SUPPORT DEMOCRACY : DON’T VOTE
How Media Lies to You
Here are two recent media articles ostensibly on the same subject but offering quite different focuses. Readers of each article will likely get completely different impressions of what is going on.
The first story is from a western media outlet and the second is from RT News America, a global news outlet known for its critiques of western media shortcomings. We can’t say which article is correct, if either of them are.
The article contents are in black, my comments in red.
The following headline and the abridged article recently appeared in the New Zealand Herald, our national newspaper which is closely associated with the western mainstream media,
“Covid-19: Wuhan scientists planned to release coronaviruses into cave bats 18 months before outbreak”
22 Sep, 2021 12:00 PM
Article headline immediately focuses on and associates “Wuhan Scientists” and “Covid 19.”
Studies show up to 70% of people read no further than the headline and their takeaway message of the article occurs within these few seconds. Just in case you are someone who reads the first few lines as well as the headline, the reference between “Coronaviruses” and “Wuhan scientists” is repeated.
Wuhan scientists were planning to release enhanced airborne coronaviruses into Chinese bat populations to inoculate them against diseases that could jump to humans, leaked grant proposals dating from 2018 show.
New documents reportedly show that just 18 months before the first Covid-19 cases appeared, researchers had submitted plans to release skin-penetrating nanoparticles containing “novel chimeric spike proteins” of bat coronaviruses into cave bats in Yunnan, China, according to UK newspaper The Telegraph.
They also planned to create chimeric viruses, genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily, and requested US$14 million from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to fund the work.
“They” – the Wuhan scientists who are the main focuses of the article – planned to create highly dangerous chimeric (man made) viruses and requested financial assisitance from “DARPA” to do so.
The article makes no mention of who or what Darpa is, which would lead most people to conclude Darpa is a Chinese organization, as this is consistent with the context of the article, but this is not correct. Darpa is an American military research agency, a part of the United States Department of “Defense” (Pentagon). It is responsible for the development of emerging technologies for possible use as weapons by the American military, viruses included.
The proposal also included plans to mix high-risk natural coronavirus strains with more infectious but less dangerous varieties.
The bid was submitted by British zoologist Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, the US-based organisation, which has worked closely with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) researching bat coronaviruses.
Darpa refused to fund the work, saying: “It is clear that the proposed project led by Peter Daszak could have put local communities at risk”, and warned that the team had not properly considered the dangers of enhancing the virus (gain of function research) or releasing a vaccine by air.
Peter Daszak was also behind a letter published in The Lancet last year which effectively shut down scientific debate into the origins of Covid-19.
Viscount Ridley, who has co-authored a book on the origin of Covid-19, due for release in November, and who has frequently called for a further investigation into what caused the pandemic in the House of Lords, said:
“For more than a year, I tried repeatedly to ask questions of Peter Daszak with no response. Now it turns out he had authored this vital piece of information about virus work in Wuhan but refused to share it with the world. I am furious. So should the world be.”
“Peter Daszak and the EcoHealth Alliance (EHA) proposed injecting deadly chimeric (man made) bat coronaviruses collected by the Wuhan Institute of Virology into humanised and ‘batified’ mice, and much, much more.”
THIS SECOND ARTICLE FROM RT AMERICA IS REPORTING ON THE SAME SUBJECT, BUT PRESENTS A DIFFERENT FOCUS ENTIRELY…
“Leaked docs show DARPA considered funding $14mn project to infect Chinese bats with altered coronaviruses in 2018”
22 Sep, 2021 16:25
Documents published by a scientist group probing Covid-19’s origins reveal that controversial US non-profit organization EcoHealth Alliance had sought $14 million in 2018 for a project that would expose Chinese bats to altered coronaviruses.
This article immediately focuses on the western “EcoHealth Alliance”, an allegedly controversial organization, and not on “Wuhan scientists.”
Some 18 months before the first Covid cases appeared, the three-and-a-half year study had planned to release skin-penetrating particles containing “novel chimeric spike proteins” from bat coronaviruses into bat caves in China’s Yunnan province. The goal was to study and prevent transmission to humans.
Now we hear the 3.5 year study – still not associated with Wuhan scientists – was to help prevent virus transmission to humans, a surely noble goal.
The proposal, titled ‘Project Defuse’, was submitted by EcoHealth Alliance for funding consideration as part of an initiative aimed at preventing emerging pathogen threats by the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). It was ultimately rejected over safety concerns.
This article clearly describes Darpa as an American military research organization.
EcoHealth President Peter Daszak, a British zoologist, is listed as the person in charge of Project Defuse, which would have been a collaborative effort with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and a number of US universities, along with the US Geological Survey National Wildlife Health Center and the Palo Alto Research Center.
The article shows the project leader is British scientist Peter Dasuk with several American research organizations being listed as collaborators.
Earlier this month, investigative news outlet The Intercept revealed that federal agencies, including the US National Institutes of Health, granted EcoHealth Alliance a total of $3.1 million – with nearly $600,000 used in part to “identify and alter bat coronaviruses likely to infect humans” at the WIV.
They indicate that researchers were looking to tailor bat coronaviruses to target “human-specific cleavage sites”. This would make it easier for the virus to get into human cells.
Here a connection is listed between US research organizations and coronavirus research. Specifically, work included modifying coronaviruses in order to increase human infectiousness.
In a statement, DRASTIC said the proposal’s “discussion of the planned introduction of human-specific cleavage sites” indicated that a closer review by the “wider scientific community of the plausibility of artificial insertion is warranted.”
Although DARPA’s ‘Biological Technologies Office’ rejected the project since it would “potentially involve ‘Gain of Function’ research” without assessing the risks of such, it left the door open for future funding since there were “several components of great interest” in the proposal.
This paragraph is more ambiguous – stating that Darpa rejected funding on this particular occasion, but also making it clear that they were still interested in some aspects of the project.
In response to a verification request from a news outlet, DARPA stated that it has “never funded directly, nor indirectly as a subcontractor, any activity or researcher associated with the EcoHealth Alliance or WIV.”
The documents do not present any conclusive evidence to support the disputed theory that Covid-19 was leaked from a Chinese lab, but they further highlight the fact that US agencies had expressed interest in risky research into bat coronaviruses in the years leading up the pandemic.
This paragraph is self explantory. It highlights an aspect of the whole story that is not commonly mentioned in the western media. Also not made clear by either article – perhaps because no-one really knows exactly what went on between American and Chinese authorities and organizations – is who it was who actually initiated and lead this “gain of function” research on coronaviruses in Wuhan.
Was this an American military initiative or did the Chinese government play a part ? Was it a joint venture? Was it for civilian or military use? Was the Wuhan lab used simply as a specialist facility for doing the donkey work or did they contribute to the direction of the research program itself?
The lab in Wuhan was only commissioned in 2018, a year before the similar Fort Detrick military bio-research lab in America was shut down over safety concerns. Are these two events linked? Like all major global stories – invasions, assassinations, terroriat attacks, regime changes etc – the truth of the matter takes years and decades to emerge.
No doubt the truth about the Covid 19 global pandemic will emerge at a similarly glacial pace. Read internationally to get a better view on this and every subject. Check in with small citizen journalists who now are the best source of information in many cases.
The mainstream media we thought we had, died long ago. You must remember that.
Links vs Causes
One of my pet peeve words – out of many – that is often heard on the mainstream media is “links”.
You hear it frequently out of the mouths of people who are attempting to deceive you. So you hear it alot from the political, media and military leadership class. That is, the Military-Industrial-Media-Political complex.
Vice President Cheney used the word alot when drumming up support for America’s unprovoked military attack and take over of the sovereign nation of Iraq.
“There were links between Saddam Hussein and Al-Quada…” or words similar to that would often spew out from Cheney’s upper most orrifice. At other times, you will hear “links” being used by any of the hundreds of senior American or British military and political figures who happen to be violently occupying this country or that. Or aiming their drones at innocent people due to “links.”
I have heard ordinary people use the same word frequently as well. They learn to say it from their daily indoctrination sessions by the Wall St media.
What powerful elites are trying to convince you of, when they say there are “links” between ISIS and a car bombing last week, is that the car bombing was caused by ISIS. Which may or may not be true, and it probably isn’t true, as if it were true, they would have most assuredly said so in very definite terms.
When you hear this word used incorrectly so frequently by so many people, you end up permanently incorrectly identifying the meaning of the word, which all goes to help the elites spread their propaganda messages. These messages help to block off original thinking in people.
All the elites and their media have to say or claim is that there were “links” between party A and event B, and automatically, all listeners will conclude that party A caused event B. Even the tiniest or silliest “links” will do the job. Whole races, ethnicities and religions can be tarred and feathered with the spouting of a single word, repeated frequently enough.
The nonsense that is inherent in this faulty logic and non-thinking type of behaviour can be identified by highlighting the “links” between obviously silly eamples, say bread and domestic violence. One day you might find yourself listening to a media report along the following lines,
“BREAKING NEWS : We can now reveal that multiple studies have shown that there are clear links between bread and domestic violence. One independent think tank has reported that in over 98% of cases of domestic violence, bread had either been earlier consumed by the perpetraitor of the assault or was proven to be present at the location of the incident.
One university expert, who didn’t want to be identifed due to them not being authorized to comment, confirmed that bread and domestic violence have long been associated and they feel it is time to speak out about this irrefutable linkage.
“From our years of field research, we have proven conclusively that nearly all initiators of domestic violence are habitual bread eaters. Bread is commonly available in most residential locations and so violent offenders have no problems securing it. It is time we looked at this serious social issue and decide if bread should continue to be so commonly available.”
Does this sound completely farcical? Well, just substitute “bread” with Saddam Hussein and “domestic violence” with Al-Quada and there you are. Equally causative cases. That is – zero.
It is not necessary to prove anything these days, and especially not in the media or political circles. Just hire yourself a Public Relations company (see earlier post) who will put together an expert campaign of lies, innuendo, half truths and wild exaggerations, and, hey presto! you’re in business with whatever agenda you have in mind, no matter how outrageous. Regime change, claims of genocide, foreign invasions, stealing oil, WMDs……
“Links” solve everything.
It’s No Coincidence PROPAGANDA Begins With “PR”.
The term “Public Relations” (PR) was invented by American Edward Bernays in the early 20th century, just prior to World War 1. He was known as the “Father of Spin.”
Mr Bernays was the nephew of notable psychologist, and researcher into matters of the mind, Sigmund Freud. It is no coincidence that the word PROPAGANDA starts with “PR” or that it involves manipulating the mind.
Bernay’s best-known campaigns include a 1929 effort to promote female smoking by branding cigarettes as feminist “Torches of Freedom”, and his work for the United Fruit Company in the 1950s, connected with the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of the democratically elected Guatemalan government in 1954.
There are over 40,000 PR firms in the world – nearly one third of them in the United States – employing approximately 100,000 people.
The Pentagon, America’s military headquarters, spends over US$1 billion with PR companies annually, accounting for almost 8% of the entire American public relations industry revenues. That gives you a good clue as to the business of both partners.
PR is NOT advertising. Advertising is publicity that is openly bought and paid for by a person or organization.
PR is publicity that is not paid for – it’s free but secretive.
With advertizing, the link between the media content and the organization behind it are clear and public. With PR, the links between the media content and who paid for it, and their motives, are hidden.
Social, newspapers and broadcast media give free exposure to any “issue” if that media outlet’s management thinks it will increase its viewership, and therefore its revenues and profits. As the head of one of the big four news channels said many years ago, modern news is about entertainment and profit – not about information.
This free mainstream media exposure takes the form of editorials, front page headlines, features and special pieces, letters to the editor, TV specials and documentaries, podcasts, blogs, etc. You know, what you might think makes up normal everyday “news”.
Importantly – it doesn’t matter if the issues promoted by the mainstream media are true or false, real or imagined, beneficial or harmful, violent or peaceful. As long as issues increase revenues they will get media coverage via their PR companies partners.
PR Companies help almost anyone with almost anything. Clients of PR companies can be nations and governments, celebrities, corporations, government departments like the Pentagon, elites and the super rich or other public figures or any just anyone who wants to improve their public image in order to, say, invade another nation or deflect attention away from their major crimes or simply bad public image.
PR companies can help their clients in the following areas,
- Image Creation… how people see you, your organization, your policies, your country, your political party.
- Crisis management….. when you stuff up, they make your problems disappear or are at least minimized in the minds of the public.
- News and Media management.….. they counter negative opinions or promote positive opinions, whether or not either are true or justified.
- “Brand” & Communications management.…this makes sure your language, public images and actions all support your desired image.
- Campaign Creation & Co-ordination.…. media campaigns – short or long term, positive or negative – created on behalf of countries, individuals, corporations.
For example, here’s a Saudi guy who clearly needs alot of PR help in the eyes of most westerners. His PR people have worked in many of the categories listed above to deflect negative public impressions and create new positive ones. His PR people have flooded the airwaves with wholesome, normal looking poses such as that below, where a Starbucks coffee in his hand in place of a bloodied hacksaw.
Has his PR company suceeded in changing his public image? What do you think? What is your impression of him these days?
Max Bolomolov, Founder of Exclusive PR Solutions adds startling comments on the role PR companies play in presenting news items to the public via the mainstream media,
“The news that you that read on a daily basis is often created by PR companies, who present ideas to media organisations in terms of things that are news worthy and can sell.”
Understand what this means – much of your daily “news” is simply the ideas of PR companies, “sold” to media corporations, often as part of an ongoing campaign, created to increase the ratings and revenues of the media organization. Irrespective of the truth, legality or morality behind the story. You might have noticed this pattern in the news. Subjects are often presented in an ongoing “campaign style” format. Once ratings for that particular subject fall away, new campaigns are ready to take their place. For example, for many months we had almost contant coverage about Hong Kong. When interest (ratings) about that started to fade, it was replaced by Uighers. Interest in Uighers has faded too now, and now we see a more general negative topic concerning China, being their so-called military “aggression.”
How long will this topic last? China rarely acts rashly or militarily so hopefully, a full scale war will be avoided. Depends on how good the western PR is I guess as to whether our elites can convince enough people that China is our enemy, like they did with Iraq.
Do you believe that actually? That our news often eminates from PR companies? If you don’t believe it, read on.
Let’s take a look at the world’s No1 PR company – Edelman Public Relations.
A few of Edelman’s selected Clients –
a) Edelman PR created a campaign to ensure that US State Attorneys-Generals did not participate in legal actions against their customer, Microsoft.
The Los Angeles Times reported that Edelmans used….
“unethical tactics, such as the planting of (fake) news articles and editorials written by Microsoft’s media dept, but presented to the public and the state attorney generals – via the media – as being genuine public submissions”.
(a campaign style effort)
b) Edelman PR creates fake groups claiming to be real grass roots organizations.
eg: “Working Families for Wal-Mart”, a group funded by Wal-Mart but presented as a spontaneous public initiative. Two bloggers were paid by Walmart to travel around America interviewing Wal-Mart employees and then report back with glowing responses.
“Everyone they talked to was delighted with Wal-Mart”, reported the fake group to the mainstream media and the public.
The deliberate mis-representation of fake organizations and the facts surrounding them, is known in the PR industry as “Astro Turfing” and is a widely used technique.
c) Edelman PR provides “creative services” and “strategic counsel” to Saudi Arabia’s UN based staff, in order bolster that countries poor image on the international stage. (FYI – Crown Princes, you need alot more work IMHO – see above)
d) Edelman PR creates mind control projects to alter public opinion on behalf of its clients.
Eg: the Edelman strategy to increase public support of the Canada Energy East pipeline for client TransCanada Oil.
Edelman’s spied on the web movements of internet users by using a technology called “Multiplier” that profiles and tracks “fence sitters” on the topic their client is invested in.
By collecting huge masses of data on citizens’ internet movements, potential pipeline supporters who held neutral views are re-programmed into becoming supporters.
Edelman targeted neutral people potentially sympathetic to the oil industry, eg: construction workers or engineers who might get jobs on the pipeline, and nudged them towards a favourable viewpoint, by re-prioritising their Google search results and targeting them with specific Social Media advertisements and biased PR presentations from Facebook & Whatsapp sympathetic to the pipeline.
This same technique of social media manipulation of susceptible people is used to alter public opinion on anything not just pipelines; eg: Global warming, foreign invasions, deregulation agendas, tax cuts for the wealthy, controverisal legislation…
e) Edelman PR reluctantly dropped “GEO Group” as a client in August 2019, after Edelman employees revolted at prospect of whitewashing the reputation of the American “concentration camps” owner. (their quote).
GEO Group is one of many private prison companies in America which houses the 3 million prisoners of the US Government, and it also does work for the US govt in their Guantanemo Bay Prison in Cuba.
When Edelman employees leaked their company’s GEO slide presentation, highlighting how Edelmans would whitewash the fact that GEO prisoners are often held in appalling conditions in America, a major controversy erupted and Edelman was forced to drop GEO as a client, due to the public backlash.
Edelman PR commented simply, “Edelman takes on complex and diverse clients … and ultimately decided not to proceed with this work.”
* * * * * *
This is just a small sample of the types of businesses that Public Relations companies involve themselves with and the services they offer – mind control projects, implanting fake articles into media outlets, creating fake public groups, improving the image of US “concentration camp” operators, etc.
We call this our mainstream news media. It must be avoided.
Next time you’re reading or listening to a product of the mainstream media, just remember – it is probably part of a PR media campaign to alter your opinions about something or other….
Disconnect yourself from the mainstream media. It’s the only real way to know anything.
Being President is Like Walking a Dog
Foot and Paw Prints in the Sand – What have they to do with being a nation’s leader?
I’m sure you’ve heard the phrase “he’s most powerful man in the world” thousands of times with regards to the President of the United States. I sure have. I used to believe it actually.
I think most people still do believe it, especially about their own leader. And it is true to some extent, but much less than people think.
The best analogy I can think of for the powers of the occupant of the Whitehouse or Number 10 Downing St is the picture above – showing the remnants of a person walking a dog.
Except for one major difference – it is the President who is the Dog.
The question then becomes… if the President is the dog, whose are the footprints beside the dog?
That is, “Who is walking the dog?”
When a responsible owner takes their dog out for a walk in a public space, where the pet’s behaviour will be seen by many people, what does the owner do first of all?
The owners put their dog on a sturdy lead. That way, the dog can appear to be walking freely but actually, it is still under the control of the “owner”. The dog and its owner never become separated. The pet is at all times ultimately under the control of its owner.
All owners walk the same path irrespective of the size, breed or type of their pet, but each pet appears to be moving independently to public observers. Leads are a great tool.
Most pets always walk close to their owners, maintaining a close and reliable relationship over the time they are together. This close relationship normally lasts for no more than eight years.
Other pets take a more unpredictable path, meandering from side to side, occasionally even stopping to sniff and explore, but they always, come back to the intended path of the owner. Dogs on leads are allowed a certain amount of freedom and independence after all, otherwise the pet will quickly lose interest in its life and get all maudlin. Nothing worse than a melacholic pet in public is there…..
Owners look after their prize pets. They usually like their pet to look all shiny and healthy looking otherwise the public passing by won’t take much notice of their prize possession. Owners like to feel proud of their pet. Money is no object when competing in and winning the biggest competitions.
Most pets quickly realize the relationship between them and their owners and accept it. Otherwise, how else will the pet get all the freebies and treats from the owners if they don’t co-operate? So it is easiest just to kick back and obey all owner commands. Doing a few tricks will help cement your reputation.
If owners realize they have a champion in their midst, they will go great lengths to clean up after their prize pet when it does do the inevitable “whoopsee”. Well established owners will always carry a little plastic bag with them when walking the dog to clean up after their pet soils themselves with the brown stuff. It always happens at some point. The plastic bag fixes all!
“Nothing to see here folks – see, he’s as good as new.”
Occasionally, owners get a nasty surprise after securing ownership of their new pet.
It isn’t common, but it has been known that beloved and precious pets can sometimes undergo quite a personality change after getting the lead on them and hitting the wide open spaces of the beach. What the owner thought was going to be an excellent vermin catcher turns tail and in fact, sometimes cosies up to the damn varments!
This is quite distressing for the wealthy pet breeder types. It means their bloodlines are not as pure and well controlled as they thought. There is variation in the breeding process. Owners hate variations and unpredictable events. These flaws can ruin long established pet breeders’ reputations if not fixed quickly.
Long established pet owners do not get to that position overnight or by being taken for a ride. They have been around the block a few times. There are always procedures at hand to handle recalitrant pets.
The most basic technique of all is to simply cut the lead that connects the pet to its owner whilst convieniently leaving the plastic bag at home. Off goes the dog at one hundred miles an hour, its tongue hanging out in great enthusiasm! Freedom at last!
But the pet’s freedom is short-lived. You see some pets tire of being on a lead. After several years of faithful ownership, some pets forget who the owner is and actually think they are free and independent beings. That can cause discord, which if not treated, can lead to a complete breakdown in owner-pet dynamics.
Pets bought up in a household of wealthy and indulgent owners won’t last long with true independence. They will always get themselves into trouble at some point. And if the owner is not nearby with the plastic bag, then who is going to clean up the shit?
Newly independent pets have been known to withdraw from all walks in public due to the large amounts of brown stuff sticking to them. The public doesn’t like smelly pets and the odour is hard to remove. These pets are forced to withdraw from public life, but it has been known in very rare cases for soiled pets with very large and wet tongues to lick themselves clean. This takes an enormous effort and endurance and is not recommended.
There is one last category of difficult pets that requires even more drastic action should the animal tug at the owner’s lead for too long. How can we put this?
Even the most highly admired and prized pets are never safe once they break away from the owners’ designated path for too long.
In extreme cases, when pets are just too much trouble…. they are simply, well… they’re put down. It’s a sad and distressing occasion for most people to witness.
The faint hearted and animal lovers please look away now….
“John from Dorset” Proves The Power of Media & Government Propaganda.
3 minutes of proof of the effects of Mainstream Media fear and propaganda.
George Galloway is a hugely knowledgable and experienced former British politician, media figure and a commentator on a wide range of subjects. He is a little eccentric occasionally but his debating skills are formidable indeed. He has his own talk show on RT America News where he shares large amounts of what used to termed “common sense.”
I came across this short clip of Mr Galloway receiving a call in from “John from Dorset” on George’s talk show.
It is clear that “John from Dorset” is very concerned, agitated even, about the prospect of “China taking over the world.”
The short chat between John and George is very comical really and I laugh every time I hear it. But it isn’t really funny. Quite the opposite.
Apart from its comical aspect, the short chat between host George and caller John is also very disturbing. John clearly has quite set and negative views about China’s role in the world. I’m not sure his expressed views on the role of other western nations, including his own the UK are quite so firmly held. He seems to be making certain peripheral – non China related – comments up as he goes.
At the very least, John seems quite disturbed and not at all sure of his facts. Ill informed, confused and frightened. All the things that many governments and their mainstream media work very hard at achieving amongst their readers and viewers.
Sadly, it seems John from Dorsett has been a star pupil of the mainstream media’s masterclasses in propaganda. He doesn’t really seem to know or fully understand even his own views. All he knows is that China is bad. No matter what. And even if he acknowledges that his own country, the UK, and the USA are “no good” too…..well… then that is okay, but….China is even worse!
Without really knowing why. Let alone explaining his opinion in any coherent manner.
I think there are hundreds of millions of people in the western world like John from Dorset. Good, well meaning and law abiding people who have been frightened almost to hysteria by years of constant exposure to our lying and manipulative, propaganda spreading mainstream media and government. Remember the CNN posts here?
John is an extreme case, but from observation, I believe many more westerners are just like John to various degrees. If you read my “Donald Trump Test” post, you will remember that I would gauge a person’s current affairs knowledge by me raising positive aspects of – or even simply neutral aspects of – President Trump’s tenure to see what reaction I got.
Invariably, I received negative feedback on President Trump, even on issues where he spoke some very rare truths, such as America being far from innocent when killing millions of people around the world, killing people who were innocent.
But all that counts for naught. The mainstream media demolished every apsect of Donald Trump’s tenure in the Whitehouse. I’ll just repeat – much of what Mr Trump did do and say DID need to be demolished. It was awful. But not all of it. Some of his comments were spot on and truthful. But the media demolition of Donald Trump means he will never receive any credit for his truth telling.
George Galloway said at the end of the call, when thanking John for his contribution, “it was a very useful call.”
It was indeed. We can all ask ourselves, “am I related to John from Dorset?”
Is Afghanistan The Latest (Really) BIG Media Lie?
99% of Afghans Support Sharia Law
Since the Taliban gained control over Afghanistan, it is being widely reported in the west that the group has started imposing strict Sharia law in the country, supposedly terrorising the long suffering population in the process.
However, there seems to be much less to this “alarming” headline than what meets the eye….
In a previous post, it was alluded to that there might be another – more important – reason why the Taliban were able to sweep across all of Afghanistan so easily and achieve control with hardly a shot being fired. I mean, a reason excluding American incompetance and the corruption of the local elite classes.
A survey conducted by the highly respected non-partisan Pew Research Centre in America in 2017, highlighted a little publicised facet about the outlook of the Afghan people themselves.
In the 2017 survey, it was found that 99% of the citizens in Afghanistan were in favour of Sharia law in their country. Remember, this survey was conducted when the country was NOT under Taliban rule.
Repeating the survey’s conclusion – even before the Taliban gained control of Afghanistan, (essentially) the entire country’s population were allied with and supportive of one of the most important policy planks of that organization : imposition of Sharia law.
This isn’t really consistent with the long standing western media narrative that the Taliban impose their will only through violence and terror and that most Afghans hate it. You can still see these types of negative headlines continuing around the world even today.
Of course the utterly shambolic end to America’s military occupation of the nation hasn’t helped the new governors restore calm. If we recall the recent tragic and brutal history of Afghanistan, it is obvious that there will be much to do to restore some semblence of peace. Just look at how South Africa, another former colony, continues to struggle to achieve this, decades after winning full democracy.
Even in my remote and quiet but “developed” country, New Zealand, there are a small number of people who have extremist ideas about separatism, imposition of dual legal systems and such things. As the media pays little attention to them, and they have little intrinsic power or profile, few people outside of NZ have any idea they exist. Even many NZ citizens would not know much about their existence and ideas. That would change overnight if the local and international media chose to focus on the “cause” of these people and they were supplied with weapons, cash and influence. New Zealand would see civil unrest, violence and chaos if these tiny groups were supplied with all the resources they needed to create it, as happened in Hong Kong. Unlike in Iran in 1953, where Washington’s anti-government plotting went on in secret behind closed embassy doors, today the United States and British governments and media openly support anti-China groups in Hong Kong and Xinjiang, without shame.
This is how many “issues” around the world are created I have discovered. The pattern is always roughly similar.
Powerful western governments, in conjunction with their global media and intelligence friends, identify (usually small) groups of discontented people within a nation that takes their interest. This small group are then supplied with money, technology, logistics support and a continuously favourable international media profile, and voila! … these people are in the wrecking business.
Within no time, a small group of previously unremarkable people without power or a following, suddenly become the latest “cause” to “save” amongst the western, ivy league, latte and sushi loving set. And if a “humanitarian” angle can be created as well, as there was in Libya, then this “demands” urgent action to “save” these poor people. Urgent actions that always involve bombing and shooting people. The nation in question is then is set on the path to regime change, or at the very least, serious social disruption is created, with an eye on regime change down the track a bit, when it can be more easily accomplished.
Think Cuba, Venezuela, Syria, Hong Kong, Xinjiang and now it seems, we might be adding Afghanistan to that list. One hopes the Afghan people will be left alone to sort out their country by themselves, but if history is anything to go by, that scenario seems unlikely.
Every nation contains divergence groups, with different opinions. But generally speaking, if left alone, I believe people can usually work things out for themselves eventually. When foreign nations meddle in the affairs of an already troubled society, the loss and suffering of the set upon people, only increases unnecessarily and prolongs any final lasting peace. In order to be “saved”, Vietnam suffered unspeakable atrocities for 20 years only for its invaders to eventually leave it in a far worse state than they found it in. Atrocities that continue until the present day as 1000 Vietnamese people are killed annually by American landmines that they left behind and show no enthusiasm to remove. That’s 20 years of misery and Vietnam still ended up with a communist government anyway. A communist government that everyone accepts and deals with on a normal basis. (And that is handling Covid 19 very well).
Only western weapons manufacturers and chemical companies profited from all the killing in Indo-China.
I think it is safe to say that sensational headlines about who “lost” Afghanistan, headlines about the terrible “suffering” of the “helpless” population and the brutality of sharia law look set to continue. Even if 99% of Afghanistan’s people support it.
And anyway, why is Afghanistan getting wall to wall international media coverage now, after the American installed government evaporated – and 4 people have tragically died at the airport – when for the last 20 years, after car bombings, terror attacks at local markets, shootings, allied bombings, etc….Afghanistan hardly got any media attention at all? It wasn’t called the forgotten war for nothing….but now it is constantly featured. Why?
Isn’t it remarkable that most people had no clue about the widespread support of Sharia law in Afghanistan? Well, it isn’t really – that is the role of our wonderful mainstream media after all : to keep us all in the dark and oblivious to the carnage our governments cause in the name of freedom.
The Two Law Changes That Destroyed America’s Media: Part 2
Part 2 – The 1996 Telecommuncations Act.
In Part 1 we saw how in 1989 President Reagan initiated substantial change in the American media market by repealing what was colloquially called, “The Fairness Doctrine.” This was a legal requirement that media organizations had to show both sides of an issue and not be partisan. Additionally, media outlets could not shy away from debate and had to present controversial issues for public consideration.
This change was followed 7 years later by the creation of the Telecommunications Act, 1996 signed by President Clinton. This act’s stated objective was to open up media markets to competition by removing regulatory barriers to entry. The 104th Congress of the House of Representatives refers to the purprose of the bill as “to provide for a pro-competitive, de-regulatory national policy framework designed to accelerate rapidly private sector deployment of advanced information technologies and services to all Americans by opening all telecommunications markets to competition.”
The goal of the law was to let anyone enter any communications business and to let any communications business compete in any market against any other. The bill included the internet for the first time as well as traditional media markets of television and radio.
Also removed by the bill, were limits of ownership in any single communications market that prevented anyone owning too much of the media in any location or market. These previous limits prevented any one party from creating a monopoly and dominating a market.
The intentions of the bill ended up as great failures. Or maybe, great successes, depending on how you see it. Depending upon which side of the boardroom door you’re sitting.
According to the intentions of the Act as laid out by the Congress which passed it, the bill must be considered a failure. Competition has greatly decreased since the bill was adopted, not increased as intended. By removing caps to media ownership and allowing “anyone” to enter any market location or type, the obvious outcome has indeed arisen. That is, the largest existing media outlets, now substantially free of limits to their activities, simply entered new marketplaces, bought up smaller outlets, thereby only increasing their market dominance and reducing competition. The opposite of intentions.
This has had the effect of reducing the major media players in the American telecommunications market from about 75-80 in the 1980s to just 6 today. These are currently, in 2021,
Enacting just one of the two great changes to the American media market would have been detrimental to the quality of information shared with the public.
By enacting the Telecommunications Act AND by removing the fairness doctrine, the result has been….well, the result has been what we see today in America’s news media industry.
A splitting of American society into roughly three thirds – one third only watch Fox & their friends, one third only watch MSNBC & friends and one third are somewhere inbetween.
Context and fairness are long gone from most combatants. Statements, actions and beliefs are all highly misrepresented by all sides much of the time. Ratings wars are won by personal attacks on the opposition, hyper-partisanship and even straight out lies are nothing unusual. Well, I don’t need to tell you about it I’m sure….
Who misses out as a result of these changes? Almost everybody…
- news “consumers”, who nowadays come from around the globe, and who are now being indoctrinated by one cause or another, without them realizing it,
- foreign nations, many of which are frequently slandered with impunity by these media giants, in ongoing efforts to appear “tough” or “humanitarian” or whatever their PR created “brand” dictates they appear to be,
- America’s ordinary citizens, especially the poorest, who instead of having their government use taxpayers’ money to set up universal healthcare and free education, as is done in all other “developed” nations, the government of the citizen’s of the USA pays military and weapons corporations trillions of dollars to supply the equipment needed to attack and kill millions of people around the world.
And that last point – about America’s ordinary citizens missing out the most – is perhaps the most significant one of all. For there is at least ONE subject where all of America’s giant media combatants forget their rivalries and work, mostly, in unison – promoting War.
As noted previously, the global mainstream media are not just doing a poor job at communicating information to the public. That would be bad enough, but it would be still just tolerable. After all, everyone has good days and bad days, even many bad days sometimes.
However the global mainstream media are having more than just many bad days – they are all bad days and deliberately so. They are actively supporting wars, actively suppressing information that is critical of the conduct of failed wars, and in doing so, are actively promoting propaganda which aids and abetts in war crimes and crimes against humanity by western governments. These are words which have no real meaning anymore – and therefore provoke no real reaction from the public when these acts are committed.
We must ask, on the other side of the coin, the reverse question, “who wins from all these media changes and outcomes?”
Almost nobody. But there are some. Who all have vast holiday homes in the same exclusive areas. Whose children all go to the “right” schools. These are the very tiny number of elites who sit on the boards of each others’ corporations. Boardrooms which make the decisions beneficial to the companies and boardrooms of their friends in the other sectors of what we now commonly call, the Military-Industrial complex.
We should update the name these days to the Military-Industrial- Financial-Media- Congressional complex. Its members are constantly dizzy from the “revolving door” nature of corporate life today. Former members of Congress or the intelligence agencies (which are sectors of government) move through revolving doors to sit on the boards of weapons manufacturers and/or media giants. Former senior Congressional figures, who, in a previous life, used to create laws to protect people, are now employed by corporate giants, who use these politicians’ long experience to get around the same laws that they helped to create.
The needs of the few always take priority over the needs of the many today. Maybe it has aways been that way. It is very incestuous. And the results of this ongoing incest are clearly evident in contemporary American society. It can not go on forever.
Why Is China Treated Differently in the Western Media?
Human rights abuses have been an ongoing issue for the government of this asian giant. The abuses range from mass killings, enforced disappearances, torture, rape and sexual abuse to political repression. The Army, the Police Force and Border Security Personnel have all been accused of committing severe human rights abuses against local civilians.
Human rights groups say more than 100,000 people have died since 1989 and even the official government figures give the number of civilians killed as above 50,000.
Rape was regularly used as a means to punish and humiliate communities.
A US State department report from 2010 concurred with many of the above findings.
However the government has insisted that the mass graves found in the region all belong to foreign militants.
In 2011, a Human Rights group confirmed that there are thousands of bullet-ridden bodies buried in unmarked graves across the region. 574 bodies were identified as missing locals in a just a small part of the region. This figure indicates that claims of thousands of killed, or “disappeared” locals are accurate.
In 2012, human rights lawyer Parvez Imroz commenced the first statewide study of torture in the region, his study sample comprising 50 villages, a reasonable number in order to make sensible conclusions. More than 2,000 extreme cases of torture were identified and documented. He discovered 50 “centers” run by state army and paramilitaries where torture is practised.
The latest crackdown by the government of this asian giant began in August 2019, when it took the highly controversial step of revoking the region’s long held autonomy and its self government. By the federal government annexing the region, it has essentially reverted it to the same status as the rest of the nation, with no special powers or authority of its own, ruled by the Capital.
This annexation was always going to be highly controversial. To ensure compliance with it, as many as 600,000 government troops have been sent to the region to enforce order and quash dissent. Approximately 4 million people have been confined within their homes by the military, essentially under house arrest. A total internet, media and communication blackout put in place at the start of the annexation was only lifted in February 2021, after 18 months.
Life remains hard in the region in 2021, with hundreds of military checkpoints still in place, internet coverage patchy and slow, many phone systems still cut by the State government. The predictable winter power cuts – intentional or not – make life even more miserable. The combined economic effect on the population from all these measures has been dire while the coronavirus has only added to their misery.
Upon reading these reports one might think we are talking about the persecution of the Uighurs in the Chinese autonomous region of Xinjiang or about events in Hong Kong. And that these crimes have been committed at the hands of Beijing. But we are not and they have not.
These long standing human rights abuses all come from the previously autonomous Kasmir region in India. And the violent events all relate to the Indian government in Delhi. Successive Indian governments in fact.
But you would never know much about the troubles of this region in India as it gets only spasmodic coverage in the mainstream media and even then, only after the most undeniable atrocities by Delhi. The fuss is soon gone. Why is that?
There is hardly any space in the illustrious western media headlines anyway as every second line is taken up with negative coverage of anything to do with China – factual or otherwise.
The Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) was accorded special status by Article 370 of the Constitution of India after the former British colony was divided into Pakistan and India in 1947. In contrast to other states of India, Jammu and Kashmir had its own constitution, own flag and administrative autonomy and it was the only Indian state with a Muslim majority. Indian citizens from other states were not allowed to purchase land or property in Jammu and Kashmir.
India initially indicated in 1947 that it would allow Kashmir a referendum on whether Kashmiri citizens wanted to stay part of India, join Muslim Pakistan (as the majority of Kashmiris are not Hindu Indians but Muslims) or become independent. The referendum was never held and there has been troubles in the region ever since. India and Pakistan have fought three wars and there have been insurgencies within Kashmir as the locals try to change their status. Complicating things further, half of Kashmir is held by India and half by Pakistan, but both nations claim the entire region for themselves. Now India has changed the status quo by removing the Kasmir region’s autonomy and annexing it into India itself.
So how have western governments reacted to discoveries of ACTUAL mass graves in the former British colony of India, where thousands of ACTUAL dead people have been documented as missing and confirmed and identified as dead?
The British parliament has expressed many views since the troubles began, all rather vague sounding, non-blaming, even-handed irrelavancies, such as it expressing in 2012 its “sadness and “regret” over the discovery of more than 6,000 unmarked graves in Kashmir, India.
Sadness? Really ? That is all the British government can express? It is sad? Is this the same nation’s government that expresses total moral outrage at the so-called “genocide” against the Uighurs in Xinjiang by the Chinese government? A genocide that is not supported by any significant body of credible evidence nor by finds of mass graves nor dead bodies or anything much at all?
Is there persecution in China? Undoubtedly Yes. But Genocide? No.
Could it be that just like the mass graves of children in Canada – interestingly, another former British colony – the finding of real and genuine and documented dead bodies of men, women and children in India is just too much to bear for the former moral leader of the world?
The lack of outrage expressed by western governments at the atrocities in India and Canada are only made more sickening by their complete lack of objectivity and perspective in their comments about Xinjiang in China.
And once again, don’t look to any international mainstream media for guidance – they are completely in on the con.
What is the real agenda here ? It is pretty obvious and has been discussed in previous posts on Xinjiang. Check them out.
Thanks for reading.
The Deadly Spanish Flu Wasn’t Spanish At All.
Another story from the mainstream media hall of shame…
What is known to be one of most devastating pandemics in history – The Great Spanish Flu of the early 20th Century – had nothing to do with Spain at all. It is just another example – like the Iran Contra scandal that had nothing to do with Iran – of how events in history are sent along in time, often with false or misleading labels attached, which masks the reality of the time and also that of the historical record for those looking back to the past only casually.
When the great pandemic ended two years after it was first detected, an estimated 500 million people – about a third of the world’s population at the time – had been infected. Spanish flu death toll estimates typically hover about the 50 million mark, though taking all estimates into account, the death toll ranges from 20 million to 100 million people. This pandemic created more fatalities therefore, than in the previous four years of World War I, making it one of the deadliest outbreaks in history.
It must be remembered that there were no vaccines at that time so the death toll was far greater than what we would expect if a similar outbreak occurred today.
The epidemic broke out near the end of World War I, when wartime media censors in the west had been suppressing any bad news in order to maintain civilian morale. However, newspapers were free to report the pandemic’s effects in neutral countries such as Spain. Because neutral countries like Spain were the only sources of information about the pandemic, their stories created a false impression of Spain being hard hit by the virus, which led the media, either deliberately or not, to keep using the name “Spanish” flu. Over time, some people today even think that Spain might have been the source of the virus, judging simply by its name.
It must also be remembered that it was about the time of the first World War that the modern propaganda industry was created in the West, so it is quite possible that the use of the Spanish label was deliberate.
But as noted above, the Spanish flu had nothing to do with Spain in actuality, and Spain was not greatly affected by it until the second wave hit many months later. Spain was definitely not the source of the virus.
The earliest recorded deaths associated with the great “Spanish Flu” global pandemic were actually recorded in the state of Kansas, in the United States in March 1918 at an American Military Camp, Camp Funston.
The pandemic is conventionally marked as having begun in March 1918 in Kansas, USA, although as early as January 1918 an American doctor had warned the US Public Health Service of its existance. The virus had also been recorded about the same time in New York and the first exact case location is still unclear, and although there are other theories as to the origins of the virus, it is generally thought and is taken to have originated in the United States.
At any rate, within days of the first officially recorded case in March, 1918 at Camp Funston in America, 522 men at the camp had reported sick and it very quickly got worse.
When the United States entered World War 1 in its later stages, it is thought that its 2 million troops, many infected with the virus, carried the disease across to Europe infecting millions more. Once the virus had taken hold in the theatres of war in Europe, where death, poor hygiene and close contact habitation were the norm, there was no stopping its spread.
Wounded troops sent away to recuperate or sent home permanently carried the virus back to new countries where it had the opportunity to spread throughout fresh populations.
Even my grandfather’s first wife died from the Spanish flu here in New Zealand when, as a nurse tending to sick and wounded returned soldiers, she contracted the virus and succumbed to it.
Who says globalization is new? Nature has been a global force for billions of years actually. We are only just realizing how globally connected we all are.
It is no more appropriate to call the great global pandemic of 1918-20 the Spanish flu or American flu any more than it is to call our latest flu pandemic the China flu. By deliberately attaching a specific ethnic or cultural label to a naturally occurring virus – although the jury is still out on the origins of the Covid 19 virus – especially when it is repeatedly done by high ranking government officials such as those in the Trump administration, ethnic tensions are needlessly inflamed.
Due to modern efforts at biological warfare, of which the western world is the undoubted leader, we may never know the real origins of the Covid 19 virus. It could have been created in a laboratory in Wuhan but who was involved and why will be more difficult to determine. No one is going to want to publicly own up to working with these types of deadly organisms, let alone letting it escape.
But hopefully the world will learn a great lesson from Covid 19. That is, we all live on the same little ball and what affects one, affects everybody. Unless all the nations of the world are supplied with vaccines to help control it, we will simply be letting a deadly virus continue to circulate and mutate making it worse for all of us to cope with.
WIll we learn that?
Words Have No Meaning Anymore
If you’re old enough, you will remember that the one book everyone had in the house was a dictionary. If you didn’t know the meaning or context of a word, you looked it up in the dictionary. Flash homes even had a book called a “Thesaurus”, which was like a dictionary but it was printed upside down or something… damn, I should have looked that word up in a dictionary to find out maybe…
But dictionaries, like encyclopedias, were the standard references that everyone used and, more or less, every dictionary or encyclopedia had much the same definitions and information. And businesses who wrote and sold dictionaries and encyclopedias staked their reputation on the contents of their product. Can you imagine how quickly the Acme Encyclopedia Company’s shares would dissolve if it was discovered that under their entry for the word “Euthanasia”, they wrote “Young chinese people”.
They might get away with that now, for just a few years back we were been told of the previously unknown existance of things called “alternative facts.”
Nowadays, alot fewer people have dictionaries or encyclopedias in book form. We can just “google it” now, and usually we get presented with something from “Wikipedia” which is much easier to spell than Encyclopedia.
Wikipedia is an okay place to start when looking for information but it’s too unreliable to stop reading there. I read a great description of wikipedia recently, with a columnist calling it, “the public bathroom wall” of the internet. That was a spot on observation I thought. And witty.
Because although you can get factual and useful information scribbled on a public bathroom wall, it might even be exactly what you’re looking for that day, but you wouldn’t want to base your life around it.
Information is now democratized, one of the few things in life that actually is. Facts are not autonomous entities anymore, considered solely on their own merit, but are simply what the majority of people can be convinced that they are. In many cases, just what a single person writes on wikipedia. A writer no one has heard of, knows anything about or even cares about – the information is free and fast – and that’s all that is important !
Wikipedia always comes first in your Google search, which is probably no coincidence. That is where most people stop. They never read from the next cubicle wall or from the bulletin board outside in the sunshine.
Even “fact checking” – quite the darling of the “respectable” media these days is often misleading, as I have seen “fact checked” claims that are false or misleading to start with.
For example, there are many aspects of the death of Diana Spenser, former Princess of Wales, that merit serious attention. But they don’t get any attention. Why not?
It simply makes no sense at all that perhaps the most famous and most admired and topical lady in the world, the mother of the future British King, a much loved “celebrity” and royal figure, dies in unusual circumstances overseas and the British government DOES NOT initiate their legal responsibilty to conduct a full and immediate enquiry into her death. Huh? How can that be?
Even if it was an unknown Harrods shop assisstant who died in unusual circumstances in a Paris tunnel, UK law says the government must conduct an enquiry into the death. And here was the most “followed” person in the western world who was killed, and the British government broke the law by not conducting an immediate enquiry.
It is simply not possible under any circumstances remotely considered “normal” that the aftermath to Diana’s death would have happened the way it did. “Normal” would have been the exact opposite of what happened. Normal would have been that no stone was left unturned, no tiny detail overlooked in finding out what exactly happened to “England’s Rose.” That is what would have been normal. But the opposite of normal happened. Why?
Note – I am not advocating either way on the death of Diana. All that I am noting by using this example is a phenomena that I have also seen used on other highly contentious issues. That is, substituting a misleading and fairly preposterous claim in order to successfully “debunk” or deflect attention away from another related, but much more serious issue.
In the Diana case, one of the common claims doing the rounds was that Prince Phillip had instructed MI6 to kill Diana. A few nutters might have promoted this story but it’s not the claim that was being promoted by more serious observers or a claim I thought had any merit. Therefore, of course, it is fairly easy to debunk this silly claim. And it was. And for many people that would be the end of the story. But eliminating Prince Philip’s involvement is not the same thing as eliminating MI6 involvement, or any other.
No serious person was claiming that Prince Philip had anything to do with Diana’s death. But MI6 ? That is a different story. And a story, if it exists at all, that seems to have been dealth with for now.
Debunking can only be taken seriously if the claim being debunked is an accurate portrayal and hypothesis of real events in the first place. In many cases they aren’t. Therefore the debunked status of a bogus claim is not of any value either. Where to turn to?
Well not to our wonderful mainstream media outlets, which often make Wikipedia look positively “Shakespearian” in comparison.
Simple innocuous information is no longer “presented” by the media – it is “revealed.” Trivial occurrances, usually involving a reality TV show or a celebrity, are labelled “shocking”.
What does all this shocking revelation do to our world?
Well, when things are in chaos, when ordinary people are constantly bombarded with sensational but flakey headlines about nothing at all, they get desensitized to real events that should be genuinely shocking and sensational, like bogus wars and the resulting mass murder of innocent people. Or like government abetted genocide of children in civilized, white western nations like Canada.
Julian Assange “reveals” information like this and he is paying a very heavy price for it, maybe he will pay for it with his life.
The evening news or the front page of our daily newspapers rarely reveal anything of consequence. In fact, they hide the truely imortant. They portray some nobody as having suffered a shocking event in their life – an event that could happen to all of us – and it is presented by highly trained newsreaders who “emote” the news, not simply present it. As if it needed presenting in the first place. Our TV newsreaders in New Zealand have been trained in this high art of “emoting” – a form of propaganda really – several decades ago by American media specialists.
What all this means is that many people react to the news of another unprovoked American atrocity in the same way they react to the latest pics of Adele’s “shocking” weight loss. Or weight gain. It doesn’t matter which. As long as it is trivial.
Genuinely and truely shocking man made global events become invisible. Tolerable. Even quasi supported. Passive acceptance of an atrocity is a form of support for it.
“They must have had it coming to them….”
“That is always happening over there…”
“Well, we can’t do anything about it….”
If it was Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin who originally said the following, then he was a highly perceptive person, as well as a maniac,
“One death is a tragedy, a million deaths are simply a statistic.”Joseph Stalin
Deception and crime thrives in chaos.
Deception and crime are universal concepts working together. How do pick pockets often operate? Or shop lifters? By deception, then crime. One person distracts you with some pleasant banter whilst their associate steals your property. In the case of the USA, the deception is not carried out on the victims of the attack as in petty crime – the American victims die. The deception of the American government is aimed at the people who would take to the streets if they ever woke up from their mass delusion, as they did during America’s invasion of Vietnam. These are the good people who actually fund the atrocity.
I’m not sure ordinary people really comprehend that these ongoing global atrocities are being carried out in their name, by their representatives that they freely vote for, and who use their hard earned tax money to pay giant weapons manufacturers.
Some brilliant comedians and philosophers like American George Carlin, who died in 2008, tried his whole life to wake people up to what was being done in their name. They all had a good laugh at his shows, but I don’t think many of the laughing crowd realized that, yes, YOU – he WAS talking to YOU.
George Carlin : “Bombing people is our hobby now”
If anything here makes any sense to you please share it with a friend or family member and ask their opinion. Knowledge really is power.
Thanks for listening.
The Two Law Changes That Destroyed America’s Media – Part 1
Part 1 – Repeal of The Fairness Doctrine
The “fairness doctrine” of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, was a policy that required the holders of television and radio broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was honest, equitable, and balanced.
The fairness doctrine had two basic elements then,
- It prevented controversial or embarrassing issues from being swept under the carpet. It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of genuine public interest, to ensure the public were kept informed.
- The act also required radio and TV station to handle all issues in a fair and responsible manner by showing contrasting views – both sides of the argument – regarding those matters.
Television and Radio were given a wide latitude as to how to comply with the requirements. It could be done through straightout news articles, public and current affairs shows, or by writing editorials and opinion pieces.
The personal attack rule was integral to the fairness doctrine. It mandated that time for a response by any party criticized during a broadcast must be made available, particulary for issues of great public importance.
In June 1987, Congress attempted to preempt and nullify the impending FCC decision to remove the Fairness Doctrine by attempting to formalize it into law, but the legislation was vetoed by Republican President Ronald Reagan.
(Another attempt to bring the doctrine into law in 1991 was also stopped when Republican President George H.W. Bush threatened another veto.)
On August 5, 1987 therefore, during the Presidency of Republican Ronald Reagan the FCC abolished the fairness doctrine by a unanimous 4–0 vote, the committee compromising two Democrats and two Republicans – a perfect example of how, when something needs to be done to the advantage of elites, political partys work together just fine.
The FCC suggested that because of the many media voices in the marketplace, the doctrine be deemed unconstitutional, stating that,
“The intrusion by government into the content of programming occasioned by the enforcement of [the Fairness Doctrine] restricts the journalistic freedom of broadcasters … [and] actually inhibits the presentation of controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and the degradation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists.”
Really ? I guess once you mention that something is impinging upon freedom in America, then that thing has to go.
After the fairness doctrine was repealed in 1987, the personal attack rule persisted until 2000, when it was first suspended and later abolished that same year by the FCC.
Former President Bill Clinton is one of the many US politicians who have shown support for its reinstatement. During a 2009 appearance on a radio show, Clinton said,
“Well, you either ought to have the Fairness Doctrine or we ought to have more balance on the other side, because essentially there’s always been a lot of big money to support the right wing talk shows“.Former President Clinton, 2009
Of course, it is equally likely that his Republican opponents would argue it is the liberal left wing press that are generously funded, and both are probably correct. But essentially, it seems there is significant support to return to the days of a fair and honest media – at least in theory – in America. I don’t believe it will ever happen.
For what the American media has morphed into since the Reagan era make-over of the nation, is very ugly indeed. All that is required now are slogans proclaiming that your channel is fair and balanced. No effort is required to actually achieve these things.
Corrosive media figures such as former Radio host Rush Limbaugh were able to pioneer the trash talk media industry and it flourished after 1987. Any pretence of balance was out the window. Fox News followed suit. It was created to support conservative, Right Wing views through its media stars such as Sean Hannity and that’s that. The only place “fair” appeared was on its now defunct marketing slogan, which surely must have been created tongue in cheek.
And The Left are no better. (I hate using “labels” sorry)
The hysterical and incessant and nonsensical Russiagate attacks by MSNBC media stars such as Rachel Maddow were quite simply beyond belief.
And now all sides are beating upon China in a similar vein.
But audiences love these grotesque approaches to communication and at least Fox and MSNBC include some sort of dark humor or sarcasm in their shows as they go about the trashing of their supposed arch enemy media foes. (I say “supposed” because they are all probably great friends behind the scenes – trash talk is just their highly lucrative day job).
“Neutral” CNN is populated by cardboard cutouts, sprinkled with glitter. Their main presentors are so stiff and arrogant and serious – they look like they have large toilet brushes inserted up their rear orifice. They hardly merit mentioning at all. Occasionally we get to hear from Darth Vader, the only enjoyable thing CNN has to offer.
But in fact, it is essential to view all of these outlets from time to time, for the same reason that I view media outlets both public and private, both western and non western, both media giants and small citizen journalist outfits. To get balance.
It is difficult to be agenda free. We all have one somewhere. I have one writing this blog. You will read things in one of these media categories that another media outlet will never tell you, as all media outlets have an agenda as well.
That is why I check out claims or things that sound dubious from several different types of media organizations, and not just from another outlet of the same type, whether they be “left” or “right”.
In rare cases, War being one, the mainstream media almost across the entire political spectrum step in unison.
And that is just not fair at all.
Part 2 of this post will deal with the other fatal blow to the American media – President Clinton’s 1996 Telecommunications Act.
Is Mr Blinken the Dumbest Yet? Or Maybe Just the Most Arrogant?
“American Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken demands China release Canadian Businessman Convicted of Spying”
Danny just heard the news about Mr Blinken’s demands….but this is all far from funny.
So, let us just get this straight. Sorry, this is going to be a long sentence….but here goes,
The Government of the United States, in Washington, is “demanding” that another nation’s government, China, release a convicted spy, who isn’t American but a citizen of a third nation, Canada, all whilst, Canada, had previously apprehended – on possibly dubious legal grounds – a highly prominent Chinese business lady who had broken no Canadian laws, but was apprehended simply because the United States asked Canada to do so, on the grounds that the Chinese business lady is alleged by the United States government to have undertaken normal business dealings – again, not involving America – and breaking no laws of Canada or China, with yet a fourth nation, Iran – who America doesn’t like – dealings through a Hong Kong bank, and where she wasn’t breaking any laws of Iran or Hong Kong either, and all whilst the American government is refusing to drop its charges against the citizen of a fifth (or is it sixth?) nation, Australia, who is also not American, and who is being held in solitary confinement conditions commonly described as torture, by a sixth (or seventh) nation, Britain, for reasons most people would classify as bogus due to the captive being a genuine whistleblower and therefore protected by legal rights?
Phew – that took some effort.
It is beyond the ability of language to describe these events. Which is actually the subject of another post coming shortly.
In the meantime, all we can do is to share these arrogant atrocities carried out in the name of democracy and freedom, with as many people as we can to highlight the events transpiring out of a dieing empire’s struggle to see itself, and its own horrors, in the mirror.
We can only hope and pray that this dieing empire – America – doesn’t take us all with it.
Mainstream Media Bias… Behind the Curtains
“3 Reasons Why the Arrest of a Journalist by Belarus is Troubling”
So says the NPR headline above from the 25th May, 2021. Other western mainstream media giants like the New York Times, Associated Press (AP) and the Wall St Journal (WSJ) followed suit, zeroing in on the case of a Belarus journalist arrested supposedly for annoying the Belarus government with his opinions.
Can you please point to Belarus on a map for me? It is somewhere between Russia and London right? I do know it is called “an authoritarian state” by western governments and I now know it has a population of 9.5 million – about the same as greater London.
I know where Scotland is. I’ve been there a few times. Greasy Scotch pies they have. It’s just up the road from London. Some of my ancestors come from there.
Scotland is where Craig Murray, a private blogger, former British diplomat and outspoken supporter of Julian Assange is from. Recently Murray was jailed for contempt of Court – the first media journalist in Scotland to be imprisoned for this offence for 70 years.
Several international media watchdogs and journalist associations have called Murray’s 8 month jail sentence “disproportionate” for the offence. Although Murray was aware that his actions might lead to a conviction for Contempt of Court, the 8 month jail sentence of a private blogger has been met shock on both sides of the Atlantic. It fits into a disturbing and increasing pattern of western democracies jailing and/or torturing journalists. But you would never know all these things if you didn’t find them out for yourself.
In the FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting) article they question why the arrest of a journalist from tiny Belarus has been featured by several major western media outlets, whereas those same outlets have not reported on UK blogger Craig Murray’s jail sentence case at all.
You can read more details in the FAIR article above.
Let’s face it, the Belarus government is not going to win any “freedom” awards from the western establishment and their media. Those accolades only get handed out to themselves, or are withheld due to lack of a suitable recipient. So the arrest of a journalist from Belarus isn’t really big news or surprising considering the Belarus government’s track record.
But how bad is the Belarus government actually? How can we really know what it’s like if the western media only focus on these negative aspects, whilst, ignoring similar troubling stories from on our own shores? That is certainly not what I thought the media was for. Where is that vital ingredient of fair reporting – context?
The UK is supposedly a free and robust democracy. For its government to clamp down on small time private bloggers and for the US government to continue the torture of whistleblower Julian Assange (especially considering outlets like the New York Times published the same information as Wikileaks did) are far more troubling to me than the government of Belarus’s action. Where will persecution of small time bloggers end?
As alluded to in other posts on this blog, the role of the western mainstream media today is highly troubling. They are not just doing their job badly, but are actually deliberately aiding and abetting corrupt western governments and corporations to loot money from the residents of Main St and use it to send the children of Main St off to fight in pointless endless wars. The American media giants rarely come together to support any cause but War is one of the things that does unite them.
(Search for posts of CNN Director Charlie Chester on this site – he admits whilst being secretly filmed that his employer, CNN, only deals in Propaganda.)
Maybe “us” people aren’t quite as fabulous as we think we are and maybe all those “them” people aren’t quite as bad as we are aways told they are either. Or these things might be true after all – who knows? We will never know for sure, as we have a corrupt mainstream media that is increasingly and regularly showing its true colours.
Which is why we have to abandon the mainstream media and go look for information and truths ourselves. The mainstream media will not only not help our search for truth in the world – they will actively mislead you away from it and confuse you.
And yet, the problem is even worse than that. After decades of high flying and compliant management rolling in and around the corporate media world, these organizations are now headed by people who are blind to their true roles. These senior media executives have been rewarded and promoted based upon their willingness to suspend belief and conform, so many times now, that the heads of giant western media outlets now believe their own headlines. They are genuinely dumbfounded by those who question their motives and journalistic standards.
If you want to see truly startling admissions on open camera by senior news people at the BBC, ITV and others, please make time to watch John Pilger’s excellent documentary movie, “The War You Don’t See.” It will highlight how serious the problems of western news and media really are.
It’s about highlighting propaganda in the media and is not as gory as the shot below – from WW1 – suggests.https://player.vimeo.com/video/67739294?dnt=1&app_id=122963&h=e72f648aa1
It really is a must see.
Somehow, John Pilger has remained out of jail over the long period of his illustrious media career. How does he do it?
The Universe Explained…Properly.
Freeing myself from the hold of the mainstream media was personal journey of about a decade. It even involved the discovery of new scientific laws as well as the application of some traditional old ones!
Two of Sir Issac Newton’s laws of motion are very useful when determining why so many people are blind to the mainstream media and their deceit, namely,
- An object at rest (like someone’s mind) remains at rest, and a mind in motion remains in motion at constant speed and in a straight line, unless acted on by an unbalanced force.
I’m am unbalanced force it seems according to Sir Issac. Oh well. It could be worse. At least I’m not just going in a straight line.
2. Whenever one object (mind) exerts a force (like an idea) on another object, the second object (mind) exerts an equal and opposite force on the first.
So there you have it from one of the west’s greatest ever scientists.
It is pointless trying to change people’s minds about anything really as either they are a bit thick and so their mind is stationery and it will remain in this position unless some unbalanced person comes along. In the absence of any unbalanced force coming along, most people’s mind will simply remain where it has been since they first entered the education system.
There is one group of people – whose minds are actually working and only in one direction and always at the same speed – we call them Politicians and Billionaires.
Politicians and Billionaires are permanently maintained in their upward flightpath by the people whose minds are stationary. These people are called Voters.
Of the two groups Voters constitute a much bigger group than Politicians and Billionaires.
Politicians and Billionaires go to great lengths to ensure that Voters minds remain at rest. Because Politicians and Billionaires realize that their constant velocity in the upwards direction, whilst Voters remain stationery, is actually, the most important law in the entire universe.
This is the hitherto unknown law of the universe which utilizes the exotic and secret “null force” to keep Politicians and Billionaires on their path. A force so powerful, yet so invisible that it hasn’t been fully proven as yet. Until just now.
The null force and how it is used in nature is such a stroke of genius that only the chosen few ever awake to it. For these people, it feels like breaking out of a tiny egg shell to see the daylight for the first time.
I mean, my god, who would ever think of it? The idea that it takes the combined inactivity of the minds of billions of Voters to actually supply the force needed to propel the few Politicians and Billionaires on their ever upward journey! It seems so illogical right? It’s actually… utterly brilliant!
Now you know how they do it too.
Politicians and Billionaires need to make sure that no unbalanced forces come anywhere near Voters minds – because then, unbalanced people, I mean forces, like me might upset the status quo and move people’s minds. Ever so slightly. Which isn’t allowed by the universe, as even that tiny movement might affect the null force and weaken the direction of the Politicians’ and Billionaires’ ever upward trajectory.
We can’t have that. Nature and stability and the universe must be preserved.
Politicians and Billionaires realize that they can’t be everywhere all the time so they make use of another compatible force which is on a similar but parallel trajectory. This friendly and compatible “strong force” is what we call The Media.
The Media exerts enormous pressure on Voters globally to ensure their minds remain at rest. Just doing what they have always done. Avoiding unbalanced forces. Which. Might. Make. Them. Actually…….. Move.
I mean, “Move” in some genuinely meaningful way. Every three or four years Voters are allowed very limited and temporary movement by the Strong Force, just to maintain their belief in the illusion of things called Progress and Change. This temporary and occasional movement is sufficient for most Voters, it has been observed, to choose to remain stationary for several more years. In fact, experiments show that increasing numbers of Voters are choosing to remain stationary permanently, wilfully forgoing even a tiny movement every four years.
Progress and Change are part of a group of forces that modern science now calls the “feeble forces”. Other members of the feeble force group have been discovered, including Democracy and Freedom, but none of the feeble forces gets much public attention.
Stationery objects like Voters have very limited sensory perception – they are sort of like a giant estuary of baby mud fish – and so to them, feeble forces like Progress, Change and Democracy appear highly significant. And they are happy with those things. But that is only because they are stationary objects sitting in mud and always will be. If they ever moved significantly under their own steam they would realize how feeble are the forces that are around them.
So, Politicians and Billionaires can continue in their direction of “upwards” knowing that these “feeble forces” have no effect on them, protected as they are by the “strong force” of the Media.
Science acknowledges that it is still remotely possible for million-to-one chances of random events to occur. Like a stationary object actually showing a random movement under its own steam every few million minutes or so. Even by accident, which it probably will be.
That is where Newton’s other Law of Motion comes into effect.
Remember it? Whenever one mind (object) has an idea (force), a second object (mind) exerts an equal and opposite force on the first. The constant application of equal and opposite “strong forces” by The Media, on stationery people’s minds – the Voters – ensures that Voters’ minds will remain at rest. Which is where they should be, just to keep the universe happy and feeble. And stationary.
So there you are. The Universe Explained….. Properly.
There’s NO WAR in Palestine
Is this a “war”?
There is NO war in Palestine.
14-year-old Palestinian boy Faris Odeh (right) is about to be shot dead by Israeli troops because he was throwing stones at an Israeli tank in November 2000.
After this incident 21 years ago, the shock and disgust from around the world soon dissipated (as it always does) and Israel went back to illegally demolishing Palestinian homes and building internationally condemned Jewish settlements in their place.
Israel has been doing this for four decades now and shows no signs of changing. By some measures, their activity is getting worse.
There is no “peace process”, “two state solution”, or “road map”. Those are simply the pre-programed talking points, repeated infinitely by the highly paid useful idiots in the UN and in western capitals, which satisfy the highly paid dangerous idiots who parade as a genuine international media. These parrotted talking points simply give Israel the time to carry on with their plans without being bothered too much.
The Israeli goal is surely obvious even to the most casual observer. They are eliminating all Palestinian Muslims from their own lands. This is Genocide. Or maybe it is Ethnic Cleansing. Or both? Where is the discussion about this? By the International media? By Washington and London? Or even by the supposed friends and allies of the Palestinian people in the region?
No one dares speak. They have seen what happens in the region when you are no longer useful to Washington.
There is no war in Palestine.
“War” is a deadly conflict between two broadly equivalent parties. Nations fight wars. Britain, Spain, Germany, The Netherlands, France, Russia etc and nations everywhere have been to war many times, often against each other’s armies. India and China have fought small wars as have Pakistan and India – all nuclear powers.
Israel and Palestinians are not fighting a “war”. It should not even be termed a “conflict”.
What is happening is that Israel, is shooting fish (the Palestinians) in a barrel. It’s a hobby for the IDF. The endless daily persecution of an almost defenseless and occupied population, decade after bloody decade. In broad daylight and with total impunity.
Israel possesses every advantage – burgeoning hi-tech weaponry, endless money (thanks to the USA), tight control of the global media narrative, powerful political support, diplomatic immunity (again thanks to the USA), cutting-edge IT resources, nuclear weapons.
In comparison, the Palestinians have practically nothing….home made rockets and old women and children throwing stones. But they do possess perhaps the most important assest of all.
The moral high ground.
Which is ever so slowly being acknowleged world wide, including now by myself, but the Palestinian people continue to pay a tragically high price.
I used to simply follow what I heard from the “respectable” media on global issues, including Palestine, until I actually found a few things out for myself. When I did my own research, I realized that I knew nothing at all about what happens in the world. I now realize that almost all global issues are either falsely or at least misleadingly reported in the international media, jst as CNN Director Charlie Chester admitted earlier this year. The history of Palestine I discovered is one of most falsely reported issues in my lifetime.
Article 4 of the Geneva Conventions, states that the Palestinian people – who, according to international law are living under an occupation – have the LEGAL RIGHT TO RESIST their occupying forces by any and all means – including the use of FORCE.
When Palestinians legitimately resist the occupation of their land, they are instantly demonized and called “militants” or “terrorists” in the media and by observers, as if they’re doing something wrong. It’s very helpful when one side has this sort of powerful influence over the narrative of things. No matter what your atrocity, you have protection from the media mob.
Refer to other posts at The Font which demonstrate this blatant narrative control by the supposedly “neutral” western media. The documentary about media propaganda wars by John Pilger, titled “The War You Don’t See” is highly recommended. It gives you an excellent idea of the power and history of using the western media for propaganda purposes, going all the way back to the roots of the modern propaganda industry during World War 1, and running all the way up to the present day.
In Palestine, which struggle will succeed – the one backed by money and power and influence or the one backed by morals? The result will say a lot about us as a species don’t you think?
By the way, is it just me, or does it look like major war crimes and the endless slaughter of Muslims by “respectable” people are quite acceptable, condoned and even encouraged, in some parts of the world, like, say, the whole of the Middle East, whereas in other parts of the world, like, say, Xinjiang, scant and often unreliable evidence of far lesser crimes against Muslims is enough to charge, convict and sentence the demonic perpetrators forever?
How Media Frame Things in Your Head With Careful Use of Words
Words are a major building block of life. They are what we use to describe things. A major part of the way we communicate. How we learn.
But the problem with words is that they can be lies as well. And cause misunderstandings, especially in English, which is a language more prone to misunderstandings than many. More prone than say the French language, which consists of far more words and also, makes more accurate use of words and grammar in order to minimise misunderstandings. It is not for nothing that French, not English, was the traditional language of diplomacy as French allowed for more precise meanings to be conveyed between gentlemen – essential if you are attempting to avert a war through the conducting of ongoing discussions. This isn’t done much anymore sadly. In any language.
But more than creating unintended meanings, giant media corporations today deliberately use words to build false pictures of reality in your mind.
A very simple example is the use of the word “former” in the following recent headline,
“Former US diplomat to Mexico sexually abused and photographed unconscious women for years.”
Simply by adding the word “Former” to all associations with this story, in fact making “former” the very first word, the severity of these acts is ever so slightly diminished.
By US diplomat Mr Bryan Raymond being a “former” diplomat, some readers might think that he has already been punished somehow, that he got found out and sacked. Which is already a punishment of sorts right? And he’s probably sorry for his actions.
Starting the headline with the word “former” might make other people misunderstand the situation and think that Mr Raymond committed these sexual acts as a “former diplomat.” Which is still bad, but it is not quite as bad as committing these crimes whilst still serving as the American people’s official representative to another nation is it?
Once again, quite deliberately I believe, the media use very simple techniques – sometimes just the inclusion of a single word – to downplay the seriousness of an article. Of course, in the case of some other nations or groups – say a nation that Washington or London doesn’t like very much as they might have different views – then the opposite in wordplay occurs. Harsh, exaggerated and misleading words are added left, right and center.
Studies show that between 60-80% of people only ever read the headline before forming an opinion on a story and its subject. Most people never read the article but simply rely on a headline to form an impression. Impressions add up.
The inclusion of just one word in the headline of this drug rape case committed by a then serving American diplomat to Mexico, over a 14 year period, will slightly diminish the global severity of the story, when it is read by many millions of people. Additionally, all of the other thousands of stories about American activities will have had the same treatment. None of these stories or headlines are huge in themselves, but when thousands are combined day after day, over the period of someone’s adult lifetime they can have a dramatic effect. It is called Brainwashing. Propaganda. Just as CNN Director Charlie Chester admitted and as reported on in other posts at The Font.
We laugh at North Korea with their huge portraits of the Dear Leader all around the country. We laugh at their media which constantly feature over the top stories of the leaders’ stupendous achievements. What stupid people they must be to believe all this, we think to ourselves. And how sad it is they don’t realize they are being brainwashed.
The German people were just the same in the 1930s. And in 2020, there were 74 million American people who believed Donald Trump was a good role model as President. Another 81 million thought Joe Biden was.
Western propaganda is just as effective as that in North Korea. It’s just that our propaganda is much more subtle, much more invasive, much more clever. It is pretty much invisible. That makes it even more dangerous. If North Korea uses a sledgehammer to brainwash its people, western governments use a fine surgical laser. But the results are the same.
It is impossible to miss someone wielding a sledgehammer. But a fine medical laser can be used very cleanly and painlessly – wihout even leaving a scar.
Other notible examples of how serious events can be downgraded in the public’s consciousness, or your attention refocussed onto something, or someone else occur when the media and governments simply ignore the prime subject of the event. By ignoring who or what was at fault, the public gets false impressions of things over time, even if just sub-consciously.
The “Monica Lewinsky Scandal” is an example of this. We all know straight away what I’m reffering to right? But why is it mostly called or remembered as the “Monica Lewinsky” scandal, sometimes the “Clinton-Lewinsky” scandal? Why isn’t the correct name of the scandal the “President Clinton Scandal”?
“Remembering the Monica Lewinsky Scandal in Pictures”
UPDATED: JUN 10, 2019 ORIGINAL: DEC 20, 2017
“Monica Lewinsky Scandal”
Of course, calling it the “President Clinton scandal” might be hard to pin down in the public mind to a specfic event. But calling it the “Clinton Whitehouse Sex Scandal” should suffice, especially if Ms Lewinsky’s name is added further into the article. But then, remember only a minority of people read past the headline. So that is no good. The Lewinsky scandal it will remain to many people.
Another example of how media push negative impressions onto innocent parties is the well known “Iran Contra” scandal during the Reagan administration.
Actually, Iran had very little to do with it. The major crimes being committed were by Reagan administration officials in Washington. Iran didn’t do anything wrong. There was no role for them in the American scandal.
Senior Reagan administration officials were violating American law by illegally selling weapons to Iran. That is not Iran’s problem. Furthermore, senior Whitehouse officials broke more American laws, by then giving the proceeds of the already illegal arms sales to rebels in Nicaragua. American laws prevented any American citizen from funding these people in Nicaragua.
Again, this is nothing to do with Iran or Nicaragua. Iran was simply a customer dealing with the world’s largest weapons seller, the United States. They don’t care about domestic American law.
But history has recorded this series of law breaking activities by the American government as the “Iran-Contra” scandal. No historical mention is made of “Reagan” or “American” or “North” or “Poindexter” or anything or anyone connected to Washington – where it was all actually planned and carried out, or to any of the 13 Americans who were criminally charged for breaking the law.https://www.nytimes.com/svc/oembed/html/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F1987%2F11%2F19%2Fworld%2Firan-contra-report-arms-hostages-contras-secret-foreign-policy-unraveled.html
This New York Times headline, America’s most famous and respected newspaper, is typical – “Iran-Contra”, “Secret”, “Policy”, “Unraveled.”
None of these words sound particularly sinister do they? In fact, they seem to indicate that it was Iran was up to no good, not President Reagan’s officials. A series of major crimes were planned and executed at the highest levels of the American government, and the New York Times simply refers to that as a “policy”. Like education is a policy.
And when this series of high level crimes were discovered and the perpetraitors criminally charged, we’re told the “policy” simply “unraveled” like it was a ball of soft fluffy wool.
Out of the 13 government officials charged with criminal offences, including those senior staff answering directly to the President, only Thomas Clines, a low level CIA field officer, ever served time in prison, at 16 months. Clines’s crime was for tax fraud. The remaining 12 government officials were all either pardoned by President George H W Bush, had their convictions overturned or received probation.
We read and hear this type of gentle, almost invisible manipulation every single day. That is why it is so important to mostly disconnect yourself from the global mainstream media. As CNN Director Charlie Chester said on secret tape, the only real unbiased information today comes from private citizen journalists and media outlets. The mainstream media, Chester said, was just propaganda.
Mainstream media outlets are just brightly coloured circus style distractions. There is nothing real inside them. They are integral to the process of public manipulation and should be avoided, apart from maybe the weather report – probably the most reliable aspect of the mainstream media. Which gives you some idea…
You will never understand how the world works by engaging with it.
Why I’m Back Near The Fence on Climate Change
Climate change. It is one of the biggest “hot button” issues of our time, maybe the biggest. I used to be a firm believer in it.
Now I am not so sure. The most significant thing which has put me back near the fence came after I gave global warming some thought and did some researching on Capped carbon emmissions, Carbon trading, Kyoto accords, Carbon Trading, Exchanges etc…
From this, I realised that Carbon “trading”, the thing that’s supposed to save the world, is founded on yet another “free market” idea, ie: that a colourless and invisible naturally occuring gas can be “traded” as it turns from and into other chemical compounds by entirely natural processes. That thought in itself gives me the creeps. Free markets do have a place, but they have also reeked great havoc in many societies when left unchecked. It is beyond doubt that inequality has increased since these ideas became mainstream again in the 1980s.
So it seems a bit suspicious to me to link the “free market” with mother nature. I mean, we do it with oil – how does that work out?
And what will be next? Will we trade water and fresh air ? Oh wait, private corporations have already tried to “own” rain water in Bolivia some years back – that idea didn’t go down too well (pun intended) with the locals – and that idea was abandoned. But it does highlight the fact that no idea is too preposterous for “free market” devotees to try and slip into law, somewhere, somehow.
But let’s say Carbon trading is the way to solve this climate crisis – now to do this trading of Carbon, you need Traders and Exchanges, just like any other sort of commodity.
And who are usually the main beneficiaries of the efforts of traders and exchanges ?
The already wealthy.
Sure, some every day people benefit from trading shares, either directly or through some sort of managed scheme, but generally speaking, only the minority of ordinary people benefit from any form of share trading. Far fewer people – only a very tiny number – benefit from other forms of trading and exchange such as currency trading, futures trading and bonds trading.
Back to carbon trading – one financial opinion from London opined that greenhouse gas trading could become “the biggest commodity market in the world” if all the major polluting countries and corporations could be persuaded to sign up to an exchange.
How would you convince nations and global corporations to sign up to an invisible gas exchange ? You’d have to convince them that they needed to clean up their act… that they needed to reduce their “carbon foot print”, that they can actually profit from making themselves look good by becoming, at least on the surface, globally responsible citizens and saving the world.
Well, if you were already well connected in western political and financial circles that would help alot to get the ball rolling right? If you were already a known “brand”, and a trusted public figure you are half way there to convincing enough other influential people to start holding conferences, create UN committees, create lobby groups, get new laws and standards passed, get your friends in the media on board, etc….that is, to build a movement from the ground up.
Someone did take the plunge in the early 2000s. The first and most significant company involved in Carbon trading was “Generation Investment Management” – or GIM, founded in 2004. This company today advises its now huge list of major corporate clients of their responsibilities in lowering their carbon foorprints and going “green”. And advising them how to take advantage of the legal and political winds that might blow green or brown. It would be helpful to know the movers and shakers in Washington and Brussels to accomplish that.
But you also need a trading exchange as well in order to save the planet and fortunately for GIM, this exchange had already been created as well the previous year in 2003.
It was called the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX).
The CCX was co-founded by Richard Sandor, a former research professor at Kellogg Business School, Chicago along with former Goldman Sachs Bank CEO, and later Bush Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, seen below on the right.
The CCX carbon trading exchange had connections with the Atlanta-based Intercontinental Exchange, (ICE) whose subsidiary is the International Petroleum Exchange, the world’s largest petroleum futures options market. The “green” founder of CCX, CEO Richard Sandor had served as an Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) board member since 2002.
Hmmm… not very green is it?
Anyway, by 2006 a new phenomenon had arrived around the world – A documentary movie called “An Inconvienient Truth” made by former American Vice President, Al Gore.
We all saw it. It even won an Academy Award for Best Documentary. Everyone was suddenly aware of climate change. Or global warming I think it was still called back then. Maybe this new climate change thing is really serious after all seemed to be the common thought back at that time.
I saw the film but I always thought the extreme right hand side of Al Gore’s temperature graph didn’t make sense…if CO2 today is “off the scale” – as the graph shows – why aren’t we all burnt to a crisp? Is Gore saying there is a lag effect which hasn’t shown up yet due to the huge time scale of the X axis? That we can measure CO2 content accurately but not temperature? Maybe that is true, I don’t know.
In Gore’s chart, the white temperature line simply stops following the already increasing CO2 red line.
These figures are now at least 15 years old now, so the increase in CO2 content in the atmosphere today, 2021, should be almost one-third the way along onto the “projected CO2 in 50 years” data point. Has today’s mean global temperature increased accordingly, looking at this chart?
But it is not even this chart or the science behind it that really concerns me the most. As a scientist, I am aware that you can create statistics, figures and charts to support any conclusion you want.
What bothers me the most about this particular mix of climate change philosophy are the types of people involved.
You see, An Inconvienient Truth in 2006 was not the first environmental creation of former US Vice President Al Gore. Before he created eco-movies Gore created Generation Investment Management (GIM) in 2004, the corporate carbon trading advisory company talked about at the beginning of this post.
Of even more concern, is that Gore’s co-founding partners in Generation Investment Management were former chief of Goldman Sachs Asset Management (GSAM) David Blood, along with Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris, also of Goldman Sachs. GSAM also became the largest Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) shareholder, with about an 18% ownership.
Al Gore’s GIM was the fifth largest shareholder.
But the CCX didn’t do very well. People had not sufficiently understood Gore’s eco-movies it seems and in May 2010 the Inter Continental Exchange (ICE) – owner of the huge International Petroleum Exchange – agreed to purchase the Green CCX and its parent company Climate Exchange, along with two of its other exchanges – the Chicago Climate Futures and the European Climate Exchange – for $603 million.
By November 2010 the green CCX founder Richard Sandor had already pocketed an estimated $98 million from the CCX sale from his 16.5% ownership of it. Just how much Al Gore’s GIM and Goldman Sachs Asset Management ended up with from the sale is unclear – but they probably did okay out of their dealings with ICE.
So, we now know that Al Gore, ostensibly a global climate crusader had already set himself up privately to potentially make huge profits via his green GIM company, even before he became a public climate champion in 2006 via his famous eco-movie. If his public lecturing and climate policies were ever enacted, by say, the Kyoto and Paris climate accords, Gore was set to make potentially healthy profits from ventures he had set up some years earlier.
Is it a big deal that Mr Gore had pre-positioned himself using his well established public and political profile to profit from his climate change message? Is there a connection ? Does it matter?
And are Mr Gore’s dealings with Wall St types like Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulson and David Blood etc cause for concern? After all, these are the same types of people who had helped to create, and then profit from, the 2007/08 global financial crisis, and the subsequent taxpayer funded bail outs of the companies they ran.
Are these Wall St and Washington elite type activities well meaning efforts to save the world, or cyncial manipulations to grab more public money, or some combination of the two?
We can’t ever know for sure whether Mr Gore is genuine in his crusade, but, knowing of his pre-positioning of himself in the “climate business” does take a bit of the authenicity off of his message for me.
It may well be Gore is still correct in his climate beliefs. But after finding out a bit more background about his dealings, and who the people and organizations he has had dealings with, I’m now less convinced. I’m now back closer to the fence.
I’m now wondering is this whole thing just another elaborate Wall St scam?
Let’s hope it is. If it isn’t we’re all in big trouble.
The USA Topples Even The Most Loyal & Democratic Governments
(Abridged and enlarged from articles by John Pilger)
Australia briefly followed an independent foreign policy between 1972-75 under Labour Prime Minister Gough Whitlam.
Whitlam was elected as the leader of the sovereign western nation of Australia and he believed that a foreign power, even those such as Australia’s historic allies such as the USA and UK, should not control his country’s resources and dictate its economic and foreign policies.
Prime Minister Whitlam was therefore keen to follow independent policies which would be in the best interests of the Australian people and quickly set his government in motion doing so.
Whitlam knew the risk he was taking. The day after his election, he ordered that his staff should not be “vetted or harassed” by the Australian security organisation, ASIO – then, as now, tied to Anglo-American intelligence.
But when his ministers publicly condemned the US bombing of Vietnam as “corrupt and barbaric”, a CIA station officer in Saigon said,
“We were told the Australians might as well be regarded as North Vietnamese collaborators.”
Whitlam demanded to know if and why the CIA was running a spy base at Pine Gap near Alice Springs in Australia which, as Edward Snowden later revealed, “allows the USA to spy on everyone.“
The Australian Prime Minister, who had little idea of exactly what was going on at Pine Gap demanded to know the functions of the American base. The American government was reluctant to tell him. Whitlam threatened to close the base unless he was told of its work.
Victor Marchetti, the CIA officer who had helped set up Pine Gap, later said,
“This threat (by PM Whitlam) to close Pine Gap caused apoplexy in the White House … a kind of Chile [coup] was set in motion.”
Pine Gap’s top-secret messages were decoded by a CIA contractor, one of whose employees was American Christopher Boyce, a young man troubled by the “deception and betrayal of an ally”. Boyce revealed that the CIA had infiltrated the Australian political and trade union elite and that the CIA referred to the governor-general of Australia, Sir John Kerr, as “our man Kerr”.
Sir John Kerr, supposedly a strictly apolitical and neutral figure, with little real power and appointed by the Queen, actually had longstanding ties to both American (CIA) and British (MI6) intelligence, and these ties were to come in handy in 1975.
When Whitlam was re-elected for a second term, in 1974, the White House sent Marshall Green to Australia as US ambassador. Green was a sinister figure who worked in the shadows of America’s “deep state”. Known as “the coupmaster”, he had played a central role in the 1965 US backed coup against President Sukarno in Indonesia.
One of Green’s first speeches in Australia, to the Australian Institute of Directors, was described by an alarmed member of the audience as “an incitement to the country’s business leaders to rise against the government”.
In 1975, Whitlam discovered that Britain’s MI6 was operating against his government. “The British were actually decoding secret messages coming into my foreign affairs office,” he said later.
One of Whitlam’s ministers, Clyde Cameron, said,
“We knew MI6 was bugging (Australian) cabinet meetings for the Americans.”
In the 1980s, senior CIA officers revealed that the “Whitlam problem” had been discussed at the time “with urgency” by the CIA’s director, William Colby, and the head of MI6, Sir Maurice Oldfield.
Whitlam was shown a top-secret message sourced to Theodore Shackley, the head of the CIA’s East Asia division, who had helped run the CIA coup against the democratically elected President Salvador Allende in Chile two years earlier. Allende was a man who, like Whitlam, also believed in the independent and sovereign nature of elected governments. How wrong they both were.
Shackley’s CIA message was read to Whitlam.
The message said that the (CIA considered) the Prime Minister of Australia to be a security risk in his own country.
As it happened, the day before Whitlam was read Shackley’s CIA message, Queen’s representative Sir John Kerr had visited Australia’s National Security Agency – their CIA – where he was briefed on the “security crisis” surrounding PM Whitlam.
A deputy director of the CIA later revealed : “Kerr did what he was told to do…(remove PM Whitlam from power.)”
On 11 November – the day Gough Whitlam was to inform Parliament about the secret CIA presence in Australian society – the Prime Minister was summoned by Kerr. Invoking archaic vice-regal “reserve powers”, controversial even at the time, Kerr sacked the democratically elected prime minister.
The “Whitlam problem” was solved and Australian politics never recovered. Nor has the nation ever regained its true independence from American and British hegemony.
We know that America has toppled many governments and leaders around the world over the last century or two, both authoritarian and democratically elected ones, as in this case.
But there has surely never been such a shocking act by an American government as this one. I lived through this event as a young man in neighbouring New Zealand, and it was a big deal at the time.
Whitlam was portrayed in the media as a leader not in control of the government. Someone causing a crisis, not solving it. We all looked on eagerly waiting for new developments each day, totally unaware that the so called “crisis” was simply another hatchet job by Washington and London. It’s outcome already determined in advance. The rest was just for public and media fodder and amusement.
The crisis mounted in the public’s eyes…something had to give, and the leader of Australia was what gave. But not voluntarily. He was removed from his elected position by orders from foreign powers in broad daylight. No one had a clue. How naieve we all were. Many people still are.
When you see today just how far Australia has nestled cosily into the sweaty, dank underbelly of the United States, one can now appreciate how alarming a genuinely independent Australian nation would be to Washington. The same goes for New Zealand.
Independence isn’t something the United States does. It tightens the leash without mercy any time. No one is safe.
Is Media Propaganda Effective? You Bet IT IS!
If the western media is as bad as some people say with regards to brainwashing whole populations around the world, either in support of, or in turning us against certain groups, topics or issues, then can we see this happening in real life?
For example, is a constant association of Islam with violence effective in supporting Islamophobia and Xenophobia ?
IT IS VERY EFFECTIVE….sadly.
Here are just a few examples, one from my own experience.
After the shocking Christchurch terror attack, a white local man posted his experience to the daily national newspaper, the New Zealand Herald. The local man thought he would dress in an Islamic style costume and visit the mosque in his city in order to offer his deep condolences to the muslim community who lived in his city.
What a great act of humanity and compassion right?
The compassionate white man soon found out what it is like to the target of Islamophobia. In less than 5 minutes (literally) of walking on his way to the mosque, a city resident stuck their hand out of a passing car window, making the shape of a gun and shouted, “piaow, piaow, piaow!” leaving the local man shocked and shaken.
Yes, it was only someone’s hand gesture and yes, he wasn’t actually a muslim himself, but it was still a jarring experience.
He went on to say,
“I am a white kiwi male and had walked just a few hundred meters in the shoes of our Muslim community and I had already been a target for violence and abuse.”
This happened to a grown man. Imagine how frightened young Muslim ladies must feel walking in public in our supposedly great city in New Zealand. Or any other western city. How many times do muslim men and women get subject to abuse every day around the world?
Remember – this incident occured AFTER a horribly violent terrorist attack on innocent people. Hate crimes actually increased in New Zealand after this terror attack, a phenomenon that is not unusual globally I’m sad to say.
Was the person who made the violent gun gesture a bad person? I don’t think so. They are just like billions of other good people who have been brainwashed on a whole raft of issues without them even realizing it. That is how powerful, yet how invisible the mainstream media is.
I have my own story about that same Mosque actually.
Many years ago (in the post 9/11 days) and soon after the mosque opened I noticed on my way to work that part of the green mosque fence had fallen over, and their garden was damaged. It looked like a car accident had occurred. Soon afterwards though, the damage was repaired and garden replanted and it looked normal again.
A few weeks later I saw the fence had fallen over again. Another car accident ? The fence and garden were repaired again.
After the fourth time that the fence was damaged, I realized these were not accidents. I was witnessing deliberate acts of terrorism – as defined by the FBI – against innocent people on the streets of my city, in New Zealand. This was the sort of welcome my community was giving to these new residents. The new residents were clearly not welcome in our local community.
9/11 had seen to that.
In a way, by staying silent on this abuse, by not raising this issue publicly myself, I was contributing to the later Christchurch terrorist massacre. I was probably not the only one to observe this going on. But like most people, it is just too easy to look the other way every time. Even after multiple violent invasions of foreign countries, many westerners continue to look the other way.
Media mind control sees to that.
In another case after the Christchurch attack, the NZ Herald reported that, in another small city in a different part of the country, some school boys had finished playing tennis, and one group went to congratulate the victors.
One of the victors, a white kiwi teenager, said directly to one of the other teens, “you look like a Muslim and I want to shoot you.”
NZ Lawyer, Deborah Manning, asks in exasperation,“where are our young people getting these viewpoints from?”
Where indeed? Why do people want to attack mosques and shoot Muslims NZ?
Why do young white active sportspeople in New Zealand want to shoot Muslims? These are truly disturbing images and ideas that we all live amongst every day actually.
It is blatantly obvious where western people – young and old, left or right leaning or even politically disinterested – are getting their negative stereotypical views about Muslims from.
There is only ONE THING that people around the western world all have in common.
Their exposure to the western global mainstream media.
Pick any media outlet on any subject….it doesn’t matter which. You will see a 24/7 negative word association and negative stereotypes about Muslims and Islam, even when no major event has happened. The occasional “neutral” article is drowned out by a wall of negative noise. Few artices show obvious and clear support for Muslims or Islam. Who would buy or read those anyway?
Today we have a new target – China. That is why elderley chinese people are being sucker punched on American streets. It is why well meaning people in America are organizing patrol groups to accompany chinese people, so that they can live a normal life free from the fear of being attacked by hateful brainwashed people.
So, are you still doubtful of the power of mainstream, respectable media to demonize? And conversely, their power to sanitize acts of war and invasion and killing?
Stick around. The next example will be here soon.
Mass Shootings v Terrorism – Why Is There a Difference in the Media?
Note: this article was originally posted in 2019 immediately after the Christchurch NZ terrorist attack which left 51 people dead. The excellent response to the victims from the New Zealand Prime Minister seemed to help increase public awareness on the glaring differences in the media treatment of different shooting events. A slight improvement in the issues raised below may have occurred since 2019 but it is important to realise that the issue of media bias has not gone away.
White Supremacy, terrorism, slavery and racism are not new concepts amongst human beings nor are they confined to the western world.
What I believe is relatively new however, is the concerted global campaign, originating in the western world’s media to specifically associate one of the world’s major religious groups with terrorism and in a negative light generally.
At the same time, there has been another parallel campaign to mask the links between white supremacist based acts of terrorism originating from another major cultural group, that of “white” people from western nations and a tiny minority of their inhabitants, in particular, the United States.
Americans and their media almost always refer to their multiple victim, domestic killings as “mass shootings”. You will have heard this term many times in your life I’m sure, for America has alot of these events.
Every newspaper and TV channel will soon be reporting the latest news on another US “mass shooting” incident. But is there anything about these “mass shootings” that is common to each?
Yes, there is. A mass shooting is when the person puIling the trigger is white.
If the shooter was not white, the Western media use a different term to describe that incident.
Here’s a typical example from the New York Times, comparing their first day headlines of the Charlie Hebdo terror attack in Paris (2015 non-white perpetrators), and their first day coverage from the Christchurch New Zealand terror attack (2019 white perpetrator),
“Terrorists Strike Charlie Hebdo in Paris” (non white gunman)
“In Christchurch, signs point to a gunman internet troll” (white gunman)
The two headlines could not be more different in tone. One is decisive, authoritative and definitive, using the words “terrorists” and “dead”, whilst the other seems rather off hand and generalized… you might even call it slightly disinterested. Early reports noted that there were more than 12 dead in Christchurch, the same as the final total in Paris, so it is not as if there was a marked difference in the nature of the early understanding of the two events.
So why the marked difference in headline tone and phrasing?
Well, what is terrorism then ?
Let’s consult the FBI….the American government agency specifically tasked with describing, monitoring and preventing it.
FBI Definition of “Domestic Terrorism” (from “FBI.gov” website),
“(acts) perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by, or associated with primarily US based movements that espouse extremist ideologies of a political, religious, social, racial or environmental nature.
eg: the June 8, 2014 Las Vegas shooting which the married (white) couple held anti-government views and who intended to use the shooting to start a revolution.”
So, there’s the official American government definition of terrorism, with a specific example included, to make it simple and clear for everyone to understand. To be clear then, the attack by a white couple in 2014, which took 5 lives WAS officially defined by the FBI as terrorism.
So how did the mainstream American media present this textbook example of terrorism?
The New York Times called the incident …. “a shooting rampage,”
NBC News called it ….. “a shooting spree,”
CNN just called them …….“the gunmen”
The mainstream media used terms including, “Massacre“, “Rampage”, and even the-not-so-bad-sounding, “Spree“. But no major media outlet immediately featured the words “terror” or “terrorists” like they did for the non-white initiated Charlie Hebdo attack.
The 2014 Las Vegas incident was the work of “shooters”, who can also be labelled as, “deranged”, “sick”, ” lone wolves”,etc. But they’re still not terrorists.
The mainstream Western media uses every negative term in the book to describe these events – except the REAL ONE. Terrorism.
The Las Vegas shooting was a terrorist act carried out by white American terrorists – by US government definition!
So why doesn’t the US media say so? Why doesn’t the mainstream media follow their own government’s guidelines?
Even when a young white male Dylann Roof, shot dead 9 black worshipers in a black church in Charleston, South Carolina in 2015, with the SPECIFIC INTENT to start a race war, he wasn’t even charged with murder, yet alone called a terrorist !!
Dylan Roof was only charged with “Hates crimes”. And he certainly wasn’t called a terrorist by the mainstream media. How can that be ? It is surely not a coincidence.
Check the terrorist attacks in United States since 9/11 carried out by white people and to see if the word, “terrorism” or “terror” or “terrorist” is used by the mainstream media to describe it. Occasionally, a local official might use these terms, but this usage does not generally feature in the bulk or tone of the media coverage.
There are 350 – 380 examples of this type of domestic terrorism every year in the United States killing hundreds of people and wounding thousands more. ONE HUNDRED people die each day from gun violence in the United States. Many of these incidents are terrorism as defined by the FBI, but media outlets seem reluctant to say so.
White people, it seems, are not terrorists and do not carry out acts of terrorism, according to our media.
The labels of “terrorist” and “terrorism” are clearly reserved for a different group of people.
Muslim Shooter = Terrorist; Black Shooter = Gang Violence
Military Shooter = Hero; White Shooter = Lone Wolf, Disturbed, Deranged…
There is plenty of other every media output to support this notion of a concerted campaign of Islamophobia, such as a previous post here,
When taken altogether it seems unlikely that all of these media headlines and the differing media treatment handed out to the different subjects involved – based upon skin colour and/or religion – can be anything other than a co-ordinated campaign to portray different members of society differently.
This type of media reporting must be called out for what it is. Write to the media outlet concerned if you think you see inconsistencies like this. We can all do little things to make a big difference.
Racism in Full View Each Day
WHITE SUPREMACISTS RACISM IN THE BRITISH MAINSTREAM MEDIA….
“Muslims” are telling “us”, presumably those British people who wrote this headline or own this newspaper and who, presumably, are not muslim, how to run “our” schools – that is, the British schools, which this headline is saying are not for Muslims. The schools are only for “British” people, or at least, only non-muslim people, whether they are British or not. Which means Muslims are not British. I think. The logic is a bit hard to follow although the intent is crystal clear.
It seems every generation of immigrants everywhere has a harder time fitting in than the previous one.
Maybe that is because it has been a “go-to” media story for generations that “immigrants steal your jobs”….
And don’t think it is just the awful British tabloids which publish this offensive and derogatory stuff about Muslims and immigrants. Although they are very good at it.
WHITE SUPREMACISTS RACISM IN THE AUSTRALIAN MAINSTREAM MEDIA.
The newspapers in Australia are pretty good at openly attacking immigrants too – in this case above, the Sydney Daily Telegraph attacking… you guessed it – the Australians of Chinese origin.
After the shocking white supremacy terrorist attack in Christchurch, New Zealand in 2019, where 51 innocent bystanders were murdered in their places of worship, the common question asked was, “how could something like this happen?.“
It is certain most people were genuinely disgusted and dismayed by the shooting.
However, the event wasn’t really that unpredictable, when you realise what sort of media we have in the world, a media that routinely prints inflammatory, racist and probably not even factual headlines, like the examples above. And this is called “business.” This sort of stuff is allowed to continue.
Why aren’t more people offended by this sort of every day media activity to the point that their sales drop to near zero or they are forced by public pressure to desist from such activity? After all, junk media only exists because there is a market for it. It exists because people want to buy it.
Even in little New Zealand there is most definitely a closet racism itch that has been successfully scratched by some of our political parties for generations, parties which usually pattern themselves in the long established mould like,
” X First” – where you insert the name of your country in place of the “X”.
Many countries have had political parties named or fashioned after this idea. It was one of Donald Trump’s regular jingles that it would now be, “America First.” Australia has had a party named like this and I think some in Europe too. Even in NZ.
Their intent is always the same. There is an “us” and a “them”. They follow the ancient and highly successful stratedgy of all colonializers and conquerers – divide and rule.
We haven’t really come that far as a species have we?
Sorry – I have to go now to get today’s paper!
Taiwan Claims the South China Sea :o)
We all know that China makes some pretty big claims to territory in the South China Sea… claims that even I think seem a bit exaggerated, but then I don’t know any of the history behind it all.
You know, there’s China’s huge “nine dash line” and all that, which extends far south of their actual mainland areas and islands.
So China claims a heck of alot of the sea as we’re always told in our media. Fair enough.
But do you know about the claims of the other Asian countries to the same parts of that sea?
I didn’t. Other than that there were overlapping claims. Maybe because the media never mentions those competing claims.
Vietnam, a country only a fraction of the size and population of China claims well over half the area that China does! That’s it in the solid white line below,
And most absurd of all – and never mentioned – are the claims of the tiny province of Taiwan. Taiwan is tiny even compared to Vietnam, therefore is miniscule compared to mainland China. Taiwan is not even a country!
Yet Taiwan’s claim (the green island at the top of the map below) to the south China Sea IS ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THAT OF CHINA!! Their claim is represented by white dashed line below. China’s claim is the red shaded area – the two claims being almost identical.
And Vietnam’s claim extends well past halfway across to The Philippines and Malaysia. (the white solid line)
In fact, only Malaysia seems to be making anything like a sensible claim.
Brunei, just a dot of a country is just annoying by claiming anything at all.
It really does seem like everywhere you read these days, someone, somewhere is trying to make China look greedy or aggressive, either by straight out lies, lies of ommission or by exaggerations and half truths.
Let the reader beware!
(except for when you are at The Font blog. I wouldn’t do any of those things :o)
Palestine and Xinjiang : One and the Same Thing
In the short comments above, acclaimed film maker and journalist John Pilger outlines why the issues underlying the slow, inexorable genocide of the Palestinian people and the issues underlying fabricated genocide in Xinjiang, China are one and the same thing.
They are both about a fading empire desparately trying to maintain their control over others.
The Palestinians have been sold out so many times by their regional cousins and by western powers and they have few resources to call on – mainly, the moral highground and the flimsical hope that a majority of westerners will one day understand the historical processes at work during the creation of Israel. And how and why Israel and the land it is made from, Palestine, are what they are.
When any reasonable person truly understands these process, I believe they will support the Palestinian people and their right to their own land. The global processes which have led to such great injustice in Palestine are the same processes that are playing out today in Xinjiang. However, in Palestine, the processes of western propaganda and their wars have been active for 70 years and the victim is weak and without much support.
The propaganda against China, and Xinjiang in particular is fairly new and the victim is becoming increasingly powerful.
It is not for nothing that China has gone, in a few short years since 2015 from this…
President Xi Jingping was treated to a full scale British state visit, complete with trips to the pub and selfies with his good mate UK PM David Cameron, as well as grand accomodation and state dinners with Queen Elizabeth. They were heady days back in 2015.
But those days are long gone and now we have these, pretty much all at the same time. Coincidence? Or is it because the west woke up the amazing opportunities that China can offer the world, if left alone?
These issues in China are not new, but they have certainly all been highly inflamed since 2015. Why is that ?
Because the United States in particular sees China’s new role in the world with fear and envy. President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) will transform the world for the better in my opinion. America now realizes this and they know that the bulk of the poorer countries in the world that have been bypassed for decade after decade by the major western powers will ask, “why didn’t you help us like China is today when you had the chance?”
The only answer to that is not flattering to the centuries of western led colonialism and domination that extracted the resources from its subject nations, but did little to improve the basic infrastructures of life to help the local people. China is doing that today with the BRI.
At any rate, America has done little to update its own infrastructure, instead choosing to give its money to financial elites and spending it on endess wars. So infrastructure building anywhere is not America’s strongpoint anymore.
John Pilger has also correctly stated that if you can fully understand the issue of Palestine, since the 19th century until today, and how Israel was created from it, then you will understand every issue around the globe. I used to be fooled by western propaganda until I started to do my own research and thinking. That is when I understood what Israel represents and how it came into being. And the role played by the UK and USA in creating a nation upon another people’s land.
And now I can see, as John Pilger said, how these same processes play out around the world every day.
It should be becoming increasingly obvious that the “leadership” of the USA, if it ever really existed, is coming to an end and not before time.
The only question is – will they go quietly or will they take much of the world down with them?
The Dishonesty of the BBC
The once widely respected BBC, the State owned British broadcaster, has really sunk to new low levels with its various tricks and fakery to promote or dishevel, as the case may be, a person or a cause.
Here are but three examples,
“Comrade” Jeremy Corbyn.
The British Labour party continues to implode due to the ongoing internal wars between the traditional Labour “left”, led by figures such as Mr Corbyn and the newer, American influenced “neo liberals” (I can’t stand labels but they often do the job) represented by the new Labour leader Keir Starmer and former leader, liar and war mongerer Tony Blair.
Mr Corbyn has spoken out publicly many times against American wars in the middle east; even worse, as Labour leader, he promoted policies that the public liked, eg: keeping people’s assets like railways and hospitals under state, not private control. Record numbers of people joined the Labour Party under his leadership.
Those two things – popular policies that shut out elites and promoting antiwar views – are a recipe for disaster for the neo-conservative Washington and London elites who need the increasingly thinning veneer of respectibility that UK support for American based war mongering and financial thievery gives them.
And so, the prospect of the UK Primeminister ever being Jeremy Corbyn was terrifying to these elites. Consequently, Mr Corbyn was the subect of one of the worst character assassination programs in UK politics during the run up to the 2019 election. The BBC image below typifies this plot.
The BBC’s flagship evening news program, Newsnight, and its celebrity host Emily Maitlis are seen below presenting a feature on Jeremy Corbyn which would have been watched by millions of voters.
If you are over 60 years old, this image will instantly mean something to you. The old communist Soviet Union era disappeared in the 90s, but the images and emotions that the old Soviet era has on older people are still strong. The UK also had union problems up until the Thatcher era, and it was known that the Soviets were likely to be supporting the union’s cause to some degree. So “red” images such as this are still highly (and negatively) significant to many midde aged and older voters.
You know, all the fear and loathing and general devil worshiping things that are represented in the above BBC image of Mr Corbyn. I’m surprised they didn’t have horns coming out of his head. Maybe that was discussed but discarded as being too much.
At any rate, the BBC Newsnight team got the hatchet job done very well – the very wide background of the shot is red, (blood and communist colour), the picture is set beside the unmistakeable architecture of Red Square Moscow, the bloody “Empire of the Sun” flag of the brutal WW2 Japanese government is there too (the sun “rays” eminating immediately behind Corbyn) and just to top things off – literally in this case – Mr Corbyn is seen wearing a traditional Soviet era “Cossack” style hat.
It simply couldn’t get any more blatant if the BBC photoshopped images of Mr Corbyn in a devil’s costume, beheading nuns in wheelchairs, and dancing on the corpses whilst chanting satanic verses.
And shockingly, millions of people fell for this. Even as far away as New Zealand.
Compare and contrast how the BBC treated the candidate chosen by the elites for UK Primeminister – Boris Johnson – during the same 2019 election campaign.
Mr Johnson has a reputation of being a bit of a buffoon, a likeable but bumbling figure. Maybe it is true, maybe not. I don’t know.
But, during the 2019 Memorial Day Wreath laying ceremony in London, held during the election campaign, which is a very solemn and dignified occasion where dignitairies are tasked with the fairly simple job of laying a wreath at a memorial to fallen soldiers, Boris Johnson’s bumbling and buffoonery was on full display.
In the 2019 ceremony, a screenshot of which is seen below on the right, Mr Johnson left his position in dignitary the lineup before it was his time to lay the wreath, and so he had to turn around and walk back to where he was standing, by which time, it really WAS time for him to lay the wreath. And so he had to turn around for a second time and walk back again to lay the wreath.
When Boris Johnson gets to the memorial in 2019, the wreath slips from his grasp before he could lay it and he fumbles it to the ground. Eventually, he successfully leaves it at the foot of the memorial – but he leaves it upside down, meaning the handwritten notes from the relatives of dead soldiers which are attached to the wreath can’t be read properly.
This performance was a PR disaster. AND, during an election campaign.
But none of this matters because it is the fake news BBC to Boris Johnson’s rescue!
The image on the left, where Mr Johnson has a different hairstyle and is wearing different clothes comes from BBC footage of the same ceremony in 2016. In order to save Mr Johnson the embarassment of his multiple failures in carrying out even the simpliest tasks of a solemn and publicly broadcast live event – during an election campaign – the BBC simply substituted the 2016 footage on the left during their evening news bulletin, and never showed the actual 2019 bumbling footage at all.
St Boris Johnson 1; Devil Worshipper Jeremy Corbyn -5
Great to have friends like the BBC huh? Corbyn didn’t handle the Brexit question as well as he should have, but when you are up against powerful media enemies you really have not got a chance at all in winning public support.
And finally the BBC is continuing to do its fake picture things with China as well. Many westerners now live and work and raise families in China and they make Youtube videos about life in China. And to the rapidly crumbling elites in London and Washington, the last thing they want is for the world to know what life in China is really like for most people. That is – for most of China’s 1.4 billion people life is immeasurably better than it was a generation ago. Young people in China today have lives their parents could only dream about and lives their grandparents could not even contemplate or imagine.
The lives of westerners, particularly in America, are going in the opposite direction sadly, due to decades of war mongering and societal neglect, both things that China has not done. So the big western media giants have to do all they can to make China look bad, even down to changing the colours of the trees in China. Like this,
Western Vlogger and current resident in China, Jason Lightfoot made it all the way to the BBC headlines ! But of course, the BBC didn’t show Jason wearing a cossack hat. That wasn’t the angle this time. The BBC instead took much of the bright and natural colours of China out of the pictures they uplifted from his youtube video…
OMG – how desparate is that?
Haven’t these old fossils at the BBC heard of the internet? People can go see China either for themselves, as millions are, or see China online in unbiased blogs in an instant these days. The BBC is just playing into the hands of older people many of whom will no doubt already have negative attitudes about foreigners anyway.
Well, let’s hope that is all who are believing this relentless fear campaign about China coming from America, Britain and Australia. You know, those morally upright white people who bought us the invasion and destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Guatamala, etc etc….and all the lies that went with those.
Washington Post Admits Fake Quotes
Media Outlets Issues Retractions
The Washington Post has published an astonishing retraction two months after a bombshell story about a phone call between then-US President Donald Trump and an elections investigator in Georgia.
The newspaper reported in January that Trump had spoken to Frances Watson in December, asking her to “find the fraud” in the state and that she would be a “national hero” if she did.
Numerous other US media outlets – including CNN, ABC News, NBC News and USA Today – all subsequently claimed that they had “confirmed” The Washington Post’s reporting.
But a newly surfaced recording – which had been deleted from Watson’s device and was only recovered by officials responding to a freedom-of-information request – has revealed the quotes attributed to Trump, and relayed to media by an anonymous source, were false.
The Washington Post added a lengthy correction to its original story today, admitting that it “misquoted” Trump based on “information provided by a source”.
“Correction: Two months after publication of this story, the Georgia Secretary of State released an audio recording of President Donald Trump’s December phone call with the state’s top elections investigator,” the note read.
“The recording revealed that The Post misquoted Trump’s comments on the call, based on information provided by a source. Trump did not tell the investigator to ‘find the fraud’ or say she would be ‘a national hero’ if she did so.
CNN also issued a correction today. Its original story included the same quotes, saying they came from “a source with knowledge of the call”.
As one media observer noted,
“There’s zero accountability in major corporate media any more, yet they continually insist they’re the ones holding the line on the truth. And always remember what should scare you about the media is what doesn’t get exposed.”
The false quotes made it all the way into official government records being included in House Democrats’ impeachment brief.
CNN Director Admits his Channel deals in Propaganda Part 1
CNN Technical Director Charles Chester’s unscripted comments were captured during a secret camera recording over dinner.Highly Embarrassing story goes mostly unpublished in western media
CNN Technical Director Charles Chester, right, confirms what we all suspected.
Whether you liked or supported Donald Trump during his time in office, he was democratically elected by the people and should only have been removed from office by the people as well. At least, that is my understanding of the principles of freedom and democracy that American leaders and citizens have lauded for centuries.
And it is up to the media to report fairly and honestly about such dealings and the performances of public political figures.
Well, we all probably know this is not really how the real world works. The ideals of that system are long gone with broken systems of society existing everywhere, including in the media.
Media today are hugely fractured and biased for and against their pet causes and movements and nowhere is this systemic bias more evident than in the USA.
But now we have real proof of this systemic bias. Technical Director for CNN Charles Chester was recorded during a date night discussion talking to an undercover citizen media journalist.
A few snippets from Mr Chester’s stark admissions from Part 1 of the tape, (see Parts 2 and 3 here as Mr Chester expands on the mainstream media’s failings)
On President Donald Trump,
“We bought in so many medical people all to tell the same story… (that Trump had questionable health)”
“We were creating a story that we knew nothing about.” (note: he is admitting CNN “create” stories – not “report” stories). Donald Trump’s health may well be fine, but not according to CNN, who admitted they had no idea of the truth.
“Our focus was to get (President Trump) out of office. Without saying it, that’s what it was. Right?”
“I’m gonna say it and I one hundred percent believe it that if it wasn’t for CNN I think the president might not have been voted out of office.”
“That’s what — that’s what, I think that is propaganda.”
Yup, you are correct Mr Chester – that is propaganda. Thanks for clearing that up with the public.
On President Joe Biden,
“The whole thing of (showing) him ‘jogging’ during the entire campaign …was obviously a deflection of his age… and they’re trying to make it like, ‘Oh, I’m healthy blah, blah, blah’ …paint him as a young geriatric.”
The Biden push was just another entirely blatant propaganda effort by CNN (of course all the networks do the same thing for or against their favourite subjects or people, so don’t think this is targeting just CNN)
On his media organization’s next big story, climate change,
“I have a feeling that it is going to be like, constantly showing videos of decline in weather… it’s going to be like, the next pandemic story that we’ll beat to death.”
See Parts 2 and 3 of the secret tape on other posts.
CNN Director Admits All Mainstream Media is Biased Part 2
Comments go mostly unreported in mainstream mediaSort of proving Mr Chester’s point about bias
CNN Director Charles Chester, right, caught on tape accidentally exposing maintream media bias.
Mr Charles Chester, Technical Director of CNN continues to illuminate and confirm what most of us knew anyway – that the global mainstream news media is hopelessly biased and agenda driven for profits. They create news – real or not – and do not simply “report” news as is their actual role.
See Parts 1 and 3 for his other comments.
Here are some of Mr Chester comments on mainstream media bias, unaware he is being recorded,
“No one ever says these things out loud but it’s obvious.There’s no such thing as unbiased (mainstream media) news. It just doesn’t exist. There are too many agendas. It’s impossible.”
“The most unbiased news is now grassroots, out of people’s basements with podcasts. That’s the most unbiased you can probably get.”
(“The Grayzone” is one of many excellent unbiased grassroots sites IMHO)
“Listen to the way they (mainstream media interviewers such as those on CNN) ask questions. They’re not actually asking questions. They’re telling the person what to say. There’s an art form to it.”
“The only people that we will let on the air, for the most part, are those that have a proven track record at taking the bait (being manipulated).”
“I mean it (mainstream media techniques of biased and agenda driven propaganda) is enough to change the world you know.”
“(you’re asking about) Covid? Gangbusters with the ratings, which is why we constantly have the death toll on the side (of the screen). It’s fear…fear really drives the numbers (ratings).”
Mr Chester also confirms what astute current affairs followers also know already – that the only place to get unbiased news and information is from the huge number of “citizen media” outlets that have popped up over the decades. Outlets started by people who are fed up with being lied to and taken for idiots by the global mainstream media outlets such as CNN, CBS, ABC, NY Times, BBC, ITV etc….
This new web site in fact, “The Font Blog” is just my very modest effort at sharing and supporting these private citizen initiatives and trying to put another perspective in front of people on topical issues. That is why even just ONE shared post by YOU, and encouraging others to do the same, all helps to overcome the propaganda we all live under every day. It will help to undercover truth.
No one else will do that for you and CERTAINLY not the mainstream media.
CNN Director Says Mainstream Media is “Just Propaganda” Part 3
His Comments widely ignored by mainstream media – unsurprisingly.
Charlie Chester, Technical Director at CNN, concludes his enlightening and truthful comments about his employer and the maintream media in general, as he was being secretly recorded on tape saying,
“I mean it (news) is just propaganda…it can… shape an entire peoples perception about anything.”
And usually not the correct perception.
Much more of Mr Chester’s comments on mainstream media bias, their fictional story creation, their limited agenda and profit driven behaviour, can be seen in Parts 1 and 2.
Mainstream Media Propaganda called Out by Citizen Journalists!
Here’s an excellent example of “citizen journalism” in action, in this case discussing the blatant bias of mainstream media such as the BBC and CNN, on issues such as Palestine.
The discussion centers around the performances of three prominent mainstream media figures,
1) Ms Emily Maitlis, above, host of the prestigious BBC Newsnight show, attempts to bring the interview narrative back to “Hamas aggression” when interviewing the Palestinian ambassador.
2) a CNN interviewer who instantly ends an interview after an excellent response in reply to the interviewer’s attempted narrative framing question against Hamas, and
3) Ned Price, a Biden spokesman on the Middle East who turns himself inside out trying not to say forbidden words, in response to fair and reasonable questioning.
If 20 minutes is too long to watch, just forward to the 15 mins mark to hear the funniest and most tragic section – the Whitehouse spokesman Price desperately trying NOT to speak words that he knows are forbidden to be spoken.
“Self defense often does authorize the use of force,” Whitehouse spokesman Price initially says in his official comments (when referring to Israel naturally…)
Ok Ned, so the obvious follow-up question therefore is, which is then asked by a reporter,
“Do the Palestinians have a right to self-defense?”
This is where Whitehouse spokesperson Price gets himself into all sorts of trouble. It is shocking to watch actually.
Even if he contradicts himself, even if he makes a fool of himself, even if everyone watching knows what the correct answer should be to this fair and reasonable question, Mr Price knows that he just CAN NOT publicly say anything positive about Hamas or the Palestinians, or grant them any rights or respect.
That is not following the very long established narrative.
On the other hand, many European countries have made any criticism of Israel a crime.
Is that because of guilt maybe? Fascism?
Why should the Palestinian people have to pay for the centuries-long persecution of the Jewish people by Europeans?
Mainstream Media’s Famous Figures, Easily Manipulated?
CNN Technical Director was previously caught on tape stating only easily manipulated people ever feature on CNN – like these people maybe?
A frequent guest commentator on CNN was former presidential candidate Rick Santorum – a public Zionist supporter.
Santorum was recently removed as a commentator from CNN after comments he had made about the white settlement of America back in 2012,
“We birthed a nation from nothing in America. I mean, there was nothing here.”“I mean, yes, we have Native Americans, but candidly, there isn’t much Native American culture in American culture.”
Mr. Santorum has expressed similar views in the past about the Palestinians, although he was still hired by CNN subsequent to him making those comments.
Is Mr Santorum, who has taken controversial public stands on topical issues a fair and reliable person to feature on a major TV News channel?
Another guest commentator on CNN when discussing the Middle East is Michael Oren, (born Michael Bornstein) seen below being interviewed on the topic of Iran by Wolf Blitzer at CNN.
Mr. Oren, who is Jewish, is the former Israeli ambassador to Washington.
Is he a neutral guest to feature on a major TV News network when discussing Iran?
Much to the anger of Israel and the Arab royal dictators of the Middle East, Persian Iran has been a loyal friend and ally of the Palestinians for many years.
It’s probably very galling for the Sunni Muslim and the Arab leaders in the Middle East to see their poor Sunni Muslim Palestinian brothers receive overt public support only from their second class Shia Muslim cousins in Iran.
But the Sunni Palestinians have been all but deserted by their wealthy Sunni Muslim neighbours, who have, one by one, increasingly followed the Zionist line for reasons only known to themselves.
But it is not just the guest commentators regularly featuring on CNN who have Zionist connections.
In the interview above, even the senior CNN News anchor has a little known connection to Israel, according to Al jazeera.
In the long and detailed career profile of Wolf Blitzer featured on the CNN website, nowhere is it mentioned that in the late 1980s, Mr. Blitzer, who is Jewish, was a paid lobbyist for AIPAC – American Israel Public Affairs Committee – one of the largest and most powerful Zionist and Israeli lobby groups.
Wolf Blitzer was a paid lobbyist for the Israeli government in the late 1980s according to TV network Al jazeera.
That other “face of CNN”, Anderson Cooper, also has a little omission on his official employment record.
Cooper, son of Gloria Vanderbilt, and therefore an heir to the huge Vanderbilt fortune, spent two summers working for the CIA during his formative years. You know, as you do.
Perhaps the senior media figures at CNN and the guests they choose to interview are all consummate professionals who provide impartial comments on the chosen topics at all times.
Or perhaps, much more likely is that CNN Technical Director, Charlie Chester was completely correct when he was secretly captured on tape saying that only easily manipulated people ever feature on CNN as guests….and maybe as the commentators and hosts as well!
Blatant Examples of Mainstream Media Propaganda (and worse)
Some might designate these mainstream media headlines as support for White Supremacy and Islamophobia.
The main driver of mainstream media output today is profit. Not information. Not truth. Not knowledge. Just pure profits from getting the best sales, from getting and saying anything that will appeal to the worst in our human nature. No matter who it hurts, defames or abuses. Just get more sales !
Words and work ethics have lost all meaning today. Nothing is off limits and no lie too big to tell. As long as short term profits are made. Even if devastating long term harm is being done to society, both locally and globally.
“Money trumps Peace” as President George W Bush once said, giving a rare glimpse of how the modern world actually works.
How sadly correct he was.