Coronavirus: "Reality" & "Conspiracy Theory"

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

There's this... but note that the majority are Fox stations (no surprise) and CBS. I noted maybe a couple of NBC....

---

Barry, It was the Whole Shebang * : ABC, CBS, CNBC, CNN, MSNBC, & NBC - as well as FOX - The Whole Corporate Melange. I advise y'all to watch it again, closely; stopping & back-tracking, to take it all in...

A video compilation proving that countless local news networks read the same exact scripts around the United States is a chilling reminder of the Orwellian, heavily controlled nature of mass media. Even more chilling: The media coverage of this video.

Yes, what is happening in this video is indeed “extremely dangerous to our democracy”. The viral video, posted online by Deadspin, mashes together segments from a variety of television stations owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group – the largest television station operator in the United States. Dozens of newscasters, reduced to the state of word-parroting drones, are seen reciting the same script, one that obviously came from “above”. The creepy, Orwellian vibe emanating from the video and its clever editing clearly highlights the fact that mass media is owned by a few mega-companies.

In a twist of irony, the script read by the newscasters ominously warns viewers about “fake and biased news circulating on social media”, the same way Big Brother frowns against “thoughtcrime” in Orwell’s 1984.
While the video highlights the propaganda function of mass media, it was spun by mass media to generate … propaganda.

Media Spin

Shortly after the video went viral, major news outlets responded with engineered outrage and disgust. It did not take long before the blame was put on Sinclair, a “conservative, pro-Trump media conglomerate”.

A headline about the video using the words “pro-Trump” and “conservative” to deflect the true nature of the problem. = A CNN headline about the compilation video. = Superstar newscaster Dan Rather published an angry tweet about the video.

The video, which highlights a major problem that is rampant across all mass media, is used to attack one specific company: Sinclair Broadcast Group. CNN is already reporting that Kentucky Democrat candidate Amy McGrath is pulling ads from Sinclair stations and is calling for a boycott. Is Sinclair the only company guilty of such news tampering? Of course not.

The fact that media sources are attempting to frame this issue in a liberal vs conservative debate only highlights the mediocrity, the lack of objectivity and the complete bias of modern journalism. If journalists were actually about “unbiased” facts, they would point out that all media sources are owned by a handful of conglomerates which are connected to the same world elite.

Not About Liberals vs Conservatives

If one closely watches the above video, one can easily note that the same script was read on CBS, ABC, NBC, and FOX networks. That means it was read on EVERY major television network in the United States, and these stations are owned by mega companies that are represented in elite organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg group and so forth. NBC is owned by Comcast; CBS is owned by Viacom; ABC is owned by the Walt Disney Company; Fox TV stations are owned by 21st Century Fox which was sold to … the Walt Disney Company.

The fact that the local news are scripted from above is far from new. This has been happening for decades. Here is an example from several years ago. Mass media is currently spinning the story in order to turn it into a political debate and to attack one specific company.

By doing so, it purposely ignores the core truth about the video. The news segment was about not trusting “fake news on social media”. Mass media created the term “fake news” to censor and suppress real, factual news that go against the elite’s interests and that reveal unflattering truths (i.e. pedogate).

In recent years, a growing number of people have been learning important facts through “alternative” news. This has struck the elite with intense fear and panic, causing it to use all of its mass media control to deliver Orwellian warnings about “fake news”. This is what the newscasters were forced to recite on the news. This is not about liberals versus conservatives. This is about truth-seeking journalism versus elite-sponsored propaganda.

[ Source ]

*****

I watched it. I understand what I saw. It is a "mashup" that either Fox or Trump's crew created to discredit mainstream news sources. This is the Trump playbook, pure and simple. Like Trump, they discredit facts and the sources of facts.

Fox and CNN are not two sides of the same coin. They are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. Fox is extreme right wing with special affection for Trump and his ultra-right, white supremacist, Jew hating base of support. CNN's viewpoint is left-of-center Democrat. Of the major media, MSNBC is the furthest left, what Mort Sahl used to call "left wing social democrats."

Nothing is more important politically than defeating Trump this November. If Trump is reelectd to another four-year term, he will replace two liberal Supreme Court justices with two far-right justices. They will reverse Roe v. Wade and thus permit states to prohibit abortions. If the Republicans also gain control Congress, they could pass statutes that would prohibit abortions even in Blue states that would otherwise permit abortions. Trump would be a nightmare on other social issues as well, but preserving a woman's right to choose is paramount.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

Do the research finell. Looks like a mashup of mainstream media, including fox, bashing social media, what we're on, with the same words. Can you imagine that fox and cnn are two sides of the same coin?

---

People only allow data into their sensorium that validates their tenuous grip on reality. The chronic seeking of validation is symptomatic of a personality structure unable to update its interpretive framework and is often met with surprise and disbelief when the predictions from their opinion handlers turn out to be a mismatch with reality. Why the mainstream news is still trusted after their utter failure to call the election, the results of the Mueller investigation, the 2 hearings, the invisible "whistleblower", the "impeachment", is beyond me. This is a form of codependency - the masochistic attachment to a wife beater. This inability to flex into the shoes of the opposition to check the validity of their ideas is a cognitive weakness and is being played like a cheap violin by forces who understand subconscious drives and expectations better than the pop psychology and vapid spiritual guruisms the New Age dumbing down process has resulted in. History and Darwin has an irritating habit of removing the more stupid idea from off the food chain. Be stupid at your peril. Notch awareness cannot masquerade as panoramic awareness without being eclipsed by total field data apperception. The more you know, the more you survive in the Age of Info.

In Lenin’s little (very important) tome, "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism" written in 1916 in Switzerland, before he took power in Russia and sullied his hands with rivers of blood, the revolutionary scholar living in exile postulated that - given the intrinsic tendency in capitalism towards the “increase in power of monopolies” and vertical corporate amalgamation (big fish eat smaller fish) and the formation of cartel monopolies– eventually there would be only One Big Corporation.

Shades of the Movie, “ALIENS” ? Perhaps the screenwriter read Lenin.

Anyway, what we have now is pretty close to all that. We are well on our way. – Six Mega-Media Corporations with talking head sycophants all reading from the same script and all talking with the same spooky Voice.

Media Conglomerates


6 Media Giants


Media Landscape


Tech and Media Monopolies

= AND =

Lest we forget,

"big pharma owns the mainstream media"

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

The chronic seeking of validation is symptomatic of a personality structure unable to update its interpretive framework and is often met with surprise and disbelief when the predictions from their opinion handlers turn out to be a mismatch with reality. Why the mainstream news is still trusted after their utter failure to call the election, the results of the Mueller investigation, the 2 hearings, the invisible "whistleblower", the "impeachment", is beyond me.

---

there's a real dissonance there. First, you imply (at least I hope you're implying) that being unable to 'update interpretive framework' is a personality disorder, a point I agree with. So, who on earth would expect MSM to accurately call elections and results of investigations? only those with that personality disorder, I guess. And as I've said before, it's not true that "they" said that unambiguously, no doubt about it, Clinton's fer sure a winner and Mueller will be taking Trump on a perp walk.

Dude - add it up. Who are the neocon's and why have they founded the "never Trump" movement within the GOP. You cannot answer that question with the interpretive framework you possess. Trump has been so thoroughly demonized that logic can no longer be applied to anything dealing with him. If you tell me you haven't heard of the "Never Trump" movement by the Bush/Rockefeller CIA neocon crypto nazi Wall St. central banking aristocracy, then you are simply uninformed and will experience surprise after surprise handed to you by the corporate news cabal owned and operated by those same monopolists the Occupy movement was formed to protest against. You do recall the Occupy Wall St. movement, do you not? For the first time since Lenin, the left correctly targeted the brain of the Beast. Then what - distraction, diversion, dissipation,. i.e., the left got played. Why is the left doing the dirty work for these crypto fascist ruling class elitist bastards?! They hate Trump precisely because they cannot control him. The mainstream media has handed you a cartoon version of reality.

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...0_12-39-47.png

How ‘Never Trumpers’ Crashed The Democratic Party
By Perry Bacon Jr.


Anti-Donald Trump activism among conservatives — known informally as the “#NeverTrump” movement — started in early 2016 as a way to stop the businessman from winning the GOP nomination. It failed.
Even by the slightly broader standard of influencing Republican politics, #NeverTrump has been largely unsuccessful. Trump won around 90 percent of self-identified Republican voters in 2016, similar to past GOP presidential nominees. About 90 percent of Republicans have approved of Trump throughout his first term, similar to George W. Bush’s standing in his first four years in office. And with Trump as the face of the party, Republican congressional candidates won around 90 percent of the GOP vote in the 2018 midterms, just as in recent midterm elections. There is really only one anti-Trump figure among the 249 Republicans on Capitol Hill: Sen. Mitt Romney.

“Never Trumpers” tried to draft a high-profile Republican like Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan to run against Trump for the GOP nomination. That didn’t pan out either. Facing fairly weak opponents, Trump easily won the GOP primaries that occurred earlier this year. Polls also suggest most Republicans will be strongly behind Trump this November too — he is getting about 90 percent of the Republican vote in head-to-head match-ups with the presumptive Democratic nominee, former Vice President Joe Biden.

But “Never Trumpers” are increasingly involved in the Democratic Party and have gradually shifted their tactics in that direction — effectively becoming a “Never Trump” and “Never Bernie Sanders” coalition. And they appear to be having more success shaping their new party than the one that many of them had been associated with for much of their lives. Here’s how that shift has happened.

‘Never Trumpers’ found a home in the media

By pure numbers, the anti-Trump conservative bloc is both fairly small and not that remarkable. The group of Republican voters who disapprove of Trump is similar (but slightly smaller) than Democrats who disapproved of then-President Barack Obama during his first term. Conservatives who really hate Trump probably no longer identify as Republicans — 11 percent of Republicans switched their party affiliation between December 2015 and March 2017, according to Pew. But surveys suggest that the share of Democrats switching affiliation in that same period is about the same. It’s hard to be precise about this: Data suggests at most 10 percent of American voters overall are anti-Trump but generally lean Republican.¹ That’s not nothing, but between 40 and 50 percent of Americans are likely to vote for Trump in November.

But while this hard to prove conclusively, anti-Trump conservatives are arguably way overrepresented in elite media, at least compared to their numbers in the general population. The New York Times, for example, has three conservative-leaning but Trump-skeptical opinion columnists — David Brooks, Ross Douthat, Bret Stephens — and no columnists who regularly align with the president. MSNBC has programs fronted by two anti-Trump hosts once closely aligned with the GOP establishment — ex-Rep. Joe Scarborough and Nicolle Wallace, a former communications director for President George W. Bush — and no explicitly pro-Trump hosts. Among the 53 Washington Post opinion writers highlighted on the paper’s website, seven are people who have identified with conservatives and/or the Republican Party in the past but regularly attack Trump. Just four are conservatives who regularly defend the president.² Numerous anti-Trump conservatives are also featured prominently on CNN.³

How did this happen? Well, from the media perspective, the prominence of “Never Trump” conservatives makes perfect sense. The readers and watchers of The Post, The Times and MSNBC in particular are disproportionately left-leaning.⁴ So these audiences probably don’t want too much explicitly pro-Trump commentary. At the same time, news outlets usually like to present themselves as both offering a diverse set of voices and not too closely aligned with one party or the other. So by featuring, for example, George Conway, a conservative lawyer turned “Never Trump” leader⁵ who sharply criticizes the president in his cable news appearances and columns in The Washington Post, the press can essentially suggest, “It’s not just the ‘liberal media,’ even Republicans were angry when Trump did X.”⁶

Continues here

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

well, I was with you till here, anyway.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

I find your metaphor for watching cnn as self lobotomy extremely disgusting and judgemental of those regularly do it. Let's just call it boring.

---

So you read the Wikipedia article then? I have my doubts. Let me disgust you further - here is but one of many web sites dedicated to listing news stories that have been retracted. Yes such things actually exist on the Internet, in profusion and all you have to do to access them is click your mouse. But insecure humans would rather protect their opinions than challenge them and learn. Why? Because hard core, permanently worshiped opinions are not held by us, they ARE us. Somehow they were formed by data coming into consciousness, but are of such a character that they allow no data other than that which are self-validating. Being unable to conceive of a rational, effective or true alternative to one's thoughts, outlooks become permanent and that is a form of lobotomy. No data contradicting of the ego-ideal will ever be allowed into evaluative processes. Believers will learn only what the social approval apparat will allow and will be surprised over and over when the world and its reality turn out to be not the cartoon. Lobotomy. Good luck with that.

https://www.imediaethics.org/topics/...s-retractions/

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

Dude - add it up... Trump has been so thoroughly demonized that logic can no longer be applied to anything dealing with him. If you tell me you haven't heard of the "Never Trump" movement by the Bush/Rockefeller CIA neocon crypto nazi Wall St. central banking aristocracy, then you are simply uninformed and will experience surprise after surprise handed to you by the corporate news cabal owned and operated by those same monopolists ....

---

I think we're going in circles here. Sure, colloquially you can say Trump's been demonized. And sure, the "Never Trump" movement exists as a reasonably well defined group, and I don't dispute your characterizations of those who are in it. And I do know Comey and George Conway aren't my friends.

But there are plenty of people who also feel aligned with "Never Trump", who might reject association with the neocons.

Trump might actually deserve most of the negative characterizations he gets; "demonization" implies it's all shaped by an agenda, which I dispute. He's worked hard to earn any opprobrium he gets from thinking people, as well as those few who may never have figured out what the media-labeled "Never Trump" group has in common.

You do keep characterizing most people as easily surprised, continually led by carefully coordinated media to shallow conclusions. I reluctantly keep pointing out that it's not that simple, we may be generally a bit stupid but not that stupid, and that it's totally predictable that those with vested interests in the status quo aren't acting in our best interests -- and a lot of your conclusions are built on assertions you make to bridge gaps in the evidence, all of which fit a predictable pattern.

Neither. Someone asked a question in wanting this video, and I posted it in responding. Next time, consider not assuming and ask... because your questions don't allow for anything other than making people wrong.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

Are you promoting this Fox Views' ultra right wing, pro-Trump propaganda? Or are you posting this to inform those of us who oppose Trump about how the Trump party-line distorts and vilifies mainstream news media?

---

You may be right. I may have no idea of the dimension of the struggle we are enmeshed within or the historic antecedents the latter day fascists draw upon. I may just be spouting some manufactured siezed upon opinion. Who has time to investigate the thoughts of the opposition? And why bother, nothing to be learned there. They are misled idiots and sociopaths. Demons, actually. The opposition is composed of demons. Curse them and fill you breast with pride. Check out the below URL...

www.walteralter.com/psyops.htm.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

I think we're going in circles here. ...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

You may be right.

---

I think so.

Quote:

---

The opposition is composed of demons.

---

no, I don't think so

Nice bit of context removal, there. Natural talent?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

I think so.no, I don't think so

---

"This is Extremely Dangerous to Our Democracy"

[SCRIPT]

By
Erin Bromhead
April 4, 2018

Have you ever heard anything more spine-chilling in your life?

America’s largest local TV station owner, Sinclair Broadcast Group, recently forced its local news anchors to read a Trump inspired script, touting the importance of “honest journalism” and denouncing “the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country.”


Sinclair have long been accused of pushing conservative views and coverage on their local channels. Sports news site Deadspin released this video over the weekend, compiling dozens of TV News Anchors from across America reciting the speech in unison like drugged zombies from a dystopian nightmare that it is beginning to feel very much like real life.

Here is the script in full, based on the KOMO (Seattle) version.

Hi, I’m(A) ____________, and I’m (B) _________________


(B) Our greatest responsibility is to serve our Northwest communities. We are extremely proud of the quality, balanced journalism that KOMO News produces.


(A) But we’re concerned about the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country. The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media.


(B) More alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake stories… stories that just aren’t true, without checking facts first.


(A) Unfortunately, some members of the media use their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda to control ‘exactly what people think’…This is extremely dangerous to a democracy.


(B) At KOMO it’s our responsibility to pursue and report the truth. We understand Truth is neither politically ‘left nor right.’ Our commitment to factual reporting is the foundation of our credibility, now more than ever.


(A) But we are human and sometimes our reporting might fall short. If you believe our coverage is unfair please reach out to us by going to KOMOnews.com and clicking on CONTENT CONCERNS. We value your comments. We will respond back to you.


(B) We work very hard to seek the truth and strive to be fair, balanced and factual… We consider it our honor, our privilege to responsibly deliver the news every day.


(A) Thank you for watching and we appreciate your feedback.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

Nice bit of context removal, there. Natural talent?

---

may not be quite fair, but may be a bit funny.

I don't know who created the video, it's credited to old grey beard, who from his other videos belongs on wacco. However it's sophistication and length indicates plagiarism.

Fox and cnn at opposite ends of mainstream us politics is a coin. Sure it matters if you pick heads or tails. Its a facinating game. I find fox more interesting when i bother.

My father in law voted for trump, he's a South African Jewish emigrant Republican zionist. I dont know if he will again. We don't talk politics much. It's hard for me to imagine trump winning again, but I didn't think he would the first time. And I certainly don't believe it would be the end of the world!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

I watched it. I understand what I saw. It is a "mashup" that either Fox or Trump's crew created to discredit mainstream news sources. This is the Trump playbook, pure and simple. Like Trump, they discredit facts and the sources of facts.

Fox and CNN are not two sides of the same coin. They are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. Fox is extreme right wing with special affection for Trump and his ultra-right, white supremacist, Jew hating base of support. CNN's viewpoint is left-of-center Democrat. Of the major media, MSNBC is the furthest left, what Mort Sahl used to call "left wing social democrats."

Nothing is more important politically than defeating Trump this November. If Trump is reelectd to another four-year term, he will replace two liberal Supreme Court justices with two far-right justices. They will reverse Roe v. Wade and thus permit states to prohibit abortions. If the Republicans also gain control Congress, they could pass statutes that would prohibit abortions even in Blue states that would otherwise permit abortions. Trump would be a nightmare on other social issues as well, but preserving a woman's right to choose is paramount.

---

Sorry, another bad attempt at humor. I actually thought the lobotomy metaphor for watching main stream media was a little over the top, unkind to those who enjoy it, although humorously accurate in a somewhat disgusting way. Since my experience is often boredom and the icepick lobotomy is basicly a boring action I mashed it up in sly attempt at humor in honor of your disgusting metaphor. Twisted I know.

Btw I love it when I and others challenge my opinions. And I find disgust to be a useful emotion to explore my own bias. I'm glad icepicks are no longer used for brain surgery. Now we use psychotropics, which I guess is better? Main stream media now seems kind of benign.

You know, in a kind of useless growth taking up brainspace way.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

So you read the Wikipedia article then? I have my doubts. Let me disgust you further - ...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

I watched it. I understand what I saw. It is a "mashup" that either Fox or Trump's crew created to discredit mainstream news sources. This is the Trump playbook, pure and simple. Like Trump, they discredit facts and the sources of facts.

---

Wrong. This is just about the exact opposite of the actual reality. As I quoted, above:

“America’s largest local TV station owner, Sinclair Broadcast Group, recently forced its local news anchors to read a Trump inspired script, touting the importance of “honest journalism” and denouncing “the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country.”

Sinclair have long been accused of pushing conservative views and coverage on their local channels. Sports news site Deadspin released this video over the weekend, [April 1, 2018] compiling dozens of TV News Anchors from across America reciting the speech in unison like drugged zombies from a dystopian nightmare that it is beginning to feel very much like real life.” [Source]

= And =

“If one closely watches the above video, one can easily note that the same script was read on CBS, ABC, NBC, and FOX networks. That means it was read on EVERY major television network in the United States, and these stations are owned by mega companies that are represented in elite organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg group and so forth. NBC is owned by Comcast; CBS is owned by Viacom; ABC is owned by the Walt Disney Company; Fox TV stations are owned by 21st Century Fox which was sold to … the Walt Disney Company”. [Source]

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

Fox and CNN are not two sides of the same coin. They are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. Fox is extreme right wing with special affection for Trump and his ultra-right, white supremacist, Jew hating base of support.

---

This is errant nonsense. For a solid rebuttal of this simplistic spin on reality, read up on Chris Hedges' critique of the so-called “liberal media.” Also, read up on the function of the “controlled dialectic” – This is a field in which “Amerika’s foremost public intellectual” Noam Chomsky is particularly instructive – and correct.

And - whatever tendencies towards "Jew-hating" might lodge in the bosoms of his "base"- in Real Time, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu are allies on the Global game board. Besides that, Rupert Murdoch - the primary architect & creator of the FOX News Channel - is Jewish. Pressed to Answer, I wonder how Finell would explain the cognitive dissonance of that.

Beyond that, the so-called “political spectrum” is not a line-segment * [ See footnote ] floating somewhere in Space. In plain terms, that is a false depiction & understanding of the so-called "Spectrum”. That, Dear Students, is a One-dimensional viewpoint that will land you smack dab in the middle of Flatland - among the clueless denizens of that pitiful place. In the four-dimensional political reality in which we actually live, the “Spectrum” looks more like this: @ [See footnote ]

As I wrote, in a tiny left-wing bi-monthly produced out in Occidental back in the 1990’s:

“…the Power Elite in America have set up tax-exempt foundations to facilitate the coordination of Left/Right activities, in order to implement the greater dialectical (or thesetical) process and move history in the direction.. [favored by] …the corporate interests of the ruling class.

The tax-exempt foundations dispense their ill-gotten capitalist largesse (much of which derives from interest collected from the national debt, as well as currency speculation, and various other surplus-value scams) all along the political spectrum - to left, right and center, as well as to the foggy bottom of the political underworld, the "fringes" of Left and Right.

Although the power elite transcend the political spectrum and are seldom visible in the political arena… their fingerprints are all over the whole thing, and their bag-men and liaisons are in almost every camp of any size.

Beneath the tax-exempt foundations, …think tanks… target various segments of the political spectrum and serve as transmission-belts for implementing policy directives.

These think tanks formulate the unique language (dialectics) tailored to suit and influence the thinking of the various targeted strata across the political spectrum… Various sectors of the Spectrum are apportioned various Analyses, each of which contains a core element of historical truth, (lending it a certain validity) as well as current Ideological & Economically derived applications.

These various Ideologies all contain elements that are seemingly antithetical to the "hands" held by other players. In the dialectical (thesetical) process, the [power elite] via the Foundations, set the various political formations in conflict, each holding a thesis or antithesis originating in the various think tanks.

In turn, the Syntheses that are hammered out by means of this process of orchestrated dialectical conflict, become, in turn, a new thesis, or antithesis, and thus the historical process is "shepherded" by the ruling class elite.

It is this constant enmity or political strife within the spectrum, which gives the whole thing its incredible dynamism, its electric drive. It is what makes the Mobius = Continuum turn. The various "stations" along the spectrum, are like seats on a Merry-go-Round: segregated, isolated, and locked into specific "party-spirit" consciousness.

Although this Dialectical Merry-go-round may be said to spin, in reality, the Geometry of the spectrum cannot be a circle. Rather, it is more on the order of a Mobius strip. It is not a circle, because it is twisted; possessing an intrinsic twistedness…” [ Source (on Archive.org) ]

In retrospect, I think that the Mobius=Continuum can best be likened to the Roller Coaster at Coney Island; loop de loop & all. It is a diversion - and, like Monday Night Football, it is merely 'bread & circuses' for the masses.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

CNN's viewpoint is left-of-center Democrat. Of the major media, MSNBC is the furthest left, what Mort Sahl used to call "left wing social democrats."

---

Again, this is errant nonsense - to the point of being ludicrous. Imagine the executives of MSNBC searching for alumni from the hungry i to employ as anchors on their network in order to reach their targeted “left / liberal” audience.

If Finell really believes his own words he is an idiot. If not, he is a deceiver. You, reader, have a choice of what to believe about Finell - who is in over his head down in this Ward. Doesn’t he know that a body can get drowned down here when the levee breaks?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

Nothing is more important politically than defeating Trump this November. If Trump is reelectd to another four-year term, he will replace two liberal Supreme Court justices with two far-right justices. They will reverse Roe v. Wade and thus permit states to prohibit abortions.

If the Republicans also gain control Congress, they could pass statutes that would prohibit abortions even in Blue states that would otherwise permit abortions. Trump would be a nightmare on other social issues as well, but preserving a woman's right to choose is paramount.

---

Not so. Nothing is more important in 2020 for you personally, Dear Reader, than that you resist receiving the “mark of the beast” – the digital chip which the billionaires of the private Men’s Club known as the “World Economic Forum” intend to stamp you with. Read up on “ID2020”

That, Dear Reader, is more important than whether or not Joe Biden & the Democrat party defeats Donald Trump in November. It should be more important to you and your soul than even the continuity of the survival of your own body in “life”.

It is an intellectual , soulical , and deeply spiritual choice = All three. For, to maintain the integrity of your soul in 2020, you must be willing to lay down your life and be willing to suffer martyrdom for this.

Forget the pro-vaxx admonitions, democrat party platitudes and ward-healer bromides of this dubious character, Steve Finell.

************** *********888******* @

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

How ‘Never Trumpers’ Crashed The Democratic Party
By Perry Bacon Jr.

Anti-Donald Trump activism among conservatives — known informally as the “#NeverTrump” movement — started in early 2016 as a way to stop the businessman from winning the GOP nomination. It failed.
Even by the slightly broader standard of influencing Republican politics, #NeverTrump has been largely unsuccessful. Trump won around 90 percent of self-identified Republican voters in 2016, similar to past GOP presidential nominees. About 90 percent of Republicans have approved of Trump throughout his first term, similar to George W. Bush’s standing in his first four years in office. And with Trump as the face of the party, Republican congressional candidates won around 90 percent of the GOP vote in the 2018 midterms, just as in recent midterm elections. There is really only one anti-Trump figure among the 249 Republicans on Capitol Hill: Sen. Mitt Romney.

“Never Trumpers” tried to draft a high-profile Republican like Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan to run against Trump for the GOP nomination. That didn’t pan out either. Facing fairly weak opponents, Trump easily won the GOP primaries that occurred earlier this year. Polls also suggest most Republicans will be strongly behind Trump this November too — he is getting about 90 percent of the Republican vote in head-to-head match-ups with the presumptive Democratic nominee, former Vice President Joe Biden.

But “Never Trumpers” are increasingly involved in the Democratic Party and have gradually shifted their tactics in that direction — effectively becoming a “Never Trump” and “Never Bernie Sanders” coalition. And they appear to be having more success shaping their new party than the one that many of them had been associated with for much of their lives. Here’s how that shift has happened.

‘Never Trumpers’ found a home in the media

By pure numbers, the anti-Trump conservative bloc is both fairly small and not that remarkable. The group of Republican voters who disapprove of Trump is similar (but slightly smaller) than Democrats who disapproved of then-President Barack Obama during his first term. Conservatives who really hate Trump probably no longer identify as Republicans — 11 percent of Republicans switched their party affiliation between December 2015 and March 2017, according to Pew. But surveys suggest that the share of Democrats switching affiliation in that same period is about the same. It’s hard to be precise about this: Data suggests at most 10 percent of American voters overall are anti-Trump but generally lean Republican.¹ That’s not nothing, but between 40 and 50 percent of Americans are likely to vote for Trump in November.

But while this hard to prove conclusively, anti-Trump conservatives are arguably way overrepresented in elite media, at least compared to their numbers in the general population. The New York Times, for example, has three conservative-leaning but Trump-skeptical opinion columnists — David Brooks, Ross Douthat, Bret Stephens — and no columnists who regularly align with the president. MSNBC has programs fronted by two anti-Trump hosts once closely aligned with the GOP establishment — ex-Rep. Joe Scarborough and Nicolle Wallace, a former communications director for President George W. Bush — and no explicitly pro-Trump hosts. Among the 53 Washington Post opinion writers highlighted on the paper’s website, seven are people who have identified with conservatives and/or the Republican Party in the past but regularly attack Trump. Just four are conservatives who regularly defend the president.² Numerous anti-Trump conservatives are also featured prominently on CNN.³

How did this happen? Well, from the media perspective, the prominence of “Never Trump” conservatives makes perfect sense. The readers and watchers of The Post, The Times and MSNBC in particular are disproportionately left-leaning.⁴ So these audiences probably don’t want too much explicitly pro-Trump commentary. At the same time, news outlets usually like to present themselves as both offering a diverse set of voices and not too closely aligned with one party or the other. So by featuring, for example, George Conway, a conservative lawyer turned “Never Trump” leader⁵ who sharply criticizes the president in his cable news appearances and columns in The Washington Post, the press can essentially suggest, “It’s not just the ‘liberal media,’ even Republicans were angry when Trump did X.”⁶

Continues here

---

A very interesting realpolitic analysis of the current situation in the Duopoly, Walter Alter. Thanks for the link. But, as I wrote here, in Amerika we live in a Duopoly. And, as my little, socialist Jewish grandmother from Flatbush correctly opined back in 1934,

"Ever since the aftermath of the Compromise of 1877 worked out so well for the plutocrats, the bi-partisan Party bosses have been meeting in a smoke-filled room in a Men's Club in Mid-town Manhattan on election years, before the Primaries, to work out who will run in the coming elections - Who will win, place, & show - and where the patronage will go..."

- Edith Fleischer Liggett, in "The Mid-West American," Rochester, Minnesota, 1934.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

I don't know who created the video, it's credited to old grey beard, who from his other videos belongs on wacco. However it's sophistication and length indicates plagiarism.

Fox and cnn at opposite ends of mainstream us politics is a coin. Sure it matters if you pick heads or tails. Its a fascinating game. I find fox more interesting when i bother...

---

Sinclair Broadcast Group fires back at criticism

@ 3:20 in the video above, there is a CNN interview of the creator of the “viral video” - Tim Burke - formerly of Deadspin.


A little background information:


who owns cnn msnbc and nbc


who owns fox news network

Media Conglomerates


6 Media Giants


Media Landscape



Tech and Media Monopolies



= AND =

Lest we forget,

"big pharma owns the mainstream media"

This is Where the Pay-dirt Can Be Found :

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

*
Check Out This Virus :

This is the Mother Lode of Covidity

You see, it is {italics] a "designer" virus; a viris that has arrived complete with
its own website {underline] that is two hundred (yes, 200) layers deep. - A virus
on a mission - a “Crown-virus" that has arrived on the World scene in order
to hasten "Global Governance."


What is a "Crown Virus"?

Study Up:

World Economic Forum: Strategic Intelligence Covid-19:


Before you click on the link ^above^ -Just a little explanation :

New World Order Explained ~ Covid Action Plan ~ Fema Whistleblower

Study up. This is what the Billionaires has been planning for us field-negroes...

---

The website was up and running in Mid-January, in time for the 2020 World Economic Forum Meeting of those wonderful, lovable, beautiful, jet set, Billionaire Globalists in Davos, Switzerland.

Question: How Long does it normally take to build a Website with a Platform that is Two Hundred {200} layers deep?

Maybe some of you west county whiz kids can figure that one out.

From now on, I'd like to keep this thread on Track.

This *is *the *Rail...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0b_eHBZLM6U

Some conspiracy theories are tin foil hat, some actually reveal the covert rat lines of influence that are kept secret from society. The former are often played up by the latter in order to delegitimize various investigative reports and the idea of conspiracy itself. Conspiracy research is a legitimate form of digging up the back story and revealing shit that the bad guys don't want revealed. This is why we have WHISTLEBLOWERS and INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM. Snowden revealed massive spying and data hoarding on citizens. Deny the data he revealed at your peril. Wikileaks provides the source data for all its revelations, usually secret policy reports, hacked data, whistleblower data, etc., ALL with source documentation. Then there is the 1975 Senate Church Cpommittee hearings that revealed massive secret CIA population and mind control programs, previously decried as "conspiracy theories", shown to be actual fact by the hearings. You believe Oswald shot JFK, I got a bridge to sell you. The Occupy Wall St. movement was unleashed precisely because Wall St. banks operate secretly to subject the 3rd World to grinding chronic poverty with IMF and World Bank loan "conditionalities" or collateral, which is nothing more than raw materials extortion, that usually require a dictatorship to carry out. No one should trust any bureaucratic governmental or corporate entity ever.

By the way - the radical left is under the control of the fascist internationale, has been since Operation Gladio put the CIA in charge of the Baader Meinhoff and Brigada Rossa radicals in the 1970's resulting in the assassination of Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro by those useful tools.-

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Operatio...coups_in_Italy.

Subsequently Moro was kidnapped and murdered.
The Senate commission investigating Gladio and the terrorist bombings suspected the CIA and the Italian military secret service to have organised the abduction and murder of Moro. It therefore reopened the case but found that almost all files on the Moro kidnapping and murder had mysteriously disappeared from the archives of the Ministry of the Interior. The final 370-page report of the commission concluded in 1995 that, ‘It emerges without the shadow of a doubt that elements of the CIA started in the second half of the 1960s a massive operation in order to counter by the use of all means the spreading of groups and movements of the left on a European level.’ However these words were not strong enough for some Senators who continued the investigation under the chairmanship of Senator Pellegrini and concluded in June 2000 that

'those massacres, those bombs, those military actions had been organized or promoted or supported by men inside Italian state institutions and, as has been discovered more recently, by men linked to the structures of United States intelligence.

(DG p.82)

Ganser continues his inquiry with an exhaustive but depressingly familiar account of the same anti-democratic crimes being played out in the other countries of Western Europe, both within and without NATO, namely: France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, The Netherlands, Luxemburg, Denmark, Norway, Germany, Greece and Turkey.


Conspiracy is a way of life for governments and their "invisible hand" controllers. To remain ignorant of their manifestations is to help them, to collaborate with them. Don't be a collaborator. Understand that conspiracy is how the evil in the world works. Be aware and awake or be tricked again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDfAdHBtK_Q

www.walteralter.com/psyops.htm

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

Some conspiracy theories are tin foil hat, some actually reveal the covert rat lines of influence that are kept secret from society. The former are often played up by the latter in order to delegitimize various investigative reports and the idea of conspiracy itself. Conspiracy research is a legitimate form of digging up the back story and revealing shit that the bad guys don't want revealed. This is why we have WHISTLEBLOWERS and INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM. Snowden revealed massive spying and data hoarding on citizens. Deny the data he revealed at your peril. Wikileaks provides the source data for all its revelations, usually secret policy reports, hacked data, whistleblower data, etc., ALL with source documentation. Then there is the 1975 Senate Church Cpommittee hearings that revealed massive secret CIA population and mind control programs, previously decried as "conspiracy theories", shown to be actual fact by the hearings.

---

all true so far. But, when you dive into specifics:

Quote:

---

You believe Oswald shot JFK, I got a bridge to sell you. The Occupy Wall St. movement was unleashed precisely because Wall St. banks operate secretly to subject the 3rd World to grinding chronic poverty with IMF and World Bank loan "conditionalities" or collateral, which is nothing more than raw materials extortion, that usually require a dictatorship to carry out. No one should trust any bureaucratic governmental or corporate entity ever.

By the way - the radical left is under the control of the fascist internationale, has been since Operation Gladio put the CIA in charge of the Baader Meinhoff and Brigada Rossa radicals in the 1970's resulting in the assassination of Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro by those useful tools.-
.....
Conspiracy is a way of life for governments and their "invisible hand" controllers....

---

there are lots of missing adjectives there, that should be there to qualify the observations.
No, don't blindly trust anyone - governments, corporations, or your grandma. Granny, because she might not know what she's talking about, and the others, because their interests don't always align with yours.
Just one specific that to me shows the fallacy of your position: "the radical left" isn't a thing, certainly not something that can be controlled by something else that isn't a thing, the "fascist internationale". Those are informal categories of people, not organizations with a board that can implement an agenda. It's far more likely that Wall Street policies are crippling to third world populations mostly because many of the myriad people who work in Wall Street are a bit morally crippled themselves, and don't have the imagination to concern themselves with the harm their self-enrichment is doing to people they have no empathy for. Simple causes are enough to explain what you see. Doesn't make these extremely complex ones impossible, just implausible.

See my responses interspersed below. Quoted text marked with >>

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

>>all true so far. But, when you dive into specifics:
there are lots of missing adjectives there, that should be there to qualify the observations.

That's the fallacy of words for ya - they are seriously low resolution and require at least a thousand adjectives to go tit to tit with images. You'll just have to interpolate the blank spots the best you can with the interpretive framework you have developed out of your own curiosity, which should be relevant given your able expressivity.

>>No, don't blindly trust anyone - governments, corporations, or your grandma. Granny, because she might not know what she's talking about, and the others, because their interests don't always align with yours.

Check. The trick is to be free from alignment to anything other than a point for point duplication of external reality. But that pesky time factor enters in and external reality changes from instant to instant. So that interpretive framework better damn well be capable of upgrade and update.

>>Just one specific that to me shows the fallacy of your position: "the radical left" isn't a thing, certainly not something that can be controlled by something else that isn't a thing, the "fascist internationale".

Straight up wrong. The fascist internationale didn't die in a bunker in the courtyard of the Reich Chancellery on Walpurgisnacht 1945. And its beating heart does not reside within the various White Nationalist outcroppings. Where do you think its beating heart lies? Trump? Boy, are you easy to fool.

>>Those are informal categories of people, not organizations with a board that can implement an agenda.

Wrong again. Watch this video and learn the existence of that very self same agenda board you require to be a chimera - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mB-pdPaQNKA

>It's far more likely that Wall Street policies are crippling to third world populations mostly because many of the myriad people who work in Wall Street are a bit morally crippled themselves,

Any organization will reflect the mind at its top. Your attempt to relegate evil to a diffuse human error, fudge or venality factor kinda leaves out that little number we like to call "purposive volition". You think that Jeffrey Epstein was murdered in his cell while his jailers took a vacation to be a matter of entropy, a happenstance, a chance encounter of an umbrella and a sewing machine upon a dissecting table? I actually happen to be the real estate agent of the Brooklyn Bridge in case you were considering a lucrative investment

>>and don't have the imagination to concern themselves with the harm their self-enrichment is doing to people they have no empathy for.

Don't have the imagination?!! Who the Sam Hell you think humanity has been dicing it up with the past 10,000 years? Apparently they have imagination enough knock the righteous back on their heels from time to time on a regular basis since the invention of priesthoods. They know damned well and truly the suffering they inflict, but like sadists, they actually enjoy it. They didn't enjoy it too much at Ykaterinberg 1918, but they have a bit of wealth to toss around these days and can buy, at the point of an extortion gun or blackmail letter, all the imagination they require.

>>Simple causes are enough to explain what you see. Doesn't make these extremely complex ones impossible, just implausible.

Yah, yah, Occam's Razor, one of the great cognitive consensus hoaxes of the modern era. Occam's razor only works with a three color, three finger cartoon tunnel vision of the world. In an existant world of unfathomable complexity, we are crippled by the ease with which we accept the "authoritative" plausible, devoid of a rigorous comparison with actual history or documentation. Watch the freaking video and learn something.

Conspiratorially,
W.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

The Occupy Wall St. movement was unleashed precisely because Wall St. banks operate secretly to subject the 3rd World to grinding chronic poverty with IMF and World Bank loan "conditionalities" or collateral, which is nothing more than raw materials extortion, that usually require a dictatorship to carry out. No one should trust any bureaucratic governmental or corporate entity ever.

---

Yes. Quite so, as the Brits say...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

By the way - the radical left is under the control of the fascist internationale, has been since Operation Gladio put the CIA in charge of the Baader Meinhoff and Brigada Rossa radicals in the 1970's resulting in the assassination of Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro by those useful tools.-

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Operatio...coups_in_Italy.

---

Also true.

Back in the late 'eighties, I stumbled upon the books of two serious academics. They were Anthony Sutton, a former Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford, and Carroll Quigley, the professor of Political Science at Georgetown University whom Bill Clinton (later) cited as his "mentor" in his acceptance speech at the Democrat Party Convention in 1992. These two authors were referenced in the John Birch Society book, "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" by Gary Allen, who up until roughly 1966 had been a campus leftist at Stanford.

Along about the same time - in early 1986 - through a chance turn of the radio dial one stormy night, I heard an interview of Eustace Mullins, and was exposed to the then foreign (to me) concept that the 'Federal Reserve Bank' is, in reality, a privately-owned joint-stock corporation. Subsequently, I made an exhaustive study of the literature of the four factions of the "right" that appeared to be in opposition to the Federal Reserve Bank. At the time, the four factions were: the John Birch Society; the Libertarian Party; the so-called "Populist Party" of Willis Carto; and the "National Caucus of Labor Committees" aka, the LaRouche group.

This study took several years to accomplish. Since I had grown up in Berkeley, in a decidedly "left-wing" environment, and come from a family with pronounced radical (left) tendencies, this was new material to me. During this time, I was also involved in assisting my mother in the process of researching her biography of her father, the journalist Walter Liggett, who was assassinated in 1935. In the course of doing that research I came upon the fascinating factoid that the "Old Left" - the non-Communist, "Socialist" and Mid-Western "Populist-Socialist" Left - back in the 1920's and 30's, were also opposed to the institution known as the "Federal Reserve Bank".

In point of fact - and this is the aspect of the picture that is mind-boggling - the principled opposition to the Federal Reserve Bank of the "Old Left" had been carried over as a tradition into factions of the "Old Right" that were still extant in America in the 1980's. The Progressive Party (LaFollette, 1924), the Farmer-Labor Party (1932-34) & the Socialist Party (1932) all had planks in their Party platforms that called for the Nationalization of the Federal Reserve Bank.

I say all this in order to illustrate the truth that there is a mobius twist in the so-called "political spectrum"; and that the factions that are radical - whether they be called left or right - have certain elements in common. And, over the course of time, alignments -and labels- change.

I have had to assimilate and synthesize the data in the books of Anthony Sutton and Carroll Quigley into my own political world-view. This I have been able to do without discarding the basic understanding of the "Class War" that my socialist grandmother from Flatbush gifted me with at the age of two, when I received Socialist Catechism from her, and she taught me some of my first three and four syllable words - like plu•to•crat, and plu•toc•ra•cy.

Yes, the Class War is Real - you can bank on it. Also true, is the fact that the Wall Street Bankers financed the Bolshevik Revolution - as well as Adolf Hitler and Franklin Delano Roosevelt - as Anthony Sutton very clearly revealed in his books. That was something that my grandparents - who were early enthusiasts of the Bolshevik Revolution way back in 1917 - did not know.

In the Present, George Soros is the designated cut-out for "dirty money" from the plutocrats to the controlled opposition "left" [ the "useful idiot" left ] known as "Antifa" and "Black Lives Matter"*. This has been documented. Meanwhile, George Soros continues to be a member in good standing of such select clubs of Globalist/Plutocrats as the Bilderberg Society, the Club of the Isles, and the Club of Rome. George Soros also attended (as usual) the World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland this year -2020 - where the Billionaires laid their plans for implementing ID2020, on the wings of this "Corona-virus Crisis."

* Black lives do matter - All lives matter. -But Antifa & BLM are being used by the plutes to implement the Changes that they wish to facilitate towards the implementation of their New World Order.

https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728

https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=250x250

notice the ridicule and dismissal, yet AGAIN (cartoonists V Noble prize winners) - and just who perpetuates it, like here,
versus promulgating information on medicine which actually saves lives, vital to disseminate, like here:
https://thehighwire.com/ohio-board-of-pharmacy-reverses-ban-on-hcq-after-backlash/

could this be being barred - in so many cases - because it short-circuits the vaccine agenda AND ALL the corelate social/economical/spiritual dictates imposed with virus as their basis?!?!
still not clear??? put your goggles on.

It is known and reported which countries are making hydrochloroquine their first line of defense against Covid 19. The death rates of all countries is known and reported. Anyone can access these data and create a graph - you have the colored bars represent numbers. Makes for a direct, easy to read in front of your eyes comparison. Have a look at this chart and get back to me.

https://twitter.com/gummibear737

Southern - & Sonoma - Trees Bear Strange Fruit

Rumor has it - or perhaps it is only an obscure, almost forgotten Sonoma County Legend - that the last Lynching that took place in Sonoma County took place in 1955, when an African-American man was lynched by a mob of "poor white trash" led by some of your more respectable citizens - of the sort who had Antebellum style mansions on MacDonald Avenue.

The old "hanging tree" is a place that hasn't changed much. It can still be accessed by walking along the Joe Rodota Trail. It is a site that is on the Southern side of the Trail, in the jog between Llano Road and Merced Avenue. It is hard by one of those old cattle ramps. A spooky place, still. I heard of the legend back in 1991 and went searching for it recently. I found it. It has a vibe. We're all psychic, you know.

Lots of folks were lynched in Sonoma County in the old days, by the way. The 'proper' folks who built those lovely white mansions on MacDonald Avenue, after all, were former Southern Plantation owners from Missouri, who liquidated what they still retained after the Civil War, and made it on out to sunny Santa Rosa as a Lodge. Yes indeed, dusky brethren were hung here, and Union organizers were tarred and feathered and run out of town on rails - just like in the old days, way down South.

I said all that, in order to make a point: that y'all who've been posting on the thread that I started (next door to this one), have been engaging in a little Lynch Party of your own. Aja ! But you so-called "Liberal Democrats" didn't even realize that it was a Lynch Party. Yes but it was . Y'all went out to follow a lynch mob led by the plutocrats who own & run the mainstream media, to lynch and crucify an African-American Woman - one Stella Immanuel, M.D.

“Nobody Needs to Die” - “Thousands of Doctors” are Being Silenced on Facts and Treatments


Besides making that point - and you can still address me here - i'd like to protest to Barry Chertov, here publicly, that for the past two days [CORRECTION: twenty-four hours] I have not been able to enter my cursor into the Post box on that thread; the thread that I initiated.... I have been blocked from posting over there. Go figure. I have no Idea who-dun-it or why.

-I am not fingering Barry, just letting y'all know, publicly, that I have been attempting to retain a foot in the dialog next door for the past forty-eight hours, [twenty-four hours, Ed.] and have be unable to post. For the Record.

For all I know, it could be the handiwork of the skateboard whiz kids who work in the puzzle palace ://

Any responsible or sensible person would would have asked Barry what he did or did not do regarding your posting privileges before calling him out publicly. I know you think you know something about the law of defamation (libel, slander, etc.), but you obviously do not. When a reasonable person, such as a judge or juror, would understand your words as an accusation of wrongdoing, or as having any other defamatory meaning, you cannot escape liability with a disclaimer. Since no reasonable person would believe that your BBS your troubles “could be the handiwork of the skateboard whiz kids who work in the puzzle palace ://”(even without the frownie), that does not get you off the hook that you so so gleefully and capriciously hung yourself on.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

...

Besides making that point - and you can still address me here - i'd like to protest to Barry Chertov, here publicly, that for the past two days I have not been able to enter my cursor into the Post box on that thread; the thread that I initiated.... I have been blocked from posting over there. Go figure. I have no Idea who-dun-it or why....

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

...i'd like to protest to Barry Chertov, here publicly, that for the past two days I have not been able to enter my cursor into the Post box on that thread; the thread that I initiated.... I have been blocked from posting over there.....

---

maybe. But maybe it's a web glitch, too. On my previous post, it wouldn't edit correctly, looking like I couldn't get the cursor located in a place to start editing. I beat on it a while, 'cuz, computers... and eventually it started working. Can't remember the juju that kick started it, though

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

maybe. But maybe it's a web glitch, too. On my previous post, it wouldn't edit correctly, looking like I couldn't get the cursor located in a place to start editing. I beat on it a while, 'cuz, computers... and eventually it started working. Can't remember the juju that kick started it, though

---

I had a similar problem. Several times the cursor was dodgy, so I did a *preview post* and it cleared up. Just because one is spamming the site with voluminous nonsense does not *necessarily* mean you're being fucked with by Barry.

Look who just dropped into the Ninth Ward to offer his legal opinion on the Subject of what constitutes Libel. -The same character who has steadfastly, repeatedly dodged & refused to answer my simple Question, (posed Again, below). I suggest that if he is really hurting for work and the temp gig he is currently doing as a stringer is not sufficient to keep him living that luxurious lawyer lifestyle that he - & his wife - were formerly accustomed to, that he can notify Barry himself and solicit a gig as his Solicitor. (Brit term for Lawyer.)

Now, I don't think that the small slight I may have offered Barry is actually, in reality, worthy of a lawsuit. Finell must know this. -And Barry wouldn't spring for it either, since we have a mutual love-hate relationship, of the kind that exists in family systems. The reason why this white attorney has ventured to go slumming down here is because he must fulfill his obligations to his employers - and part of that entails his duty to discredit yours truly every single opportunity he can find.

Apart from that, any judge worth his salt would throw such a lawsuit - were it to be initiated by an enterprizing attorney like the learned Stephen Finell, Esq. - out of Court, on the grounds that it is a frivolous suit. I could, after all, produce a pile of evidence in the form of personal emails, to-&-from waccob1, that made my binary option (our moderator =OR= the skateboard brigade) plausible.

I must eat crow on the time period during which I was trying, in vain, to break back into the conversation on the other thread. -For it was only 26 hours, and not 48 - though it certainly felt like the latter. I have corrected this error.

Quite apart from that, I get flack all of the time from the brats who skateboard around Georgetown and carpool out to their day-gigs ( & swing & night-shift, too) @ the puzzle palace. Just because it hasn't happened to you, doesn't mean that it ain't real. We have lived our whole lives under surveillance. It is getting worse. Get a Clue.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

You complain that those who oppose your opinions repeat themselves. Yet you keep repeating the same arguments and glorifying the same lengthy list of crackpot sources....

---

= ONCE AGAIN =

Which of these sources are you referring to, when
you say "crack pot sources", Steven Finell, Esq. ?
:

Transcript of Interview of Dr. Francis Boyle
[the lawyer who drafted the Bio-weapons Treaty of 1989]


Interview of Dr. Peter Daszak by Amy Goodman - April 16, 2020
Zoologist Debunks Trump’s COVID-19 Origin Theory, Calling It “Pure Baloney”


Article by Fred Guterl in Newsweek, April 28, 2020:
Dr. Fauci Backed Controversial Wuhan Lab with U.S. Dollars for Risky Coronavirus Research


Article by Josh Rogin, in the Washington Post, April 14, 2020
State Department cables warned of safety issues
at Wuhan lab studying bat coronaviruses


=OR=


Perhaps it is the Scientific American?

*************^Click on Link^

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

...i'd like to protest to Barry Chertov, here publicly, that for the past two days [CORRECTION: twenty-four hours] I have not been able to enter my cursor into the Post box on that thread; the thread that I initiated.... I have been blocked from posting over there. Go figure. I have no Idea who-dun-it or why.

---

It seems fitting that in this thread about conspiracy theories and reality, Mayacaman posits yet another conspiracy theory (even if only 1 person, moi, is accused of "conspiring") that has no basis in reality. Mark, you are welcome to contact privately and explain exactly what is happening and I'll look into. I don't see a problem from what I can tell.

Since WaccoBB allows HTML all sorts of problems can occur. Some of which I am able or willing to resolve, some not. You can get a better idea of what is happening by looking at the source code for your post by clicking the first button in the edit tool bar:

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco..._12-28-01a.png

You can edit the post in source code mode to correct problems. Clicking on it a second time will return the posting to the normal mode.

Common issues are mismatched or incorrectly nested or improperly formatted tags (as it was in podfish's post that I fixed) . An easy solution is to highlight the full post text (in source or standard mode) and click the remove formatting editbar tool:

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco..._12-28-01b.png

Sometimes the problem may be with a prior post on the thread.
In anycase, you are welcome to contact us privately about the problem, or continue to assume I am out to get you :burningmad:

I speak only for myself. I have no employer or client that has any interest in any of these discussions on WaccoBB. I have no employer or client that has any interest in you. I cannot think of anyone that would have any interest in discrediting you. I know of no reason why anyone would want to discredit you.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

The reason why this white attorney has ventured to go slumming down here is because he must fulfill his obligations to his employers - and part of that entails his duty to discredit yours truly every single opportunity he can find.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

I speak only for myself. I have no employer or client that has any interest in any of these discussions on WaccoBB. I have no employer or client that has any interest in you. I cannot think of anyone that would have any interest in discrediting you. I know of no reason why anyone would want to discredit you.

---

Fine, Finell. If what you say is true. Let's just agree to have a truce. But truly, I have not found anyone yet on WaccoBB who has been so consistently contentious as you have been towards me. I have already cited many incidents of all that in an earlier post. There have been further incidents since.

Nevertheless, could you kindly answer the Question that I posed - to you, Sir - in my last post here, on this thread?

= ONCE AGAIN =

Which of these sources are you referring to, when
you say "crackpot sources", Steven Finell, Esq. ?
:

Transcript of Interview of Dr. Francis Boyle
[the lawyer who drafted the Bio-weapons Treaty of 1989]


Interview of Dr. Peter Daszak by Amy Goodman - April 16, 2020
Zoologist Debunks Trump’s COVID-19 Origin Theory, Calling It “Pure Baloney”


Article by Fred Guterl in Newsweek, April 28, 2020:
Dr. Fauci Backed Controversial Wuhan Lab with U.S. Dollars for Risky Coronavirus Research


Article by Josh Rogin, in the Washington Post, April 14, 2020
State Department cables warned of safety issues
at Wuhan lab studying bat coronaviruses


=OR=


Perhaps it is the Scientific American?

*************^Click on Link^

https://waccobb.net/forums/images/misc/quote_icon.png Finell wrote: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/image...post-right.png
You complain that those who oppose your opinions repeat themselves. Yet you keep repeating the same arguments and glorifying the same lengthy list of crackpot sources....

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by geomancer:

I had a similar problem. Several times the cursor was dodgy, so I did a *preview post* and it cleared up. Just because one is spamming the site with voluminous nonsense does not *necessarily* mean you're being fucked with by Barry.

---

Well, Richard, I still am not able to post on the other thread - or to move my cursor around in order to correct my own text as I write - even after doing the "preview post" several times, as you suggested. So the Jury is out on who-dun-it. Barry has sent me an e-mail informing me that it was not him.

Ipso, ergo, it must be the hacks at the NSA - those wonderful, lovable computer whiz kids - of whom Edward Snowden was once one; who were recruited from off the campuses of our fair country by NSA 'talent scouts' who dangled the lure of big buck$ after graduation.

By the way, Thad, I see that you have given geomancer gratitude for this little dinger of a dismissal of the "voluminous nonsense" with which this one ( i ) am allegedly - "spamming the site."

I hereby take this opportunity to pose a simple Question to you - A Question that I have posed before - & one that you have dodged answering, to date:

Come out, come out, wherever you are...

A Curious, ephemeral (disappearing, now-you-see-it-now -you-don't, kind of a) message appeared yesterday in my e-mail box. It was this:

Quote:

---

Thad Wrote:

I object, I write this and am here on this website because of him. Him and the misses give lots of money to the world in kindness to care.

---

It was in written in the context of the low sample of "coronavirus humor" that Barry posted above.

So let me Guess, Thad : You be the in-house room monitor @ WaccoBB.net, detailed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation?

-And, at the present, your employers are nudging you towards the hour when you must eventually come out & declare yourself as such; but you are just a little bit sheepish about how exactly you're going to do that ??

-Eventually, your mission - once you 'come out' as a paid representative of the B&M Gates Foundation - will be to wax eloquent to all the West County Waccobbians about the benefits of being micro-chipped.

After all, it’s simply wonderful to be micro-chipped. It’s the Wave of the Future; it’s a mystical Initiation into the New Age of Global Oneness, “New Age” digital money, and the joys of Happytalism.

Tell me if I’m wrong, boss. I'm talking to you, Thad.

Quote:

---

Thad wrote:
Please unspoof me, could you repost what you thought I might be spoofing.

---

It was just this, Thad, a little bit of ephemera :

Quote:

---

Thad wrote:
I object, I write this and am here on this website because of him. Him and the misses give lots of money to the world in kindness to care.

---

Do you really believe that the NSA, or any other government agency, is interfering with your ability to post on a WaccoBB discussion?

The leading cause of computer-related problems, by an enormous margin, is user error.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

Ipso, ergo, it must be the hacks at the NSA

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

..The leading cause of computer-related problems, by an enormous margin, is user error.

---

don't let us sell you that -- the leading cause is bad UX/UI design, and bad programmers. Or, good programmers with bad project management.

Speaking from experience on both ends.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Finell:

Do you really believe that the NSA, or any other government agency, is interfering with your ability to post on a WaccoBB discussion?

The leading cause of computer-related problems, by an enormous margin, is user error.

---

You just recently said, and I Quote : "I cannot think of anyone that would have any interest in discrediting you. I know of no reason why anyone would want to discredit you."

But the digital record indicates otherwise. Your last post indicates otherwise. Because trying to discredit me is all that I have ever experienced from your poison pen ever since you arrived here in Wacco-ville. You have done it again & again and again. It goes without saying that we are all a bit nuts here. But why rub it in the way you do? *You are relentless. And it is evident that you don't want a truce, Stephen.

Just Answer my Question, Stephen Finell, Esq. - the one I repeated ^Above^ - for about the eighth time.
Don't dodge the Question and deflect the issue that you yourself raised when you wrote the following:

https://waccobb.net/forums/images/misc/quote_icon.png Finell wrote: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/image...post-right.png
You complain that those who oppose your opinions repeat themselves. Yet you keep repeating the same arguments and glorifying the same lengthy list of crackpot sources....


And while You're at it, Stephen Finell, Esq., I Demand that You Swear, under Oath and Penalty of Perjury, Here and Now, in this forum - before the General readership, GOD and the holy angels, that you are Not a paid employee of the Center for Disease Control.

You are aware -as an Attorney- that if one speaks, tells, or writes lies under Oath, one is guilty of Perjury and Fraud. *

• :wink2:

*I am putting You on the spot, Stephen.

= ONCE AGAIN =

• :wink2:
  

I am putting You on the Spot ; Also, Thad.

Declare * YourSelf :

Are You = OR = Are You Not

A Paid Member of the "Microsoft Family" ?

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco..._14-31-03a.png

EVIDENCE :

Thad wrote:
I object, I write this and am here on this website because of him. Him and the misses give lots of money to the world in kindness to care.

^****^ ***^ ***^ ***^***^ ***^***^***^

Thad wrote:
Please unspoof me, could you repost what you thought I might be spoofing.

[ SOURCE ]


Please "Unspoof" Us, Thad

Well, he's back. That honky lawyer is back down here in the Ninth Ward after shunning my challenge to answer two very simple Questions. The first Question was one I repeated many times. The second Question -which I demanded that he answer Under Oath, as if this were a Courtroom- only required a Yes or a No for an Answer. The reason why he hasn't answered the first Question is because he can not. The public may draw their own conclusions as to why he dodged the second Question.

My own methodology for arriving at an understanding of anything is to do across-the-board research. One must read everything, and be open to information, and "factoids" floating in the soup of all of the mish-mash that is out there - from whatever source. One must be open to reading and - this is most important - analyzing everything that has been put into print (i.e. books & journals) -and- now, of course, on the internet.

I have already stated, in this forum, and on this very thread, Why I avoid using professional "conspiracy theorists" as references. Although one may find useful information, true 'factoids' and pieces of the puzzle anywhere, from the standpoint of retaining or establishing one's own credibility, one must always append the reference, when such sources are mentioned, with a caveat. That is how academics and responsible journalists work. Those are the rules of the road.

On another thread - How to Analyze Disparate Media Data,'Theorize', & Resolve Contradictions - time permitting, I shall attempt to post a few more lessons in order to further explain & round out the method. This "method" of doing research is not original with me; it is common to many researchers. I learned it from two people: the historian, Bruce Levene, who was my friend up in Mendocino, and the late Mae Brussell, of Carmel Valley.

The reason why that honky lawyer can not answer my very simple Question - the one that I posed multiple times - is because none of these sources are "crackpot" sources. Yet these are the four pillars on which I began my own career as a corona-virus dissident. Because there is serious cognitive dissonance between what Dr. Francis Boyle says about the nature and origin of SARS-CoV-2 -&- what Dr. Peter Daszak told Amy Goodman.


A. February 3, 2020: Transcript of Interview of Dr. Francis Boyle
[the lawyer who drafted the Bio-weapons Treaty of 1989]

B. Interview of Dr. Peter Daszak by Amy Goodman - April 16, 2020
Zoologist Debunks Trump’s COVID-19 Origin Theory, Calling It “Pure Baloney”

C. Article by Josh Rogin, in the Washington Post, April 14, 2020
State Department cables warned of safety issues
at Wuhan lab studying bat coronaviruses

D. Article by Fred Guterl in Newsweek, April 28, 2020:
Dr. Fauci Backed Controversial Wuhan Lab with U.S. Dollars for Risky Coronavirus Research

So -Back to Square One- the Main Issue down here in the Ninth Ward hinges on
the Question of whether the damned thing is a Bio-weapon =OR= Not. Go figure.

Thad also, after a period of seven [7] days, has chosen not to answer my challenge to him – which I never would have posed, had I not paid attention to the email that arrived on my doorstep. [ See pic, below * ]

But there are other, earlier examples & epistemological evidence that Thad is the room-monitor from Microsoft, with the specific detail to influence the thinking & move the dialog in this forum. To wit:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Thad:

Here's the Elephant in the room.

For a long time the harshness of life kept the human specie fit and able and there was evolution.

The fact there are enough people in America to vote trump to the presidency proves devolution

There are 7.8 billion people on the planet and that's too many.

---

…To which I answered {Our Moderator which art in heaven moved my comments down here into the Ninth Ward}:

"Thad, I beg to differ. There are not "too many" people on the planet. There is plenty of room in North America and South America to provide a house in the country-with acreage for everyone who currently lives on the whole planet. –And there is ample Room in Africa to do the same.

As I shared with you all, the B.L.M. is sitting on almost a Quarter of a Billion acres. The "problem" lies in the fact that we are saddled with an over-class - commonly called "billionaires" - who want to have it All.

The power elite have been plotting and planning to depopulate the planet for a long time. They are the ones who have been spouting that anti-life rhetoric for the past fifty years. Their “Plan” is now in full swing. The plutocrats are busy, working for a neo-feudal future.

Please Thad, get over the thought that '...7.8 billion people on the planet are too many...' -As a thought /meme, It is not original with you; it has been implanted in your mind through repetition and auto-suggestion.”

To which Thad responded : [Comment since deleted. For documentation, See pic, below * ]

“There comes a time in life you must sum up your experiences and the things derived from them into a working stance.

The more people there is the less special they are. Why do with more what less does better.

Another elephant.

Individual nations is a nicety the planet has allowed relative to arable land, water and population growth.
As climate shifts this around and populations migrate, respect for boundaries can only be maintained by lethal threat. The invitation on the statue of liberty is dated and obsolete The constitution of America is a nice document that was a good dream for awhile but an Armageddon for the indigenous populations.

One world government is inevitable unless massive population reduction occurs hopefully brought to you by mother nature.

Permafrost is melting and releasing biological life frozen from before this last ice age, corona virus is just one of many population reductions coming soon to a theater near you.

In comparison to American Indigenous life, and the European style of living which brought into play our Constitution One world government already happened to them, What's so special about us? “

*******

I confess that I must oppose and expose this ideology for what it is – the aggressive, genocidal, marching Malthusianism of Bill Gates and his confreres of the Billionaires' Men’s Club known as the World Economic Forum – the Big Boys who meet in Davos, Switzerland every January to map out and facilitate their plans for the planet.

I am not being mean or cruel in stating these things. The record speaks for itself – whatever one may choose to see in it.

‘Outing’ people is an honorable old left tradition. It was necessary, in the Unions to out the plants & the police informers put in there by the bosses, in order to keep the membership pure.

********
****00000********99999********
**

Just did a Duck Duck Go search on _Malthus-Nazi_ and this page was the first hit, titled "The men behind Hitler" http://www.toolan.com/hitler/surplus.html


Malthus -

Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834) was an English political economist and historian who in 1798 published a book called "An Essay on the Principle of Population". This document started a reaction against the earlier writings of Godwin, Condorcet and others, who reinforced the principles of emancipation and enlightenment which ensued after the French Revolution. Malthus' theories put forward here and in later works have a surprising influence even today.


He proposed that poverty, and thereby also vice and misery, are unavoidable because population growth will always exceed food production. The checks on population growth were wars, famine, and diseases. Malthus proposed "sexual abstinence" for the working class as a means by which the population excess could be diminished and a balance achieved. In this way, the "lower" social classes were made totally responsible for social misery.


Malthus created an atmosphere which not only prevented a real solution to the social problems, but also promoted the repressive legislation which worsened the conditions of the poor in England. It was reasoned that better conditions for the poor would only encourage them to further propagate, putting those who were capable of work at a disadvantage. Malthusianism then moved forward to achieve its greatest triumph in 1834 with a new law providing for the institution of workhouses for the poor, in which the sexes were strictly separated to curb the otherwise inevitable over-breeding. This type of thinking has an inherent devaluation of human life through fear that the ever increasing population of lower classes will devour the more civilised or "better" people. This kind of philosophy, of course, urged the calling forth of drastic measures to handle the problem. The first resurgence took place a hundred and fifty years after his death, resulting in the birth-control movement, a principle which is based on Malthusianism. Following the Second World War, the idea was again taken up and today receives new momentum in the "population explosion" campaigns.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by infojockey:

Malthus -... proposed that poverty, and thereby also vice and misery, are unavoidable because population growth will always exceed food production.

---

his almost-contemporary, Swift had an answer for that, at least if you like Irish food.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

his almost-contemporary, Swift had an answer for that, at least if you like Irish food.

---

Jonathan Swift (one of my favorite writers) and Thomas Malthus were not contemporaries, Peter. Dean Swift predated Pastor Malthus by a whole century. Beyond that, when Swift wrote "A Modest Proposal" he was putting the wicked on, keeping a straight face as he did it. It was satire. He wanted to see what the social reaction-at-large would be...

Malthus, on the other hand, was in deadly earnest - and a bastard for it.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

Jonathan Swift (one of my favorite writers) and Thomas Malthus were not contemporaries, Peter. Dean Swift predated Pastor Malthus by a whole century. ...

---

both 18th Century guys, I said 'almost' contemporaries, and from the 21st century, that makes them close enough. What's the cliche? horseshoes, hand-grenades, and history???

Birthdays:

A. Jonathan Swift (30 November 1667 - 19 October 1745)

B. Thomas Robert Malthus (14 February 1766 - 23 December 1834)

No Biggee, Peter - but they were born a Century apart. I favor Swift.

But you are mistaken when you say: "from the 21st century, that makes them close enough."

I suppose that may be "close enough" for someone who lives in the two-dimensional world of Flatland - but I don't. I am privileged -gifted, really- to see the world from above - the overview - and from here, I tell you, the changes in the cultural and social milieu were quite substantial in that hundred years between 1666 -=- 1766 .

Furthermore, the changes that took place between 1745, when Swift passed on, and 1766, when Malthus was born, were phenomenal. The Seven Years War took place - the first actual 'world war' - after which Great Britain emerged as the dominant world power.

And, during the life of Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) the world changed even more: Revolutions in America and France; revolutions in technology (the steam engine); the Napoleonic Wars and the Industrial Revolution. -All of which, Dean Swift could scarcely have imagined.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

both 18th Century guys, I said 'almost' contemporaries, and from the 21st century, that makes them close enough. What's the cliche? horseshoes, hand-grenades, and history???

---

Thad **Saith:

"...One world government is inevitable unless massive population reduction occurs hopefully brought to you by mother nature.

Permafrost is melting and releasing biological life frozen from before this last ice age, corona virus is just one of many population reductions coming soon to a theater near you..."

Doctor Peter Daszak Saith:

Well, we’ve done the science on this. We’ve been working on this for 20 years. We tracked every known emerging disease to its origin, from the scientific literature. And then we tested, with mathematical models, what’s driving that, what are the causes that could underlie the emergence of these new diseases. And what we found is they emerge in places where human populations are very dense and growing. They emerge in the tropics mainly, because that’s where the wildlife diversity is, and the viruses that become pandemic come from wildlife.

And the other key factor is land-use change, people moving into new areas, encroachment into wildlife habitat, building roads into a forest for a mine or for a logging camp. There are many, many examples of diseases, like Ebola, SARS and others, HIV itself, from this. And that’s a global trend that will drive the rise of future pandemics.

Now, we’re not saying that we’ve got to stop every modern aspect of development. We can do these things, but we need to do them in a smarter way, a more sustainable way. And we need to start treating pandemics as a risk of doing these things around the planet. We’ve got to reassess our relationship with the environment and reduce our ecological footprint. It’s to the benefit of conservation. It’ll reduce climate change. It will also stop us getting sick. And I think that’s a really important point. For folks on the right who aren’t interested in conservation or climate change, what about your own health? You know, we are making ourselves sick by making the planet sick.

And that’s really the message that needs to come through from this, because if we just treat this as another disease, wait for a vaccine and then think, “Great, it’s all over,” well, I’ve got news. There are 1.7 million more viruses out there that will be emerging in the future. We can either wait for them to emerge and get sick and have another global recession, or we can get out there and readdress our relationship with wildlife and make the planet a little bit healthier...."

Yahshua Ha' Meshiach *Saith:

“Βλέπετε (Take heed), μή (lest) τις (anyone) ὑμᾶς (you) πλανήσῃ (mislead). πολλοὶ (Many) γὰρ (for) ἐλεύσονται (will come) ἐπὶ (in) τῷ (the) ὀνόματί (name) μου (of Me), λέγοντες (saying), ‘Ἐγώ (I) εἰμι (am) ὁ (the) Χριστός (Christ),’ καὶ (and) πολλοὺς (many) πλανήσουσιν (they will mislead). μελλήσετε (You will begin) δὲ (then) ἀκούειν (to hear of) πολέμους (wars) καὶ (and) ἀκοὰς (rumors) πολέμων (of wars). ὁρᾶτε (Behold), μὴ (not) θροεῖσθε (be alarmed); δεῖ (it is necessary) γὰρ (for) γενέσθαι (to take place), ἀλλ’ (but) οὔπω (not yet) ἐστὶν (is) τὸ (the) τέλος (end).

ἐγερθήσεται (Will rise up) γὰρ (for) ἔθνος (nation) ἐπὶ (against) ἔθνος (nation), καὶ (and) βασιλεία (kingdom) ἐπὶ (against) βασιλείαν (kingdom); καὶ (and) ἔσονται (there will be) λιμοὶ (famines) καὶ (and) σεισμοὶ (earthquakes) κατὰ (in) τόπους (various places). πάντα (All) δὲ (then) ταῦτα (these are) ἀρχὴ (the beginning) ὠδίνων (of birth pains).

Saint John, the Revelator Scribed*:

Καὶ (And) ὅτε (when) ἤνοιξεν (He opened) τὴν (the) σφραγῖδα (seal) τὴν (-) δευτέραν (second), ἤκουσα (I heard) τοῦ (the) δευτέρου (second) ζῴου (living creature) λέγοντος (saying), “Ἔρχου (Come)!”Καὶ (And) ἐξῆλθεν (went forth) ἄλλος (another) ἵππος (horse) πυρρός (bright red); καὶ (and) τῷ (to the one) καθημένῳ (sitting) ἐπ’ (on) αὐτὸν (it) ἐδόθη (was granted) αὐτῷ (to him) λαβεῖν (to take) τὴν (the) εἰρήνην (peace) ἐκ (from) τῆς (the) γῆς (earth), καὶ (and) ἵνα (that) ἀλλήλους (one another) σφάξουσιν (they will slay); καὶ (and) ἐδόθη (was given) αὐτῷ (to him) μάχαιρα (a sword) μεγάλη (great).

Καὶ (And) ὅτε (when) ἤνοιξεν (He opened) τὴν (the) σφραγῖδα (seal) τὴν (-) τρίτην (third), ἤκουσα (I heard) τοῦ (the) τρίτου (third) ζῴου (living creature) λέγοντος (saying), “Ἔρχου (Come)!”Καὶ (And) εἶδον (I looked), καὶ (and) ἰδοὺ (behold), ἵππος (a horse) μέλας (black), καὶ (and) ὁ (the one) καθήμενος (sitting) ἐπ’ (on) αὐτὸν (it) ἔχων (having) ζυγὸν (a pair of scales) ἐν (in) τῇ (the) χειρὶ (hand) αὐτοῦ (of him). καὶ (And) ἤκουσα (I heard) ὡς (something like) φωνὴν (a voice) ἐν (in) μέσῳ (the midst) τῶν (of the) τεσσάρων (four) ζῴων (living creatures), λέγουσαν (saying), “Χοῖνιξ (A choenix) σίτου (of wheat) δηναρίου (for a denarius),a καὶ (and) τρεῖς (three) χοίνικες (choenixes) κριθῶν (of barley) δηναρίου (for a denarius); καὶ (and) τὸ (the) ἔλαιον (oil) καὶ (and) τὸν (the) οἶνον (wine) μὴ (not) ἀδικήσῃς (you should injure).”

Καὶ (And) ὅτε (when) ἤνοιξεν (He opened) τὴν (the) σφραγῖδα (seal) τὴν (-) τετάρτην (fourth), ἤκουσα (I heard) φωνὴν (the voice) τοῦ (of the) τετάρτου (fourth) ζῴου (living creature) λέγοντος (saying), “Ἔρχου (Come)!”Καὶ (And) εἶδον (I looked), καὶ (and) ἰδοὺ (behold), ἵππος (a horse) χλωρός (pale), καὶ (and) ὁ (the one) καθήμενος (sitting) ἐπάνω (on) αὐτοῦ (it), ὄνομα (the name) αὐτῷ (of him was) Ὁ (-) Θάνατος (Death), καὶ (and) ὁ (-) ᾅδης (Hades) ἠκολούθει (was following) μετ’ (with) αὐτοῦ (him); καὶ (and) ἐδόθη (was given) αὐτοῖς (to them) ἐξουσία (authority) ἐπὶ (over) τὸ (the) τέταρτον (fourth) τῆς (of the) γῆς (earth), ἀποκτεῖναι (to kill) ἐν (with)ῥομφαίᾳ (sword), καὶ (and) ἐν (with)λιμῷ (famine), καὶ (and) ἐν (with)θανάτῳ (plague), καὶ (and) ὑπὸ (by) τῶν (the) θηρίων (beasts) τῆς (of the) γῆς (earth).

[ Source ]

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by occihoff:

So why do you think Dr. Fauci has done this apparently crazy and even homicidal thing? And why do so many other experts agree with him?

---

A few more points, Richard...

The “Event 201 Corona-virus Playbook” mandates that the Crisis is to be handled in a specific manner:
No alternative medical modalities other than Vaccines are to be tolerated in the mainstream media –Or- on the internet. I first learned about “Event 201” from this woman, Dana Ashlie, in this video.

Corona Virus (5G) Connections

All throughout, Dana Ashlie makes some very telling points. @ 48:00, she shows footage from within the "Event 201" meeting, where the insiders discuss how they will control & manage the Outbreak, and what new measures must be taken when people spread any information or "cures" that runs counter to the official CDC / WHO / Pharma / Gates Foundation Party-line.

A few days later, I learned, from this interview of Dr. Francis Boyle by Dr. Joseph Mercola, that “Event 201” was "a table-top exercise” - meaning a War Games exercise.

Coronavirus- Interview with Dr. Francis A. Boyle

Dr. Francis Boyle drafted the Biological Weapons Anti- Terrorism Act (BWATA) of 1989 - and he declares that this virus is a Bio-weapon. Here at WaccoBB - as elsewhere on the internet - the testimony of Dr. Francis Boyle regarding Covid-19 has been shuffled off & categorized as a "conspiracy theory". I posted it in the civil "Coronavirus" category, but our moderator moved it into the "Coronavirus Conspiracy Theories" category.

= MORE =


For a Full Tour of the "Table-top Exercise", "Event 201" :

Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Highlights Reelhttps://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.png


Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Segment 1, Intro and Medical Countermeasures (MCM) Discussionhttps://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.png

Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Segment 2, Trade and Travel Discussionhttps://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.png


Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Segment 3, Finance Discussionhttps://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.png


Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Segment 4, Communications Discussion and Epilogue Videohttps://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.png

Open Letter to Dr. Richard Hoff, aka occihoff

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

·

---

Quote:

---

occihoff wrote:
Fascinating, Mayacaman! I greatly appreciate this intimate revelation of your extraordinary personal history, and your spiritual earnestness and intensity.

---

It has been four months and a week, Dr. Hoff, since you gave me gratitude for the post in which I bared my heart and shared the story of my ‘high school graduation present’ with the world. For the past four months I have been meaning to respond to your kind words, but have put it off until now.

As an adherent of the school of Wilhelm Reich, Dr. Hoff, I think you can appreciate the manner in which the A.M.A. lords it over the field of ‘Medicine’ in Amerika. In truth, we are both heretics; I because I advocate the use of “Electro-therapy” as a modality in dealing with viruses of all sorts – and you because you have an Orgone Chamber in your little ol’ housit.

My “issues” with the A.M.A. started at the tender age of seventeen, and in the circumstances that I have described.

If there are any “Amerikan Exceptionalists” out there within the sound of my megaphone who think “It Can’t Happen Here” with regards to the sort of psychiatric persecution of Christians that went on in the old Soviet Union by the men in white smocks armed with drugs and syringes here in Amerika... Well, I’ve got news for them. It was happening here in the good old U.S.A. as long ago as 1967.

Dr. Eldridge would have let me out of that bloody place after two weeks if I would have signed on to the formula that I was “crazy” when I came in and was “seeing things that don’t exist” ( i.e., LORD Jesus). But I could not do that. He is Real – Beyond the reality of our own little mundane plane.

You may perceive that seeing LORD Jesus did not turn me into either a religious fanatic or a “right-wing” political reactionary. I still retain a profound respect for the elements that are deep and true in Buddhism and Taoism. My “politics” have remained the same. I was raised a peacenik and I still am one. War is still a Racket. Guns & Cannons & Bombs & Germ warfare, etc., are all “evil inventions” – to borrow a phrase from St. Paul.

I realize that I have expressed my frustration with the folks in this forum for their tendency to not study or read up on all of the information about this “crisis.” It has occurred to me lately that I should be somewhat more tolerant. After All, one cannot expect other people to live up to ones own standards. And, if I am "extraordinary" - as you put it - I freely admit that I have nothing that I have not received. I encourage you all to be diligent and to study, as I do.

I also realize that the probable reason why Yahshua Ha’ Messiach appeared to me on Christmas Day in 1966 was most likely because I had put myself through a crash course in comparative religion & had read everything - all of the texts of the six “major religions” : the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, the Torah & the Prophets, the Teachings of the Compassionate Buddha, the Tao Te Ching, the New Testament, the Koran, the “Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh” & the “Autobiography of a Yogi.”

My Vision of LORD Jesus was my reward for having had an Open Mind. “Those who seek me early shall find me.” In the same manner, I encourage everyone to be open to information from all sources in this current crisis. That’s the method that Mae Brussell taught her disciples.

The whole field is like a tapestry or mosaic. One must be willing to study all of the phenomenal world with a magnifying glass like a scholar, and go over it all {the whole open pit} with a trowel and a basting brush, as an archeologist does.

Open Letter to Sandy Murphey, aka Shandi

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

·

---

Quote:

---

Shandi wrote:
Thank you for sharing the painfully intimate details of what you suffered while incarcerated in the "Langley-Porter" CIA drug experiment facility. I'm glad you made it out alive and in one piece mentally, if not emotionally. How could anyone go through this, and not be damaged?

But here you are, trying to share information that's too frightening to be believed. The result is rejection for the "protection" of the status quo.

Front runners are always a target. Be safe!

---

Dear Sandy, as I have shared with Dr. Hoff, It has taken me this long to get back to you on this. I realize that the reason for this is because there is a threshold of pain here – and shame, also - that has not gone away, even after so many years. After all, people reason ‘If his father, who was a Doctor, put him in a Mental Hospital, he must have been crazy.’ I’ve even had ministers tell me as much, after I have shared the details of my story with them.

I felt compelled to tell the whole story, from the beginning, because someone asked me “Do you believe that a vaccination for the virus will contain a microchip?” I am compelled to explain why I am more than critical of the A.M.A. – which is a corrupt dinosaur of an institution - functionally, an arm of the Rockefeller Empire - and which has, historically co-operated with the C.I.A., another wing of the Rockefeller Syndicate on a number of "Operations" & "Projects” over the years.

Langley-Porter Neuro-psychiatric Institute in the 1960’s was known on Haight Street as a C.I.A. drug experimentation facility. I was raped in that hospital. Not sexually, but with a syringe. And that is why I post now. I have experienced the cutting edge of brazenly brutal “medical science” in all of its coercive violence, masquerading as “healing.”

My dear departed dad – whom I loved dearly – explained to me, thirteen months before he committed me, the reason for his animus towards my person. He described it as a function of his own “Saturn Complex” – the deep subterranean drive within a father to clip the wings and “level’’ a son who is perceived as being smarter or better in some ways than himself. In a sense, My father gave me a wonderful gift – the awareness of this tendency in the male psyche: the Saturn Complex.

It explains a whole lot: Why there is continual War, & why each succeeding generation of Males sacrifices the up-and-coming generation. In 1970, the Year of the Kent State massacre, a radical collective in the Art Department at Cal, Berkeley produced a poster in Protest. It read : “Amerika Is Devouring Its Children”* Well, Amerika sure was. And it’s still going on, Denny.


**********

Thank you once again, Mark, for baring your soul like this. I feel much closer to you.

By the way, I must tell you that I am not a "doctor." I am a mere "bachelor." Nor do I have an orgone chamber--much as I respect and have learned from the writings of Wilhelm Reich, plus my experiences undergoing actual body psychotherapy.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:

·

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by occihoff:

·

---

Thank you, also, Richard Hoff. I figured I owed it to you to pick up that thread and say a few more words on the subject. But as I say, there was a threshold of pain that I had to overcome before I could utter them in print, in public. *I did inquire of Judith Iam - who once lived with you and Margaret - if you had an Orgone box in your house, and she said she thought you did. -For what it's worth.

You may notice, Richard, at the top of this column, that Barry Chertov, our erstwhile moderator, saw fit to move my comments that were made in response to a comment you'd made in a thread I initiated that still remains (miraculously) in the uptown ward,

Dr. Fauci’s Double Standards: Polarizing the Nation on Hydroxychloroquine


>>> down into the Ghetto of the Ninth Ward...

https://waccobb.net/forums/images/misc/quote_icon.png Posted in reply to the post by occihoff: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/image...post-right.png

A few more points, Richard...

The “Event 201 Corona-virus Playbook” mandates that the Crisis is to be handled in a specific manner:
No alternative medical modalities other than Vaccines are to be tolerated in the mainstream media –Or- on the internet. I first learned about “Event 201” from this woman, Dana Ashlie, in this video.

Corona Virus (5G) Connectionshttps://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.png

All throughout, Dana Ashlie makes some very telling points. @ 48:00, she shows footage from within the "Event 201" meeting, where the insiders discuss how they will control & manage the Outbreak, and what new measures must be taken when people spread any information or "cures" that runs counter to the official CDC / WHO / Pharma / Gates Foundation Party-line...

...

And that's totally in Sync with the "Event 201" playbook !

= *go *figure *=

Quote:

---

https://waccobb.net/forums/images/misc/quote_icon.png Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/image...post-right.png

---

Quote:

---

podfish wrote:
if you're trying to persuade people of something, it helps to know why they may not already accept the ideas you're pushing - to think about what are considered red-flags, that indicate to your audience that the information being presented isn't necessarily credible. It's not hard to figure out what those of us who are resisting your message think, what we find a bit ridiculous or unconvincing, because we're not shy about pointing it out.

When someone presents a case that challenges the mainstream thinking, has believable explanations for why these challenges aren't necessarily being accepted, and new reasons on why they should, it'll be far better recieved.

Still, though, there's the need to deal with the limitations of the media: this is the interwebs for people with short attention spans. Information presented here has to be engaging, pithy and leave you eager to learn more

---

Seems to me, if I remember correctly Peter, that around about a fortnight ago, you said in passing that you were taking a class in how to open links. How's that coming? Have you done any homework lately? Because -once more- I would present this here link for you-all to Open:

Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Segment 4, Communications Discussion and Epilogue Videohttps://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.pnghttps://www.waccobb.net/forums/images/youtube.png

That's the original, unedited version - from the horses mouth - of what I call the "Event 201 Playbook".

Now, you may have a short attention span - as podfish confesses he does - but if you can afford to spend thirty-six minutes of your precious time sitting in one place watching a video, I would recommend that you invest in this particular look / see. It may take a bit longer than the thirty-six minutes that it should run, because it stops and pauses while the talking heads are spinning their spiels.

Watch it anyway - even if it takes an hour. The silent moments are precious learning experiences, while the wheel is in spin, and the dopes are caught in mid-sentences, with those tell-tale looks on their faces.

This is the War Game "Table Top" exercise that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, John Hopkins University, the CDC, the World Economic Forum, & the UN put on in December of 2019 in anticipation of the "Main Event." At 15:19, Stephen Redd, the Man from the C.D.C., comes on, wearing his Naval Intelligence Officer's uniform. He has a few very important things to tell his co-conspirators. Listen.

If you-all keep coming down here into the Ninth Ward because you feel a little ill-at-ease about the party-line Uptown, and you sometimes wonder if we are being played - Then, Watch this Video ! Stay with it.

Quote:

---

Quote podfish wrote:
if you're trying to persuade people of something, it helps to know why they may not already accept the ideas you're pushing - to think about what are considered red-flags, that indicate to your audience that the information being presented isn't necessarily credible. It's not hard to figure out what those of us who are resisting your message think, what we find a bit ridiculous or unconvincing, because we're not shy about pointing it out.

When someone presents a case that challenges the mainstream thinking, has believable explanations for why these challenges aren't necessarily being accepted, and new reasons on why they should, it'll be far better recieved.

Still, though, there's the need to deal with the limitations of the media: this is the interwebs for people with short attention spans. Information presented here has to be engaging, pithy and leave you eager to learn more

---

This is perhaps one reason why you "may not already accept the ideas [I'm] pushing" podfish. You are not willing to Question the Sacrosanct position in the Dialectic of so-called "Liberal" Media pundits like Amy Goodman, who hosted the talking head Dr. Peter Daszak at the very beginning of the Pandemic, and established his Spin on the Origin of the Virus.

Sorry, but the so-called "Left" is Quite Kept.
= And = We Are Being Continually Played.

https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=728x728

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

·

---

You might benefit from an accurate perception of actual conspiracy. You do realize that various bits of nefarious business conducted on this planet are done in secret, yes? Have been for maybe 10,000 years, right? And you realize that things can be kept secret by the use of camouflage - lying, deception, deflection of attention. This is not esoteric arcana, this is how things are done in govt., business and CRIME. How many criminals do you imagine announce their plans? No brainer. So it becomes a matter of detecting which conspiracy theories are actual descriptions of chains of command, tactics, false flag operations, character assassination, propaganda, etc. I mean, there are serious military and political analysts, very bright men and women, who spend their entire careers trying to suss who is doing what to whom invisibly.

So start here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee, with a Senate investigation into CIA funded and staffed experiments on human cognition with the aim of a) getting a spy to confess, b) getting a spy to change sides and work for the CIA, c) discovering a personality type that is easy to manipulate d) putting a manipulable personality type into a hypnotized state. What is your take on the "Manchurian Candidate" phenomenon? The Church Committee hearings uncovered several programs designed to use drugs, hypnosis, sensory deprivation in order to get someone to do something at a particular time and place. You understand that hypnotism is a real phenomenon, I'm sure. So here we are with a govt investigation that reveals a world of persuasive techniques being studied, invented invented and employed, for real, by a govt. agency, in secret, for a hidden agenda.

Why do you think that this secret world does not exist? Why do you denigrate the topic when without the data that is revealed by a Snowden or an Assange or a Manning, we face the machinations of a rampant clandestine fascism that should be as much a worry to the average citizen as global warming or the fate of baby harp seals? Refusal to admit that conspiracy exists is a form of naivete that can destroy a culture, a nation, a tribe, a belief system. So let's not assume that all conspiracy is crap. Doing that when the data is at hand makes one into a co-conspirator, an ally, a participant with those who require secrecy and stupidity by a dumbed down public. Let's not be dumb about certain political realities or we will get what we deserve, ja?

A Few Observations on the Incidence of
“Conspiracy Theories” in “Reality”

One of the first times I became aware of the strange bi-partisan use of the term “conspiracy theory” was in the year 1991, in the course of listening to the radio. It was the second incidence of the use of the term that brought the catharsis.

I remember hearing Phillip Maldari on KPFA taking calls after he had played a tape of Doug Dowd holding forth on the Subject of Economics. Doug Dowd had mentioned the subject of the National Debt.

I called in to say that the “National Debt” was owned by the Prime Banks – which had acquired the “Debt” and made it grow through the systemic function of the Wall Street branch of the Federal Reserve Bank.

-Furthermore, I stated that the stockholders of the “Class A” (the “preferred”) stock of the prime banks are the ones who collect the Interest on the “National Debt.”

Well, Phillip Maldari didn’t bother to dialog on that subject. Instead, he just cut me of (Click!) and shouted “That’s a conspiracy theory !” and went on to the next caller. I was stung, a bit puzzled by the vehemence of the man, but took it in stride.

Shortly after that, in the scheme of things, I was playing with the A.M. radio dial one night, and happened to come across Rush Limbaugh, holding forth on the subject of Economics. Rush is a person that I have always loathed - on general principles. Still, for some reason or other, I let the dial linger on that spot. He was taking calls.

No sooner had I tuned in to good ol’ Rush, some Mid-Westerner (from the Southern Mid-West, judging by his accent) called in to say that the Federal Reserve Bank is a “Privately owned Joint Stock Company.” –And what did good ol’ (10-4, ditto, good buddy) Rush do? He immediately hung up on that caller (Click !) and decried, with vehemence and considerable contempt, “That’s a conspiracy theory!” Bingo.

Bingo. That was the moment in time when I realized that the Institution known as the “Federal Reserve Bank” was a hot potato. For, Lo & Behold, “left-wing” talking heads @ Pacifica & “right-wing” talk jocks @ Clear Channel were reacting in exactly the same manner at the mere mention of any suggestion that the Fed might be a privately owned Money-Cartel.

It was as if a red light in the studio began to flash as soon as any caller mentioned the "Federal Reserve Bank" in a critical manner. Whether it was @ Clear Channel or @ Pacifica, the response was the same : [Click !] followed by the exclamation : “That’s a conspiracy theory!”

Not many people in the general public were aware of the birth of the phrase. The term – the juxtaposition of the words “conspiracy” with the word “theory” - was first coined by the philosopher Karl Popper in the 1950’s. It was in the wake of the first critical appraisals of the paperback “abridged” version of the Warren Commission Report in 1964 that the term took on a life of its own.

The actual, full transcripts of the Warren Commission Hearings filled twenty-five (25) volumes of single-spaced, dense text. Each volume was folio-sized (8 ½” x 11”) and three inches thick.

I happen to know this because the late Mae Brussell (1922-1988) who purchased the whole shebang (she had both the money and the interest to make the purchase) spoke on her radio program on KAZU (Pacific Grove) about the day the sizeable wooden crate from Washington, D.C., arrived at the doorstep of her home in Carmel Valley.

To her surprise, when she unpacked all twenty-five folio-sized 3-inch thick volumes, she found that there was no Index. From that moment, Mae Brussell resolved to dedicate herself to producing an Index for the exhaustive twenty-five volumes of the Complete Warren Commission Hearings.

She had seen both Kennedy and Oswald assassinated - live on television. She had heard Oswald say, before he was offed "I'm just a patsy." She was certain Oswald had been silenced because he knew too much. Mae Brussell was a single, divorced mother with two daughters to raise, but she dedicated as much time as she could to the project.

Seven years later – without the aid of a personal computer – and using only index cards, she produced the Index: also folio-sized, single-spaced, and three inches thick. She had it bound. Being a daughter of the I. Magnin family, she could afford to do that.

By that time (1971) Mae Brussell knew who had killed John Fitzgerald Kennedy & why. It was all in the transcripts of the Warren Commission Hearings. Through a tangled web of un- pursued leads and dangling threads of testimony that begged questions of the Commissioners - Questions that were never asked - the evidence of whodunit and why was all contained in the exhaustive transcripts themselves.

From 1971 until shortly before her death from a fast-acting cancer in 1988, Mae Brussell had a good run for seventeen years on her weekly radio show -at first on KLRB- and then on KAZU, during which time she exposed the details of the networks behind the assassination of Kennedy and made a full disclosure of the many things she learned in the course of her continuing research.

The paperback, condensed version of the “Warren Commission Report” was produced and released to the public in 1964 with the express – and deceitful - prior intention of blaming the assassination of John Kennedy on a “lone nut / lone assassin.”

During the seven years after 1964, while Mae Brussell and other correspondents & researchers in the field of the Kennedy Assassination were studying the issue of ‘Who killed Kennedy and Why’, the C.I.A. was also busy. After the first wave of critical assessments of the “street” paperback version of the Warren Commission Report were published, and the ‘cat was out of the bag’ the C.I.A. itself set up a little cottage industry churning out paperback after paperback of “conspiracy theories” about who killed Kennedy – all of which were black propaganda and disinformation.

The upshot of that flood of C.I.A.-engendered paperbacks & disinformation on WKK? (Who Killed Kennedy?) was that a score of critics & hack journalists with C.I.A. ties in the kept press decreed each new essay in the stream to be “just another conspiracy theory.” It was a very deft inside / outside job with the obvious intent of keeping the lid on the Subject. This is called, in C.I.A. parlance, “containment.”

Another Chapter in the ongoing brainwashing of Amerikans, teaching them to react in a Pavlovian manner at the mention or even the inference of “conspiracy theory”, & further, to think that they discern “conspiracy thinking” in the presence of data that may merely be old-fashioned muckraking, took place in 1991, in the aftermath of the release of Oliver Stone’s film, “JFK”.

This Operation – which in retrospect had all the earmarks of a Psy-Op - took place in left-wing journals like “Z Magazine”, “The Nation” & “The Progressive”. It was framed in terms of a debate between the “Systems Analysis” folks (the school fostered by Noam Chomsky & M.I.T.) and the remnant of the “left” who held that there had been a conspiracy involved in the Kennedy assassination.

Roughly a year and a half after this debate in the left-wing journals began – and as it tended to subside – some pollsters did an exit poll among “progressives” and compared the findings with a similar exit poll which had been taken of progressives who had been waylaid while leaving the movie theaters where “JFK” had been playing a year or more before.

To the surprise of many, after all the “debating” was over, the numbers of the progressives who still believed that there had been a “conspiracy to kill Kennedy” had diminished, significantly. A significant percentage of Amerikan "leftists" had been won over to the "Systems Analysis" approach of Noam Chomsky. In my humble opinion, this is unfortunate. -I am not a advocate of "conspiracy thinking" - I just think that one should have a balanced approached that allows for the existence of conspiracies in politics.

I would suggest that in the present reality – of the Covid-19 Pandemic and president Trump’s reaction to it - that it would do well for all Americans (& denizens of the Earth) to consider all of the angles – among which are:

A. The relationship of the CDC & the WHO to the Pharmaceutical Industry (the Medical-Industrial Complex)

B. The strong likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 is a Lab-created pathogen, and as such, a Bio-Weapon.

C. The long-term Plan of the power elite to depopulate the “useless eaters” of the earth and implement the final phases of their long-heralded “New World Order.”

from the article:

The Deceptions and Disguises of Noam Chomsky

by James DiEugenio

IV

Before centering on the issues of Kennedy’s assassination and his presidency, it is important to discuss briefly the general issue of the Cold War, if only to place those subjects in historical context. As with many leftist polemicists, Chomsky usually does not do this. And when he does, he almost exclusively centers on what western powers did to cause the Cold War and continue it.Yet it would seem to most people to be important to review objectively these matters in any historical discussion of American foreign policy from 1945-1991—the obvious reason being that it was the most powerful influence on American foreign policy and world events in that time period. Every president from Harry Truman to George H.W. Bush was strongly influenced by it, to the point that almost every major foreign policy issue was colored by it. Therefore, if one is writing the history of this period, or a part of it, one has to factor this into the discussion. If not, then one can be accused of ignoring, or discounting, the historical backdrop.

For to deprive these events of their context is to sap them of some of their meaning. Related to this, another problem with Chomsky—as noted above—is imbalance. The policy of aiding foreign countries in their resistance to communism was spelled out way back in 1947 with the Truman Doctrine. This was then endorsed by Congress, and legislation was passed to carry out the policy. One can argue whether or not the Cold War was exaggerated, whether it was too covert, even whether or not it was justified. But one cannot act as if it did not exist. Or that the communist side had no provocations to it, or had no atrocities done in its name. For how else can one explain the Korean War, Hungary in 1956, or the Russian invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968? We can continue in this vein with the Chinese usurpation of Tibet or the crimes of Fidel Castro, or those of Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong, the latter of which are both mind-boggling.

But as with Pol Pot in Cambodia, these things are minimized, discounted or ignored by people like Chomsky, and the late Alexander Cockburn. Almost all of the critical analysis was and is of the USA. But if things like balance and historical context are left out, then what is this kind of writing really worth?

Which is another way of saying the following: A theoretical approach is only as good as the person who uses it. If that writer is too biased one way or the other, the result will suffer greatly. To make a point of comparison: Michael Parenti is also an advocate of the aforementioned style of analysis we have called “structural” or “systemic”. Yet he understands that there are men and women who occasionally manage to rise above the system and do some good for a great number of people. And Parenti also understands that political conspiracies do exist, and have been proven to exist. To use just one example, the heist of the 2000 election in Florida by Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris.

Even though this crime was done in broad daylight—what with roadblocks set up to hinder people from voting—no person was even interviewed by any law enforcement arm, let alone indicted. The political result of this was horrendous: George W. Bush created a totally unjustified war in Iraq. A war that Al Gore would not have started. Not only do political conspiracies exist, if not addressed, prosecuted, and stopped, they can have terrible results for hundreds of thousands, even millions, of people. So to deny they occur is to deny reality. And as Parenti has said, reality is sometimes radical.

A second problem with using this system-oriented approach is that—as we have seen with Cambodia—it tends to sweep all contrary facts or evidence into an ideological whirlpool. That is, facts get discounted, data gets warped, and key events are sometimes omitted. What is important is keeping the model of that oppressive structure intact. If facts or data collide with that model, it’s the facts or data that get discarded or discounted. The theoretical underpinnings of Chomsky and Edward Herman’s writings on Cambodia were to show that American and western media was distorting a communist revolution. Therefore, they repeatedly used phrases like “the alleged genocide in Cambodia”, or they wrote that “executions have numbered at most in the thousands”. (See this article) This last comment was written in 1979, when the Khmer Rouge regime had fallen and some reporters had visited the country to actually see the horrible devastation with their own eyes. At times Chomsky and Herman used Khmer Rouge sources and endorsed books that extensively sourced footnotes to Pol Pot’s government releases. This approach is a serious problem for people who actually care about things like accuracy, fairness, and completeness.

In the wake of Oliver Stone’s JFK, what was so odd about the Chomsky/Cockburn allegiance to a point of view which privileges the critique of institutions as systems is that it disappeared upon their inquiry into Kennedy’s murder. That is, in both men’s comments on the Warren Commission and its presentation of evidence, you will nowhere find any discussion of the lives and careers of the persons who controlled that investigative body. Men like Allen Dulles, John McCloy, Gerald Ford, and J. Edgar Hoover. Yet, those four men dominated the Commission proceedings. (See Walt Brown’s book, The Warren Omission, especially pp. 84-87).

This is odd—in two respects. First, it was these men, not Kennedy, who had played large parts in being ‘Present at the Creation’—that is, in forming and then supporting the Eastern Establishment, which was responsible for setting up and maintaining the structure of American government in the 20^th century. Any critic of the way institutions of power function would surely be concerned with this detail, because in presenting that particular case, one does not have to juggle, manipulate, and distort the evidence. There are books on these men in which tons of evidence exist to make that demonstration. These four were clearly responsible for some of the worst American crimes of the 20^th century. (See James DiEugenio, Reclaiming Parkland, second edition, pp. 234-40, 321-40.)

Secondly, to somehow suppose that those four would not manipulate the evidence in a murder case is simply to ignore the reality of who they were. Yet this is the concept that both Chomsky and Cockburn supported. For instance, as mentioned earlier, Cockburn actually interviewed a junior counsel for the Warren Commission in the pages of The Nation. He never asked him one challenging question. Which is incredible considering the record of that Commission.

Regarding Chomsky, consider an incident from 1994. Two subscribers to Probe Magazine, Steve Jones and Bob Dean, went to a meeting of the Democratic Socialist Club of Reading, Pennsylvania. Chomsky was the guest speaker. Both Jones and Dean were surprised when Chomsky seemed to veer off topic to go into a tirade against President Kennedy. When Jones and Dean tried to approach and talk to Chomsky about Kennedy afterwards, he became “very defensive and dismissive of us, brushing us off by saying that he’d seen all of the evidence.” Apparently, this meant the declassified record, and therefore there was nothing to address. (e-mail communication with Jones, 6/19/2017)

Again, this tells us much about Chomsky’s respect—or lack of—for scholarly practice. Because, at that time, the Assassination Records Review Board had just begun declassifying two million pages of records that had previously been kept secret from the public on the JFK case. Hence no one had seen them prior to this time. Including Chomsky. So what was he talking about? The evidence the ARRB declassified concerning the actual circumstances of Kennedy’s murder make the case against Oswald pretty much insupportable. And in just about every way: concerning Oswald, Kennedy’s autopsy, the ballistics evidence, and Oswald’s alibi. (For the last, see Barry Ernest’s book, The Girl on the Stairs.)

Further, neither Cockburn nor Chomsky seemed to be aware of the transcript of the final executive session of the Warren Commission. Sen. Richard Russell, Representative Hale Boggs, and Senator John Sherman Cooper—who I have previously called the Southern Wing—had planned on expressing their reservations at this meeting about the Single Bullet Theory. The idea that one bullet, CE 399, had gone through both Kennedy and Governor John Connally, smashing two bones, making seven wounds, emerging almost entirely unscathed, and losing almost no volume from its mass. Russell, especially, wanted his objections expressed in the record of this final meeting. Today, we have the record of that meeting. There is no trace of his, or anyone else’s, reservations about the Single Bullet Theory. For the simple reason that there was no stenographic record of that final meeting. (Gerald McKnight, Breach of Trust, p. 284)

In other words, the Eastern Establishment figures—Dulles, McCloy, and Ford, likely coopted Chief Justice Earl Warren and chief counsel J. Lee Rankin into tricking the other members into believing there would be such a record. In fact, a woman was there masquerading as a stenographer. But the Commission’s contract with the stenographic company had expired three days prior. (ibid, p. 295) As Gerald McKnight writes about this matter, the obvious reason for this charade was to keep the strenuous objections of the Southern Wing out of the transcribed record, and thereby maintain the illusion that the Commission had been unanimous in its verdict on the case. In other words, here was an almost textbook case of the way institutions tend to ensure the survival of belief in the status quo, one made to order for critics on the Left.

But in an unexplained inconsistency, both Chomsky and Cockburn dropped the structural approach in their analysis of the Commission. Even though it would seem to be perfectly suited for that type of analysis. Why? Because if one did explain who these men were and what they did with the evidence, then one could conclude that they covered up the true circumstances of Kennedy’s death, for the simple reason he was not a member of their club. Which is a direction they do not want to go in.

Yet, David Talbot demonstrates this at length in his analysis of the conflicts between President Kennedy and Allen Dulles during 1961. These were centered on Kennedy’s Congo policy, Dulles’ backing of the revolt of the Algerian generals against French President Charles DeGaulle, and ultimately how Dulles lied to Kennedy about the Bay of Pigs operation. (Talbot, pp. 382-417) In other words, in just one year, the CIA Director had come into conflict with Kennedy over three important areas and events. Finally, Kennedy felt he had to terminate Dulles, along with both his Deputy Director Charles Cabell, and Director of Plans Richard Bissell.

The first and only time in 70 years that has been done at the CIA. As Talbot also points out, after Kennedy was killed, Dulles lobbied for a position on the Warren Commission (ibid, pp. 573-74)—something that no one else did. As previously referred to, Walt Brown has shown that Dulles then became the single most active member of the Warren Commission. During a meeting with Commission critic David Lifton at UCLA in 1965, Dulles showed utter disdain for any of the evidence that the Commission had ignored or misrepresented to the public, e.g., the Zapruder film frames. (Talbot, p. 591)

Let us use just one other example. Robert Kennedy was the first Attorney General who actually exercised some degree of control over FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. The enmity between the two has been well chronicled by more than one author. After JFK was killed, Hoover had Bobby Kennedy’s private line to his office removed. (Anthony Summers, Official and Confidential, p. 315) The Warren Report itself says that Hoover and the FBI were responsible for the vast majority of the investigation. (See, p. xii) Therefore, why would such men—Dulles and Hoover—who clearly had no love for JFK, bend over backwards to find out the truth about his death? The fact is they did not. For example, the day after the murder, Hoover was so concerned about who killed President Kennedy that he was at the racetrack. (Summers, op. cit.) To leave out things like this, and much more, is not writing history. And it is not honest scholarship. It is depriving the reader of important information.

[ Source ]

from the article:

The Deceptions and Disguises of Noam Chomsky

by James DiEugenio

V

Chomsky operates his views of both Kennedy and his murder via inductive, closed-system reasoning. It is both banal and simplistic: since the USA operates in a sick political and economic system, no one can rise above it. Therefore, Kennedy was really no different than Nixon, Johnson, and Eisenhower. The underlying problem—as writers like Donald Gibson and Richard Mahoney have demonstrated—is that when one actually studies the record, Kennedy was not part of the Power Elite, and did not aspire to be part of it. This is why, as Donald Gibson has shown, Kennedy and David Rockefeller—the acknowledged leader of the Eastern Establishment at the time—had no time or sympathy for each other. (See Gibson’s Battling Wall Street throughout, but especially pp. 73-76) The reason Kennedy made his historic 1957 Senate speech on the impending doom of French colonialism in Algeria was because he had been in Vietnam when the French empire there was collapsing. He understood that the Vietnam conflict had not really been about communism, but about nationalism. And he said this many times, and took considerable heat for it. (See Mahoney, JFK: Ordeal In Africa, pp. 14-23)

When Oliver Stone’s JFK came out, Chomsky made numerous statements questioning Stone’s thesis about Kennedy’s intent to withdraw from Vietnam. He eventually wrote an essay in Z Magazine on the topic. In essence, he denied all the withdrawal evidence as outlined by Fletcher Prouty and John Newman, who advised Stone on that subject. The problem for Chomsky today is that other scholars decided that Prouty and Newman were on to something. After all, Prouty actually worked on Kennedy’s withdrawal plan in September of 1963. John Newman was writing a revolutionary book on the subject entitled JFK and Vietnam, which was published in January of 1992.

Seriously considering that evidence, these scholars then went to work. And today, a small shelf of books exists on the subject. These authors agree with the Stone/Prouty/Newman withdrawal thesis, e.g., David Kaiser’s American Tragedy, James Blight’s Virtual JFK, Gordon Goldstein’s Lessons in Disaster. One reason these new books are there is that the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) declassified many pages of documents that support the withdrawal thesis. This declassification process occurred in 1997. Any serious scholar has to consider new evidence when it is declassified. Chomsky did not. In 2000, in a book called Hopes and Prospects, in relation to this issue, he wrote: “On these matters see my Rethinking Camelot ... . Much more material has appeared since, but while adding some interesting nuances, it leaves the basic picture intact.” (pp. 123, 295)

In other words, the scores of pages of new ARRB documents released on the subject, the recorded tapes in the White House, and the new essays and books published, these amount to “nuances.” The “nuances” include President Johnson confessing in February of 1964 that he himself knows he is breaking with Kennedy’s policy. They include the transcripts of the May 1963 Sec/Def meeting in Hawaii where McNamara is actually executing that withdrawal plan—with no reference to a contingency upon victory. (These and other documents are included in this presentation)

In 1997, that last piece of evidence convinced some MSM outlets, like The New York Times, that Kennedy was planning on withdrawing from Vietnam at the time of his assassination. We can go on and on. But the point is made. To any objective person, these are not “nuances”. They are integral.

To show Chomsky's bizarreness on this point, let us use two other instances of just how intent he is to disguise the facts and evidence of Kennedy’s withdrawal plan. One of his older excuses was to say that Kennedy’s advisors fabricated the withdrawal plan after the Tet offensive. (Z Magazine, September, 1992) Even for Chomsky, this is ridiculous. What is he saying? That Kennedy’s advisors falsified the then classified record while it was in the National Archives? That they also managed to get a voice impressionist to impersonate Johnson, McGeorge Bundy and McNamara discussing this withdrawal plan?

Chomsky’s latest position is a sort of rear action retreat. He now admits that Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara offered up a withdrawal plan. In other words, it was McNamara’s plan, not Kennedy’s. Not so, and let us illustrate why.

In November of 1961, a two-week long debate took place in the White House. The subject was whether or not to commit combat troops into Vietnam. Advisors Max Taylor and Walt Rostow had returned from Vietnam and made that recommendation. From all the accounts we have, Kennedy was virtually the only person arguing against that proposal. (James Blight, Virtual JFK, pp. 275-83) At its conclusion he signed off on NSAM 111 which sent 15,000 more advisors instead.

Kennedy was disturbed that he had to carry the argument virtually alone. So he decided to ask someone who he knew agreed with him to write his own report on the subject. This was Ambassador to India, John Kenneth Galbraith. Galbraith did visit Saigon, and he did write a report recommending no combat troops in theater and a gradual American distancing. (Cable of November 20, 1961, which was followed by a longer report; Blight, p. 72, see also David Kaiser, American Tragedy, pp. 131-32) Kennedy later had this report forwarded to Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara in April of 1962. This was the beginning of the withdrawal plan. We know this because on his trip to Vietnam in May, McNamara told General Paul Harkins to begin a training program for the army of South Vietnam so America could begin reducing its forces there. Harkins was the supreme military commander in Saigon. (Kaiser, pp. 132-34) Also, McNamara’s deputy Roswell Gilpatric revealed in an oral history that his boss had told him that he had instructions from Kennedy to begin to wind down the war. (Blight, p. 371) This culminated with the aforementioned declassified Sec/Def conference in Hawaii in May of 1963. At this meeting, McNamara requested from all departments—State, Pentagon, CIA—specific schedules beginning a withdrawal in December of 1963 and ending in the early fall of 1965. (James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 126)

The idea that this plan was McNamara’s is another fanciful Chomsky invention. In addition to the evidence stated above—cables, oral history—there is another undeniable fact. In the November, 1961 debates described above, McNamara was asking for the insertion of combat troops into Vietnam. In fact, his proposal was the largest request of all. He told Kennedy to commit upward of six divisions, or about 205,000 men. And he framed the request in pure Cold War terms. If this was not done, it would lead to communist control over all of Indochina and also Indonesia. (Blight, pp. 276-77) The idea that afterwards McNamara had a personal epiphany and reversed himself on his own is simply not credible. Especially when combined with the above evidence. Plus the fact that it was Kennedy alone who was holding out against combat troops in November. And as with Kennedy, there is no mention by McNamara on any tape or any of the Sec/Def documents, or in NSAM 263, that the withdrawal plan would only be completed as the circumstances on the battlefield improve. Chomsky’s arguments against Kennedy’s withdrawal plan exist in a vacuum created by him and his acolytes.

[ Source ]

Noam Chomsky on the Significance of 911 and JFK Murder



The Shame of Noam Chomsky & left gatekeepers: Barrie Zwicker

Noam Chomsky - The 5 Filters
of the Mass Media Machine -

A very interesting mini-documentary cum-animated-film narrated by Amy Goodman, the Fairy Godmother of the "New Left". Noam Chomsky and his pal Amy Goodman know what they are talking about when they speak of "Manufacturing Consent". They should; they practice the same trade on the so-called "Left".

@ the top of this thread, on March 24, 2020, I wrote:


Lo & Behold


Those busy Canadian "conspiracy theorists" at GlobalResearch.ca have been busy, busy, busy.
I just thought I would spin the word "Covid-19" in the Search box at that lovely, prolific site, and
guess what? To date, there are "about 1, 090 articles" on the Subject - and daily growing, growing,
growing - just like the number of infected & the dead & dying. O Well, What is this World coming to?

But, lest I be bested by Barry for directing Y'all to a subversive site, I'll pre-empt him by posting
the inevitable Barry rejoinder, i.e., the spiel from Wikipedia about those darned conspiracy-minded
(& subversive) Cannucks:

Wikipedia Sez:
{un-snipped}

Centre for Research on Globalization

"Globalresearch.ca" redirects here. It is not to be confused with Global News or GlobalSecurity.org.
In 2001, Chossudovsky founded the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), becoming its editor and director. Located in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, it describes itself as an "independent research and media organization" that provides "analysis on issues which are barely covered by the mainstream media".^[20]


The Centre for Research on Globalization promotes a variety of conspiracy theories and falsehoods.^[26] It has reported that the 11 September attacks were a false flag attack planned by the CIA,^[2] that the United States and its allies fund al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, and that sarin gas was not used in the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack, which globalresearch.ca articles characterized as a false flag operation orchestrated by terrorists opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.^[6][21] Other articles published on the site have asserted that the 7 July 2005 London bombings were perpetrated by the United States, Israel, and United Kingdom.^[13] Chossudovsky has himself posted articles on the site which suggested that Osama bin Laden was a CIA asset, and accusing the United States, Israel and Britain of plotting to conquer the world.^[13] The Centre has also promoted the Irish slavery myth, prompting a letter by more than 80 scholars debunking the myth.^[25]

According to PolitiFact, the Centre "has advanced specious conspiracy theories on topics like 9/11, vaccines and global warming."^[8] Foreign Policy notes that the Centre "sells books and videos that 'expose' how the September 11 terrorist attacks were 'most likely a special covert action' to 'further the goals of corporate globalization.'"^[22] A 2010 study categorized the website as a source of anti-vaccine misinformation.^[23] The Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab described it as "pro-Putin and anti-NATO".^[27] The Jewish Tribune described the Centre as being "rife with anti-Jewish conspiracy theory and Holocaust denial."^[28] Writing for the New Republic, Muhammad Idrees Ahmad, Lecturer in Digital journalism at the University of Stirling, describes the Centre's website as a "conspiracy site".^[24]

...pick your poison...


( It's called "free will" )

Yes, It is a matter of free will whether you choose to believe the subsidized & kept "fact-checkers" or consider alternative information that runs counter to the narratives promoted by the Main Stream Media - All of which, indeed, do have interlocking Boards of Directors with the Pharmaceutical-Industrial Complex. It's your choice, Dear WaccoBBians.

But should you choose, on today, to spin the word "Covid-19" in the Search box at GlobalResearch.ca, you would find that there are now 7,620 articles that contain that novel term. So, Research is being done - and is still being published - outside of the Globalist / Corporate box, and you may tap into it.

Nevertheless, if you choose to believe that everything that is posted on GlobalResearch.ca is all "conspiracy theory", that also, is your option. How convenient for the oligarchy, that a simple phrase like "conspiracy theory" could negate million of words, in the minds of millions of people. But then, people are not all that different from lemmings.

Given the fact that the initial spin on the origins of SARS-CoV-2 was spun by Dr. Peter Daszak on Amy Goodman's "Democracy Now," the so-called "Liberal / Left" has, in general, swallowed the kool-aid and gone along with Daszak & Fauci for the ride.

I suppose the hardest thing for left / liberals to grasp in this scenario, is that their heroine, Amy Goodman, could be either a dupe or a shill. That, I know, is hard to grasp. But the fact is that since at least as early as 2002, Amy Goodman has been compromised. When, in the aftermath of 9/11, and the mounting evidence that the radicals @ WBAI in New York were assembling - regarding the reality that the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job - Amy Goodman, in the midst of a serious crisis of conscience, opted to take the Chompskyite tack that all such talk was '"conspiracy theory."

Rumor has it {skuttlebut on the street} that the Big Boys let Amy Goodman know in no uncertain terms {the old horse's head in the bed routine} that if she came out with the Story about the Bush Family connection to the Event of September 11, 2001, she would become the proverbial "dead meat." Given her stature and credibility as a journalist, it was not expedient to THEM, Inc. that Amy should take that position on that critical issue. O well. You makes your choices and you takes your consequences.

Since then, Amy has chosen to take the path of -shall we say- 'lesser' resistance, and interviews the talking heads that are sent to her by way of Central Casting. These she breezily shepherds through fawning interviews, fielding them softball -and scripted- Questions. Dr. Peter Daszak being a case in point. O well. I'm not the only one who sees through the façade. Case in Point :

“Democracy Now” and the “Progressive” Alternative
Media: Valued Cheerleaders For Imperialism and War

By Finian Cunningham
Global Research, July 13, 2012

The major Western mainstream media outlets have been running a “shock and awe” propaganda offensive against the Syrian government of President Bashar Al Assad for nearly 16 months. The misinformation has been unrelenting, monolithic, unverified, one-sided and, frankly, increasingly preposterous.

With the suppression of mounting facts that Western governments are waging a covert war of aggression in Syria, the Western public is right to treat the conventional media sources with skepticism and outright contempt. Such media are seen as “politicized” and “unreliable”, serving a naked imperialist agenda for Western regime change. In a word, they are damaged goods.

This is where a segment of the so-called alternative media can play a valuable propaganda function for Western powers. Because such media are supposed to be independent, critical, non-corporate, the public tends to consider their reports as objective and unbiased. One such “alternative” news service is “Democracy Now” hosted by Amy Goodman. Goodman is seen as something of a campaigning critical journalist shedding the light of truth on the depredations of the US government, corporations and the Pentagon. But a closer look at what Goodman’s “Democracy Now” is reporting on Syria shows that the purported critical broadcaster has become a purveyor of Western government propaganda. While the mainstream media’s propaganda function is obvious to the informed public, Goodman’s “Democracy Now” plays a more subtle role. Camouflaged with the trappings of critical, independent journalism, “Democracy Now” serves to sow powerful seeds of misinformation in a way that the “compromised” mainstream media cannot.

This misinformation from “Democracy Now” is valuable to the ruling elite because to many of its readers it is not seen as misinformation.

Rather, the “news” on “Democracy Now” is viewed as reliable and representing the views of the anti-war, anti-imperialist constituency. In this way, Goodman is a valuable asset to Washington and Wall Street because her broadcasts can serve to disorient and undermine a constituency that is normally opposed to Western warmongering and imperialism. Many of the subscribers to “Democracy Now” may see through the misinformation. Many, though, may not, and therefore will become embedded with the imperialist agenda. The fact that Democracy Now ratings appear to be holding up would indicate that a lot of its followers are oblivious to the insidious effect of such misinformation. As such, Democracy Now is more valuable to the powers-that-be than, say, the New York Times or the Financial Times. “Democracy Now” ensures that the agenda of the powerful becomes infiltrated in a constituency that would otherwise be opposed to that agenda.

First, let’s recap on the mainstream propaganda offensive against Syria.

Since mid-March 2011, when violence was initially reported in that country, the Western mainstream television, radio and press studiously ignored the evidence of covert foreign-backed subversion and terrorism. Instead these outlets have sought to portray the protests as part of the pro-democracy Arab Spring popular movements that were seen in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen and Bahrain. The mainstream media have run saturation coverage to demonise the government in Damascus as a “brutal, authoritarian regime” that is cracking down mercilessly on its civilian population demanding democratic reforms. The narrative is monolithic in the major media outlets on both sides of the Atlantic. Whether the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, or the Financial Times, Guardian, Independent, Le Monde, BBC, ITN, the Irish national broadcaster RTE or the Middle East’s much-vaunted Al Jazeera – the “story” on Syria is uncannily uniform. A noble, civilian mass-based movement is being savagely crushed by a tin-eared dictator, so the story goes.

Every possible smear campaign against the Assad government has been indulged in and indeed fabricated. From the alleged killing of innocent civilians by the national armed forces, to the perpetration of massacres by pro-government militias, to self-inflicted car bombs in urban centres by Assad secret services, to the feckless shopping habits of the president’s wife. Russia Today, Press TV, Der Spiegel, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, the Vatican News Service (Agenzia Fides), to name a few, have been honorable exceptions in mainstream media journalism for conveying a more accurate picture of what is really happening inside Syria – showing that “protesters” are far from peaceful civilians, and much of the violence is actually stemming from Western, Turkish and Arab-backed mercenaries that have infiltrated the country. As the facts of US and NATO-backed violence in Syria become more transparent and harder to conceal owing to the sheer volume of covert involvement, the Western public has rightly become more skeptical about what the mainstream media outlets are telling them. Indeed, the blatant misinformation and lies that are being sold as journalism is increasingly seen as contemptible.

The Houla massacre on 24 May is a case in point. The BBC and other mainstream media outlets have been shown to be outrageously wrong in their initial rush to blame the atrocity on Syrian government forces when the evidence has slowly emerged that it was most likely the grisly work of Western-backed mercenaries.

It is all the more disquieting when a supposedly informed, alternative news service, Democracy Now, peddles such blatant misinformation – more than six weeks after the massacre occurred and after evidence has been reported that points convincingly to Western-backed perpetrators. On 9 July, Goodman broadcast an interview with Rafif Jouejati, a spokesperson for a Syrian opposition group called the Syrian Local Coordination Committees, based in Washington DC. Despite the mounting evidence of Western, Turkish and Saudi/Qatari covert operations, Goodman gave her guest a free rein to regurgitate the litany of mainstream media calumnies on Syria. Without a hint of scepticism from Goodman, her guest said:

“The bottom line is that the majority of the country is engaged in a popular revolution for freedom, for democracy, for dignity… We have mountains of evidence indicating that [Assad’s] armed forces have been engaged in systematic torture, rampant detentions, massacres across the country.”


Really? The majority of the country engaged in a popular revolution for freedom, democracy and dignity? That sounds more like the fanciful imagination of someone safely based in Washington DC. By contrast, sources in Syria have confirmed that people are terrified by Western-armed gangs running amok in their communities, kidnapping, murdering, evicting families from their homes and burning down business premises. According to the leaked Arab League Observer Mission Report, which had initially been commissioned by the Arab League at Washington’s request:

“In Homs, Idlib and Hama, the Observer Mission witnessed acts of violence being committed against Government forces and civilians that resulted in several deaths and injuries. Examples of those acts include the bombing of a civilian bus, killing eight persons and injuring others, including women and children, and the bombing of a train carrying diesel oil. In another incident in Homs, a police bus was blown up, killing two police officers. A fuel pipeline and some small bridges were also bombed. “

“Such incidents include the bombing of buildings, trains carrying fuel, vehicles carrying diesel oil and explosions targeting the police, members of the media and fuel pipelines. Some of those attacks have been carried out by the Free Syrian Army and some by other armed opposition groups.” (League of Arab States Observer Mission to Syria, Report of the Head of the League of Arab States Observer Mission to Syria for the period from 24 December 2011 to 18 January 2012, Ironically, these fact-finding observations of the AL Observer Mission , went against the interests of its Western sponsors. It was barely reported by the mainstream media)

According to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ):

“Those killed were almost exclusively from families belonging to Houla’s Alawi and Shia minorities. Over 90% of Houla’s population are Sunnis. Several dozen members of a family were slaughtered, which had converted from Sunni to Shia Islam. Members of the Shomaliya, an Alawi family, were also killed, as was the family of a Sunni member of the Syrian parliament who is regarded as a collaborator. Immediately following the massacre, the perpetrators are supposed to have filmed their victims and then presented them as Sunni victims in videos posted on the internet.” (Neue Erkenntnisse zu Getöteten von Hula.Abermals Massaker in Syrien, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, June 7, 2012 translated from the German,

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/neue-erkenntnisse-zu-getoeteten-von-hula-abermals-massaker-in-syrien-11776496.html)

The FAZ report quoted above echoes eyewitness accounts collected from refugees from the Houla region by members of the Monastery of St. James in Qara, Syria. According to monastery sources cited by the Dutch Middle East expert Martin Janssen, armed rebels murdered “entire Alawi families” in the village of Taldo in the Houla region.

Also of significance is the report of Der Spiegel (March 29, 2012) entitled “An Executioner for Syria’s Rebels Tells His Story”. A system of “burial brigades” for those executed confirms an organized process of mass-murder and extra-judicial killings. This single “burial brigade”, according to the executioner’s testimony, was responsible for the arbitrary execution of 350-400 people including “prisoners” and “traitors”. The “traitors” are Sunni civilians within the occupied urban and rural areas, who express their opposition to the rule of terror of the Free Syrian Army (FSA):

“Since last summer, we have executed slightly fewer than 150 men, which represents about 20 percent of our prisoners,” says Abu Rami. … But the executioners of Homs have been busier with traitors within their own ranks than with prisoners of war. “If we catch a Sunni spying, or if a citizen betrays the revolution, we make it quick,” says the fighter. According to Abu Rami, Hussein’s burial brigade has put between 200 and 250 traitors to death since the beginning of the uprising.” (Der Spiegel, March 29, 2012)

The Vatican News Service Agenzia Fides largely confirms that the Western backed “opposition forces” rather than the Al Assad government were responsible for countless atrocities:

“In Homs, called the “martyred city”, “opposition forces have occupied two areas, Diwan Al Bustan and Hamidieh, where there are all the churches and bishoprics,” the Archimandrite told Fides. “The picture for us – he continues – is utter desolation: the church of Mar Elian is half destroyed and that of Our Lady of Peace is still occupied by the rebels. Christian homes are severely damaged due to the fighting and completely emptied of their inhabitants, who fled without taking anything. The area of Hamidieh is still shelter to armed groups independent of each other, heavily armed and bankrolled by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. All Christians (138,000) have fled to Damascus and Lebanon, while others took refuge in the surrounding countryside.

The Syrian soldiers in fact, continue to face foreign fighters, mercenaries Libyans, Lebanese militants from the Gulf, Afghans, Turks. “The Sunni Salafist militants – says the Bishop – continue to commit crimes against civilians, or to recruit fighters with force. The fanatical Sunni extremists are fighting a holy war proudly, especially against the Alawites. When terrorists seek to control the religious identity of a suspect, they ask him to cite the genealogies dating back to Moses. And they ask to recite a prayer that the Alawites removed. The Alawites have no chance to get out alive.” (Agenzia Fides, Vatican News Service, 4 June 2012)

These reports were known to the alternative media. “Democracy Now” chose to ignore them.


Overblown Casualty Figures, Blamed on the Government

Goodman also indulged in the overblown casualty figures from dubious Syrian opposition sources as if they were verifiable accurate data. She even sounded like Hillary Clinton in talking up the “defection” of the hapless former Syrian Brigadier General Manaf Tlass as “significant” when informed sources discount that news as a minor irrelevance.

In the interview between Goodman and her guest (whom sources describe as belonging to a family formerly aligned with the Syrian government), Bashar Al Assad was portrayed as an unhinged leader who is in denial over massacres – massacres, as we have noted, that have most likely been carried out by Western-backed death squads as confirmed by numerous reports.

Preposterously, Assad was described as guilty of much worse crimes than former Egyptian and Libyan rulers Hosni Mubarak and Muammar Gaddafi. Then the “alternative” Democracy Now broadcast this statement from the supposed opposition spokesperson as if it were normal discourse:

“I would like to think that we will proceed with full prosecution in the International Criminal Court. I think the longer this issue goes on and the more violence he [Assad] commits, the more likely he will wish to have a fate such as Gaddafi’s.”


Recall that the Libyan leader was lynched on a roadside by a NATO-directed mob, and sodomised with a knife before being shot dead. It may also be recalled that “Democracy Now” gave prominent broadcasts supporting NATO’s intervention in Libya and justifying the criminal subversion of that country. Going by the latest coverage on Syria, Democracy Now is acting once again under a “progressive” cloak as a propaganda tool for US-led imperialist intervention. Given the misplaced respect among many of the public seeking independent, alternative, accurate news and analysis, this insidious role of Democracy Now is reprehensible. May it be suggested, in the name of media transparency, that the programme be aptly renamed “Imperialism Now”.


Finian Cunningham is Global Research’s Middle East and East Africa Correspondent [email protected]