally supposed to be about the protagonist dog Lassie howling to alert Timmy of a plane crash.
The producers originally wanted to do a show where a US airplane crashed because it had a design fault that Lassie could sense due to a high pitch noise and thus identify.
The US military, however, would not accept any script that would even remotely suggest that US military hardware could have a design fault.
This was because the US government and Pentagon did not want children to think that US military equipment could be faulty, because it would hurt future recruitment for the US military. So the circumstances of the airplane’s crash had to be rewritten for the show to get Pentagon support.
This relationship has in effect sanitized US wars and invasions while it has justified Washington’s foreign policy.
It has led to the production of historically twisted movies.
At one end of the spectrum in Hollywood this has led to Hollywood self-censorship whereas at the other end of the spectrum it has led to government subsidized propaganda.
Hollywood script writers draft movie scripts that are self-censored because they know that they will be asking for assistance from the Pentagon and US government which can significant reduce a Hollywood production’s budget and save its producers a lot of money.
Hollywood scripts are constantly modified in this regard and the Pentagon even has an entity in Los Angeles that deals with Hollywood directors and producers called the Film Liaison Unit.
Hollywood’s Role in Hiding US War Crimes
While the US uses films like Top Gun as promotional and recruitment material it used movies like the Green Berets to distort the role of US in wars and movies like Argo, which the CIA is reported to have fact checked, to distort the perception of history.
Hollywood movies like Iron Man and Lone Survivor never explain the circumstances behind the US military presence in Afghanistan and Central Asia. They merely present the US presence there as an invited one and even the US contingents there as simply peacekeepers.
Movies like Transformers, G.I. Joe, and Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer portray the US as having a mandate to act with impunity anywhere in the world, including Russia and China, by disregarding the sovereignty of other nations and even placing US military bases on their soil.
The US military has no jurisdiction on Chinese soil nor does the Pentagon have a base in Russia’s territory. These Hollywood movies naturalize US interference in other countries and create the false impression that the US military has a right to do whatever it wants.
Aside from not addressing the darker side of US foreign policy, Hollywood movies like Forrest Gump carry subliminal messages. In the words of the US culture and entertainment magazine Rolling Stone:
"The message of Forrest Gump was that if you think about the hard stuff too much, you’ll either get AIDS or lose your legs. Meanwhile, the hero is the idiot who just shrugs and says ‘Whatever!’ whenever his country asks him to do something crazy."
What Rolling Stone is saying that listen to what you are commanded to do.
Then there are movies like American Sniper that collapse US foreign policy into the simplistic notion of individual characters. What this does is collapse the event and the soldiers into one, which means that if ones criticize a US war that you are attacking the soldiers and their convictions.
This is hiding behind the soldiers and detracting from the real issue of an illegal invasion and occupation. Nor is there any mention of Abu Ghraib or the false weapons of mass destruction lies. Rolling Stone had this to say about American Sniper:
The only thing that forces us to take it seriously is the extraordinary fact that an almost exactly similar worldview consumed the walnut-sized mind of the president who got us into the war in question".
It’s the fact that the movie is popular, and actually makes sense to so many people, that’s the problem," it also adds.
In fact, as a result of the movie there was an increase in hate crimes in the US and negative feelings towards Arabs and Muslims.
Nor was Chris Kyle in real life a hero protecting the US way of life as the Hollywood movie depicts him; he was part of an occupational force that should never have been in Iraq and he was fighting what he called an 'insurgency' that emerged to resist the occupation of Iraq.
Kyle also claimed that he was ordered to kill thirty fellow Americans in New Orleans because they were looting. He was also a known liar who also admitted that he loved killing Iraqis in his book.
Hollywood helps sanitize US war crimes and create false images. It should also come as no surprise that Hollywood movies are part of intelligence operations either. When Ben Affleck, the director of the movie Argo and an admirer of the CIA that collaborated with them in the making of Argo, was asked by Catherine Shoard if Hollywood was filled with CIA agents, his response was to say:
"I think that Hollywood is probably full of CIA agents".
It is worth quoting US Senator Tom Hayden about the CIA’s involvement in Hollywood:
"Think about that: it’s not that Hollywood is in bed with the CIA in some repugnant way, but that the Agency is looking to plant positive images about itself (in other words, propaganda) through our most popular forms of entertainment.
So natural has the CIA - entertainment connection become that few question its legal or moral ramifications. This is a government agency like no other; the truth of its operations is not subject to public examination.
When the CIA’s hidden persuaders influence a Hollywood movie, it is using a popular medium to spin as favorable an image of itself as possible, or at least, prevent an unfavorable one from taking hold. If incestuous enough, Jenkins argues, these relationships violate the spirit or letter of government laws."
The importance of movies as a tool of US foreign policy and warfare cannot be ignored. As an illustration of their importance, movies have even been censored inside the United States to hide US war crimes and reality.
The 1946 movie documentary Let There Be Light, which was about the lives of US soldiers that were traumatized from war and directed by John Huston, was banned for over thirty years from being watched in the US because of the awareness it would create among the US public.
Think Hollywood is neutral or that movie like Seth Rogen’s comedy The Interview, which promotes regime change in North Korea, is innocent?
Think again. Hollywood is helping Washington wage a war of perception management and to hide US war crimes.
The CIA And The Media: 50 Facts The World Needs To Know September 18 2015 | From: GlobalResearch
Since the end of World War Two the Central Intelligence Agency has been a major force in US and foreign news media, exerting considerable influence over what the public sees, hears and reads on a regular basis.
CIA publicists and journalists alike will assert they have few, if any, relationships, yet the seldom acknowledged history of their intimate collaboration indicates a far different story–indeed, one that media historians are reluctant to examine.
When seriously practiced, the journalistic profession involves gathering information concerning individuals, locales, events, and issues. In theory such information informs people about their world, thereby strengthening “democracy.”
This is exactly the reason why news organizations and individual journalists are tapped as assets by intelligence agencies and, as the experiences of German journalist Udo Ulfkotte (entry 47 below) suggest, this practice is at least as widespread today as it was at the height of the Cold War.
Consider the coverups of election fraud in 2000 and 2004, the events of September 11, 2001, the invasions Afghanistan and Iraq, the destabilization of Syria, and the creation of “ISIS.” These are among the most significant events in recent world history, and yet they are also those much of the American public is wholly ignorant of.
In an era where information and communication technologies are ubiquitous, prompting many to harbor the illusion of being well-informed, one must ask why this condition persists.
Further, why do prominent US journalists routinely fail to question other deep events that shape America’s tragic history over the past half century, such as the political assassinations of the 1960s, or the central role played by the CIA major role in international drug trafficking?
Popular and academic commentators have suggested various reasons for the almost universal failure of mainstream journalism in these areas, including newsroom sociology, advertising pressure, monopoly ownership, news organizations’ heavy reliance on “official” sources, and journalists’ simple quest for career advancement.
There is also, no doubt, the influence of professional public relations maneuvers. Yet such a broad conspiracy of silence suggests another province of deception examined far too infrequently - specifically the CIA and similar intelligence agencies’ continued involvement in the news media to mold thought and opinion in ways scarcely imagined by the lay public.
The following historical and contemporary facts–by no means exhaustive–provides a glimpse of how the power such entities possess to influence if not determine popular memory and what respectable institutions deem to be the historical record.
The CIA’s Operation MOCKINGBIRD is a long-recognised keystone among researchers pointing to the Agency’s clear interest in and relationship to major US news media.
MOCKINGBIRD grew out of the CIA’s forerunner, the Office for Strategic Services (OSS, 1942-47), which during World War Two had established a network of journalists and psychological warfare experts operating primarily in the European theatre.
2. Many of the relationships forged under OSS auspices were carried over into the postwar era through a State Department-run organization called the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) overseen by OSS staffer Frank Wisner.
3. The OPC “became the fastest-growing unit within the nascent CIA,” historian Lisa Pease observes, “rising in personnel from 302 in 1949 to 2,812 in 1952, along with 3,142 overseas contract personnel. In the same period, the budget rose from $4.7 million to $82 million.” Lisa Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” in James DiEugenio and Lisa Pease, The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X, Port Townsend, WA, 2003, 300.
4. Like many career CIA officers, eventual CIA Director/Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Richard Helms was recruited out of the press corps by his own supervisor at the United Press International’s Berlin Bureau to join in the OSS’s fledgling “black propaganda” program.
Helms & Nixon
“‘[Y]ou’re a natural,” Helms’ boss remarked. Richard Helms, A Look Over My Shoulder: A Life in the Central Intelligence Agency, New York: Random House, 2003, 30-31.
5. Wisner tapped Marshall Plan funds to pay for his division’s early exploits, money his branch referred to as “candy.” “We couldn’t spend it all,” CIA agent Gilbert Greenway recalls.
'“I remember once meeting with Wisner and the comptroller. My God, I said, how can we spend that? There were no limits, and nobody had to account for it. It was amazing.”
Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, New York: The New Press, 2000, 105.
6. When the OPC was merged with the Office of Special Operations in 1948 to create the CIA, OPC’s media assets were likewise absorbed.
7. Wisner maintained the top secret “Propaganda Assets Inventory,” better known as “Wisner’s Wurlitzer” - a virtual rolodex of over 800 news and information entities prepared to play whatever tune Wisner chose.
“The network included journalists, columnists, book publishers, editors, entire organizations such as Radio Free Europe, and stringers across multiple news organizations.” Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 300.
8. A few years after Wisner’s operation was up-and-running he “’owned’ respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS, and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all, according to a CIA analyst.
Each one was a separate ‘operation,’” investigative journalist Deborah Davis notes;
'“Requiring a code name, a field supervisor, and a field office, at an annual cost of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars - there has never been an accurate accounting.”
Deborah Davis, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post, Second Edition, Bethesda MD: National Press Inc, 1987, 139.
9. Psychological operations in the form of journalism were perceived as necessary to influence and direct mass opinion, as well as elite perspectives.
'“[T]he President of the United States, the Secretary of State, Congressmen and even the Director of the CIA himself will read, believe, and be impressed by a report from Cy Sulzberger, Arnaud de Borchgrave, or Stewart Alsop when they don’t even bother to read a CIA report on the same subject,” noted CIA agent Miles Copeland. Cited in Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 301.
10. By the mid-to-late 1950s, Darrell Garwood points out, the Agency sought to limit criticism directed against covert activity and bypass congressional oversight or potential judicial interference by:
'“Infiltrat[ing] the groves of academia, the missionary corps, the editorial boards of influential journal and book publishers, and any other quarters where public attitudes could be effectively influenced.”
Darrell Garwood, Under Cover: Thirty-Five Years of CIA Deception, New York: Grove Press, 1985, 250.
11. The CIA frequently intercedes in editorial decision-making. For example, when the Agency proceeded to wage an overthrow of the Arbenz regime in Guatemala in 1954, Allen and John Foster Dulles, President Eisenhower’s Secretary of State and CIA Director respectively, called upon New York Times publisher Arthur Hays Sulzberger to reassign reporter Sydney Gruson from Guatemala to Mexico City.
Sulzberger thus placed Gruson in Mexico City with the rationale that some repercussions from the revolution might be felt in Mexico. Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 302.
12. Since the early 1950s the CIA “has secretly bankrolled numerous foreign press services, periodicals and newspapers - both English and foreign language - which provided excellent cover for CIA operatives,” Carl Bernstein reported in 1977.
'“One such publication was the Rome Daily American, forty percent of which was owned by the CIA until the 1970s.”
Carl Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media,” Rolling Stone, October 20, 1977.
13. The CIA exercised informal liaisons with news media executives, in contrast to its relationships with salaried reporters and stringers, “who were much more subject to direction from the Agency” according to Bernstein.
"A few executives - Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times among them - signed secrecy agreements. But such formal understandings were rare: relationships between Agency officials and media executives were usually social - ’The P and Q Street axis in Georgetown,’ said one source. ‘You don’t tell William Paley to sign a piece of paper saying he won’t fink.’”
Director of CBS William Paley’s personal “friendship with CIA Director Dulles is now known to have been one of the most influential and significant in the communications industry,” author Debora Davis explains.
“He provided cover for CIA agents, supplied out-takes of news film, permitted the debriefing of reporters, and in many ways set the standard for the cooperation between the CIA and major broadcast companies which lasted until the mid-1970s.”
Deborah Davis, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post, Second Edition, Bethesda MD: National Press Inc, 1987, 175.
14. “The Agency’s relationship with the Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials,” Bernstein points out in his key 1977 article:
"From 1950 to 1966, about ten CIA employees were provided Times cover under arrangements approved by the newspaper’s late publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. The cover arrangements were part of a general Times policy - set by Sulzberger - to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible.”
In addition, Sulzberger was a close friend of CIA Director Allen Dulles.
“’At that level of contact it was the mighty talking to the mighty,’ said a highlevel CIA official who was present at some of the discussions. ‘There was an agreement in principle that, yes indeed, we would help each other. The question of cover came up on several occasions. It was agreed that the actual arrangements would be handled by subordinates…. The mighty didn’t want to know the specifics; they wanted plausible deniability.’”
- Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”
15. CBS’s Paley worked reciprocally with the CIA, allowing the Agency to utilize network resources and personnel.
“It was a form of assistance that a number of wealthy persons are now generally known to have rendered the CIA through their private interests,” veteran broadcast journalist Daniel Schorr wrote in 1977.
“It suggested to me, however, that a relationship of confidence and trust had existed between him and the agency.” Schorr points to “clues indicating that CBS had been infiltrated.”
For example, “A news editor remembered the CIA officer who used to come to the radio control room in New York in the early morning, and, with the permission of persons unknown, listened to CBS correspondents around the world recording their ‘spots’ for the ‘World News Roundup’ and discussing events with the editor on duty."
Sam Jaffe claimed that when he applied in 1955 for a job with CBS, a CIA officer told him that he would be hired - which he subsequently was. He was told that he would be sent to Moscow - which he subsequently was; he was assigned in 1960 to cover the trial of U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers. [Richard] Salant told me - Schorr continues;
“That when he first became president of CBS News in 1961, a CIA case officer called saying he wanted to continue the ‘long standing relationship known to Paley and [CBS president Frank] Stanton, but Salant was told by Stanton there was no obligation that he knew of”
16. National Enquirer publisher Gene Pope Jr. worked briefly on the CIA’s Italy desk in the early 1950s and maintained close ties with the Agency thereafter.
Pope refrained from publishing dozens of stories with:
“Details of CIA kidnappings and murders, enough stuff for a year’s worth of headlines” in order to “collect chits, IOUs,” Pope’s son writes.
“He figured he’d never know when he might need them, and those IOUs would come in handy when he got to 20 million circulation. When that happened, he’d have the voice to be almost his own branch of government and would need the cover.”
Paul David Pope, The Deeds of My Fathers: How My Grandfather and Father Built New York and Created the Tabloid World of Today, New York: Phillip Turner/Rowman & Littlefield, 2010, 309, 310.
17. One explosive story Pope’s National Enquirer‘s refrained from publishing in the late 1970s centered on excerpts from a long-sought after diary of President Kennedy’s lover, Mary Pinchot Meyer, who was murdered on October 12, 1964.
“The reporters who wrote the story were even able to place James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s head of counterintelligence operations, at the scene.”
Another potential story drew on “documents provingthat [Howard] Hughes and the CIA had been connected for years and that the CIA was giving Hughes money to secretly fund, with campaign donations, twenty-seven congressmen and senators who sat on sub-committees critical to the agency. There are also fifty-three international companies named and sourced as CIA fronts .. and even a list of reporters for mainstream media organizations who were playing ball with the agency.”
Pope, The Deeds of My Fathers, 309.
18. Angleton, who oversaw the Agency counterintelligence branch for 25 years,
“Ran a completely independent group entirely separate cadre of journalistoperatives who performed sensitive and frequently dangerous assignments; little is known about this group for the simple reason that Angleton deliberately kept only the vaguest of files.”
Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”
19. The CIA conducted a “formal training program” during the 1950s for the sole purpose of instructing its agents to function as newsmen.
“Intelligence officers were ‘taught to make noises like reporters,’ explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management.
These were the guys who went through the ranks and were told ‘You’re going to he a journalist,’” the CIA official said.” The Agency’s preference, however, was to engage journalists who were already established in the industry.
Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”
20. Newspaper columnists and broadcast journalists with household names have been known to maintain close ties with the Agency.
“There are perhaps a dozen well known columnists and broadcast commentators whose relationships with the CIA go far beyond those normally maintained between reporters and their sources,” Bernstein maintains.
“They are referred to at the Agency as ‘known assets’ and can be counted on to perform a variety of undercover tasks; they are considered receptive to the Agency’s point of view on various subjects.”
Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”
21. Frank Wisner, Allen Dulles, and Washington Post publisher Phillip Graham were close associates, and the Post developed into one of the most influential news organs in the United States due to its ties with the CIA. The Post managers’
“Individual relations with intelligence had in fact been the reason the Post Company had grown as fast as it did after the war,” Davis (172) observes.
“[T]heir secrets were its corporate secrets, beginning with MOCKINGBIRD. Phillip Graham’s commitment to intelligence had given his friends Frank Wisner an interest in helping to make the Washington Post the dominant news vehicle in Washington, which they had done by assisting with its two most crucial acquisitions, the Times-Herald and WTOP radio and television stations.”
Davis, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post, 172.
22. In the wake of World War One the Woodrow Wilson administration placed journalist and author Walter Lippmann in charge of recruiting agents for the Inquiry, a first-of-its-kind ultra-secret civilian intelligence organization whose role involved ascertaining information to prepare Wilson for the peace negotiations, as well as identify foreign natural resources for Wall Street speculators and oil companies.
The activities of this organization served as a prototype for the function eventually performed by the CIA, namely“planning, collecting, digesting, and editing the raw data,” notes historian Servando Gonzalez.
“This roughly corresponds to the CIA’s intelligence cycle: planning and direction, collection, processing, production and analysis, and dissemination.”
Most Inquiry members would later become members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Lippmann would go on to become the Washington Post’s best known columnists. Servando Gonzalez, Psychological Warfare and the New World Order: The Secret War Against the American People, Oakland, CA: Spooks Books, 2010, 50.
23. The two most prominent US newsweeklies, Time and Newsweek, kept close ties with the CIA.
“Agency files contain written agreements with former foreign correspondents and stringers for both the weekly newsmagazines,” according to Carl Bernstein.
“Allen Dulles often interceded with his good friend, the lateHenry Luce, founder of Time and Life magazines, who readily allowed certain members of his staff to work for the Agency and agreed to provide jobs and credentials for other CIA operatives who lacked journalistic experience.”
Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”
24. In his autobiography former CIA officer E. Howard Hunt quotes Bernstein’s “The CIA and the Media” article at length.
“I know nothing to contradict this report,” Hunt declares, suggesting the investigative journalist of Watergate fame didn’t go far enough.
“Bernstein further identified some of the country’s top media executives as being valuable assets to the agency … But the list of organizations that cooperated with the agency was a veritable ‘Who’s Who’ of the media industry, including ABC, NBC, the Associated Press, UPI, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, and others.”
E. Howard Hunt, American Spy: My Secret History in the CIA, Watergate, and Beyond, Hoboken NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2007, 150.
25. When the first major exposé of the CIA emerged in 1964 with the publication of The Invisible Government by journalists David Wise and Thomas B. Ross, the CIA considered purchasing the entire printing to keep the book from the public, yet in the end judged against it.
“To an extent that is only beginning to be perceived, this shadow government is shaping the lives of 190,000,000 Americans” authors Wise and Ross write in the book’s preamble.
“Major decisions involving peace and war are taking place out of public view. An informed citizen might come to suspect that the foreign policy of the United States often works publicly in one direction and secretly through the Invisible Government in just the opposite direction.”
Lisa Pease, “When the CIA’s Empire Struck Back,” Consortiumnews.com, February 6, 2014.
26. Agency infiltration of the news media shaped public perception of deep events and undergirded the official explanations of such events.
For example, the Warren Commission’s report on President John F. Kennedy’s assassination was met with almost unanimous approval by US media outlets.
“I have never seen an official report greeted with such universal praise as that accorded the Warren Commission’s findings when they were made public on September 24, 1964,” recalls investigative reporter Fred Cook.
“All the major television networks devoted special programs and analyses to the report; the next day the newspapers ran long columns detailing its findings, accompanied by special news analyses and editorials. The verdict was unanimous. The report answered all questions, left no room for doubt. Lee Harvey Oswald, alone and unaided, had assassinated the president of the United States.”
Fred J. Cook, Maverick: Fifty Years of Investigative Reporting, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984, 276.
27. In late 1966 the New York Times began an inquiry on the numerous questions surrounding President Kennedy’s assassination that were not satisfactorily dealt with by the Warren Commission.
“It was never completed,” author Jerry Policoff observes, “nor would the New York Times ever again question the findings of the Warren Commission.”
When the story was being developed the lead reporter at the Times‘ Houston bureau “said that he and others came up with ‘a lot of unanswered questions’ that the Times didn’t bother to pursue. ‘I’d be off on a good lead and then somebody’d call me off and send me out to California on another story or something. We never really detached anyone for this. We weren’t really serious.’”
- Jerry Policoff, “The Media and the Murder of John Kennedy,” in Peter Dale Scott, Paul L. Hoch and Russell Stetler, eds., The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond, New York: Vintage, 1976, 265.
28. When New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison embarked on an investigation of the JFK assassination in 1966 centering on Lee Harvey Oswald’s presence in New Orleans in the months leading up to November, 22, 1963;
“He was cross-whipped with two hurricane blasts, one from Washington and one from New York,” historian James DiEugenio explains.
The first, of course, was from the government, specifically the Central Intelligence Agency, the FBI, and to a lesser extent, the White House. The blast from New York was from the major mainstream media e.g. Time-Life and NBC. Those two communication giants were instrumental in making Garrison into a lightning rod for ridicule and criticism. This orchestrated campaign … was successful in diverting attention from what Garrison was uncovering by creating controversy about the DA himself. -
DiEugenio, Preface, in William Davy, Let Justice Be Done: New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, Reston VA: Jordan Publishing, 1999.
29. The CIA and other US intelligence agencies used the news media to sabotage Garrison’s 1966-69 independent investigation of the Kennedy assassination. Garrison presided over the only law enforcement agency with subpoena power to seriously delve into the intricate details surrounding JFK’s murder. One of Garrison’s key witnesses, Gordon Novel, fled New Orleans to avoid testifying before the Grand Jury assembled by Garrison. According to DiEugenio, CIA Director Allen;
“Dulles and the Agency would begin to connect the fugitive from New Orleans with over a dozen CIA friendly journalists who - in a blatant attempt to destroy Garrison’s reputation - would proceed to write up the most outrageous stories imaginable about the DA.”
James DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed: JFK, Cuba, and The Garrison Case, Second Edition, New York: SkyHorse Publishing, 2012, 235.
30. CIA officer Victor Marchetti recounted to author William Davy that in 1967 while attending staff meetings as an assistant to then-CIA Director Richard Helms;
“Helms expressed great concerns over [former OSS officer, CIA operative and primary suspect in Jim Garrison's investigation Clay] Shaw’s predicament, asking his staff, ‘Are we giving them all the help we can down there?’”
William Davy, Let Justice Be Done: New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, Reston VA: Jordan Publishing, 1999.
31. The pejorative dimensions of the term “conspiracy theory” were introduced into the Western lexicon by CIA “media assets,” as evidenced in the design laid out by Document 1035-960 Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report, an Agency communiqué issued in early 1967 to Agency bureaus throughout the world at a time when attorney Mark Lane’s Rush to Judgment was atop bestseller lists and New Orleans DA Garrison’s investigation of the Kennedy assassination began to gain traction.
32. Time had close relations with the CIA stemming from the friendship of the magazine’s publisher Henry Luce and Eisenhower CIA chief Allen Dulles. When former newsman Richard Helms was appointed DCI in 1966 he;
“Began to cultivate the press,” prompting journalists toward conclusions that placed the Agency in a positive light. As Time Washington correspondent Hugh Sidney recollects, “‘[w]ith [John] McCone and [Richard] Helms, we had a set-up when the magazine was doing something on the CIA, we went to them and put it before them … We were never misled.’ Similarly, when Newsweek decided in the fall of 1971 to do a cover story on Richard Helms and ‘The New Espionage,’ the magazine, according to a Newsweek staffer, went directly to the agency for much of the information.
And the article … generally reflected the line that Helms was trying so hard to sell: that since the latter 1960s … the focus of attention and prestige within CIA’ had switched from the Clandestine Services to the analysis of intelligence, and that ‘the vast majority of recruits are bound for’ the Intelligence Directorate.”
Victor Marchetti and John D. Marks, The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1974, 362-363.
33. In 1970 Jim Garrison wrote and published the semi-autobiographical A Heritage of Stone, a work that examines how the New Orleans DA:
“Discovered that the CIA operated within the borders of the United States, and how it took the CIA six months to reply to the Warren Commission’s question of whether Oswald and [Jack] Ruby had been with the Agency,” Garrison biographer and Temple University humanities professor Joan Mellen observes.
“In response to A Heritage of Stone, the CIA rounded up its media assets” and the book was panned by reviewers writing for the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Chicago Sun Times, and Life magazine. “
John Leonard’s New York Times review went through a metamorphosis, Mellen explains. “The original last paragraph challenged the Warren Report: ‘Something stinks about this whole affair,’ Leonard wrote. ‘Why were Kennedy’s neck organs not examined at Bethesda for evidence of a frontal shot? Why was his body whisked away to Washington before the legally required Texas inquest? Why?’
This paragraph evaporated in later editions of the Times. A third of a column gone, the review then ended: ‘Frankly I prefer to believe that the Warren Commission did a poor job, rather than a dishonest one. I like to think that Garrison invents monsters to explain incompetence.’” - Joan Mellen, A Farewell to Justice: Jim Garrison, JFK’s Assassination, and the Case That Should Have Changed History, Washington DC: Potomac Books, 2005, 323, 324.
34. CIA Deputy Director for Plans Cord Meyer Jr. appealed to Harper & Row president emeritus Cass Canfield Sr. over the book publisher’s pending release of Alfred McCoy’s The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, based on the author’s fieldwork and Yale PhD dissertation wherein he examined the CIA’s explicit role in the opium trade.
“Claiming my book was a threat to national security,” McCoy recalls, “the CIA official had asked Harper & Row to suppress it. To his credit, Mr. Canfield had refused. But he had agreed to review the manuscript prior to publication.”
Alfred W. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade, Chicago Review Press, 2003, xx.
35. Publication of The Secret Team, a book by US Air Force Colonel and Pentagon-CIA liaison L. Fletcher Prouty recounting the author’s firsthand knowledge of CIA black operations and espionage, was met with a wide scale censorship campaign in 1972.
“The campaign to kill the book was nationwide and world-wide,” Prouty notes. “It was removed from the Library of Congress and from college libraries as letters I received attested all too frequently … I was a writer whose book had been cancelled by a major publisher [Prentice Hall] and a major paperback publisher [Ballantine Books] under the persuasive hand of the CIA.”
L. Fletcher Prouty, The Secret Team: The CIA and Its Allies in Control of the United States and the World, New York: SkyHorse Publishing, 2008, xii, xv.
36. During the Pike Committee hearings in 1975 Congressman Otis Pike asked DCI William Colby, “Do you have any people paid by the CIA who are working for television networks?” Colby responded;
“This, I think, gets into the kind of details, Mr. Chairman, that I’d like to get into in executive session.” Once the chamber was cleared Colby admitted that in 1975 specifically “the CIA was using ‘media cover’ for eleven agents, many fewer than in the heyday of the cloak-and-pencil operations, but no amount of questioning would persuade him to talk about the publishers and network chieftains who had cooperated at the top.”
Schorr, Clearing the Air, 275.
37. “There is quite an incredible spread of relationships,” former CIA intelligence officer William Bader informed a US Senate Intelligence Committee investigating the CIA’s infiltration of the nation’s journalistic outlets.
“You don’t need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are Agency people at the management level.”
Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”
38. In 1985 film historian and professor Joseph McBride came across a November 29, 1963 memorandum from J. Edgar Hoover, titled, “Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,” wherein the FBI director stated that his agency provided two individuals with briefings, one of whom was:
“Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency.” ” When McBride queried the CIA with the memo a “PR man was tersely formal and opaque: ‘I can neither confirm nor deny.’ It was the standard response the agency gave when it dealt with its sources and methods,” journalist Russ Baker notes.
When McBride published a story in The Nation, “The Man Who Wasn’t There, ‘George Bush,’ C.I.A. Operative,” the CIA came forward with a statement that the George Bush referenced in the FBI record “apparently” referenced a George William Bush, who filled a perfunctory night shift position at CIA headquarters that “would have been the appropriate place to receive such a report.”
McBride tracked down George William Bush to confirm he was only employed briefly as a:
“Probationary civil servant” who had “never received interagency briefings.” Shortly thereafter The Nation ran a second story by McBride wherein “the author provided evidence that the Central Intelligence Agency had foisted a lie on the American people … As with McBride’s previous story, this disclosure was greeted with the equivalent of a collective media yawn.”
Russ Baker, Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America’s Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years, New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2009, 7-12.
39. Operation Gladio, the well-documented collaboration between Western spy agencies, including the CIA, and NATO involving coordinated terrorist shootings and bombings of civilian targets throughout Europe from the late 1960s through the 1980s, has been effectively expunged from major mainstream news outlets.
A LexisNexis Academic search conducted in 2012 for “Operation Gladio” retrieved 31 articles in English language news media - most appearing in British newspapers. Only four articles discussing Gladio ever appeared in US publications - three in the New York Times and one brief mention in the Tampa Bay Times. With the exception of a 2009 BBC documentary, no network or cable news broadcast has ever referenced the state-sponsored terror operation.
Almost all of the articles referencing Gladio appeared in 1990 when Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti publicly admitted Italy’s participation in the process. The New York Times downplayed any US involvement, misleadingly designating Gladio “an Italian creation” in a story buried on page A16.
In reality, former CIA director William Colby revealed in his memoirs that covert paramilitaries were a significant agency undertaking set up after World War II, including “the smallest possible coterie of the most reliable people, in Washington [and] NATO.” James F. Tracy, “False Flag Terror and Conspiracies of Silence,” Global Research, August 10, 2012.
40. Days before the April 19, 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City DCI William Colby confided to his friend, Nebraska State Senator John DeCamp his personal concerns over the Militia and Patriot movement within the United States, then surging in popularity due to the use of the alternative media of that era–books, periodicals, cassette tapes, and radio broadcasts.
“I watched as the Anti-War movement rendered it impossible for this country to conduct or win the Vietnam War,” Colby remarked.
“I tell you, dear friend, that the Militia and Patriot movement in which, as an attorney, you have become one of the centerpieces, is far more significant and far more dangerous for American than the Anti-War movement ever was, if it is not intelligently dealt with. And I really mean this.”
David Hoffman, The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror, Venice CA: Feral House, 1998, 367.
41. Shortly after the appearance of journalist Gary Webb’s “Dark Alliance” series in the San Jose Mercury News chronicling the Agency’s involvement in drug trafficking, the CIA’s public affairs division embarked on a campaign to counter what it termed “a genuine public relations crisis for the Agency.” Webb was merely reporting to a large audience what had already been well documented by scholars such as Alfred McCoy and Peter Dale Scott, and the 1989 Kerry Committee Report on Iran-Contra - that the CIA had long been involved in the illegal transnational drug trade.
Such findings were upheld in 1999 in a study by the CIA inspector general. Nevertheless, beginning shortly after Webb’s series ran, “CIA media spokesmen would remind reporters seeking comment that this series represented no real news,” a CIA internal organ noted, “in that similar charges were made in the 1980s and were investigated by the Congress and were found to be without substance. Reporters were encouraged to read the “Dark Alliance’ series closely and with a critical eye to what allegations could actually be backed with evidence.”
42. On December 10, 2004 investigative journalist Gary Webb died of two .38 caliber gunshot wounds to the head. The coroner ruled the death a suicide. “Gary Webb was MURDERED,” concluded FBI senior special agent Ted Gunderson in 2005. “He (Webb) resisted the first shot [to the head that exited via jaw] so he was shot again with the second shot going into the head [brain].” Gunderson regards the theory that Webb could have managed to shoot himself twice as “impossible!” - Charlene Fassa, “Gary Webb: More Pieces in the Suicided Puzzle,” Rense.com, December 11, 2005.
43. The most revered journalists who receive “exclusive” information and access to the corridors of power are typically the most subservient to officialdom and often have intelligence ties. Those granted such access understand that they must likewise uphold government-sanctioned narratives. For example, the New York Times’ Tom Wicker reported on November 22, 1963 that President John F. Kennedy “was hit by a bullet in the throat, just below the Adam’s apple.”
Yet his account went to press before the official story of a single assassin shooting from the rear became established. Wicker was chastised through “lost access, complaints to editors and publishers, social penalties, leaks to competitors, a variety of responses no one wants.” - Barrie Zwicker, Towers of Deception: The Media Coverup of 9/11, Gabrioloa Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2006, 169-170.
44. The CIA actively promotes a desirable public image of its history and function by advising the production of Hollywood vehicles, such as Argo and Zero Dark Thirty.
The Agency retains “entertainment industry liaison officers” on its staff that “plant positive images about itself (in other words, propaganda) through our most popular forms of entertainment,” Tom Hayden explains in the LA Review of Books.
“So natural has the CIA - entertainment connection become that few question its legal or moral ramifications. This is a government agency like no other; the truth of its operations is not subject to public examination. When the CIA’s hidden persuaders influence a Hollywood movie, it is using a popular medium to spin as favorable an image of itself as possible, or at least, prevent an unfavorable one from taking hold.”
Tom Hayden, “Review of The CIA in Hollywood: How the Agency Shapes Film and Television by Tricia Jenkins,” LA Review of Books, February 24, 2013,
45. Former CIA case officer Robert David Steele states that CIA manipulation of news media is “worse” in the 2010s than in the late 1970s when Bernstein wrote “The CIA and the Media.” “The sad thing is that the CIA is very able to manipulate [the media] and it has financial arrangements with media, with Congress, with all others. But the other half of that coin is that the media is lazy.” - James Tracy interview with Robert David Steele, August 2, 2014,
46. A well-known fact is that broadcast journalist Anderson Cooper interned for the CIA while attending Yale as an undergraduate in the late 1980s. According to Wikipedia Cooper’s great uncle, William Henry Vanderbilt III, was an Executive Officer of the Special Operations Branch of the OSS under the spy organization’s founder William “Wild Bill” Donovan. While Wikipedia is an often dubious source, Vanderbilt’s OSS involvement would be in keeping with the OSS/CIA reputation of taking on highly affluent personnel for overseas derring-do. - William Henry Vanderbilt III, Wikipedia.
47. Veteran German journalist Udo Ulfkotte, author of the 2014 book Gekaufte Journalisten (Bought Journalists) revealed how under the threat of job termination he was routinely compelled to publish articles written by intelligence agents using his byline.
“I ended up publishing articles under my own name written by agents of the CIA and other intelligence services, especially the German secret service,” Ulfkotte explained in a recent interview with Russia Today. - “German Journo: European Media Writing Pro-US Stories Under CIA Pressure,” RT, October 18, 2014.
48. In 1999 the CIA established In-Q-Tel, a venture capital firm seeking to “identify and invest in companies developing cutting-edge information technologies that serve United States national security interests.” The firm has exercised financial relationships with internet platforms Americans use on a routine basis, including Google and Facebook.
“If you want to keep up with Silicon Valley, you need to become part of Silicon Valley,” says Jim Rickards, an adviser to the U.S. intelligence community familiar with In-Q-Tel’s activities.
“The best way to do that is have a budget because when you have a checkbook, everyone comes to you.”
At one point IQT “catered largely to the needs of the CIA.”
Today, however, “the firm supports many of the 17 agencies within the U.S. intelligence community, including the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate.”
Matt Egan, “In-Q-Tel: A Glimpse Inside the CIA’s Venture Capital Arm,” FoxBusiness.com, June 14, 2013.
49. At a 2012 conference held by In-Q-Tel CIA Director David Patraeus declared that the rapidly-developing “internet of things” and “smart home” will provide the CIA with the ability to spy on any US citizen should they become a “person of interest’ to the spy community,” Wired magazine reports. “‘Transformational’ is an overused word, but I do believe it properly applies to these technologies,’ Patraeus enthused, ‘particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft’ … ‘Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters - all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing.”
Patraeus said, “the latter now going to cloud computing, in many areas greater and greater supercomputing, and, ultimately, heading to quantum computing.” - Spencer Ackerman, “CIA Chief: We’ll Spy on You Through Your Dishwasher,” Wired, March 15, 2012.
50. In the summer of 2014 a $600 million computing cloud developed by Amazon Web Services for the CIA began servicing all 17 federal agencies comprising the intelligence community.
“If the technology plays out as officials envision,” The Atlantic reports, “it will usher in a new era of cooperation and coordination, allowing agencies to share information and services much more easily and avoid the kind of intelligence gaps that preceded the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.”
“The Details About the CIA’s Deal With Amazon,” The Atlantic, July 17, 2014.
Is Subliminal Advertising Legit? September 6 2015 | From: Uproxx
I remember when my older sister did a class project on subliminal advertising in the sixth grade. I was only 8 years old, and the idea that someone was trying to plant messages deep in my brain without my knowledge made my head spin.
She showed me images pulled from ads and informed me, very matter-of-factly, that Joe Camel was meant to look like a penis (to what end, who knows).
I was far too intrigued to even bother being outraged. We asked Jeff Warrick, director of Programming the Nation, to offer his thoughts on the matter for the latest episode of The Truth.
Truth Is A Crime Against The State - Paul Craig Roberts August 16 2015 | From: PaulCraigRoberts
The entire Western edifice rests on lies. There is no other foundation. Just lies. This makes truth an enemy. Enemies have to be suppressed, and thus truth has to be suppressed.
Truth comes from foreign news sources, such as RT, and from Internet sites, such as this one. Thus, Washington and its vassals are busy at work closing down independent media.
Washington and its vassals have redefined propaganda. Truth is propaganda if it is told by countries, such as Russia and China, that have independent foreign policies.
Propaganda is truth if told by Washington and its puppets, such as the EU Observer.
The EU Observer, little doubt following Washington’s orders, has denounced RT and Sputnik News for “broadcasting fabrications and hate speech from their bureaus in European Union cities.”
Often I appear on both RT and Sputnik. In my opinion both are too restrained in their reporting, fearful, of course, of being shut down, than full truth requires. I have never heard a word of hate speech or propaganda on either. Washington’s propaganda, perhaps, but not the Russian government’s.
In other words, the way Washington has the news world rigged, not even independent news sites can speak completely clearly.
The Western presstitutes have succeeded in creating a false reality for insouciant Americans and also for much of the European Union population.
A sizable percentage of these insouciant peoples believe that Russia invaded Ukranine and that Russia is threatening to invade the Baltic States and Poland. This belief exists despite all intelligence of all Western governments reporting that there is no sign of any Russian forces that would be required for invasion.
The “Russian invasion,” like “Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction and al Qaeda connections,” like “Assad of Syria’s use of chemical weapons against his own people,” like “Iranian nukes,” never existed but nevertheless became the reality in the Western media. The insouciant Western peoples believe in non-existent occurrencies.
In other words, just to state the obvious noncontroversial fact, the Western “news” media is a propaganda ministry from which no truth emerges.
Thus, the Western World is ruled by propaganda. Truth is excluded. Fox “news,” CNN, the NY Times, Washington Post, and all the rest of the most accomplished liars in world history, repeat constantly the same lies. For Washington, of course, and the military/security complex.
War is the only possible outcome of propaganda in behalf of war. When the irresponsible Western media brings Armageddon to you, you can thank the New York Times and the rest of the presstitutes for the destruction of yourself and all your hopes for yourself and your children.
Stephen Lendman, who comprises a good chunk of the remaining moral conscience of the West, explains the situation:
EU Bashes “Russian Propaganda”
Western major media march to the same drummer – dutifully regurgitating managed news misinformation garbage, willfully burying hard truths on issues mattering most.
Alternative sources beholden to truth and full disclosure operate by different standards – engendering ire among Western nations wanting their high crimes suppressed – bashing sources revealing them.
The EU Observer (EUO) claims independent credentials while supporting policies responsible news sources denounce.
Independently reporting hard truths isn’t its long suit. Its editor, Lisbeth Kirk, is the wife of former Danish European Parliament member Jens-Peter Bonde. Human Rights Watch’s European and Central Asian advocacy director Veronika Szente Goldston calls its journalists “the most in-your-face in Brussels.”
EUO irresponsibly bashed Russia’s Sputnik News and RT International – two reputable sources for news, information and analysis – polar opposite Western media propaganda.
It shamelessly called their reporting valued by growing millions;
“Broadcasting fabrications and hate speech from their bureaus in EU cities.”
It touted plans by EU officials to counter what they called:
“use and misuse of communications tools…play(ing) an important role in the dramatic political, economic and security-related developments (in) Eastern (European countries) over the past 18 months.”
It drafted a nine-page “action plan” intended to convey “positive” messages. It’ll increase funding to blast out Europe’s view of things more effectively.
It wants EU policies promoted in former Russian republics the old-fashioned way – by repeating Big Lies often enough until most people believe them.
A new EU foreign service cell called East StratComTeam operating by September will run things – functioning as a European ministry of propaganda.
“Develop dedicated communication material on priority issues…put at the disposal of the EU’s political leadership, press services, EU delegations and EU member states.”
Material circulated in Russia and other EU countries aims to let news consumers “easily understand that political and economic reforms promoted by the EU can, over time, have a positive impact on their daily lives” – even though precisely the opposite is true.
It wants so-called benefits Europeans enjoy explained to people continent-wide. Will millions of unemployed, underemployed and impoverished people buy what’s plainly untrue from their own experience?
Sputnik News, RT, US independent sources like the Progressive Radio Network and numerous others steadily gain audience strength at the expense of scoundrel media people abandon for good reason.
Growing numbers want truth and full disclosure on things affecting their lives and welfare. Politicians in Western countries want ordinary people treated like mushrooms – well-watered and in the dark.
RT’s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan said:
“The European Union is diligently trying to stifle the alternative voice of RT, at a time when in Europe there are hundreds of newspapers, television channels and radio stations, which set out only one point of view on what is happening in the world.”
The BBC is Fox News with an English accent. US so-called public radio and broadcasting are no different – telling listeners and viewers everything except what they most need to know.
“Britain (has) an entire army brigade of 1,500 men…whose tasks include the fight against Russia on social networks. NATO has a task force aimed at countering Russian influence throughout the world.”
“Only recently, Deutsche Welle launched a 24-hour television channel in English to counter RT. At the same time, nearly all the major Western media, including the BBC, DW and Euronews have long disseminated their information in the Russian language, while Radio Liberty, funded directly by the US government, broadcasts in Russian.”
“(I)f after all this, the EU still complains that they are losing the ‘information war’ against Russia, perhaps it’s time to realize that” Growing numbers of people are fed up with being lied to.
People want reliable sources of news, information and analysis unavailable through mainstream Western sources using propagandists masquerading as journalists.
The Emergence Of Orwellian Newspeak And The Death Of Free Speech July 6 2015 | From: Rutherford
How do you change the way people think? You start by changing the words they use.
In totalitarian regimes - a.k.a. police states - where conformity and compliance are enforced at the end of a loaded gun, the government dictates what words can and cannot be used. In countries where the police state hides behind a benevolent mask and disguises itself as tolerance, the citizens censor themselves, policing their words and thoughts to conform to the dictates of the mass mind.
“If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none. Let him forget there is such a thing as war. If the government is inefficient, top-heavy, and tax-mad, better it be all those than that people worry over it….
Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information.
Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy, because facts of that sort don’t change.”
- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Even when the motives behind this rigidly calibrated reorientation of societal language appear well-intentioned - discouraging racism, condemning violence, denouncing discrimination and hatred - inevitably, the end result is the same: intolerance, indoctrination and infantilism.
It’s political correctness disguised as tolerance, civility and love, but what it really amounts to is the chilling of free speech and the demonizing of viewpoints that run counter to the cultural elite.
As a society, we’ve become fearfully polite, careful to avoid offense, and largely unwilling to be labeled intolerant, hateful, closed-minded or any of the other toxic labels that carry a badge of shame today.
The result is a world where no one says what they really think anymore, at least if it runs counter to the prevailing views. Intolerance is the new scarlet letter of our day, a badge to be worn in shame and humiliation, deserving of society’s fear, loathing and utter banishment from society.
For those “haters” who dare to voice a different opinion, retribution is swift: they will be shamed, shouted down, silenced, censored, fired, cast out and generally relegated to the dust heap of ignorant, mean-spirited bullies who are guilty of various “word crimes.”
We have entered a new age where, as commentator Mark Steyn notes;
“We have to tiptoe around on ever thinner eggshells” and “the forces of ‘tolerance’ are intolerant of anything less than full-blown celebratory approval.”
In such a climate of intolerance, there can be no freedom speech, expression or thought.
Yet what the forces of political correctness fail to realize is that they owe a debt to the so-called “haters” who have kept the First Amendment robust. From swastika-wearing Neo-Nazis marching through Skokie, Illinois, and underaged cross burners to “God hates fags” protesters assembled near military funerals, those who have inadvertently done the most to preserve the right to freedom of speech for all have espoused views that were downright unpopular, if not hateful.
Until recently, the U.S. Supreme Court has reiterated that the First Amendment prevents the government from proscribing speech, or even expressive conduct, because it disapproves of the ideas expressed.
These tactics are nothing new. This nation, birthed from puritanical roots, has always struggled to balance its love of liberty with its moralistic need to censor books, music, art, language, symbols etc. As author Ray Bradbury notes, “There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches.”
Indeed, thanks to the rise of political correctness, the population of book burners, censors, and judges has greatly expanded over the years so that they run the gamut from left-leaning to right-leaning and everything in between.
By eliminating words, phrases and symbols from public discourse, the powers-that-be are sowing hate, distrust and paranoia. In this way, by bottling up dissent, they are creating a pressure cooker of stifled misery that will eventually blow.
For instance, the word “Christmas” is now taboo in the public schools, as is the word “gun.” Even childish drawings of soldiers result in detention or suspension under rigid zero tolerance policies.
On college campuses, trigger warnings are being used to alert students to any material they might read, see or hear that might upset them, while free speech zones restrict anyone wishing to communicate a particular viewpoint to a specially designated area on campus. Things have gotten so bad that comedians such as Chris Rock and Jerry Seinfeld refuse to perform stand-up routines to college crowds anymore.
Clearly, the world is undergoing a nervous breakdown, and the news media is helping to push us to the brink of insanity by bombarding us with wall-to-wall news coverage and news cycles that change every few days.
In this way, it’s difficult to think or debate, let alone stay focused on one thing - namely, holding the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law - and the powers-that-be understand this.
As I document in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, regularly scheduled trivia and/or distractions keep the citizenry tuned into the various breaking news headlines and entertainment spectacles and tuned out to the government’s steady encroachments on our freedoms. These sleight-of-hand distractions and diversions are how you control a population, either inadvertently or intentionally, advancing a political agenda agenda without much opposition from the citizenry.
Professor Jacques Ellul studied this phenomenon of overwhelming news, short memories and the use of propaganda to advance hidden agendas. “One thought drives away another; old facts are chased by new ones,” wrote Ellul.
“Under these conditions there can be no thought. And, in fact, modern man does not think about current problems; he feels them. He reacts, but he does not understand them any more than he takes responsibility for them.
He is even less capable of spotting any inconsistency between successive facts; man’s capacity to forget is unlimited. This is one of the most important and useful points for the propagandists, who can always be sure that a particular propaganda theme, statement, or event will be forgotten within a few weeks.
Already, the outrage over the Charleston shooting and racism are fading from the news headlines, yet the determination to censor the Confederate symbol remains. Before long, we will censor it from our thoughts, sanitize it from our history books, and eradicate it from our monuments without even recalling why. The question, of course, is what’s next on the list to be banned?
It was for the sake of preserving individuality and independence that James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, fought for a First Amendment that protected the “minority” against the majority, ensuring that even in the face of overwhelming pressure, a minority of one - even one who espouses distasteful viewpoints - would still have the right to speak freely, pray freely, assemble freely, challenge the government freely, and broadcast his views in the press freely.
This freedom for those in the unpopular minority constitutes the ultimate tolerance in a free society. Conversely, when we fail to abide by Madison’s dictates about greater tolerance for all viewpoints, no matter how distasteful, the end result is always the same: an indoctrinated, infantilized citizenry that marches in lockstep with the governmental regime.
Some of this past century’s greatest dystopian literature shows what happens when the populace is transformed into mindless automatons. In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, reading is banned and books are burned in order to suppress dissenting ideas, while televised entertainment is used to anesthetize the populace and render them easily pacified, distracted and controlled.
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, serious literature, scientific thinking and experimentation are banned as subversive, while critical thinking is discouraged through the use of conditioning, social taboos and inferior education. Likewise, expressions of individuality, independence and morality are viewed as vulgar and abnormal.
And in George Orwell’s 1984, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.” In this dystopian vision of the future, the Thought Police serve as the eyes and ears of Big Brother, while the Ministry of Peace deals with war and defense, the Ministry of Plenty deals with economic affairs (rationing and starvation), the Ministry of Love deals with law and order (torture and brainwashing), and the Ministry of Truth deals with news, entertainment, education and art (propaganda).
The mottos of Oceania: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.
All three - Bradbury, Huxley and Orwell - had an uncanny knack for realizing the future, yet it is Orwell who best understood the power of language to manipulate the masses. Orwell’s Big Brother relied on Newspeak to eliminate undesirable words, strip such words as remained of unorthodox meanings and make independent, non-government-approved thought altogether unnecessary. To give a single example, as psychologist Erich Fromm illustrates in his afterword to 1984:
“The word free still existed in Newspeak, but it could only be used in such statements as "This dog is free from lice" or "This field is free from weeds." It could not be used in its old sense of "politically free" or "intellectually free," since political and intellectual freedom no longer existed as concepts...."
Where we stand now is at the juncture of OldSpeak (where words have meanings, and ideas can be dangerous) and Newspeak (where only that which is “safe” and “accepted” by the majority is permitted). The power elite has made their intentions clear:
They will pursue and prosecute any and all words, thoughts and expressions that challenge their authority.
This is the final link in the police state chain.
Having been reduced to a cowering citizenry - mute in the face of elected officials who refuse to represent us, helpless in the face of police brutality, powerless in the face of militarized tactics and technology that treat us like enemy combatants on a battlefield, and naked in the face of government surveillance that sees and hears all - we have nowhere left to go.
Our backs are to the walls. From this point on, we have only two options: go down fighting, or capitulate and betray our loved ones, our friends and our selves by insisting that, as a brainwashed Winston Smith does at the end of Orwell’s 1984, yes, 2+2 does equal 5.
Network: Howard Beale, The Last Sane Man In The World: Television As A Form Of Knowledge In The New Age June 10 2015 | From: JonRappoport
The best film ever made about television’s war on the population is Paddy Chayefsky’s scorching masterpiece, Network (1976). Yet it stages only a few minutes of on-air television.
The rest of the film is dialogue and monologue about television. Thus you could say that, in this case, word defeats image.
"The media have substituted themselves for the older world… The new media are not bridges between man and nature - they are nature…
The new media are not ways of relating us to the old world; they are the real world and they reshape what remains of the old world at will… In television, images are projected at you. You are the screen. The images wrap around you. You are the vanishing point…
The whole tendency of modern communication… is towards participation in a process, rather than apprehension of concepts.” (Marshall McLuhan)
Even when showing what happens on the TV screen, Network bursts forth with lines like these, from newsman Howard Beale, at the end of his rope, on-camera, speaking to his in-studio audience and millions of people in their homes:
"So, you listen to me. Listen to me! Television is not the truth. Television’s a god-damned amusement park. Television is a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers, and football players. We’re in the boredom-killing business…
We deal in illusions, man.None of it is true! But you people sit there day after day, night after night, all ages, colors, creeds. We’re all you know. You’re beginning to believe the illusions we’re spinning here.
You’re beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube. You even think like the tube.
This is mass madness. You maniacs. In God’s name, you people are the real thing. We are the illusion.”
Beale, coming apart at the seams, is a mad prophet. And because he shines with brilliance and poetry, he can affect minds. Therefore, the television network can make use of him. It can turn him into a cartoon for the masses.
It is Beale’s language and the passion with which he delivers it that constitutes his dangerous weapon. Therefore, the Network transforms him into a cheap religious figure, whose audience slathers him with absurd adoration.
Television’s enemy is the word. Its currency is image.
Image from a scene in "Network"
Beale breaks through the image and defiles it. He cracks the egg. He stops the picture-flow. He brings back the sound and rhythm of spoken poetry. That is his true transgression against the medium that employs him.
The modern matrix has everything to do with how knowledge is acquired.
Television, in the main, does not attempt to impart knowledge. It strives to give the viewer the impression that he knows something. There is a difference.
Knowledge, once established, is external to, and independent of, the viewer. Whereas the impression of knowing is a feeling, a conviction, a belief the viewer holds, after he has watched moving images on a screen.
A basic premise of New Age thinking is: “everything is (connected to) everything.” This fits quite well with the experience of watching film or video flow.
Example: we see angry crowds on the street of a foreign city. Then young people on their cell phones sitting in an outdoor café. Then the marble lobby of a government building where men in suits are walking, standing in groups talking to each other. Then at night, rockets exploding in the sky. Then armored vehicles moving through a gate into the city. Then clouds of smoke on another street and people running, chased by police.
A flow of consecutive images. The sequence, obviously, has been assembled by a news editor, but most of the viewing audience isn’t aware of that. They’re watching the “interconnected” images and listening to a news anchor tell a story that colors (infects) every image.
Viewers thus believe they know something. Television has imparted that sensation to them. That’s what news is all about: delivering a sensation of knowing to the audience.
There is no convenient place where the ordinary viewing audience can stop the flow of images or the story being told. They are inside it. They don’t have the leverage of a crystalized idea or the power of reasoning to get out.
They are inside the story. Knowledge thus becomes story.
The viewer is transfixed by the sensation that he is “inside” watching story.
This fixation produces a short circuit in his reasoning mind (if he has one). No time to stop, no time to think; just watch the flow.
When you take this pattern out to a whole society, you are talking about a dominant method through which “knowledge” is gained.
"Did you see that fantastic video about the Iraq War? It showed that Saddam actually had bioweapons.”
“Really? How did they show that?”
“Well, I don’t exactly remember. But watch it. You’ll see.”
And that’s another feature of the modern acquisition of knowledge: amnesia about details.
The viewer can’t recall key features of what he saw. Or if he can, he can’t describe them, because he was in the flow. He was inside, busy building up his impression of knowing something.
Narrative-visual-television story strips out and discards conceptual references. And lines of reasoning? To the extent they exist, they’re wrapped around and inside the image-flow and the narration.
Ideas aren’t as interesting as images. That’s the premise.
To grasp the diminishment of language, consider the current use of the word “text.” Suddenly it’s become a verb; it means a process of sending words. It also refers to paragraphs or pages of writing, as opposed to pictures. “Text” makes “writing” seem like nothing more than one functional (and machine-like) method of delivering information.
And since bone-dry information (e.g., “genetic sequences”) these days is practically considered a synonym for life, when a writer infuses his words with passion, they automatically become a “rant.” “Rant” was formerly applied to describe what a person did when he was totally unhinged to the point of making no coherent sense.
Image, not the word, is the now preferred means of acquiring what passes for knowledge.
McLuhan: “Media are means of extending and enlarging our organic sense lives into our environment… My main theme is the extension of the nervous system in the electric age.”
All our electronic devices operate as extensions of our senses. In the process, image predominates, and through feedback, the majority of those pictures are produced by media. As if knowledge were being transferred.
Retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy (pseudonym), once told me in an interview:
“If you wanted to try a real revolution, you would produce thousands of videos consisting of written words on screens, with someone speaking those words.
You would try to reinstate language as a medium. Poetry, formal arguments and debates, great speeches, dramatic readings. You would go up against image and try to relegate it to its proper place…”
The degree of outrage, so far, is on the order of a bonfire in a park.
If this were happening in the American colonies of the 18th century, where several hundred thousand copies of Tom Paine’s pamphlet, Common Sense, were distributed among a total population of only 2.5 million people, the earth would shake.
The word meant something then; thousands of pages of words, held in secret, determining the shape of the future, would have instigated a revolution.
Today, that secrecy of words causes minor flames, because generations of Americans have been suckled on images.
Howard Beale:“…we know that democracy is a dying giant, a sick, sick dying, decaying political concept, writhing in its final pain…
What is finished is the idea that this great country is dedicated to the freedom and flourishing of every individual in it.
It’s the individual that’s finished. It’s the single, solitary human being that’s finished. It’s every single one of you out there that’s finished. Because this is no longer a nation of independent individuals.
It’s a nation of some two hundred odd million transistorized, deodorized, whiter-than-white, steel-belted bodies, totally unnecessary as human beings and as replaceable as piston rods.”
Paddy Chayefsky’s words. He made his pen a sword, because he was writing a movie about television, against television. He was going up against image as the primary form of knowledge. He was the man for the job.
When a technology (television) turns into a method of perception, reality is turned inside out. People watch TV through TV eyes. They observe their blessings the way crowds suck in the tautologies of a tinpot dictator.
Mind control is no longer something merely imposed from the outside. It is a matrix of a self-feeding, self-demanding loop. Willing devotees of the image want images, food stamps of the programmed society.
Are We All Terrorists Now? Russell Brand The Trews June 10 2015 | From: TheTrews
Russell Brand takes a look at the new powers brought in by David Cameron to supposedly aid in counter terrorism, but instead, turns us all into suspects. [Some people consider Brand to be a hypocrite and / or controlled opposition; but whatever the case the points he makes here are 100% valid].
This video also looks at how the mainstream media is completely ignoring the new legislation being put into place in all western countries that further erodes our rights
on an invcrementalist path towards government / corporate tyranny.
Basically the upshot is that the governments of the west are now saying: "You are a terrorist as soo as you don't do what you are told."
BBC: UK Public Funding Worldwide Propaganda May 23 2015 | From: PressTV
The UK public funds the BBC and yet the BBC is provably failing to deliver independent, impartial news reporting that truly serves the public interest.
The BBC was founded by Royal Charter; the structure of the charter is such that the Queen is at the top of the pyramid and the trustees of the BBC Trust (completely appointed by the Queen) are responsible for maintaining the purposes of the BBC. In this program, we point to the growing numbers of license fee payers who refuse to pay the BBC due to scandals like the Jimmy Savile affair or the BBC simply breaching all of its major obligations to the paying public, especially independence and impartiality.
Our conclusion is that the license fee payers have valid reasons to refuse to pay the license fee and we also lay the foundation for the second part of this program with the charge that worse than breaching its own charter, the BBC is protecting the terrorists responsible for the destruction of WTC 7 on 9/11 by withholding critical information that is of vitalpublic interest.
It’s Official, Alternative Media Win Over Mainstream Media May 22 2015 | From: GeoPolitics / Sputnik
It’s been a while since the alternative media began fighting for this. Finally, it’s here, it’s official. Mainstream media is history. Nobody wants to listen and watch it anymore, except for the deeply brainwashed segment of our society which is depleting by the day.
People are fed up with mainstream media coverage of events in Iraq and Iran, CODEPINK activist organization national coordinator Alli McCracken, told Sputnik on Tuesday. McCracken’s comments come following the release of an ICM Research poll conducted exclusively for Sputnik, revealing that a total of 60 percent of European and US citizens surveyed wanted to receive information on global events from alternative news sources.
“I think people are really fed up with mainstream media, especially after over a decade of being fed lies about Iraq, now more lies are being told about Iran.”
Western mainstream media coverage of the developments in Iraq gave rise to doubt from the beginning of the US military invasion in 2003. High-profile television channels were faulted for copycat reproduction of primary government talking points, including allegations of Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction and the use of state-sponsored foreign agents for local information.
US news outlets have come under fire for their coverage of Iran. In 2013, experts at the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland released a report suggesting that influential US and UK newspapers created inaccurate impressions of Iran’s nuclear activity by using “very vague and inconsistent terminology” and avoiding reputable local information sources.
Turning to the results of the poll published earlier in the day, McCracken expressed hope that the percentage of those in favor of access to alternative media would grow.
ICM Research surveyed over 5,000 people in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the United States and Greece between March 20 and April 9, 2015. The poll revealed that more than half of US citizens responding to the questionnaire, 57 percent, are interested or very interested in accessing alternative news coverage on global events.
These psychological operations are being used on you.The Amerikan and global populace have no conception of the level of advanced, high-tech psychological operations they are under. The field of psy ops, which used to be a tool of governments and military strategists against rival nations has now been turned upon the masses by the emerging global government.
For the last century, thousands of think tanks have perfected the use of propaganda through fields like advertising, neurological research, psychology, etc. The father of modern advertising and Defense Department brain Edward Bernays, opened his classic Propaganda in 1928 with the following:
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
One of the ironies of propaganda to work is that its population must be educated. Ellul argues that the university education forms the next generation of propagandist to manipulate its society.
In other words, the more highly educated you are, the more integrated you are in this propaganda and its dissemination.
Remember Ellul is not talking about the obvious Nazi or Communist propaganda during the Second World War which was for a short-term campaign using a vertical process (top down approach easily countered by a competing top down approach).
No, Ellul is talking about the horizontal process similar to how viruses infect adjoining people around them.
Imagine an intellectual virus which spreads itself similar to a biological virus, through contact and multiply this with mass media technology as a delivery system.We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.
This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet.
They govern us by their qualities of natural leadership, their ability to supply needed ideas and by their key position in the social structure.
Whatever attitude one chooses to take toward this condition, it remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons - a trifling fraction of our hundred and twenty million - who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.
It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.”
It is crucial to consider that the US is not a democracy, but as it was socially engineered from a republic to a so-called “democracy,” the normal state of a “democracy” is shown to be an oligarchy. Bernays is explaining that very fact – a nation of enforced egalitarian democracy ends up being an oligarchy run by billionaire manipulators and con artists.
Those that rule end up being the best as swaying mass man by appealing constantly to his baser desires. In this system, the only telos is to constantly drive any and all of society towards those base desire to increase material consumption and production. The system itself has no end, other than the propagation of the parasitical system.
“Another part of the answer to this question lies in the attitude of people towards psychological operations. To some, it produces images of government controlled communications/mass media, telling the people only what the government wants them to hear.
To others, it raises the horrid specter of Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Minister, practicing the technique of the “big lie” which has incorrectly become synonymous with “propaganda”. Still to others, the mere mention of “psychological” operations or warfare invokes visions of “mind control” through some mysterious means of brainwashing.
It should be clear that modern psychological operations, or PSYOP, is none of those things. On the contrary PSYOP is not unlike the public advertising that we are all exposed to wherever we go, every day, through all kinds of mass media. However the negative connotation that some people attach to the word psychological” prevents many people from recognizing the simple truth.
Everyone knows that if you do not have a good product to sell, people will not continue buying it, no matter how much you advertise. The same applies to the points of view advertised through the use of psychological operations. Thus we have no reason to fear PSYOP, but we do have ample reason to respect it for what it can do.”
There is no reason to fear Psy Ops, we are told, because it is a humane weapon. Infowar has ever been the major focus of warfare, back to Sun Tzu, who wrote that warfare’s goal was to change the enemy’s mind, not destroy his army. If the target could be changed in his thought pattern, what use in expending tremendous effort and resources on fighting a physical battle?
But that was an older time, when nations and tribes battled one another for regional dominance and natural resources.
While this still goes on today, the top players are different: Major power blocs are battling for control of the new world order. The dominant power bloc in our world today is the Anglo banking empire, and their method of control is largely through mass media, which, as we’ve seen from the quotes above, is the same as mass advertising.
This is why the “news” has a uniform presentation globally. The governing structure above the “government” level is that of international corporations, themselves governed by the major banking houses. Thus, the government / corporate “news” is always the same, all the way down to the local affiliate broadcasting the same laughable tabloid and warm fuzzy pieces about local kitten shelters and pharmaceutical salvation.
This was recently illustrated in a masterful way by Conan’s late night show, where pieces of local news stations were clipped together, from supposedly different stations, reading from the exact same script, nationwide. These scripts are written and sent out to the news agencies by the Pentagon and corporate central think tanks to engineer the populace into mindless abandon.
“You don’t need us to tell you gas prices are back on the rise!”
“Ellul argues that authoritarian governments never really need propaganda as much as democratic societies do and when the authoritarian governments of the past (communist and fascist) used propaganda, it was an obvious type.
One could insinuate that it would be amateurish level and much easier to spot. Nonetheless many people in the past fell prey to this propaganda as much as people today fall prey to advertising campaigns.
A democratic society uses a more sophisticated form of propaganda, one which is long-term in process and result; again one could insinuate that this would be of a professional level and much more difficult to spot.
One of the ironies of propaganda to work is that its population must be educated. Ellul argues that the university education forms the next generation of propagandist to manipulate its society.
In other words, the more highly educated you are, the more integrated you are in this propaganda and its dissemination.
Remember Ellul is not talking about the obvious Nazi or Communist propaganda during the Second World War which was for a short-term campaign using a vertical process (top down approach easily countered by a competing top down approach).
No, Ellul is talking about the horizontal process similar to how viruses infect adjoining people around them.
Imagine an intellectual virus which spreads itself similar to a biological virus, through contact and multiply this with mass media technology as a delivery system.
One of the ironies of propaganda to work is that its population must be educated. Ellul argues that the university education forms the next generation of propagandist to manipulate its society. In other words, the more highly educated you are, the more integrated you are in this propaganda and its dissemination.
Remember Ellul is not talking about the obvious Nazi or Communist propaganda during the Second World War which was for a short-term campaign using a vertical process (top down approach easily countered by a competing top down approach). No, Ellul is talking about the horizontal process similar to how viruses infect adjoining people around them.
Imagine an intellectual virus which spreads itself similar to a biological virus, through contact and multiply this with mass media technology as a delivery system.
So the more educated you become, the less aware you are that you are a victim of propaganda and the more you are ready to spread your ideology to others who will in turn reinforce you and be reinforced by you in a horizontal process.
Leaders aren’t telling you what to think (directly), you are being told by your peers what to think and you pass along this information to others to inform them what to think.
Then when this ideology has reached a substantial portion of the population, you demand the leaders to comply and they reluctantly do so (which was their intention 30 to 40 years previously, but they won’t tell you this). This is the essence of what Ellul says in his Propaganda book.”
As you watch the snooze, er, “news,” notice the psychological tricks that are being foisted upon you. Why is the focus something mundane and irrelevant, like a celebrity’s nipple or a litter of kittens being born?
Why are the newscasters talking to you like you’re a 5th grader? Why is the netwscast about depression followed by an ad for the pharmaceutical pill that will magickally make you happy?
Why is the een sexting piece followed by an ad for the latest smartphone and sex app? All of this is a scientific tactic of psychological manipulation. This is why the Pentagon places Psy Ops soldiers at local news stations.
The Infowar is the war on the public’s mind:
Mind Control Through Emotional Domination: How We're All Being Manipulated By The "Crisis Of The NOW" May 14 2015 | From: NaturalNews
What you're about to read here is a revealing look at the psychological mechanism presently being used by government and media to achieve near-absolute control over the population.
I'm calling the concept the "crisis of the NOW," and understanding this is a lot like taking the RED pill. The "crisis of the now" involves an incessant, strategic bombardment of the population with a never-ending stream of contrived crises that demand immediate attention in the present.
This psychological bombardment is waged primarily via the mainstream media which assaults the viewer by the hour with images of violence, war, emotions and conflict.
Because the human nervous system is hard wired to focus on immediate threats accompanied by depictions of violence, mainstream media viewers have their attention and mental resources funneled into the never-ending "crisis of the NOW" from which they can never have the mental breathing room to apply logic, reason or historical context.
To protect the propaganda from scrutiny, no person is ever allowed the luxury of reflection. Logic and reason are condemned.
Critical thinking is derided. Historical context is obliterated by the repeated intrusion of the now, and whatever happened just a few short years or months ago is actively rejected (or memory holed) if it does not reinforce whatever present-day delusion is being pushed as "fact."
Similarly, the future is entirely off limits and never allowed to be explored in the mainstream media because doing so would require reason and forward thinking... two things which are never tolerated because they would reveal the inevitable failures of today's insane policies, such as running the country on debt and hoping it will somehow not matter down the road.
Mentally corralled like cattle
With the past erased from the minds of the masses, and the future off limits, the crisis of the now become the only psychological reality in which the public is allowed to operate.
To remember the past gets you labeled a "relic," and to project current events into the future makes you a "conspiracy theorist." Only the crisis of the now is allowed to be entertained: riots in the streets, the aftermath of a staged school shooting, a contrived social shaming of a pizza joint in Indiana, or even an overhyped measles crisis that just happened to take place at America's epicenter of illusions and theater: Disneyland.
The media demands that you focus on the NOW but forget the past. No historical context is allowed to be recognized (or even taught to Americans) because it might interfere with the crisis of the now.
For example, in any discussion of vaccines, you are never allowed to remember that the entire medical establishment was once dominated by "Big Tobacco science," and that even the Journal of the American Medical Association used to run full-page ads touting the amazing health benefits of smoking cigarettes.
Remember the ad, "More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette?" This was achieved by the tobacco industry infiltrating all the science journals, giving money to universities, and engaging in "scientist-for-hire" activities to push their poisons under the "scientific" claim that smoking cigarettes posed no health risks whatsoever.
The exact same tactic is used today by the biotech industry to push toxic GMOs and deadly herbicides chemicals like glyphosate.
Another example of history you're never allowed to remember: The gunpoint rounding up of U.S. citizens
As another example of the memory holing of real history, in today's discussions of the JADE HELM military exercise, the mainstream media focuses entirely on attacking the journalists and analysts covering the story while refusing to mention the fact that tens of thousands of Americans have already been rounded up at gunpoint and thrown into internment camps.
Who were the victims of this government exercise in rounding up innocent Americans? Japanese-American citizens during World War II. All their Constitutional rights were violated and they were imprisoned for years based entirely on their race and country of origin.
The following photo, just one of many published at PublicIntelligence.net, captures some of the American citizens who were rounded up at gunpoint and imprisoned solely based on their race:
What this proves is that when the United States government wants to, it will round up and imprison a selected group of Americans at gunpoint, denying them all due process, even if they are completely innocent and have done nothing wrong.
You, the modern-day news viewer, are not allowed to remember this history because it might provide you with the necessary context to understand the concern over JADE HELM, a military operation being illegally conducted on U.S. soil, in open violation of established U.S. law.
Not allowed to apply logic to any crisis
Logic is the enemy of the propagandists. Because of that, no serious discussion or debate is ever allowed on any subject that the propagandists seek to control: vaccines, GMOs, martial law, national debt, the AIDS industry, gay marriage and so on.
"[I]n order to sustain gigantic false realities, there are honest debates that must never happen," writes Rappoport in Matrixology 101: debates that never happen.
"They would reveal too much. They would shine a spotlight on vast contradictions. They would expose official storytellers to withering criticism."
To further explain his point, Rappoport reveals that AIDS is diagnosed in people today through the detection of HIV antibodies.
If a person carries antibodies, they are assumed to be carrying HIV and assumed to be sick and diseased. But if an AIDS vaccine were developed, like all vaccines it would cause the body to produce antibodies to HIV, thus causing an HIV-vaccinated person to be diagnosed as having AIDS, too.
So how can HIV antibodies mean you're "sick" in the first instance, but simultaneously those same antibodies mean you're "well" if they appeared after a vaccine?
"Millions and millions of antibody tests have been given to people around the world," writes Rappoport.
"The antibody test is just one of a number of enormous issues in modern medicine that, if opened to real debate, would cause a seismic shift in society…assuming there were enough listeners who could track the lines of reasoning."
But reason is the enemy of the propagandists, and almost nobody knows how to think with clarity anymore because such skills are rarely taught in schools or universities.
That's why the crisis of the now is always presented in a way that shuts down logic and reason, engendering an emotional response to whatever events are being thrown at you, most of which are pure, fabricated theater:
The green screen ISIS beheading videos, CNN's green screen faked location shots from the Middle East, the wildly faked narrative of polar bears being "stranded" on floating pieces of ice (polar bears are great swinners), staged White House photos from the "war room" as America's former CIA buddies are hunted down and executed by special ops teams, and so on.
Every crisis is structured to evoke an emotional state of mind that shuts down all reason and critical thinking. Once this is achieved, the minds of the masses are hammered with whatever political programming messages are desired at the moment: Christians are evil, only the government can end poverty, all police are bad, carbon dioxide is going to destroy the planet, illegal immigrants should be granted the right to vote, and so on.
Creating crisis where none exists
Sometimes the crisis of the day must be so wildly exaggerated and overhyped that the exercise strains the bounds of believability... such as the CDC-directed measles panic waged by the mainstream media over a mild infection that killed no one and was never even considered a crisis until just the last few years when the vaccine industry shifted into "totalitarian science" mode.
The point of the exercise was to instill extreme fear in the population, followed by the introduction of a vaccine mandate law which we now know is called SB 277 (California).
Once again, the crisis of the NOW shut down all reasonable thinking and even encouraged the public to abandon their own core human rights principles such as the idea that people have the right to decide what medical interventions they wish to endure, and that no government can force an injection on a parent or their child without informed consent.
Through fear and crisis, the media even persuaded pro-choice women to become anti-choice on the issue of vaccines. No government has any right to interfere with a woman's body, it seems, unless that government is pushing a vaccine.
Thanks to the crisis of the NOW, every argument in favor of medical choice was steamrolled into oblivion: ethical arguments, scientific arguments, human rights arguments, legal arguments and the entire realm of reason.
But the classic crisis of the NOW which caused Americans to abandon all reason and surrender to police state totalitarianism was, of course, 9/11.
9/11 as the ultimate crisis of the NOW
The 9/11 attack was seized upon by the media and the government to wage what can only be called a psychological warfare assault upon the American people as preparation for the passage of the original Patriot Act. That's the Bush-era law that legalized government surveillance of the American people, turning America into the totalitarian police state it remains today.
In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent media campaign of instilling extreme hatred among the citizenry, Americans were ready to wholly support almost any law that claimed to "stop terror," even if it meant surrendering key liberties in the process.
Key to achieving all this was the elimination of selected facts from the memory of the American public. To this day, for example, almost no American remembers that three buildings, not two, were destroyed in New York City on 9/11, and the third building was not struck by any airplane at all.
All questions about this third building - WTC 7 - have since been banished from any public discussion. No one is allowed to ask how a concrete-and-steel building could suddenly collapse, in perfect symmetry, with the kind of precision that can only be achieved with carefully engineered and pre-planned demolitions.
The laws of physics are never allowed to be applied to the events of 9/11, because if they were, logic and reason would bring too many people to the inescapable conclusion that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition, not by airplanes. Thus, the easiest way for the propagandists to avoid this entire discussion is to delete the third building from the national memory.
Illusionist Uri Geller once made the Statue of Liberty seem to disappear from the New York skyline, but the media propagandists have deleted an entire high-rise building from America's collective memory.
The next "crisis of the now" is being planned right now
To achieve almost any desired political outcome, all the global controllers have to do is wait for the right crisis (or stage it themselves), then roll out a pre-planned wave of mental assaults structured around a crisis of the now.
If they want to outlaw local police departments and roll out a national, federally-controlled Gestapo police force, for example, all they have to do is wait for police brutality to target an African-American male - brutality against white victims doesn't count - then wait for the inevitable riots to unfold. In the midst of the riots, Al "the informant" Sharpton can easily be directed to call for a federal takeover of all police.
If they want to force every American to be vaccinated or medicated against their will, all they have to do is rush in a wave of illegal immigrants carrying infectious diseases, then wait for an outbreak to happen.
As the outbreak spreads, they can blame unvaccinated Americans and use the crisis to push mandatory vaccine compliance. All logic and reason, of course, are not allowed to enter the discussion, or else the public would come to realize that if vaccines really work, then the vaccinated have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated.
If they want to completely disarm the American public and outlaw private gun ownership, it's a simple matter to set in motion a series of events that result in a mass shooting somewhere. In the aftermath of the shooting, lawmakers can seize on the emotional intensity of the crisis of the now to demonize all firearms owners and call for national disarmament.
This very nearly happened following the Sandy Hook shooting in late 2013, after which Obama and Eric Holder aggressively tried to crush the Second Amendment in America.
Before Sandy Hook, Eric "the crime lord" Holder also arranged for illegal weapons to be smuggled into Mexico, with the hope that those guns would make their way back across the border and be used to commit acts of violence in the United States.
This operation, named "Fast and Furious," has since been exhaustively exposed. As usual, no one in government went to jail for their conspiracy to carry out these crimes.
If they want to renew the Patriot Act or pass a "Patriot Act 2.0," the process is stupidly simple: just get the FBI to stage a dirty bomb terror event in a major U.S. city, then halt it at the very last minute. (Or not, if they really want a stronger emotional response.)
In the aftermath of such an attack, passage of almost any unconstitutional anti-terrorism law becomes virtually automatic. And yes, the FBI is very skilled at staging terror attacks because it does so on a regular basis in order to prove how incredibly good the agency is at stopping them.
Whatever the desired political outcome or agenda,there is a crisis that can help it be achieved, and that crisis will be so emotionally impactful that it will trap viewers in the NOW and utterly shut down the logic parts of their brain that can contemplate the past and the future.
In effect, your conscious focus is being time-shifted into the urgency of the present so that you forget the past and don't calculate the future.
Only with those parts of your brain shut down can the controllers steer you in their desired direction.
Why The Hobbit movie makes absolutely no sense but is a sensational film to watch
A perfect example of being trapped in the NOW is found in The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies motion picture released in 2014. This film is little more than a series of sensational video game-style battle scenes involving hobbits, dwarves, elves, dragons, witches and wraiths, all tied together with no logical story whatsoever.
The script is a random jumble of high-impact scenes of violence, tension, fear, conflict, magic and celebration. The film has all the elements of Lord of the Rings - yep, there's Gandalf and there's Agent Smith dressed like an Elven King - but it utterly lacks a soul that gives those elements meaning.
As such, it's a perfect metaphor for the world we live in today, where the masses are repeatedly subjected to sequences of real-world violence, conflict and fear behind which no logic or reason can be detected.
The Hobbit is a very popular film. People love to watch it because it captures their attention in the now.
To the masses who watch the film, it does not matter that there's no story that makes any sense at all. The only thing that matters is that there's a lot of movement and violence unfolding before their eyes, and the mesmerizing effect of it all captures the soul even more effectively than the One Ring itself.
The Hobbit was written with what I call "Kindergarten logic." It's the kind of movie logic that seems awesome to a kindergartener, which is of course the same mental level to which all the government's propaganda campaigns are also targeted.
Mandatory vaccine laws don't have to make sense to adults, you see: they only have to make sense to the mind of a kindergartener who hasn't yet learned how to think rationally.
When the emotional layer of a crisis is so strong that mature thinking and logic become irrelevant, the propagandists have won.
Propaganda is the art of overwhelming logic
As I've detailed here, every staged media propaganda event witnessed today lacks all logic and reason. Regarding the Disneyland measles scare, for example, if vaccines really work, then vaccinated children have nothing at all to fear from unvaccinated children.
That's the logic of the real science, but the media ran with the utterly illogical and irrational explanation that unvaccinated children spread the measles to vaccinated children - a phenomenon which should be impossible if vaccines create immunity as we are told.
The logic of the vaccine industry makes no sense, but as journalist Jon Rappoport rightly explains, propaganda is the art of overcoming logic. It is also, as I've explained here, the art of trapping people in the crisis of the now. The higher the emotional intensity of the crisis, the more all reason is disconnected from the mind.
This is precisely why vaccine marketing has now deliberately abandoned all facts and science. Instead, vaccines are now being intentionally promoted using emotional (and graphic) false stories, nearly all of which are fabricated by Big Pharma's public relations companies or their employees, many of whom pose as "concerned moms" on social media. (They're actually paid PR operatives.)
To allow the public the luxury of reason is to lose control of their conclusions, you see. From the point of view of the controllers, allowing people to think for themselves runs too high a risk that people might not make decisions that violate their own self interests.
Yet the most important principle of exerting power over the people is to make sure that corporations and governments can convince people tomake decisions that violate their own self interests.
Psychological "deletion" of the real threats to your life, liberty and happiness
By trapping people in the crisis of the now, all critical thinking is nullified and replaced with raw emotional states that are very easy to manipulate and control through strategic media propaganda.
At the same time, the real threats to your life, liberty and happiness are psychologically "deleted" from your mind.
For example, if I told you that ISIS terrorists wielding swords were killing 44 Americans a day with gruesome beheadings, you would totally believe that because you've been programmed to do so by the media. You'd get angry about it and call for more "national security" forces to protect us from those scary ISIS people.
Prescription drug overdoses are quiet and non-violent. They aren't scary and they haven't been portrayed by the media in a manner that promotes extreme fear. So the 44 deaths a day from prescription drug overdoses is psychologically deleted from the minds of Americans, most of whom have no idea of how many people are being killed every year by prescription drugs.
(The total number of deaths from FDA-approved prescription drugs is over 100,000 Americans each year. The mainstream media utterly ignores this epidemic, even though it's the numerical equivalent to a jumbo jet falling out of the sky and killing everyone on board every single day.)
You are also not ever reminded that as many as one-third of all traffic accidents and fatalities are caused by medicated drivers. While the media wants you to emotionally freak out over drunk drivers, they don't want you to even realize that the epidemic of medicated drivers is far worse.
The entire issue has been deleted from national consciousness for the simple reason that awareness of it might harm the profits of the pharmaceutical industry. (If the media were largely funded by beer companies, you'd stop seeing stories about drunk driving, too.)
Similarly, you are never told that Tylenol causes permanent liver damage in tens of thousands of Americans each year, and that over 16,000 Americans die each year from intestinal bleeding caused by a common class of painkillers called NSAIDs.
"Conservative calculations estimate that approximately 107,000 patients are hospitalized annually for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related gastrointestinal (GI) complications and at least 16,500 NSAID-related deaths occur each year among arthritis patients alone," writes Dr. Singh Gurkirpal is his study, "Recent Considerations in Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Gastropathy", The American Journal of Medicine, July 27, 1998, p. 31S.
Nor are you told that chemotherapy causes cancer, which is why the chemotherapy industry has grown into a $100 billion medical monopoly, and you're never reminded that prescription drug prices in America are the highest in the world only because the FDA and FTC protect apharmaceutical monopoly racketthat exploits sickness for profit.
Unless an emotional reaction is constructed for something, it doesn't exist in the minds of the masses
All this leads to a fascinating realization about mind control in the world today: Until something is associated with a strong emotional response, it doesn't exist in the consciousness of the masses.
Everything that's "real" is first constructed out of pure emotion, then pushed into the minds of the masses via the crisis of the NOW. Only then does it count as real, and from that point forward it can be leveraged to pass new laws that further erode the rights and liberties of Americans, and thus everyone else shortly afterwards.
This is why the No. 1 tool of mind control from the mainstream media is emotional manipulation of the viewers. Emotional coverage can be authentic in cases where the crisis is real and attention is justified, but emotional manipulation is usually contrived in order to evoke a response for the sole purpose of manipulation.
All this gets back to the work of America's original propagandist Edward Bernays. (See History is a Weapon to learn more about Bernays.)
He understood decades ago that you don't sell cigarettes by touting their benefits; you sell them by anchoring them to powerful emotional states reflecting positive self image. Similarly in 2015, you sell vaccines not by discussing anything resembling real science, but by catapulting emotional stories involving poor, innocent children who were stricken by the chicken pox - the horrors! - even if such stories are entirely fabricated.
The truth behind the propaganda is irrelevant. What matters is its emotional impact. And because emotions override reason, those of us who attempt to cite the real science on issues like vaccines are fighting a losing battle.
As the CDC has long proven, the real science doesn't matter. What matters is the narrative painted by the vaccine industry to evoke a charged emotional response as a form of mind control.
The answer to all this, of course, is to highlight vaccine-damaged children and show those who have been brainwashed by the vaccine industry that they are grieving for the wrong side.
The real human cost is found in all the children damaged by vaccines - children who will never lead "normal" lives again because their neurology has been permanently compromised by the toxic preservatives and chemical adjuvants found in vaccines.
On both fronts - emotions or logic - the vaccine industry as operated today is a fraud. It only turned to emotional marketing because it couldn't survive any real scrutiny of its flawed science.
Meanwhile, in the realm of real science, autism rates have skyrocketed 296% over the last few years as the vaccine push has grown more aggressive. See the rising rate depicted in the red line of the bar chart below, as shown in the newly published study:
The defense against all this is to practice the ability of stepping back from the emotional tapestry being woven by the propagandists and evaluate the real logic behind the reports.
This is not easy to accomplish, but it can be achieved if you're determined to see things more clearly. Sometimes, the mere passage of time can diminish the emotional impact and achieve greater clarity.
This is precisely why the mainstream media repeatedly pounds the fear imagery into your head every few hours as we saw after the 9/11 attacks. You couldn't turn on a TV anywhere in America without the video of airplanes striking the twin towers being blasted into your psyche, and this went on for weeks!
Not all emotionally-charged warnings are fake, of course. Many truly emotional crises do exist and do warrant action on our part. The key is to be able to discern the difference between real vs. fake threats.
There's a shortcut to achieving this, and it's simpler than you think:
Assume that any agenda being pushed by the mainstream media is false.
This "default" stance is usually correct (but not always). The logical way to approach this is to assume they're lying to you, then demand they prove they aren't.
A very powerful question to use for this purpose is one of my favorite questions of all time: "How do you know?"
If the mainstream media asserts that unvaccinated children are causing vaccinated children to be stricken with measles, simply ask the question, "How do you know?" To answer this question, they would have to demonstrate the mechanism by which their original assertion could take place. And on the issue of vaccines, that effort would quickly crumble for the simple reason that it was false to begin with.
Even when it comes to the alternative media / independent media, this question can be extremely valuable. When someone claims their nutritional supplement "protects your DNA" or "detoxes your system" or whatever they claim, that same useful question can be brought to bear: "How do you know?" Do you have any laboratory evidence? Any scientific studies to cite? Any historical or indigenous knowledge to cite?
When you're buying "raw vegan protein" from a protein manufacturer, and the bottle touts the claim that this protein is "sprouted" and "raw," you'd be smart to ask that manufacturer, "How do you know?" (I can tell you as a matter of firsthand knowledge as the science director of our laboratory that many of these claims for low-integrity products are simply invented and have no basis in fact whatsoever.)
Overall, the best defense against emotional manipulation is to get really good at asking lots of questions. Be persistent.
We may not know the real story yet, but we know the "official story" is an elaborate fabrication. And that knowledge, all by itself, is quite valuable.
Do you know anyone who can still think critically?
Share this article with any friends you might have who still maintain the ability to think critically. It is people like you who will be required to save this world from the onslaught of bad medicine, bad politics, bad fiscal policies and runaway corruption.
The day that we must either stand up and fight for her freedoms or be overrun by corporate fascism is fast approaching.
You can count on the fact that at least 90% of the population will be emotionally mind controlled as all this plays out, but the good news is that revolutions never require more than a small percentage of the populace taking action to protect their collective futures against tyranny.
Demons Behind The Music Industry (Ex Illuminati Explains) & Illuminati - The Music Industry Exposed May 13 2015 | From:JohnTodd / Farhank
John Todd, former member of the Illuminati and music industry insider speaks out, plus a truly excellent documentary on what really goes on within the music industry.
I made an interesting discovery which may back up my video Demons Behind The Music Industry.
In the video John Todd mentions the album Destroyer by KISS. If you look on the cover of the album you can see the KISS members standing on rocks (or coals) above what looks like a lake of fire with smoke in the background, and it has a dark sky.
The Bible says in Revelation 9:2 -
"And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit."
In verses 7 and 8 it goes on to say that the faces of the locusts that came out of the pit had faces of men and hair as the hair of women. If you look at the KISS album cover Destroyer they have faces of men and long hair like women.
The king of these locusts from the pit is called Apollyon.
Now if you check the name Apollyon in the dictionary guess what it means? It means the DESTROYER which is the title of KISS's album. Coincidence? You decide.
Demons Behind The Music Industry (Ex Illuminati Explains)
Illuminati - The Music Industry Exposed
Seasoned Investigative Journalist Exposes Inside Strategies To Censor News April 29 2015 | From: Mercola
You can choose to ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. Most of us rely heavily on the media for information, not realizing that 90 percent of it is controlled by a mere six media giants.
Sharyl Attkisson, a five-time Emmy Award winning investigative journalist whose television career spans more than three decades is one of my personal heroes. She was the reporter who, in 2009, blew the lid off the swine flu media hype, showing the hysteria was completely unfounded and manufactured.
"I left CBS about a year ago when it seemed I had met with so many dead ends in trying to continue the original investigative reporting that I've done for so many years there," Sharyl says.
"My producer and I just kept hitting brick walls in the last two years or so in trying to get this reporting on television. We certainly weren't alone. Reporters are complaining about this across the board at many print organizations and broadcast outlets...
The watchdog reporting that the government values so much is simply not desired for a variety of reasons as much as it once was at the national level. I think also this is a problem in local news...
There was no point [in staying]. I was never in a position to turn up better stories; I have more information, more sources, more whistleblowers, and more I felt might produce terrific stories than ever before after 20 years in CBS News, and yet, utterly lacked the ability to get any of it on television.
I could've stayed and done weather stories and stories of the day but that's just not where my interest was."
What Led to the Downfall of Watchdog Reporting?
Unfortunately, the trend of diluting the depth and scope of investigative journalism can even be seen in high-quality programs like CBS' 60 Minutes, which has been a favorite show of mine since its inception over four decades ago.
As noted by Sharyl, the reasons for the decline of investigative journalism are complicated. But a big part of it is due to commercial concerns; basically, commercial and corporate influences came into play, and media outlets grew to accept commercialization as part of the news process.
"I call it soft censorship," Sharyl says. "When you know you have a sponsor and you know it's important to the corporation, are you really going to offend the sponsor by going after stories that they don't like?
But I do think it's more overt than that sometimes. The sponsors explicitly complain and argue at the corporate level that certain stories and topics shouldn't be done.
We know this is true based on one anecdote I put in the book, but there are other anecdotes and experiences that reporters have had, where they've been told that this is the case.
Additionally, there are political factors. There were managers at CBS in those last two years that inserted their ideology into the reporting of producers and reporters, who by and large were very fair. That can change the whole tone of the reporting."
One of the examples in Sharyl's book that really hit home for me was when Hillary Clinton ran against Obama for president, and while on the campaign trail told reporters she had dodged sniper fire on a trip as First Lady, 12 years prior, when she visited Bosnia.
It seems like a silly thing to lie about, but lie she did. Sharyl and other journalists had been on that trip, and they all knew no one had dodged sniper fire, least of all the First Lady. Fortunately, Sharyl had archived videos of the event to prove it.
"It couldn't be farther from the truth, the idea that we had been shot up by sniper fire," Sharyl says.
"There are a couple of choices – just being untruthful for her own benefit, or was she delusional, which is a little frightening. But I think the public got past that because they accepted her as the Secretary of State."
Another point Sharyl makes very effectively in her book is that there's this collaboration within the media, such that if one agency picks up a story, they all run the same story. You can watch the nightly news on every channel, and the story will be presented in virtually the same way, sometimes more or less verbatim.
"Too often, I think they don't want to cover a major controversy unless others have already covered it, like the New York Times or the Washington Post; then it's safe.
They don't want to cover certain stories for ideological reasons. They don't want to cover certain stories against corporate partners that might harm corporate relationships."
Intimidation and Harassment of Journalists
True investigative journalists, such as Sharyl, have also become targets of intimidation and harassment. For example, at one point her computer and phone lines were hacked to find out what she was working on.
"I assume there are a handful of journalists who do that sort of critical reporting on the government, and on this administration in particular, that they wanted to watch.
They never dreamed I would luck upon the resources to have the computer examined by experts that could find the software they deposited in my computer.
This software was proprietary to a government agency, either the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), National Security Agency (NSA), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)...
They had my keystroke data... They could look at all my files. They used Skype audio – I didn't know this was possible – but they could turn it on invisibly, without you knowing it, to listen into conversations. They could also remove files using Skype... We were able to confirm these highly sophisticated long-term, remote intrusions."
Another interesting book for anyone interested or concerned about matters such as these is Future Crimes: Everything Is Connected, Everyone Is Vulnerable, and What We Can Do About It by Marc Goodman. The book discusses in great detail how this type of hacking can occur, and more importantly, what simple measures we can do to protect ourselves. It's a reality. And if they're doing it to top-notch investigative reporters, certainly everyone is a candidate.
"Astroturf" is the effort on the part of special interests, whether corporate or political, to surreptitiously sway public opinion and make it appear as though it's a grassroots effort for or against a particular agenda, when in reality such a groundswell of public opinion might not exist. Sharyl explains:
"They turn to things like social media – Facebook and Twitter – using pseudonyms and multiple accounts to spread things around. They use their partners who blog for them, write things, and pick up on one another's work until sometimes it's been picked up in the mainstream media as if it's a fact.
It's all intended to make you feel as though if you hold a certain opinion that they don't want you to have, you're the outlier. Everybody else agrees with 'X' except you, and that may not be the truth. This is a huge business... There are actually PR firms that specialize in these sorts of tactics.
Astroturfing is now more important, I am told by lobbyists and PR firms, to many clients than the direct lobbying of Congress because it's so effective to reach out to the public. They may have someone write a letter to the editor and you don't know that person is being paid by a special interest to advance a certain opinion.
They may start as a nonprofit without saying out front that they're behind the nonprofit. The nonprofit may then look like a charity that's advancing a certain opinion, which is actually acting on behalf of the corporate interest or the special interest. Again, it's very widespread..."
Hallmark signs of astroturfing include using key language - words such as crank, crack, nutty, pseudo, conspiracy, and other language that's effective with the public to try to make you dismiss an argument they don't like. Another hallmark of an Astroturf campaign is attacking those who are questioning authority, such as reporters who are exposing the truth, whistleblowers who dare to step forward, and people asking tough questions.
It's important to be aware of these kinds of concerted efforts to distort the truth, and to understand how they're done, because these "faux concern" campaigns can have a profound influence on your perception of reality.
Astroturfing in Action
A perfect example of astroturfing just occurred when a GMO front group attacked Dr. Oz after he reported on the now scientifically established hazards of glyphosate, and the media swallowed and regurgitated the propaganda without any critical thought whatsoever. Slate magazine publicized the attack with the headline “Letter from Prominent Doctors Implies Columbia Should Fire Dr. Oz for Being a Quack.”
The letter accuses Dr. Oz of repeatedly showing “disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine, as well as baseless and relentless opposition to the genetic engineering of food crops.”
The letter was signed by Dr. Henry I. Miller and nine other “distinguished physicians.” What the media has failed to address is that Dr. Henry Miller is hardly a concerned physician. He’s actually a now well-known shill for the GMO industry.
In his capacity as its front man, he was caught misrepresenting himself during the Anti-Prop.37 campaign in 2012, pretending to be a Stanford professor opposing GMO labeling, when in fact he is not a professor at Stanford. The TV ad had to be pulled off the air because of this misrepresentation.
Aside from that, he has a long and sordid history1 of defending toxic chemicals such as DDT, in addition to defending Big Tobacco. Some of the other nine physicians are also less than distinguished. As noted by US Right to Know:
“One was stripped of his medical license in New York and sent to federal prison camp for Medicaid fraud. Yet Dr. Gilbert Ross plays up his M.D. credentials in his role as acting president of the American Council for Science and Health (ACSH). Ross was joined on the Columbia letter by ACSH board member Dr. Jack Fisher.
So what is ACSH? Though some reporters treat it as an independent science source, the group has been heavily funded by oil, chemical, and tobacco companies, and has a long history of making inaccurate statements about science that directly benefit those industries – for example claiming that secondhand smoke isn’t linked to heart attacks, fracking doesn’t pollute water...
These facts are relevant in stories about scientific integrity. The scientific accuracy and motivations of the accusers matter when they are publicly challenging the scientific accuracy and motivations of somebody they are trying to get fired. We urge reporters and editors to take a closer look at the sources selling them story ideas, and to act as better watchdogs for the public interest”.
Dr. Henry Miller and American Council for Science and Health Are False Fronts for the GMO Industry
Indeed, Henry Miller and ACSH are false fronts for the GMO industry, plain and simple. They are part of a PR hack strategy of astroturfing, and the mainstream media are too inept to look behind the curtain to see what’s really there.
The fact of the matter is that this attack on Dr. Oz is orchestrated not by concerned physicians or scientists but rather by industry shills whose job it is to attack anyone who embraces a more natural approach to health and/or raise damning questions that might hurt the industry’s bottom-line.
Why Conventional Media So Rarely Tells You the Truth About Health
One industry that wields a great deal of power within the media today is the pharmaceutical industry. It's rare to sit through an evening of television without viewing several drug ads. They also advertise heavily in print and online media.
The advertising dollars they spend not only generates sales, it also gives them the power to influence what's being reported in the news. Here's just one example:
"There's a story in my book about former executive producer of mine who got a phone call from the sales division, which was very inappropriate.
He said the sales person from CBS was kind of screaming at him because we'd been doing a lot of stories looking at side effects and problems with the very popular and billion-dollar-selling cholesterol-lowering drugs, statins.
The advertisers didn't like that. Therefore, someone from the CBS corporate apparently didn't like that, and called down and said something like, 'If you keep doing these stories, it's going to be really, really bad for CBS...'
I think that happens more often than we know explicitly. But this time, it was followed by what I see as all of the media backing down on pharmaceutical-related stories.
We were doing very aggressive coverage of problems within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) – not just me, but all the networks and a lot of print publications – about vaccines side effects, and about other medical issues. That all has virtually stopped.
You can almost point to a time period when it seems someone made a phone call and said, 'That's it fellas. There are advertisers.'
And you won't see these stories now even when there's a multi-billion-dollar criminal settlement against drug companies for mismarketing drugs that are commonly used. That's a huge story that should be leading the news in my opinion.
But most people probably never heard of it because those are things that offend the sensibilities of advertisers, who now control to some degree the editorial content of networks, publications, and print publications that are advertising.
And, as you know, they have several lobbyists for every member of Congress on Capitol Hill so they can make sure certain hearings don't happen. As recently as last year, they were able to stop a planned vaccine-related hearing. The control is almost total in my view. That's just one example of a corporate influence."
What Are Some 'Big' Stories Not Being Reported Right Now?
According to Sharyl, if journalists would simply cover the news with facts and fairness, topics like vaccine side effects would receive far greater coverage. The reason it doesn't is because that topic has been deemed "untouchable." Other emerging health issues that you don't hear about in the news include the emergence of enterovirus EV-D68. It's a polio-like virus, but it's not polio.
Thousands of people were stricken with it last year, and the virus appears to be linked to cases of paralysis. At least a dozen children also died from it, yet you didn't hear about this on the news because it was not, unlike the measles vaccine, something the government was interested in promoting.
"Too often reporters wait for the government to tell them what's a story and what's not a story. They won't do the digging on their own, which I think is a very bad trend.
But I tried to find out about this [enterovirus] and asked the CDC some questions, to which they replied they didn't gather certain data.
I searched the web and found that the CDC had published a paper with the data that I've asked for! So it was completely false what they told me..."
Sharyl's book exposes many of the inside strategies that go on to suppress this type of information. Since leaving CBS News and finishing her book, she's been writing freelance, publishing a number of stories she would have had a hard time telling before, such as the story of how a government experiment on premature babies misled parents with an unethical consent form to enroll their premature babies in the program.
This study was conducted at prestigious research institutions by the government across the country. After some of the babies died, the study was stopped. Even the government's own ethics body concluded that the consent form was unethical because it didn't actually inform the parents that their babies were being entered into a study.
They were just told that this treatment would be good for their baby. In reality, the babies were randomly placed into high-oxygen or low-oxygen groups - not what was best for them individually.
The parents were unaware that their child was being given treatment based on the flip of a coin. The parents also didn't know that their child was placed in an oxygen machine that had been disabled to give false readings.
"That story was published in Daily Signal,3 which is a heritage foundation news organization that started last year. They've done some excellent reporting and haven't tampered with my stories," Sharyl says.
What the Media Isn't Telling You about 'ObamaCare'
Another story Sharyl believes has been underreported is that of HealthCare.gov. "The US government is still hiding public documents that have been under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for a long time," she claims.
And the media simply reports whatever the government says, even though the government has been caught providing false information, including providing false statements under oath to Congress. There are still details of this health care program that we don't know anything about, and why is that?
"For millions of Americans, I think, this law is turning out to be disastrous and too expensive," she says. "There's now a new class of uninsured people who had insurance, but who've been bumped off or have gone off because they can't afford it now. The insurance isn't covering what people need.
Certainly, there are people who have benefitted, people who couldn't get insurance before. There's no doubt about that. That's going to be reported on, but what's not reported is that many people are suffering severe consequences..."
In her book she also exposes the debacle of how HealthCare.gov was developed, so if you're interested in learning more about that, please pick up a copy of Stonewalled.
Sharyl has donated proceeds from Stonewalled to the University of Florida to put on a Freedom of Information forum for students and professionals, in which they brainstormed to come up with ideas for making the government more responsive to public information request; how to fix the freedom of information process, "which is entirely pointless and useless now," as Sharyl says.
So, when you buy her book, part of the proceeds are going towards ongoing efforts to help influence a more open and honest government, which is clearly something that needs work.
These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America April 12 2015 | From: BusinessInsider
This infographic created by Frugal Dad shows that almost all media comes from the same six sources. [This is relevant to the rest of the world given their international holdings and influence.]
That’s consolidated from 50 companies back in 1983. Comment: And while it is US-specific, it portrays global trends in virtually every industry as the cabal roll out their centralist agenda, which would be vital if they were to be able to implement their New World Order - which is failing now in real time.
Note: This infographic is from last year and is missing some key transactions. GE does not own NBC (or Comcast or any media) anymore. So that 6th company is now Comcast. And Time Warner doesn’t own AOL, so Huffington Post isn’t affiliated with them.
But the fact that a few companies own everything demonstrates “the illusion of choice,” Frugal Dad says. While some big sites, like Digg and Reddit aren’t owned by any of the corporations, Time Warner owns news sites read by millions of Americans every year.
Mainstream Media Manipulation, Societal Engineering & Government Propaganda