Now That Obama Ceded

            Control of the Internet,

            Here’s What It Means

 

 

ReadyNutrition Readers, as you may or may not know, as of midnight, October 1, 2016, the U.S. control over the Internet was handed over to ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.  Congressmen wrote letters, experts petitioned their protests, and four states lodged a complaint in a U.S. District Court in Galveston, TX.  Guess what?  Nothing worked, and in the latter, the District Court judge was an Obama appointee who denied any delay in the transfer of the Internet into foreign hands on September 30, 2016.  Foreign nations, such as Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Iran, and Cuba, to name a few, are now in control of the Internet and its functions.

This is very bad.

Already there are effects being felt.  There have been many comments on many different websites about the slowness of the Internet, coupled with the inability to log onto sites, especially those of the independent news media.  Personally I have experienced such, in the form of not being able to enter Alex Jones, Dave Hodges, or SHTFplan’s websites, the latter of which I write for.  Responses I have received on the screen vary from “Yahoo is unable to connect with this website,” or “Malfunction in connecting to this website,” or “This website is temporarily unavailable.”  Sometimes the page comes up and a message “[Whatever website] not responding,” and nothing can be accessed from the site.

Such has been happening for the past two weeks, now, prior to the handover of the Internet to ICANN.  Interestingly enough, after attempts to reach these websites, I was completely successful if I entered some left-wing or liberal one such as “The Huffington Post” or “The Washington Post,” with absolutely no difficulties.

Let’s look at some problems from an individual perspective that will soon arise from this transfer of the Internet:

  1. Loss of ability/decreased ability to access conservative, independent news media sites.
  2. Censorship of postings and comments for the aforementioned sites.
  3. Problems with e-mails and e-mail delivery
  4. Slowdown and/or delay of Internet service.
  5. An exponential increase in “trolls” and other disparaging, “nonproductive” commenters on sites.
  6. Inability or difficulty making purchases online, for varying articles of equipment or preparation (such as night-vision devices, adaptors, anything firearm related, and literature pertaining to prepping, survival, or current events perspectives from a non-globalist perspective.
  7. Complete monitoring of all personal business and private communications.
  8. Problems with personal finances: shopping, bank accounts, checking, bill payments, and anything in these categories that is done via the Internet.

Now let’s examine some of the problems that will affect us as individuals from a national perspective:

  1. National Defense: Ever since GridEx 2014 in Hawaii where we allowed the Russians and the Chinese to participate in drills with the United States military, we have been at much greater risk. The Russians and Chinese now know (courtesy of Obama) our vulnerabilities regarding our electrical power infrastructure, as well as how an EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse) would affect them.  Chinese hackers can now access our computer systems and no longer have to hack: The Internet has been handed to them.
  2. Shipping: all critical transportation systems for food, medicine, and other important necessities now have their inventories and shipping at the mercy of ICANN.
  3. Finance: it will now be a simple matter to either access or crash bank accounts, IRA’s, pensions, and business venues (such as Wall Street, the FDIC, and the Federal Reserve) can easily be shut down with the flip of a switch.
  4. Censorship: all of the countries mentioned will have a say in what is permitted, and they are not “icons” of freedom of speech in their own nations. They have long desired to see censorship imposed on the U.S.  Such will mean the loss of or the rendering as ineffective the independent and conservative news venues.
  5. Monitoring: monitoring us and all of our activities – and this has military applications for those nations, as intelligence is gathered upon the economic, social, and political actions of another nation.

Spotting Trolls and How to Deal with Them

As far as the “trolls” go, they are easy to spot.  They will appear on the site, and have usually never posted before, or if so, are under “anonymous” or some other generic, “nebulous” handle.  Trolls disrupt the normal flow and facilitation of information in a discussion, going “off topic” in an attempt to discourage readers, website hosts, and writers with disparaging remarks and things that are insulting.  Pay them no heed: continue to prepare, and sift the relevant data and useful information from the article and the comments.

Nobody is perfect: not writers, their sources, or commenters.  You can spot something amiss when you see the aim is either to disparage, discourage, or discredit…all negative actions with no positive use to the preppers and positive contributors on these venues.  Mark my words: this activity of negative slanders and unproductive comments will do nothing but increase with time.

Here’s another thing for you to be sure of: the trolls and collaborators working for the establishment trying to destroy the independent news sites are not going to be rewarded in the end by their handlers.  They will be taken down by those they serve.  To substantiate this, read Solzhenitsyn’s “Gulag Archipelago” and study the history of the formation of the Soviet Union.  Read “Animal Farm” and “1984” by George Orwell (Eric Blair, if you prefer).

I ask an open question: What are you experiencing in terms of the difficulties that I have mentioned, and additionally, what solutions do you see for us as a community overall?

We are not merely welcoming your comments in this instance: we are asking you for them, please.  Who knows how much time is left before such venues of communication between all of us are either prohibited or rendered ineffective?  Only time will tell, but tyranny is sure to increase before it either decreases or is checked.  But tyranny can and must be resisted, and you can do it.  Starts in your home, with you and your family.  To paraphrase that “Terminator” movie, “If you are reading this, you are the resistance.”  Keep fighting the good fight, and please write to us.  We’re all depending on your input.  JJ out!

Jeremiah Johnson is the Nom de plume of a retired Green Beret of the United States Army Special Forces (Airborne). Mr. Johnson was a Special Forces Medic, EMT and ACLS-certified, with comprehensive training in wilderness survival, rescue, and patient-extraction. He is a Certified Master Herbalist and a graduate of the Global College of Natural Medicine of Santa Ana, CA. A graduate of the U.S. Army’s survival course of SERE school (Survival Evasion Resistance Escape), Mr. Johnson also successfully completed the Montana Master Food Preserver Course for home-canning, smoking, and dehydrating foods.

Mr. Johnson dries and tinctures a wide variety of medicinal herbs taken by wild crafting and cultivation, in addition to preserving and canning his own food. An expert in land navigation, survival, mountaineering, and parachuting as trained by the United States Army, Mr. Johnson is an ardent advocate for preparedness, self-sufficiency, and long-term disaster sustainability for families. He and his wife survived Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. Cross-trained as a Special Forces Engineer, he is an expert in supply, logistics, transport, and long-term storage of perishable materials, having incorporated many of these techniques plus some unique innovations in his own homestead.

Mr. Johnson brings practical, tested experience firmly rooted in formal education to his writings and to our team. He and his wife live in a cabin in the mountains of Western Montana with their three cats

WHO really controls the MAIN MEDIA?
Are ALL ALTERNATIVE MEDIA really WHAT they claim to be?
Find out by BUYING the HARD-HITTING book by new author S N Strutt which clearly explains who is really in CONTROL!
The Book is AVAILABLE at AMAZON either as a PAPER-BACK or on KINDLE:-
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00Q7ARAXW

 

America to hand off Internet in under two months

By RUDY TAKALA  22/08/16

The Department of Commerce is set to hand off the final vestiges of American control over the Internet to international authorities in less than two months, officials have confirmed.

The department will finalize the transition effective Oct. 1, Assistant Secretary Lawrence Strickling wrote on Tuesday, barring what he called "any significant impediment."

The move means the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, which is responsible for interpreting numerical addresses on the Web to a readable language, will move from U.S. control to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a multistakeholder body based in Los Angeles that includes countries such as China and Russia.

Critics of the move, most prominently Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, have pointed out the agency could be used by totalitarian governments to shut down the Web around the globe, either in whole or in part.

"The proposal will significantly increase the power of foreign governments over the Internet, expand ICANN's historical core mission by creating a gateway to content regulation, and embolden [its] leadership to act without any real accountability," Cruz wrote in a letter sent to Commerce and signed by two fellow Republicans, Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma and Sen. Mike Lee of Utah.

In the event any facilities are relocated to China, senators noted, they could go in the same building as the agency responsible for censoring that country's Internet. "We have uncovered that ICANN's Beijing office is actually located within the same building as the Cyberspace Administration of China, which is the central agency within the Chinese government's censorship regime," they wrote, noting that some of the American companies involved with the transition process have already "shown a willingness to acquiesce" to Chinese demands to aid with censorship.

"While this is certainly not illegal, it does raise significant concerns as to the increased influence that governments … as well as the culture of cronyism," they added.

The UN Releases Plan to Push for Worldwide Internet Censorship

29/9/15

 


social-media-banned

Via libertyblitzkrieg.com

The United Nations has disgraced itself immeasurably over the past month or so.

In case you missed the following stories, I suggest catching up now:

The UN’s “Sustainable Development Agenda” is Basically a Giant Corporatist Fraud

Not a Joke – Saudi Arabia Chosen to Head UN Human Rights Panel

Fresh off the scene from those two epic embarrassments, the UN now wants to tell governments of the world how to censor the internet. I wish I was kidding.

From the Washington Post:



On Thursday, the organization’s Broadband Commission for Digital Development released a damning “world-wide wake-up call” on what it calls “cyber VAWG,” or violence against women and girls. The report concludes that online harassment is “a problem of pandemic proportion” — which, nbd, we’ve all heard before.

But the United Nations then goes on to propose radical, proactive policy changes for both governments and social networks, effectively projecting a whole new vision for how the Internet could work.

Under U.S. law — the law that, not coincidentally, governs most of the world’s largest online platforms — intermediaries such as Twitter and Facebook generally can’t be held responsible for what people do on them. But the United Nations proposes both that social networks proactively police every profile and post, and that government agencies only “license” those who agree to do so.

People are being harassed online, and the solution is to censor everything and license speech? Remarkable.

How that would actually work, we don’t know; the report is light on concrete, actionable policy. But it repeatedly suggests both that social networks need to opt-in to stronger anti-harassment regimes and that governments need to enforce them proactively.

At one point toward the end of the paper, the U.N. panel concludes that“political and governmental bodies need to use their licensing prerogative” to better protect human and women’s rights, only granting licenses to “those Telecoms and search engines” that “supervise content and its dissemination.”

So we’re supposed to be lectured about human rights from an organization that named Saudi Arabia head of its human rights panel? Got it.

Regardless of whether you think those are worthwhile ends, the implications are huge: It’s an attempt to transform the Web from a libertarian free-for-all to some kind of enforced social commons.

This U.N. report gets us no closer, alas: all but its most modest proposals are unfeasible. We can educate people about gender violence or teach “digital citizenship” in schools, but persuading social networks to police everything their users post is next to impossible. And even if it weren’t, there are serious implications for innovation and speech: According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, CDA 230 — the law that exempts online intermediaries from this kind of policing — is basically what allowed modern social networks (and blogs, and comments, and forums, etc.) to come into being.

If we’re lucky, perhaps the Saudi religious police chief (yes, they have one) who went on a rampage against Twitter a couple of years ago, will be available to head up the project.

What a joke

bigbrotherspying

Via Activist Post

Windows 10 OS – the ultimate Big Brother?

Of the 14+ million people who have recently installed Microsoft’s new Windows 10, there haven’t been many complaints until now.

The system is said to run more efficiently, but apparently someone only recently read the tome of a service agreement. Let’s just say that Windows 10 goes above and beyond good service and makes sure that you are being a good citizen. Who is the one really getting the upgrade, here?

Yes, it is implicitly stated that whoever installs the program is agreeing to be watched and that Windows 10 can and will aid and abet law enforcement and other government agencies – should it deem that you are doing something illegal.

BGR found this part of the agreement particularly interesting:

Finally, we will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to: 1.comply with applicable law or respond to valid legal process, including from law enforcement or other government agencies; 2.protect our customers, for example to prevent spam or attempts to defraud users of the services, or to help prevent the loss of life or serious injury of anyone;

[…]

…however, if we receive information indicating that someone is using our services to traffic in stolen intellectual or physical property of Microsoft, we will not inspect a customer’s private content ourselves, but we may refer the matter to law enforcement.

From Mirror UK

…Microsoft has admitted it collects key information on Windows users, recording the searches they make with Bing, requests spoken to the voice assistant Cortana and even “your typed and handwritten words”. 

The tech giant also said it could rifle through a variety of private and personal places.

European Digital Rights Organisation said that Microsoft had given itself broad rights and would sell your data to third parties. Tech bloggers are upset that the defaults are set for automatic intrusion, as they know how many people will skip through the download without thinking – and give all of their information away. Microsoft responded in a statement claiming that it does not sell, and it “does not collect personal information without your consent.” (source)

Do you want to revoke that consent? Watch this video and follow the steps laid out in this article:


 

You can opt out. You start by going into Settings, then Privacy. Consider getting rid of Cortana – the voice-activated assistant.More instructions here.

Investment Watch Blog claims that this user agreement can land you in jail – mainly for its categorization using IP addresses. “Going to any website on the Internet is illegal because the web server must absolutely share its files with your computer so you can access that website. Anyways, since someone had your IP address before, and verse visa, if that someone had done anything illegal you’ll be the one to suffer all legal and law breaking consequences when you’re caught,” the writer explains. The person goes on to wonder about the implications of viewing Internet pornography, creating content and the files that Windows itself downloads to PCs.

not-windows-10

Recently, we learned that private companies color code your home for police and track all the people coming through your house – even pizza delivery guys. You can be flagged for something you didn’t even know your friend had done in the past. Congress discussed social media sites reporting you to the authorities. In the same week it was admitted that federal agencies like the IRS could have access to opened email and social media messages. Unfortunately, most people have completely accepted the absurd lack of privacy – but can you really accept this colonoscopic amount of scrutiny? Why would they collect information for non-use? In other words, what will happen when all that private information is put to use?

Microsoft, as you know, is in the care of billionaire Bill Gates. When he is not busy gifting the world with spyware, his groups are busy beta-testing remote controlled sterilization on women in third world countries or forcing GMO rice on an unwilling Philippines with his buddies, the Rockefellers. But a depopulation fanatic wouldn’t want to paint everyone guilty, right?

Revelations like this, will hopefully prompt people to look gift horses in the mouth, instead of blindly allowing themselves to be the ones upgraded. Why do people not question that there is virtually a monopoly (or two) on the world’s computer operating systems

MEDIA & ALTERNATIVE MEDIA

SOURCE:- justnews4m1

DAVE: "I cannot stress enough the importance of monitoring alternative news. The mainstream media’s sole purpose is to mislead, distract, outright lie, and all at the behest of their masters, the masters of lies, those “elites” who rule by deceit and sleight of hand. (If you can’t keep track, and find yourself overwhelmed to the point of exhaustion and feel like “what’s the use?”, well it is planned that way, sorry.)

Alternative news tends to be much more simple, straightforward, just makes sense, is more easily believed, and able to be proven. However it is also usually labeled and put down as “conspiracy theories”. The louder “the powers that be” scream and howl the more the “conspiracy theories” are likely to be right, and closer to the truth than we may realize, even if “far-fetched”.

The thing is that the truth can be a bitter pill to have to swallow. It is very often uncomfortable and inconvenient, because it forces us to have to make a decision. The decision required is to have to face the fact that if we have been lied to about most things, and if we have been living within the framework of those lies, then though the truth will set us free it will also have to shake us out of our status quo. Most people will find this a difficult position to find themselves in, and to act upon it will require effort that won’t be easy. This is the reason why most folks will try to avoid having to acknowledge the reality of it. However, ignoring the facts means choosing to remain a slave, even if under the illusion that “I am the master of my own fate, the captain of my own soul!”.

Personally, though I will not necessarily always agree with absolutely everything from everyone I post, I am generally on the side of anyone who opposes the status quo and wants to bring about change. I mean, anything has got to be better than the way things are already, the place we have all been dragged to so far, right? At least peaceful, helpful, beneficial alternatives, sincerely considering the needs of the common people, should be given a fair chance, shouldn’t they?

Man will never be able to “save himself” and fix all the problems, but that shouldn’t stop us from doing what we can, should it? And if we start, and stay, “small”, concentrating on those things that matter most, then we have a better chance at making progress in our livelihoods, rather than being under the illusion that any one person or any group of people are going to be able to “fix everything” FOR us. Time to take responsibility for ourselves, and our “neighbors” (those around us, closest to us), don’t you think?

You may have noticed an increase in the number of posts that have Christian, Biblical, scriptural content. There is a reason for this.

Generally men and women are simply that, men or women. Have you met any yet that are “perfect”? Of course not. None of us have because there are none. Simple. Even the best intentioned of us are going to fail sometimes, and outright screw-up on occasion. We are all fallible and imperfect. This is a fact. It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to do the best we can, but it does mean that we will invariably fall short at some point, some more or some less than others. We should never fall into comparing and “who” is more “right” or “wrong” than any other either. This is sheer folly, as no one can be aware or acquainted with ALL the facts in any given situation.

People invariably choose “who” or “what” they are going to believe, and will rise or fall on their faith in those. But if we put our trust in fallible people, is it any wonder that we will, eventually, if not sooner, become disillusioned?

Anything “man-made” does not last. The world is full of mans’ words, people talking. There are so many “versions” of who said or did what, what they meant, why, where and when. What is the point of “believing” in anything that we do not KNOW, absolutely? The only folks who can “know” anything are those who were there, who witnessed and experienced it, and even then memory can be affected by trauma or emotion. If it can be confirmed “in the mouth of two or three witnesses” then that helps and you can be pretty sure.

But what  if you were to find out that most of what you “believe”, were told or taught, all your life, wasn’t true, was actually fabricated, a lie? (See “The Matrix”)

Well, I have learned of a source that doesn’t lie, only tells the truth, what really happened, and not just what has happened, is happening, but also is going to happen. What has already happened has ALREADY PROVEN that the source is credible. So, “you can bet your bottom dollar” that the rest is also going to prove true. In fact almost daily now is proving itself true, in detail.

This is why we need the truth. It tells us where we came from, where we are, and where we are all headed. This is opposed to the BS “the powers that be” would prefer to have us believe, those things that lead us to slavery, disillusionment, despair, destruction and death.

“The beginning”, what happens now, and “the end” are certain, fixed, and do not bode well for “the elites”, which is why we have been steered away from the truth all along, or “pleasantly distracted” enough that we have not devoted enough time and attention to it. It’s as simple as this folks!

Well, enough explanation here from me for now. Following is another interview with another of Tom Horn’s friends, and again you should pay very close attention to every sentence. It is jam-packed with facts and information. After that is another video, again jam-packed with very concise information that cannot be ignored.

And lastly, before these videos, I would remind everyone to keep up-to-date with the alternative news available on RT. I especially recommend the financial exposés on the “Keiser Report”, and the news exposés of “In The Now” (currently on a Summer break), “Going Underground”, “Sputnik”, and “Crosstalk”. There’s lots of other stuff out there too, such as “UK Column”, and a whole host of stuff you can Google, or catch on YouTube (tread carefully).

Anything from Tom Horn, Cris Putnam, Steve Quayle, Michael Lake, Stan Deyo, David Flynn (deceased) is going to knock your socks off! These men have really done their homework over the last decades.

Okay then, without any further ado…

WHY we need disCERNment…

WHAT will the end of 2015 bring?

July 16, 2015

Media Silent On Strange Events Across America On The First Day Of Jade Helm 15! Were Power, Phone, Email And Cable Outages A BETA Test?

KillSticthBetaTest.jpg

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine

Please email any photos, videos or story tips to tips@allnewspipeline.com

Some very strange events happened from one end of America to the other on July 15, 2015, the same day that the military operation Jade Helm 15 started in multiple states and the media has been silent about almost all of them and have, in fact, attacked "conspiracy theorists," rather than reporting on those events.

On July 15, 2015, ANP reported on mysterious "service outages" across America, showing maps from AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner, Time Warner, Cox and Verizon and while the media was silent, the comment section of that piece was not, with over 250 comments and mailed tips, we received multiple notifications of other strange events.

NOTE - While not all these reports could be confirmed, others could be and in the absence of reporting thre truth by the mainstream media, it is the readers, all across the country that have to be the eyes and ears and witnesses, in order to get the news out there. I would go as far as to say that readers are some of the best sources because they know what is happening in their homes, their streets, neighborhoods and cities.

EMAIL

For example, we were immediately informed in the comment section of Microsoft Office email and calendar services going down from a reader:

john - ago So I work for Microsoft and EVERYTHING is down right now. Outlook/Enterprise/Sharepoint, even internal Microsoft only software...this has never happened since I had worked here. Coincidence?

Sure enough, many could not access their emails, as was reported a short time later that those services, did indeed go down.

Reports suggested that e-mails could not be sent or received in some parts of the Southern California area starting in the mid-afternoon time period. A spike in reports of Office 365 e-mail problems was recorded by theDownDectector.com site, which tracks service outages, starting at around 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time (5:00 p.m. Eastern Time).

Other email notifications were sent out, making people wonder at the "timing."

kat-  Received an email this am that Yahoo Mail is going down tonight at 10:00 pm PDT for what else "scheduled maintenance". Down from 10pm to 6 am tomoorrow. Hmmm.... interesteing timing..

We will be performing scheduled maintenance on your Yahoo Mail account from 10 p.m. PDT on Wednesday, July 15 to 6 a.m. PDT on Thursday, July 16. During this time, your account will not be accessible from your computer or mobile phone.

We apologize for any inconvenience that this causes and appreciate your patience while we work to improve our service.
Thank you for using Yahoo Mail,

The Yahoo Mail Team

PHONES, INTERNET AND CABLE

Another reader kept us updated throughout the day on what was happening in the part of Indiana where she was from, her cell service went out for making phone calls, yet she could still send text messages, then she copied a message from her local news Facebook Page, showing the following:


sistersoldier -  agoThe following just posted on our local news facebook page:

"Government agencies, including City Hall and the County Complex, are experiencing a phone outage. This is reportedly a phone company issue. It's not yet known when service will be restored."


Coincidentally, or not, Yahoo decided to schedule "maintenance" on the the same day Jade Helm started as well as we were shown a notification sent to another reader:


One that could not be confirmed as of yet, but I found highly interesting considering how the U.S. government doesn't want military members reding Alternative Media sites, was this next one:

Serpent • 14 hours agoWest Point Military Base all internet down. Cell phone still fugazi too.

Melissa Holt  - I live in Minnesota and I've been having issues with cell service ihave sprint. At my work we have been having issues with internet and computer systems not working


Reports of phone and cable outages are still coming in:

Michael Smith  -39 minutes ago -I had very brief cell phone outtages yesterday morning. Other than that, nothing. I am directly across the road from Camp Swift, Texas. Pretty much normal base traffic. However, they were apparently training near they very back area of the base.

The Liberty Point - Ive noticed some ups and downs on our Internet Connection here in S. California.


Scott Rowan - Issue at roughly 2am last night/early this morning (July 15) with TWC in northern South Carolina (our internet comes through Charlotte, NC). Called and the auto-message said "service outage. working to get it back up as soon as possible. no expected restore timeline)

Freedom 14 - In Southern Oregon we did have a power outage yesterday and my phone has been kicking me out of apps, coincidence? Att tower.


MORE "GLITCHES"

Tina McBride - All of these outages and more. Several airlines were grounded today due to "glitches". I have also noticed that the internet comes and goes for the last week. You can be on it and suddenly disconnected. And, all of this is happening right as Jade Helm is happening. There is no way that this is a "normal" operation. When was the last time any one of you have seen this type of "operation" EVER on US soil? Also, they have to have blackouts across the country at once--otherwise, it would be really obvious what they are doing. So, they are orchestrating blackouts across the country to say, "Hey, we are not doing Jade Helm exercises on those states; therefore, it can't be related." Don't believe a darn thing our government says. This is all in preparation for something bigger. Anyone who can't see that is a plain idiot.

sistersoldier - Update: We just had a member of the public come in and say that ATM and card readers are down in our area NW Indiana.

While that article garnered it's fair share of trolls, those talking of tin foil hats and waving away all the "coincidences," other readers were far more aware:

TheCountess  - Meaning, no internet access from personal people to other personal people. Computer control. Whether O gets control of said computers, said domains are already in allegiance. Too timely for me..

Incriminally Sane  to TheCountess - With no communication via E-mail and reduced cell phone service, this would be a perfect "Opportunity" for the evil controllers to have their way with the people of America.No Texting or E-mail? Hmmmmm.........

John Gault  - Ignore the trolls. Is it any wonder that they are out in record numbers on today of all days? They will distract you as much as possible with question upon question about stuff you and I know they can obtain on their own if they really were unaware. Think about it, you and I searched and found our answers and they can do the same. They will attempt to enrage you. Ignore and do not engage.


Above is just a small sample of the crowd sourced information coming in to ANP as people are attempting to get the info out there because the media won't.

READ THE REST OF THE COMMENTS HERE.

BETA TEST?

Are all these events simply "coincidence," or is the U.S goverment conducting a BETA test to see how fast they can shut down the lines of  communication? Attempting to find out how many they can shut down and how fast they can do it to prevent news of what is occurring in certain cities and states from being reported on.

If they are conducting some type of BETA test there is still some work to be done before they go live because others in areas marked on outage maps were able to still communicate and reported they were having no issues.




internet-kill-switch-ars.jpg

 

Exclusive: Bilderberg Deploys Hi-Tech Jamming to Shut Down Communications

Source tells Infowars giant mast erected to kill cellphone coverage

(http://www.infowars.com/exclusive-bilderberg-deploys-hi-tech-jamming-to-shut-down-communications/)

12/6/15

Update: InfoWars reporters have since spoken with a communications expert who revealed that this system can also be used for monitoring communications.

The secretive Bilderberg Group has deployed a hi-tech jamming system to shut down communications around the site of the elitist confab’s luxury hotel in order to strangle media coverage of the event.

After visiting one of the closest spots to the InterAlpen hotel that is still accessible, Infowars filmed a communications truck owned by the Federal Ministry for Transport and Technology. Large antennas are also visible on top of the hotel, as well as a giant newly erected mast in the forest near the hotel.

Infowars spoke to an informed local in the immediate vicinity who confirmed that cellphone coverage in the area around the hotel had died since the tower was erected. The individual had also met with police and security near the hotel.

Cellphone jammers work by preventing cellular phones from receiving signals from base stations. The jammers are technically illegal in European Union countries.

null

This triangulated jamming system would explain why Infowars reporters Rob Dew and Josh Owens have been unable to broadcast live via Skype anywhere near the InterAlpen hotel.

Apparently, Bilderberg is so afraid of media coverage, that police checkpoints miles away from the hotel are not enough, now they have resorted to installing expensive devices which shut down communications, presumably at taxpayer expense.

null

This is obviously to restrict communications amongst protesters as well as strangling live streaming coverage of Bilderberg members arriving and leaving.

As we reported earlier, police have already announced that anyone caught within the huge Bilderberg security perimeter will face fines of 500 euros or be sent to prison for two weeks.

null

Infowars reporters Rob Dew, Josh Owens and Paul Joseph Watson will be on the ground in Austria all week covering the Bilderberg conference.

 

FREEDOM OF OPINION & SPEECH ON THE INTERNET  SOON TO END

There is a plot designed to hide the truth from the general public and preserve the veil of secrecy and censorship which permeates the mainstream media and I think you have a right to know about this.

(http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/11/06/the-defense-department-is-censoring-steve-quayle-doug-hagmann-dave-hodges/)

Alternative Media Under Attack

There is an ongoing conspiracy between the money interests behind the mainstream media, the Department of Defense (DoD) and several intelligence agencies which are working together to falsely and artificially inflate the numbers of the mainstream media (i.e. Hannity) and whose purpose it is to obfuscate the true Internet ratings of the alternative media and even block traffic to alternative media sites (e.g. Steve Quayle, Doug Hagmann, Dave Hodges, et al).

Google, Yahoo, Bing, the Internet rating site of Alexa and a plethora of other website controlling “traffic cops” are conspiring to lessen the influence of the alternative media. The six corporations that control 98% of the media determine, in large part, what you see, hear and think. They are not about to let an upstart media group change their stranglehold over their control over of the public and their perceptions.

Statistical Irregularities

For about year, my news director, Annie DeRiso, and I have noticed several statistical anomalies coming from our Google inspired traffic and the corresponding Alexa ratings. For example, during the late September to late October 2014 period where Ebola was dominating both the dinosaur mainstream  and alternative, truthful media, The Common Sense Show was averaging about 12,000-16,000 hits on the website per day, just from Google alone. As soon as the mainstream media stopped covering Ebola as its top story, the Google hits to The Common Sense Show dipped below 2,000 hits and the change matched and was just as instantaneous as the mainstream media. On a typical “bad day” Google still averages 6,000-9,000 hits on the website per day. And let’s not forget that Alexa showed nearly alternative media website dropping by the same percentage in September of 2014. How many coincidences does it take to make a conspiracy?

By the way, these statistical anomalies only transpire during periods high drama and controversial news events where the corporate controlled media seeks to exert its maximum influence. These statistical anomalies have occurred at the height of the illegal immigration invasion of the United States this past summer. As soon as the switch was flipped and the MSM stopped covering the Ebola story, the Google hits on The Common Sense Show took a corresponding dive. The same “anomalies” have occurred during the Syrian (2013) crisis and the Ukrainian crisis.

Steve Quayle Receives Corresponding & Confirming Information

Steve Quayle was recently sent a memo from a high ranking military officer which addresses this topic. According to Quayle, the source is completely reliable and he verbalized the fact that Steve Quayle, Dave Hodges (The Common Sense Show) and Doug and Joe Hagmann (The Hagmann and Hagmann Report radio show) are being blocked by the DoD. Further, a certain percentage of direct and Google based web traffic to these websites are being blocked from being able to access these sites according to other sources as well.

Google operates off of an algorithm which is presently limiting searches on the topics of “Obama, Ebola, Military firings…” according to Quayle’s source. Steve Quayle’s military source went on to say that this is not an outright ban (that would be too obvious), but that “This has happened with greater frequency and is about half of the articles you post”.

Censorship

Steve Quayle has also told me that he has been contacted by military personnel who would access his former broadcasts, by satellite in Afghanistan. These military personnel were told that they “would be court-martialed ” for accessing Quayle’s broadcasts.

From a leaked DoD document sent to Steve Quayle, if a D0D employee tries to access a flagged website, such as Quayle’s, Hodges’ and Hagmann’s website/radio shows, this is a message that one is going to see.

You have attempted to access a website with possible security risks. As such, we advise against further access. However, if a MISSION ESSENTIAL access requirement exists, click on the link below and proceed with caution. This is a DoD enterprise-level protection system intended to reduce risk to DoD users and protect DoD systems from intrusion. It will block access to high-risk websites and filter high-risk web content. You are accessing a U.S. Government (USG) Information System (IS) that is provided for USG-authorized use only. By using this IS (which includes any device attached to this IS), you consent to the following conditions: o The USG routinely intercepts and monitors communications on this IS for purposes including, but not limited to, penetration testing, COMSEC monitoring, network operations and defense, personnel misconduct (PM), law enforcement (LE), and counterintelligence (CI) investigations.

o At any time, the USG may inspect and seize data stored on this IS.

o Communications using, or data stored on, this IS are not private, are subject to routine monitoring, interception, and search, and may be disclosed or used for any USG authorized purpose.

o This IS includes security measures (e.g., authentication and access controls) to protect USG interests–not for your personal benefit or privacy.

o Notwithstanding the above, using this IS does not constitute consent to PM, LE or CI investigative searching or monitoring of the content of privileged communications, or work product, related to personal representation or services by attorneys, psychotherapists, or clergy, and their assistants. Such communications and work product are private and confidential. See User Agreement for details. Click

Globalists such as Soros and Brzezinski have bemoaned the fact that the public is waking up. This begs a couple of questions. First, what percentage does Hagmann, Quayle, Hodges, Before Its News,  et al. have to reach before their collective efforts will totally consume the country? The answer according to most sociologists and marketing experts is about 10% and when that number is reached exponential growth takes place. We are almost there. The second question has to do with how long will the purveyors of the status quo of the New World Order continue to allow this unchecked growth, which threatens to greatly lessen their power and influence? The answer to the question is, not much longer.

The Net Effect

I am among a growing number of journalists who believe that when medical martial law is fully implemented as a result of the Ebola crisis, Internet sites such as Quayle, Hodges and Hagmann are going to be permanently taken down and we will return to one version of the truth and the people behind that version don’t have your best interests at heart.

My readers and listeners will undoubtedly ask me what we can do about this blatant attempt at censoring the news. The answer is simple, take a few moments and write a form letter, and include a hard copy of this article, and mail it to one sponsor for every mainstream media outlet that you participate in.  Simply tell the sponsor that you will not be using their service or product because of their indirect complicity in this latest attempt at censoring the news. If America was to do this, the ripple effect would be felt all the way back to the White House. George Noory would be working at Walmart and Wolf Blitzer would master the phrase “Do you want fries with this burger, sir?”

 

 

 

 

 

INTO A DARK NIGHT: THE END OF OBJECTIVE JOURNALISM AND THE RISE OF THE CORPORATE-MEDIA STATE
PART 1 of 3

 

 

by Benjamin Baruch
June 9, 2015
SOURCE:-NewsWithViews.com

The Industrial Age ended in the 1960’s with the beginning of a new era which would be called the Information Age; an era which promised the liberation of humanity from a world of labor and economic hardship, and which heralded the dawn of a new age of knowledge, understanding and prosperity. The changes brought about by the Information Age are ultimately transforming the balance of power between the individual and our social institutions as more information is now available to everyone, yet control of this information is accumulating in the hands of an increasingly small group of global corporations. The impact of this concentration of media power is altering the very soul of our society while also changing the relationship between these corporations and the state.

One the most profound changes have been the impact upon the profession of Journalism and its primary domain, the media. Modern journalism evolved during the enlightenment, based upon the core principles that mankind is by nature basically good, rational and intelligent, and that men can differentiate between what is important from what is irrelevant, what is good from what is bad, and ultimately between truth and lies or what may be more appropriately called propaganda. These core principles were codified in the standards of professional journalism which include truth, accuracy, reliability, balance and objectivity termed the Journalist Model. In essence, “the nature of journalism is to seek the truth.”[1]

The Information Age has brought about fundamental changes to the Journalist Model and to the world of media; with the most profound being the complete transfer of dominant media power from the written journalistic forms (newspapers, periodicals and books) to the elevation of television as the uncontested monopoly over what is today called mainstream media. It is through the medium of television that the most profound changes in the Journalist Model have occurred.

THE TOTAL DOMINANCE OF TELEVISION

The total dominance of television as a media monopoly cannot be overstated. To this point, Chris Hedges in his book, The Empire of Illusion writes: “Television, a medium built around the skillful manipulation of images, ones that can overpower reality, is our primary form of mass communication... Television speaks in a language of familiar, comforting clichés and exciting images. Its format, from reality shows to sit-coms, is predictable. It provides a mass, virtual experience that colors the way many people speak and interact with one another. It creates a false sense of intimacy with our elite - celebrity actors, news people, politicians, business tycoons, and sports stars. And everything and everyone that television transmits is validated and enhanced by the medium. If a person is not seen on television, on some level he or she is not important. Television confers authority and power. It is the final arbitrator for what matters in life.”[2]

Television and the advancing technologies of the Information Age have murdered objective journalism; It died a martyr’s death, going silently into the night, somewhere between the first Gulf War and the disaster marathon coverage of the attack on 911, while only a few seemed to observe its passing. Experts in media studies noted the death of the editorial function, the loss of objectivity and editorial inquiry as the media format of television news has evolved into a type of Reality TV show, exemplified by the “Disaster Marathon” news reporting and the now all too common “Breaking News” genre.

The public no longer watches the news to understand the day’s events, but rather is glued to television’s live footage to experience the news; objective analysis, editorial review, or even understanding the context of the new is no longer relevant. The public only desires to experience the profound video footage, sharing the emotional impact of events, or the pain of the victims, while gazing at the high definition images of the latest disaster event, whether natural or man-made.

 

As the technology of television has advanced, viewers are now treated to a “real life experience” of the news. Up close and personal, the events are viewed as if “live” in the viewer’s own living room, and as the volume of news sources has grown exponentially; from CNN and the other devoted news networks, to the video footage captured by the latest citizen reporting on the smart phone or video camera, the public is exposed to an avalanche of news images which has left them adrift in a flood of high tech news content, enabling the viewer to see and hear, and even “feel” the events, just like being there.

Lost within this sensory overload of images which are largely understood only for their emotional content is any objective analysis of what is actually happening. And rarely do any of the national media sources ever deviate from the official narrative explaining the color images flashing in front of the viewer’s eyes. The world where “less is more” has been replaced with a world where “more” is now the goal of news content; more spectacular video footage, more breaking news, more live action and more emotion framing yet, in reality, “more” has become a disaster.

Kampf writes: “Viewers and internet users around the globe follow events, literally and metaphorically, on 'wide' and 'flat' screens, in 'high definition'. Paradoxically, as we will show, the better the quality of viewing, the less the understanding of what we see.”[3] “To cite Martin Bell, the admired British journalist, in contemporary television coverage of armed conflict, "the screens become screens also in the traditional sense of blocking the view and filtering out the light".[4]

SAY GOOD NIGHT TO THE EDITORS

Also lost to viewers’ attention is the profound absence of editorial content in the steady flow of the daily news. The editor, whose role was central to maintaining the balance of objectivity in the Journalistic model, has been lost. And once the center failed to hold, the whole model was easily destroyed.

“The success of CNN is the symbol of failure… it represents the beginning of the end of journalism as we have known it… it also uses the satellite to distribute the news as quickly as possible. At first glance, this sounds like the ideal deployment of the new media technology. The only trouble is that it eliminates the editor. Rather than collecting information and trying to make sense of it in time for the evening news broadcast, the CNN ideal is to do simultaneous, almost-live editing, or better yet, no editing at all. CNN journalism almost wants to be wrong.”[5]

Kampf states, “The move to television had a massive impact on the profession …. It did not take long for journalists to understand that the order of the day has become authenticity, live action and drama, all of which have contributed to creating a new model, that we entitle 'performance journalism'. In the new environment, 'liveness', the moving image, and the penetrating voice, replace the printed word. It is an environment of images, not of letters; of stories, not of issues; of people, emotions and actions, and not of cognitive analysis.”[6]

THE CORPORATE-MEDIA STATE - A GLOBAL NEWS MONOPOLY

Beyond the move to television and the transition from objective journalism to emotional reporting, live action and drama; another more powerful change was occurring outside of the view of most observers. Globalist corporations have been consolidating ownership of the world’s major news organizations. Even more alarming than the consolidation of global media power into the hands of a few organizations is the fact that 18 out of the top 20 global media giants are also corporate members of the Council on Foreign Relations, a private globalist think tank, whose openly stated agenda is the promotion of a global government, which by definition necessitates the subversion of state sovereignty, along with the advocacy of a global socialist agenda. The executives who control the global media giants also share membership within several of the world’s secret societies such as the Skull and Bones Fraternity and the various globalists groups such as The Bilderberg Group.

 

“The Bilderberg membership is made up of Kings, Queens, Princes, Chancellors, Prime Ministers, Presidents, Ambassadors, Secretaries of State, Wall Street investors, international bankers, news media executives, and wealthy industrialist. Their meetings are by ‘invitation only’, and no ‘outsiders’ are allowed, except by special invitation… the news media are always present at these meetings. Even though the media moguls attend these secret meetings, they do not file reports about the Elite Bilderberg activities during their meetings.”[7]

“For over 14 years, Daniel Estulin investigated and researched the Bilderberg Group’s far-reaching influence … in his book, ‘The True Story of the Bilderberg Group’ he reveals the Group is ‘a shadow world government…. Bilderbergers want to supplant individual nation-state sovereignty with an all-powerful global government, corporate controlled, and check-mated by militarized enforcement…. The global media giants control everything we see, hear and read – through television, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, films, and large portions of the Internet. Their top officials and some journalists attend Bilderberg meetings – on condition they report nothing.”[8]

"The media serve the interests of state and corporate power, which are closely interlinked, framing their reporting and analysis in a manner supportive of established privilege and limiting debate and discussion accordingly."[9]

Scholars in the media field argue the end of objective journalism is the result of many factors: commercialism of the news, competition for ratings, and the new technologies which support an action oriented “live reporting” of the news. Each of these factors have clearly influenced the change in format, but it is the global media corporations who, having consolidated ownership of the global media, now control virtually all content; they now have direct control over the news content and media format, which has by design, killed objective journalism.

Hedges states this quite clearly: “Corporate media controls nearly everything we read, watch, or hear. It imposes a bland uniformity of opinion. It diverts us with trivia and celebrity gossip… Television journalism is largely a farce. Celebrity reporters, masquerading as journalists make millions a year and give a platform to the powerful and the famous so they can spin, equivocate, and lie. Sitting in a studio, putting on makeup, and chatting with Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, or Lawrence Summers has little to do with journalism.”

 

“Russert, like Cramer, when exposed as complicit in the dissemination of misinformation [propaganda], attempted to portray himself as an innocent victim, as did New York Times reporter Judy Miller, who, along with her colleague Michael Gordon, worked largely as stenographers for the Bush White House during the propaganda campaign to invade Iraq. Once the administration claims justifying the war had been exposed as falsehoods, Miller quipped that she was ‘only as good as my sources.’ This logic upends the traditional role of reporting, which should always begin with the assumption that those in power have an agenda and are rarely bound to the truth. All governments lie, as I.F. Stone pointed out, and it is the job of the journalist to do the hard, tedious reporting to expose these lies. It is the job of courtiers to feed off the scraps tossed to them by the powerful and serve the interests of the power elite.”

Claim: Science Has Proven Conspiracy Theorists Will Literally Believe Anything

 
sciencex

Via truthstreammedia.com

3/6/15

Have you taken your dose of propaganda today?

It’s time to attack those crazy conspiracy theorists again.

According to Huffington Post (and a bevy of other mainstream outlets reporting on this like flies to roadkill), conspiracy theorists will literally believe anything, which, if we’re being literal here, is literally wrong because I literally didn’t believe Huff Po’s headline when I read it.

The latest nonsense:

The team looked at 1000s of users who commented on science news pages or conspiracy theory pages within Facebook. What they then found was that the users who looked at conspiracy theory pages almost exclusively spent their time browsing similar pages.

Conversely they found that users who looked at scientific pages would explore more, looking at a wide range of other pages on different subjects.

Not content with this the researchers then posted 5,000 troll comments on both types of pages to see the results. These included:

‘Did you know ‘chem trails’ trails from planes have been chemically analysed and found to contain viagra.’

Now this is going to come as a shock, but the conspiracy theorists believed every word, no matter how ridiculous the comments got. It apparently reached the point where the comments had descended into full satire and they were still believe them.

Oh yeah? Well these days I believe scientists will validate anything they’re paid to… and then our mainstream establishment media runs with it.

We live in a technocracy under the magical sparkling banner of the modern scientific dictatorship. An agenda needs pushed? Science, bought and paid for by governments and billionaires and multinational corporations, is your authority to tell you what you need to be told to continue functioning at the most basic, most controllable consumer level.

By the way, just days ago, the Editor-in-Chief of one of the world’s most well-known medical journals The Lancet came out and said half of all the scientific literature is actually false:


 

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”

This is quite disturbing, given the fact that all of these studies (which are industry sponsored) are used to develop drugs/vaccines to supposedly help people, train medical staff, educate medical students and more.

Gee… you think?

Well, we aren’t supposed to think. The science is supposed to do the thinking for us.

The reality is you can’t open any of these supposedly prestigious journals today and read something and just trust it because it was printed in there. First you have to find out who wrote it, and then you have to find out who paid that guy… and why…

You’ll see the mainstream media jump all over these “scientific” studies and report them lovingly in the news (if it fits the agenda of the day).

But if a study is later found to be false, do they ever go back and correct their mistake? Set the record (and the trusting public) straight?

Not likely, and if so, definitely not loudly.

The study above for example. Did the researchers troll the average person on Facebook to see if they’ll believe anything that has “scientific study claims” or something similar in the headline?

Pretty sure that road goes both ways there, friends.

The phrase conspiracy theory came into heavy use in the establishment media after JFK was murdered to induce shame and keep people from asking too many questions that strayed too far from the government’s utterly ridiculous magic bullet theory.

Nice to see how that chilling of critical thought has metastasized over the last 50 years.

These media outlets always discuss conspiracies as if any conspiracy is automatically bullshit simply because someone labeled it a conspiracy.

A conspiracy is defined as “a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.” There have been many known conspiracies over the years on record, many admittedly perpetrated by our own government and governments the world over.

Conspiracy to commit a crime is defined in criminal law. People can be arrested for it. Just this week, A federal grand jury in Pennsylvania just got done indicting 15 Chinese nationals with conspiracy for using impostors with fake passports to take standardized college tests for them.

However, when mainstream outlets discuss conspiracy, it is as if conspiracy itself is a conspiracy that does not actually exist and anyone who buys into any conspiracy “theory” is a looney tune in a tin foil hat who never leaves his underground bunker in the woods.

Propaganda, however? Well apparently that’s a conspiracy theory too. It has to be. Otherwise who would ever read the mainstream “news”?

Well, I’d much rather be called a conspiracy theorist than someone who unquestioningly believes and blindly trusts an overtly corrupt government or readily put my life in the hands of what we’re told today is “science,” but is really not much more than a body of subjective knowledge carefully crafted for consumers on a need-to-know basis that comes with a hand shake with the highest bidder.

In fact, it’s a badge I’ll proudly wear with honor.


“O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.” – I. Timothy 6:20-21

Related: Adrian Salbuchi: The Coming World Government

Divide And Conquer - Who Are The Puppet Masters Behind The Attempt To Destroy Alternative Media? 

Will you be amazed when you find out who has sold you down the drain?

8/5/15 SOURCE:-(http://www.allnewspipeline.com/Divide_And_Conquer_Alternative_Media.php)



govtrollsmay7-2.jpg

During my morning routine of hunting through hundreds of articles to determine what to add to the "Hot News... Around the Web" section of All News PipeLine's front page, I ran across a piece of at Rumor Mill News that gave me what many will understand as an "AHA" moment where pieces of a puzzle, the big picture so to speak, simply assembled itself in my head, showing an insidious, long term plan and implementation of that plan, to destroy Alternative Media from within.

The article in question is from a member of the Alternative Media and while it touches on the topic of the internal strife at an Alternative News Site, that is not what caught my eye, nor the topic of this article, since we in no way have a clue what happened, nor have we had any interest to untangle the "he said, she said," issues.

What caught my eye was the following sentence "What Mike has done, however, is apparently misread what I wrote, or been prompted by "friends" (as he wrote), to construe what I wrote as being in some way an attack on...."

This has been a common refrain I have been hearing from other Alternative News website owners over the last year, whom I am not naming because there is a fine line in reporting a problem and feeding into it, but I have been told that each of these Alt Sites owners were informed by their trusted associates that "friends" or "colleagues" or "sources" have informed them of (insert false claim here against the site owner), and in each case it has caused strife between the site owner and the trusted associate. Some issues were resolved through open communication, but others left lasting scars.... aka dividing them, separating them from each other.

According to Matthew 18:15 "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector."

In other words communicate, be clear and identify the source of the rumors, lies or character assassinations openly to the person you are accusing, because if you are made to feel you cannot be truthful about the "friend," or "associate" or "source," then that should be a large red flag that they are agents, shills and/or are on someone's payroll otherwise known as professional agitators.

THE COMMON DENOMINATOR

In the past year I have seen InfoWars attacked in an attempt to cause divisions from within, I have seen Rick Wiles of TruNews attacked for his interviews and beliefs, The Hagmanns and Steve Quayle attacked and accused falsely,  just to name a few.... and what they all have in common is they question the official narrative, the "message" pushed by the mainstream media and government officials, they link to sources unlike the MSM, rather than referring to them then asking readers/listeners to simply believe their interpretation of them. 

Notice I am not linking to these attacks because to do so would be to perpetuate them and ANP will not do that, the point being, someone, or many someones, are deliberately attempting to cause divisions between friends, within Alternative websites internally, as well separate websites, to separate them so they will not share information with each other that helps to connect the dots and put the puzzle pieces together.

As seen below, this is a strategy based in Psychological Warfare that has been used throughout history and is now being used against Alternative Media, to the nth degree.

MILITARY PSY-OP STRATEGY

Wikipedia describes Psychological Warfare as "Psychological Warfare (PSYWAR), or the basic aspects of modern psychological operations (PSYOP), have been known by many other names or terms, including MISO, Psy Ops, Political Warfare, "Hearts and Minds," and propaganda. The term is used "to denote any action which is practiced mainly by psychological methods with the aim of evoking a planned psychological reaction in other people."Various techniques are used, and are aimed at influencing a target audience's value system, belief system, emotions, motives, reasoning, or behavior. It is used to induce confessions or reinforce attitudes and behaviors favorable to the originator's objectives, and are sometimes combined with black operations or false flag tactics."

In 2005, in a 244 page Air Force Law Review PDF, on page 235, we see "ruses" which are considered lawful deceptions which goes on to explain in  Article 37,  examples of permissible ruses, which includes  “the use of camouflage, decoys, mock operations and misinformation."

DISINFORMATION

According Merriam Webster Dictionary, disinformation is defined as "false information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumors) in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth." 

There are entities, whole websites, dedicated to pushing massive disinformation with just enough truth interspersed to make the person or the site appear legitimate. What they count on is the reader/listener/viewer will not do their due diligence to verify and separate the truth from the hoaxes and false information. 

These sites are created with the sole purpose of destroying Alternative Media as a whole. 

GOVERNMENT TROLLS AND ARTIFICIAL ENTITIES

The Guardian reported in 2011 on a US spy operation that creates fake online identities to spread propagnada, where the article details software that was being developed that would "manipulate" social media by using "fake online personas to influence internet conversations," most of which would lead people away from the information being exposed by Alternative Media.

The project has been likened by web experts to China's attempts to control and restrict free speech on the internet. Critics are likely to complain that it will allow the US military to create a false consensus in online conversations, crowd out unwelcome opinions and smother commentaries or reports that do not correspond with its own objectives.

The discovery that the US military is developing false online personalities – known to users of social media as "sock puppets" – could also encourage other governments, private companies and non-government organisations to do the same.

The claim was that is would be used against Americans, but revelations by Edward Snowden exposed the governments do hire "internet trolls," to manipulate and control online discourse with "extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destructions." 

He cites documents from the “previously secret” Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group in the U.K., which describe injecting “all sorts of false material onto the Internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets” and to use “social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable.”

“To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: ‘false flag operations’ (posting material to the Internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting ‘negative information’ on various forums.”

See more on the leaked handbook here.

When you are confronted in a conversation by someone  attempting to "change" the topic, or distract from the original message, ask yourself, do I know this person? How well do I know this person? Why will they not address the issue and instead are attempting to lead us away from it.


DIVIDE AND CONQUER 


The strategy of Divide and Conquer is described succinctly by WiseGeek in the follow manner:

A divide and conquer strategy, also known as “divide and rule strategy” is often applied in the arenas of politics and sociology. In this strategy, one power breaks another power into smaller, more manageable pieces, and then takes control of those pieces one by one. It generally takes a very strong power to implement such a strategy. In order to successfully break up another power or government, the conqueror must have access to strong political, military, and economic machines.

Furthermore, in order to maintain power and influence, large governments will often work to keep smaller powers and governments from uniting. In fact, this use of the principles within the divide and conquer strategy is most common. It is much easier to prevent small powers from linking forces than to break them apart once they have aligned.

Leaders who use a divide and conquer strategy may encourage or foster feuds between smaller powers. This kind of political maneuvering requires a great understanding of the people who are being manipulated. In order to foster feuds, for example, one must understand the political and social histories of the parties intended to take part in the feuds.


THE PUPPET MASTERS


It is my personal opinion that Alternative Media itself has been infiltrated by "entities" pretending to be friends, sources, associates, then whisper into the ears of their new friends that their trusted old friends are working against them, deliberately planting suggestions, manipulating situations with lies, in order to divide Alternative Media and cause them to attack each other, but more importantly, to separate them so the information cannot flow, the puzzle cannot be put together and finally, to distract them from doing what Alternative Media is supposed to do... which is to report what the MSM won't.

The ultimate puppet masters behind it all are those with the most to gain from destroying Alternative Media, those whose agendas are being exposed by Alt Media, and we will leave it up to the readers to decide who they think that is.

BOTTOM LINE

Alternative Media has made an incredible difference over the years in exposing agendas, providing aspects and points of view that the MSM doesn't, offering links, videos, documentation that asks the reader to think for themselves and to research, but these paid agitators, government shills and artificial entites do the exact opposite, they count on those that do not want to "think," those that will simply accept the "message" these shills are pushing without bothering to double check and verify the information.

After researching, a reader may disagree with the conclusions offered by the Alternative Media site, but that is a good thing, healthy, civil debate often offers others a chance to see another point of view whether it changes their mind or not.  

Final thought - If someone is whispering in your ear, but is not willing to back up what they are telling you about someone you have known and trusted for many years, with verifiable evidence.... then chances are they are on someone's payroll and their sole goal is to separate you from those you trust. 

Research that person and you may be amazed to find out who sold you down the drain.




GOVTROLLSMAY7.jpg


Ukraine's 'Ministry of Truth' Wants 15-Year Prison Terms for Journalists

22.03.2015   EAST UKRAINE

Ukraine's Minister of Information Policy announced that he seeks eight to 15 year prison terms for employees of Donetsk and Luhansk television stations.

Ukraine's Minister of Information Policy, Yuri Stets, said in an interview to Radio Liberty that he wants people who work for local television in Donetsk and Luhansk to serve eight to 15 years in prison.

"I think that it's effective enough for law enforcement to work there so that people who worked for the channels of the so-called LPR [Luhansk People's Republic] and DPR [Donetsk People's Republic] got the following sentences: eight to 15 years."

 

© Sputnik/ Mikhail Palinchak

New 'Ukraine Tomorrow' TV Channel Promises to Defeat Russia Today

In the same interview, Stets says that he has been able to convince Europeans that his ministry will not be a "Ministry of Censorship." In addition, he announced that a new radio station aimed at Crimea will be launched sometime next week.

The Ministry of Information Policy remains the least-popular ministry in Ukraine according to opinion polls, and often refer to it as the "Ministry of Truth" for its contradictory aims, referencing George Orwell's novel '1984.' On Thursday, the ministry took control of a financial education television channel, intending to launch a new international broadcaster, Ukraine Tomorrow.

In February, the Ministry of Information Policy launched the "Ukrainian Information Army," a project which intended to start arguments in comment sections of Russian news websites to shift public opinion. The project failed after warriors failed to convince Russians that Ukraine's declining standard of living is the fault of Russia and personally Putin, and has since become a mailing list of links to share on social media

 

Whistleblower… Posted by justnews4m1 on November 23, 2014 …journalist! A very brave man! For any who have not yet understood how the general public are manipulated in formulating their opinions, resulting in their compliance! This man is one of many of course, except their voices are not heard as much as they should and need to be, because….. The “meat” of his comments starts about 8 minutes in.

Why U.S. Reporters Are Always Pro-War

5 Reasons that Both Mainstream Media – and Gatekeeper “Alternative” Websites – Are Pro-WarWhy U.S. Reporters
 Are Always Pro-War

 February 8, 2015    SOURCE:-( http://www.infowars.com/why-u-s-reporters-are-always-pro-war/)

There are five reasons that the mainstream media and the largest alternative media websites are always pro-war.

1. Self-Censorship by Journalists

Initially, there is tremendous self-censorship by journalists.

A survey by the Pew Research Center and the Columbia Journalism Review in 2000 found:

Self-censorship is commonplace in the news media today …. About one-quarter of the local and national journalists say they have purposely avoided newsworthy stories, while nearly as many acknowledge they have softened the tone of stories to benefit the interests of their news organizations. Fully four-in-ten (41%) admit they have engaged in either or both of these practices.

Similarly, a 2003 survey reveals that 35% of reporters and news executives themselves admitted that journalists avoid newsworthy stories if “the story would be embarrassing or damaging to the financial interests of a news organization’s owners or parent company.”

Several months after 9/11, Dan Rather told the BBC that American reporters were practicing “a form of self-censorship”:

There was a time in South Africa that people would put flaming tires around peoples’ necks if they dissented. And in some ways the fear is that you will be necklaced here, you will have a flaming tire of lack of patriotism put around your neck. Now it is that fear that keeps journalists from asking the toughest of the tough questions…. And again, I am humbled to say, I do not except myself from this criticism.

What we are talking about here – whether one wants to recognise it or not, or call it by its proper name or not – is a form of self-censorship.

Rather said in 2008:

One of the most pernicious ways in which we do this is through self-censorship, which may be the worst censorship of all. We have seen too much self-censorship in the news in recent years, and as I say this please know that I do not except myself from this criticism.

As Mark Twain once said, “We write frankly and freely but then we ‘modify’ before we print.” Why do we modify the free and frank expression of journalistic truth? We do it out of fear: Fear for our jobs. Fear that we’ll catch hell for it. Fear that someone will seek to hang a sign around our neck that says, in essence, “Unpatriotic.”

We modify with euphemisms such as “collateral damage” or “less than truthful statements.” We modify with passive-voice constructions such as “mistakes were made.” We modify with false equivalencies that provide for bad behavior the ready-made excuse that “everybody’s doing it.” And sometimes we modify with an eraser—simply removing offending and inconvenient truths from our reporting.”

Keith Olbermann agreed that there is self-censorship in the American media, and that:

You can rock the boat, but you can never say that the entire ocean is in trouble …. You cannot say: By the way, there’s something wrong with our …. system.

Former Washington Post columnist Dan Froomkin wrote in 2006:

Mainstream-media political journalism is in danger of becoming increasingly irrelevant, but not because of the Internet, or even Comedy Central. The threat comes from inside. It comes from journalists being afraid to do what journalists were put on this green earth to do. . . .

There’s the intense pressure to maintain access to insider sources, even as those sources become ridiculously unrevealing and oversensitive. There’s the fear of being labeled partisan if one’s bullshit-calling isn’t meted out in precisely equal increments along the political spectrum.

If mainstream-media political journalists don’t start calling bullshit more often, then we do risk losing our primacy — if not to the comedians then to the bloggers.

I still believe that no one is fundamentally more capable of first-rate bullshit-calling than a well-informed beat reporter – whatever their beat. We just need to get the editors, or the corporate culture, or the self-censorship – or whatever it is – out of the way.

Self-censorship obviously occurs on the web as well as in old media. As Wikipedia notes:

Self-censorship is the act of censoring or classifying one’s own work (blog, book(s), film(s), or other means of expression) …

While you might assume that self-censorship has declined more than a decade after 9/11 – and long after Bush and Cheney left office – it has actually skyrocketed … because reporters are justifiably concerned that the NSA is spying on them. This is true of journalists all over the world.

2. Censorship by Higher-Ups

If journalists do want to speak out about an issue, they also are subject to tremendous pressure by their editors or producers to kill the story.

The 2000 Pew and Columbia Journalism Review survey notes:

Fully half of [the investigative journalists surveyed] say newsworthy stories are often or sometimes ignored because they conflict with a news organization’s economic interests. More than six-in-ten (61%) believe that corporate owners exert at least a fair amount of influence on decisions about which stories to cover….

The Pulitzer prize-winning reporter who uncovered the Iraq prison torture scandal and the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam, Seymour Hersh, said:

“All of the institutions we thought would protect us — particularly the press, but also the military, the bureaucracy, the Congress — they have failed. The courts . . . the jury’s not in yet on the courts. So all the things that we expect would normally carry us through didn’t. The biggest failure, I would argue, is the press, because that’s the most glaring….

Q: What can be done to fix the (media) situation?

[Long pause] You’d have to fire or execute ninety percent of the editors and executives. You’d actually have to start promoting people from the newsrooms to be editors who you didn’t think you could control. And they’re not going to do that.”

In fact many journalists are warning that the true story is not being reported. And see this announcement.

series of interviews with award-winning journalists also documents censorship of certain stories by media editors and owners (and see these samples).

Successful journalists who don’t go along with pro-war hysteria are severely punished … no matter how popular they are.

On the other hand, war-hypers are promoted to the top echelons of the news business … where they make huge amounts of money.

It’s not just the mainstream media. The large “alternative” media websites censor as well. For example:

Every year Project Censored [which Walter Cronkite and other ] puts together a list of the top 25 stories censored and ignored by the mainstream media.

How many of these stories were you aware of? Even regular consumers of alternative, independent media may be surprised to learn about some of these stories ….

There are many reasons for censorship by media higher-ups.

One is money.

The media has a strong monetary interest to avoid controversial topics in general. It has always been true that advertisers discourage stories which challenge corporate power. In 1969, Federal Communications Commission commissioner Nicholas Johnson noted that tv networks go to great lengthsto please their sponsors.

Some media companies make a lot of money from the government, and so don’t want to rock the boat. For example, Glenn Greenwald notes:

Because these schools [owned by the Washington P0st’s parent company, whose profits subsidize the Post] target low-income students, the vast majority of their income is derived from federal loans. Because there have been so many deceptive practices and defaults, the Federal Government has become much more aggressive about regulating these schools and now play a vital role in determining which ones can thrive and which ones fail.

Put another way, the company that owns The Washington Post is almost entirely at the mercy of the Federal Government and the Obama administration — the entities which its newspaper ostensibly checks and holds accountable. “By the end of 2010, more than 90 percent of revenue at Kaplan’s biggest division and nearly a third of The Post Co.’s revenue overall came from the U.S. government.” The Post Co.’s reliance on the Federal Government extends beyond the source of its revenue; because the industry is so heavily regulated, any animosity from the Government could single-handedly doom the Post Co.’s business — a reality of which they are well aware:

The Post Co. realized there were risks attached to being dependent on federal dollars for revenue — and that it could lose access to that money if it exceeded federal regulatory limits.

It was understood that if you fell out of grace [with the Education Department], your business might go away,” said Tom Might, who as chief executive of Cable One, a cable service provider that is owned by The Post Co., sat in at company-wide board meetings.

Beyond being reliant on federal money and not alienating federal regulators, the Post Co. desperately needs favorable treatment from members of Congress, and has been willing to use its newspaper to obtain it:

Graham has taken part in a fierce lobbying campaign by the for-profit education industry. He has visited key members of Congress, written an op-ed article for the Wall Street Journal and hired for The Post Co. high-powered lobbying firms including Akin Gump and Elmendorf Ryan, at a cost of $810,000 in 2010. The Post has also published an editorial opposing the new federal rules, while disclosing the interests of its parent company.

The Post is hardly alone among major media outlets in being owned by an entity which relies on the Federal Government for its continued profitability. NBC News and MSNBC were long owned by GE, and now by Comcast, both of which desperately need good relations with government officials for their profits. The same is true of CBS (owned by Viacom), ABC (owned by Disney), and CNN (owned by TimeWarner). For each of these large corporations, alienating federal government officials is about the worst possible move it could make — something of which all of its employees, including its media division employees, are well aware. But the Post Co.’s dependence is even more overwhelming than most.

How can a company which is almost wholly dependent upon staying in the good graces of the U.S. Government possibly be expected to serve as a journalistic “watchdog” over that same Government? The very idea is absurd.

In addition, the government has allowed tremendous consolidation in ownership of the airwaves during the past decade.

(The Post has subsequently been purchased by Jeff Bezos, whose company is working with the CIA.)

6 companies now own 90% of the American media.

This is documented by the following must-see charts prepared by:

And check out this list of interlocking directorates of big media companies from Fairness and Accuracy in Media, and this resource from the Columbia Journalism Review to research a particular company.

This image gives a sense of the decline in diversity in media ownership over the last couple of decades:

 

The large media players stand to gain billions of dollars in profits if the Obama administration continues to allow monopoly ownership of the airwaves by a handful of players. The media giants know who butters their bread. So there is a spoken or tacit agreement: if the media cover the administration in a favorable light, the MSM will continue to be the receiver of the government’s goodies.

The large alternative media websites also censor news which are too passionately anti-war.

The biggest social media websites censor the hardest-hitting anti-war stories. And see this.

Huffington Post – the largest liberal website – is owned by media giant AOL Time Warner, and censors any implication that a Democratic administration could be waging war for the wrong reasons. So HuffPost may criticize poor prosecution of the war, but would never say that the entire “War on Terror” as currently waged by the Obama administration is a stupid idea.

Similarly, Drudge Report – the largest conservative website – never questions whether the government’s engagement in offensive military action around the world is strengthening or weakening our national security.

The largest “alternative” websites may weakly criticize minor details of the overall war effort, but would never say that more or less worldwide war-fighting is counterproductive. They may whine about a specific aspect of the war-fighting … but never look at the larger geopolitical factors involved.

They all seem to follow Keith Olbermann’s advice:

You can rock the boat, but you can never say that the entire ocean is in trouble …. You cannot say: By the way, there’s something wrong with our …. system.

3. Drumming Up Support for War War Is Sold Just Like Soda or Toothpaste

 

Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com

In addition, the owners of American media companies have long actively played a part in drumming up support for war.

It is painfully obvious that the large news outlets studiously avoided any real criticism of the government’s claims in the run up to the Iraq war. It is painfully obvious that the large American media companies acted as lapdogs and stenographers for the government’s war agenda.

Veteran reporter Bill Moyers criticized the corporate media for parroting the obviously false link between 9/11 and Iraq (and the false claims that Iraq possessed WMDs) which the administration made in the run up to the Iraq war, and concluded that the false information was not challenged because:

The [mainstream] media had been cheerleaders for the White House from the beginning and were simply continuing to rally the public behind the President — no questions asked.

As NBC News’ David Gregory (later promoted to host Meet the Press) said:

I think there are a lot of critics who think that . . . . if we did not stand up [in the run-up to the war] and say ‘this is bogus, and you’re a liar, and why are you doing this,’ that we didn’t do our job. I respectfully disagree. It’s not our role.

Even after all of the mea culpas for their horribe Iraq coverage – by the New York Times (and here),Washington PostMSNBC and others – the media is doing the exact same thing again.

Believe it or not, media coverage of the wars in Syria and Ukraine are arguably WORSE than coverage of Iraq.

But this is nothing new. In fact, the large media companies have drummed up support for all previous wars.

For example, Hearst helped drum up support for the Spanish-American War.

And an official summary of America’s overthrow of the democratically-elected president of Iran in the 1950′s states, “In cooperation with the Department of State, CIA had several articles planted in major American newspapers and magazines which, when reproduced in Iran, had the desired psychological effect in Iran and contributed to the war of nerves against Mossadeq.” (page x)

The mainstream media also may have played footsie with the U.S. government right before Pearl Harbor. Specifically, a highly-praised historian (Bob Stineet) argues that the Army’s Chief of Staff informed the Washington bureau chiefs of the major newspapers and magazines of the impending Pearl Harbor attack BEFORE IT OCCURRED, and swore them to an oath of secrecy, which the media honored (page 361) .

And the military-media alliance has continued without a break (as a highly-respected journalist says, “viewers may be taken aback to see the grotesque extent to which US presidents and American news media have jointly shouldered key propaganda chores for war launches during the last five decades.”)

As the mainstream British paper, the Independent, writes:

There is a concerted strategy to manipulate global perception. And the mass media are operating as its compliant assistants, failing both to resist it and to expose it. The sheer ease with which this machinery has been able to do its work reflects a creeping structural weakness which now afflicts the production of our news.

The article in the Independent discusses the use of “black propaganda” by the U.S. government, which is then parroted by the media without analysis; for example, the government forged a letter from al Zarqawi to the “inner circle” of al-Qa’ida’s leadership, urging them to accept that the best way to beat US forces in Iraq was effectively to start a civil war, which was then publicized without question by the media.

So why has the American press has consistently served the elites in disseminating their false justifications for war?

One of of the reasons is because the large media companies are owned by those who support the militarist agenda or even directly profit from war and terror (for example, NBC was owned by General Electric, one of the largest defense contractors in the world … which directly profits from war, terrorism and chaos. NBC was subsequently sold to Comcast).

Another seems to be an unspoken rule that the media will not criticize the government’s imperial war agenda.

And the media support isn’t just for war: it is also for various other shenanigans by the powerful. For example, a BBC documentary proves:

There was “a planned coup in the USA in 1933 by a group of right-wing American businessmen . . . . The coup was aimed at toppling President Franklin D Roosevelt with the help of half-a-million war veterans. The plotters, who were alleged to involve some of the most famous families in America, (owners of Heinz, Birds Eye, Goodtea, Maxwell Hse & George Bush’s Grandfather, Prescott) believed that their country should adopt the policies of Hitler and Mussolini to beat the great depression.”

Moreover, “the tycoons told the general who they asked to carry out the coup that the American people would accept the new government because they controlled all the newspapers.“

See also this book.

Have you ever heard of this scheme before? It was certainly a very large one. And if the conspirators controlled the newspapers then, how much worse is it today with media consolidation?

(Kevin Dutton – research psychologist at the University of Cambridge – whose research has been featured in Scientific American Mind, New Scientist, The Guardian, Psychology Today and USA Today – also notes that media personalities and journalists – especially when combined in the same persons – are likely to be psychopaths. Some 12 million Americans are psychopaths or sociopaths, and psychopathstend to rub each others’ backs.)

4. Access

Dan FroomkinBrett Arends and many other mainstream reporters have noted that “access” is the most prized thing for mainstream journalists … and that they will keep fawning over those in power so that they will keep their prized access.

But there is another dynamic related to access at play: direct cash-for-access payments to the media.

For example, a 3-time Emmy Award winning CNN journalist says that CNN takes money from foreign dictators to run flattering propaganda.

Politico reveals:

For $25,000 to $250,000, The Washington Post has offered lobbyists and association executives off-the-record, nonconfrontational access to “those powerful few”: Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and — at first — even the paper’s own reporters and editors…

The offer — which essentially turns a news organization into a facilitator for private lobbyist-official encounters — was a new sign of the lengths to which news organizations will go to find revenue at a time when most newspapers are struggling for survival.

That may be one reason that the mainstream news commentators hate bloggers so much. The more people who get their news from blogs instead of mainstream news sources, the smaller their audience, and the less the MSM can charge for the kind of “nonconfrontational access” which leads to puff pieces for the big boys.

5. Censorship by the Government

Finally, as if the media’s own interest in promoting war is not strong enough, the government has exerted tremendous pressure on the media to report things a certain way.

If reporters criticize those in power, they may be smeared by the government and targeted for arrest(and see this).

Indeed, the government treats real reporters as terrorists. Because the core things which reporters docould be considered terrorism, in modern America, journalists are sometimes targeted under counter-terrorism laws.

The government spies on reporters.

Not only has the government thrown media owners and reporters in jail if they’ve been too critical, it also claims the power to indefinitely detain journalists without trial or access to an attorney which chills chills free speech.

After Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges, journalist Naomi Wolf, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg and others sued the government to enjoin the NDAA’s allowance of the indefinite detention of Americans – the judge asked the government attorneys 5 times whether journalists like Hedges could be indefinitely detained simply for interviewing and then writing about bad guys. The government refused to promise that journalists like Hedges won’t be thrown in a dungeon for the rest of their lives without any right to talk to a judge.

An al-Jazeera journalist – in no way connected to any terrorist group – was held at Guantánamo for six years … mainly to be interrogated about the Arabic news network. And see this.

Wikileaks’ head Julian Assange could face the death penalty for his heinous crime of leaking whistleblower information which make those in power uncomfortable … i.e. being a reporter.

As constitutional lawyer Glenn Greenwald notes:

It seems clear that the US military now deems any leaks of classified information to constitute the capital offense of “aiding the enemy” or “communicating with the enemy” even if no information is passed directly to the “enemy” and there is no intent to aid or communicate with them. Merely informing the public about classified government activities now constitutes this capital crime because it “indirectly” informs the enemy.

***

If someone can be charged with “aiding” or “communicating with the enemy” by virtue of leaking to WikiLeaks, then why wouldn’t that same crime be committed by someone leaking classified information to any outlet: the New York Times, the Guardian, ABC News or anyone else?

***

International Law Professor Kevin Jon Heller made a similar point when the charges against Manning were first revealed:

“[I]f Manning has aided the enemy, so has any media organization that published the information he allegedly stole. Nothing in Article 104 requires proof that the defendant illegally acquired the information that aided the enemy. As a result, if the mere act of ensuring that harmful information is published on the internet qualifies either as indirectly ‘giving intelligence to the enemy’ (if the military can prove an enemy actually accessed the information) or as indirectly ‘communicating with the enemy’ (because any reasonable person knows that enemies can access information on the internet), there is no relevant factual difference between [Bradley] Manning and a media organization that published the relevant information.”

***

It is always worth underscoring that the New York Times has published far more government secrets than WikiLeaks ever has, and more importantly, has published far more sensitive secrets than WikiLeaks has (unlike WikiLeaks, which has never published anything that was designated “Top Secret”, the New York Times has repeatedly done so: the Pentagon Papers, the Bush NSA wiretapping program, the SWIFT banking surveillance system, and the cyberwarfare program aimed at Iran were all “Top Secret” when the newspaper revealed them, as was the network of CIA secret prisons exposed by the Washington Post). There is simply no way to convert basic leaks to WikiLeaks into capital offenses – as the Obama administration is plainly doing – without sweeping up all leaks into that attack.

***

The same [Obama] administration that has prosecuted whistleblowers under espionage charges that threatened to send them to prison for life without any evidence of harm to national security, and has brought double the number of such prosecutions as all prior administrations combined. Converting all leaks into capital offenses would be perfectly consistent with the unprecedented secrecy fixation on the part of the Most Transparent Administration Ever™.

The irony from these developments is glaring. The real “enemies” of American “society” are not those who seek to inform the American people about thebad acts engaged in by their government in secret. As Democrats once recognized prior to the age of Obama – in the age of Daniel Ellsberg – people who do that are more aptly referred to as “heroes”The actual “enemies” are those who abuse secrecy powers to conceal government actions and to threaten with life imprisonment or even execution those who blow the whistle on high-level wrongdoing.

Former attorney general Mukasey said the U.S. should prosecute Assange because it’s “easier” than prosecuting the New York Times. But now Congress is considering a bill which would make even mainstream reporters liable for publishing leaked information (part of an all-out war on whistleblowing).

As such, the media companies have felt great pressure from the government to kill any real questioning of the endless wars.

For example, Dan Rather said, regarding American media, “What you have is a miniature version of what you have in totalitarian states”.

Tom Brokaw said “all wars are based on propaganda.

And the head of CNN said:

There was ‘almost a patriotism police’ after 9/11 and when the network showed [things critical of the administration’s policies] it would get phone calls from advertisers and the administration and “big people in corporations were calling up and saying, ‘You’re being anti-American here.’

Indeed, former military analyst and famed Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said that the government has ordered the media not to cover 9/11:

Ellsberg seemed hardly surprised that today’s American mainstream broadcast media has so far failed to take [former FBI translator and 9/11 whistleblower Sibel] Edmonds up on her offer, despite the blockbuster nature of her allegations [which Ellsberg calls “far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers”].

As Edmonds has also alluded, Ellsberg pointed to the New York Times, who “sat on the NSA spying story for over a year” when they “could have put it out before the 2004 election, which might have changed the outcome.”

“There will be phone calls going out to the media saying ‘don’t even think of touching it, you will be prosecuted for violating national security,’” he told us.

* * *

“I am confident that there is conversation inside the Government as to ‘How do we deal with Sibel?’” contends Ellsberg. “The first line of defense is to ensure that she doesn’t get into the media. I think any outlet that thought of using her materials would go to to the government and they would be told ‘don’t touch this . . . .‘”

Of course, if the stick approach doesn’t work, the government can always just pay off reporters to spread disinformation.

It is well-documented that the CIA has bought and paid for many well-known journalists.

Indeed, in the final analysis, the main reason today that the media giants will not cover the real stories or question the government’s actions or policies in any meaningful way is that the American government and mainstream media been somewhat blended together.

Can We Win the Battle Against Censorship?

We cannot just leave governance to our “leaders”, as “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance” (Jefferson). Similarly, we cannot leave news to the corporate media. We need to “be the media” ourselves.

“To stand in silence when they should be protesting makes cowards out of men.”
– Abraham Lincoln

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”
– Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

“Powerlessness and silence go together. We…should use our privileged positions not as a shelter from the world’s reality, but as a platform from which to speak. A voice is a gift. It should be cherished and used.”
– Margaret Atwood

“There is no act too small, no act too bold. The history of social change is the history of millions of actions, small and large, coming together at points in history and creating a power that governments cannot suppress.”
– Howard Zinn (historian)

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent”
– Thomas Jefferson