Media Bias: London Muslims March Against ISIS Goes Unreported By Mainstream Media

Muslims protest against terror-compressed

By Number23 | We Are Anonymous

When thousands of Muslims took to the streets of London for an annual March against terrorism, the double standard surrounding Muslim related events and reports was revealed once more. As the majority of mainstream media outlets serve corporate interests, bias reporting of controversial topics—particularly Muslims and the terror threat—has become a troubling and pressing issue.

On Dec. 6  2015, thousands took part in the annual UK Arbaeen Procession, organized by the Husaini Islamic Trust UK. Members flooded the streets of London, holding signs that read: “Islam promotes human rights” and “terrorism has no religion,” to highlight Islam’s core promotion of peace.

Arbaeen, is a Shia Muslim tradition to mark the anniversary of seventh-century social justice leader Imam Husain. However, in light of the recent radical Islamist terror attacks on Paris and Brussels, organizers decided to dedicate the march to denouncing all forms of terror.

Waqar Haider, one of the organizers, told The Independent about the transformation: “This year we had hundreds of placards which were basically saying ‘no’ to terrorism and ‘no’ to ISIS. A very direct message.

“For us it was a controversial move to go political. Normally we don’t mix politics with mourning. However with what’s happened recently, we thought we had to make sure we as a community totally disassociate ourselves with what’s happening elsewhere in the world,” Haider added.

However, despite the importance of the organization’s message, the event did not receive the coverage it deserved. Reports on radicalized jihadists, suspected terrorists and attacks on Western cities receive and unprecedented amount of coverage within the media. In comparison, the number of reports covering terror attacks on Muslim communities and the actions Muslim communities are taking against terrorism and ISIS (IS) is notably lacking.

Unfortunately [some] media outlets have gone for stories that to some extent can be divisive. If a group of Muslims do something good, it’s not mentioned or the religion is not mentioned. But if someone does something [negative], it is on the front page and their religion is mentioned,” volunteer Mohammed Al-Sharifi, told The Independent. “I think the reason the mainstream media hasn’t covered the story is because I don’t think it’s juicy enough to sell papers. It’s simply not interesting enough.”

The result of this biased reporting: the public’s perception becomes misconsude and unbalanced—which in turn only exacerbates this troubling situation.

Al-Sharifi, who had personally attended the march, took to Twitter to express his disappointment in the mainstream media. In a tweet, which has since been re-tweeeted over 9,000 times, he said: “Hundreds of Muslims flooded the streets of London yesterday to condemn terrorism. Media’s response: Silence.”

The reason my tweet went viral… is because I think people realise there is a huge disparity between what they’re being fed in the media and the reality of the day-to-day interactions they have with Muslims at work, at school.

Haider believes that ‘stereotyping’ is the root cause of the lack of media coverage surrounding Muslim-organized events. “I think it’s because of stereotyping. People see the entire Muslim community as one community,” Haider said.

[But] the Muslim community is a very diverse community, with the vast majority of us horrified by ISIS.

Haider added: “With our event, we had so many people from different ethnic backgrounds. It’s more of a family event in terms of people it attracts.

The sense of community within Western-countries is narrowed. Shortly after the terror attacks on Paris and Brussels, many Western-nations bound together to create an image of solidarity by projecting the Belgium and French national flags of their own monumental landmarks.

However, just six days after the attack in Brussels, an attack in Lahore, Pakistan killed 69 people—with women and children making up a large percentage of the death toll—yet the Western-nations did not pay tribute to this tragedy. Why? Because Pakistan is a Muslim majority country.

“… I think people realize there is a huge disparity between what they’re being fed in the media and the reality of the day-to-day interactions they have with Muslims at work, at school,” Mr. Al-Sharifi told The Independent, calling for the UK’s leadership to take greater steps to combat Islamophobia.

During it’s existence, the terror organization has killed more Muslims than non-Muslims. Tens of thousands of Muslims have been killed and displaced at the hands of ISIS, yet mainstream media outlets continue to frame Western nations as the sole victims of ISIS threats, plans and attacks.

Despite these overwhelming facts, the Muslim community continues to be misrepresented in the media. As a result, the public’s understanding of Islamists, Quran teachings and world news as a whole becomes skewed, or in some cases, completely inaccurate. Over the past year, the number of reported Islamophobic attacks has increased in both Europe and the U.S.

This Article (Media Bias: London Muslims March Against ISIS Goes Unreported By Mainstream Media) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com. 

Read more great articles at We Are Anonymous.

Is Scientific American ‘In Bed’ With Monsanto and Promoting Their GMO Agenda? Looks Like YES

scientific american in bed with monsanto

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com

Who can you trust to give you accurate, objective information about science and health these days? That’s a question that keeps surfacing again and again, as mainstream sources for this type of information are being increasingly infiltrated by special interest groups.

A recent article in The Huffington Post1 discusses “Monsanto’s media machine,” noting the many ways in which it has tried to manipulate and dominate the conversation about genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

In March, the media and partnerships division of Scientific American hosted a panel discussion about GMOs. The event was co-sponsored by GMO Answers, an organization created by the PR firm Ketchum, which works on behalf of the Council for Biotechnology Information to improve the public image of GMOs. US Right to Know has previously called attention to a video ad in which the firm talks about how it doubled positive GMO coverage using online social media monitoring.

This is a tactic that smacks of internet “sockpuppets” — fake internet personas who interject themselves into social media conversations to steer the debate.

Is Scientific American Now in Bed With Monsanto?

Jeremy Abatte, vice president and publisher of Scientific American, insisted the event was not a Ketchum event but a Scientific American event. Not everyone’s buying it though.

As noted by Lisa Graves, head of the Center for Media and Democracy, “Quite frankly, after Ketchum’s documented role with black ops-type spying on public interest groups like Greenpeace, it is astonishing that any legitimate scientific magazine would partner with them.”

She’s referring to Ketchum’s 2008 debacle, when Mother Jones2 implicated the firm in an espionage effort against a number of nonprofit organizations critical of GMOs. Besides Greenpeace, the Center for Food Safety, Public Citizen, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Friends of the Earth were also targeted.

Ketchum is also a “disaster PR expert” that has done work for a number of politicians and world leaders with image problems,3 as well as corrupt governments around the world.4

With a track record like that, it does make one wonder why Scientific American would be so willing to risk its reputation by being in any way associated with Ketchum. GMO Answers — one of Ketchum’s creations — also has a shady reputation to say the least.

The site is set up to allow professors at public universities answer GMO questions from the public — supposedly without remuneration from the industry. But there are many questions about the “independence” of these academics.

Many ‘Independent’ Academics Are In Fact ‘On the Take’

In January 2015, US Right to Know filed state public records requests5 to obtain correspondence to and from professors at public universities who wrote for the GMO Answer’s website. By early September, the truth began to be unveiled.

One of the most widely publicized conflict-of-interest scandals involved Monsanto and University of Florida professor Kevin Folta, a vocal advocate of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

The story received extensive coverage in Nature magazine 6  and The New York Times,7,8,9 which posted a long list of emails between Folta and Monsanto, obtained through the FOIA request.

Folta was a contributor to GMO Answers, and while he vehemently denied ever receiving any money from Monsanto, emails showed otherwise. He had in fact received a $25,000 unrestricted grant from Monsanto — monies he specifically instructed the company to donate in such a way as to remain undisclosed.

The emails between Folta and Monsanto reveal how, simply by moving money around via certain channels, it allows the academic to appear as independent and not funded by industry, when in fact they’re actually engaged in a very close, coordinated communications effort.

Fortunately, the undisclosed recruitment of academics and scientists from universities such as Harvard, Cornell, the University of Florida, Penn State and others actually gained serious attention by the mainstream media.

Critical articles were penned not just by The New York Times, but also by Bloomberg,10 Chicago Tribune,11 The Saskatoon StarPhonenix,12 and The Boston Globe.13

Academics Routinely Used to ‘Front’ Opaque Industry Lobbying Efforts

This year, two other university professors with links to Monsanto have been outed for writing pro-GMO material without disclosing their ties to the company.

An investigation by Chicago WBEZ news14 discovered that Monsanto paid the now retired University of Illinois’ professor Bruce Chassy more than $57,000 over two years for travel, writing, and speaking expenses, yet Chassy never disclosed his financial ties to the company on state and university conflict of interest disclosure forms.

Chassy even lobbied federal officials on Monsanto’s behalf to prevent further regulations on GMOs. While Chassy claims he did this of his own volition, emails15show Monsanto’s Eric Sachs urged Chassy to get involved.

They also reveal that this was in fact part of an industry lobbying effort, “with academics out in front,” basically pretending to be acting independently. Moreover, just as in Folta’s case, the money Chassy received from Monsanto was funneled in such a way as to circumvent rules of public disclosure.

Related Article: Bought Congress: Pro-GMO Lawmakers Get Big Funds from Agribusiness Lobbies

WBEZ’s investigation also revealed that the disclosure policies of the University of Illinois — a public land grant university — not only fail to prevent conflicts of interest between academia and private companies like Monsanto, they actually facilitate it.

By allowing companies to donate money to university foundations, even though they’re “earmarked” for a specific person, the transactions remain completely hidden from public scrutiny — including FOIA requests.

Internet’s Most Trusted Health Site Still Rife With Conflicts of Interest

Then there’s WebMD, the most visited health site on the web, which promises to provide you with “objective, trustworthy, and accurate health information,” despite its deep connections to the pharmaceutical industry. Such ties, and the conflicts of interest they engender, have raised red flags for a number of years now. 16,17

Partnerships and sponsorships18 color WebMD’s recommendations across the board, and the use of sneaky “passive” promotion, where advertisements are designed to look like editorials, have become increasingly common.

In essence, you think you’re reading a regular content article written and vetted by WebMD’s editorial staff, when in fact you’re reading a marketing piece created by the advertiser’s PR department.

In January of this year, I wrote an article pointing out how Monsanto had suddenly established a clear presence on WebMD. At the time, almost every WebMD article flaunted a Monsanto sponsored ad saying, “It’s time for a bigger discussion about food,” with links to Monsanto’s biased take on soil, water, and honey bee issues, with no other contributors to the discussion in sight.

Fast-forward a few months to today, and all of those Monsanto-sponsored videos and pages are now gone. In their stead, you’ll find articles that at least have some semblance of balance, presenting voices from both sides of the issue.

When searching for the term “GMO” you even end up getting an old article detailing the health concerns brought forth in Jeffrey Smith’s “Genetic Roulette,” noting that Americans are ill informed about GMOs and the studies showing potential harm.19

Whether my criticism — which reached well over 270,000 readers — had anything to do with this turn of events, I don’t know, but it’s interesting to note nonetheless. Sometimes when an actor’s wrongdoing is exposed, they self-correct, and this is precisely why open conversation about the current pattern of financing by special interest groups is so important.

Can WebMD Be Unbiased, and Sell Drugs at the Same Time?

WebMD may have ditched Monsanto after what amounted to a one-night stand, but they’re still in bed with the pharmaceutical industry. A recent “Dear Julia” column20 on Vox.com addresses WebMD’s symbiotic relationship with the pharmaceutical industry. The question is, is it possible to provide “objective, trustworthy, and accurate health information” while simultaneously being in the business of helping your advertisers sell drugs?

According to a 2013 study21 published in JAMA, WebMD and its sister site Medscape were the top recipients of Big Pharma cash of all the medical communication companies targeting doctors. In second place was the Postgraduate Institute for Medicine, followed by Research to Practice,

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and Medical Education Resources. Overall, WebMD/Medscape received nearly double the funds of the second-place receiver — a grand total of $20.3 million. Julia also noted the dizzying array of drug ads covering every page, no matter what you’re looking for, and the fear-based tone of many of their pages.

She writes:

“Some parts of the site seem to be designed to turn users into patients. The site’s popular symptom checker, which allows users to insert basic information about their age, sex, and symptoms, is a hypochondriac’s worst nightmare. A search for bloating in the lower abdomen suggested one could have anything from menstrual cramps to ovarian or colon cancers…No context — just a list of scary diagnoses.”

She also reminds her readers about WebMD’s free online depression test,22 which was rigged in such a way that no matter how you responded, you were told you were at risk for major depression and should discuss your options with your doctor. An investigation revealed the test was entirely fake. Sponsored by Eli Lilly, the maker of Cymbalta, it served just one function: to get you to talk to your doctor about antidepressants.

This sneaky form of direct-to-consumer advertising masquerading as a legitimate health test sparked enough furor to spur Senator Charles Grassley to launch an investigation. After all, no one expects to be directed to seek help, let alone drugs, when you have no symptoms of a problem whatsoever.

Scientific American Has Been Pro-GMO for Years

Getting back to where I started, as much as I like Scientific American, I cannot let them slide on the GMO issue. Three years ago, the magazine’s editors wrote an article23 in explicit support of GMOs. It was also explicitly anti-labeling. Just last year they published an article24 headlined: “Why People Oppose GMOs Even Though Science Says They Are Safe.” Clearly, Scientific American is not entirely unbiased, which means it doesn’t really matter who was in charge of the GMO panel discussion; Scientific American or Ketchum, they’re already on the same side.

The 2015 article was written by Stefan Blancke, a doctoral researcher in the department of philosophy and moral science at Ghent University in Belgium. He’s published a paper in which he and his colleagues argue: “that negative representations of GMOs are widespread and compelling because they are intuitively appealing.

By tapping into intuitions and emotions that mostly work under the radar of conscious awareness, but are constituent of any normally functioning human mind, such representations become easy to think. They capture our attention, they are easily processed and remembered and thus stand a greater chance of being transmitted and becoming popular, even if they are untrue. Thus, many people oppose GMOs, in part, because it just makes sense that they would pose a threat.”

Personally, I’d be curious to know whether Blancke’s situation is similar to Folta and Chassy. Both denied financial ties to Monsanto, yet both were caught having received tens of thousands of dollars in undisclosed funds. The idea that people would have concerns about GMOs because it’s “easier” to process the idea that they might be harmful than to actually understand the science sounds just like the kind of propaganda the biotech industry would embrace and support. Needless to say, Blancke’s article did nothing to enlighten people about the actual science, and this tends to be typical for industry-biased propaganda.

What You Need to Know About GMOs

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or genetically “engineered” (GE) foods, are live organisms whose genetic components have been artificially manipulated in a laboratory setting through creating unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacteria, and even viral genes that do not occur in nature or through traditional crossbreeding methods.

GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is “safe and beneficial,” and that it advances the agricultural industry. They also say that GMOs help ensure the global food supply and sustainability. But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I’ve stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted to be.

The FDA cleared the way for GE (Genetically Engineered) Atlantic salmon to be farmed for human consumption. Thanks to added language in the federal spending bill, the product will require special labeling so at least consumers will have the ability to identify the GE salmon in stores. However, it’s imperative ALL GE foods be labeled, which is currently still being denied.

The FDA is threatening the existence of our food supply. We have to start taking action now. I urge you to share this article with friends and family. If we act together, we can make a difference and put an end to the absurdity.

QR Codes Are NOT an Adequate Substitute for Package Labels

The biotech industry is trying to push the QR code as an answer for consumer concerns about GE foods. QR stands for Quick Response, and the code can be scanned and read by smart phones and other QR readers.

The code brings you to a product website that provides further details about the product. The video below shows you why this is not an ideal solution. There’s nothing forcing companies to declare GMOs on their website. On the contrary, GE foods are allowed to be promoted as “natural,” which further adds to the confusion.

These so-called “Smart Labels” hardly improve access to information. Instead, by making finding the truth time-consuming and cumbersome, food makers can be assured that most Americans will remain ignorant about the presence of GMOs in their products. Besides, everyone has a right to know what’s in the food. You shouldn’t have to own a smartphone to obtain this information.

Vermont’s mandatory labeling law is scheduled to go into effect July 1. Now, Monsanto is going with the only strategy it has left to block it — a Senate version of H.R.1599, also referred to as the DARK (Denying Americans the Right to Know) Act. Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan) introduced the bill, which would preempt Vermont’s GMO labeling law, and replace state mandatory labeling laws with a federal voluntary labeling plan.

Related Article: DARK Day: House Passes Anti-GMO Labeling Bill That Takes Away Our Right to Know

Fortunately, on March 16, the Senate rejected the bill, falling far short of the 60 votes it needed in its favor to pass. This is great news, but though the DARK Act was defeated, it’s not over yet.

Roberts said he would still work to find another way to preempt the law, and majority leader Mitch McConnell changed his vote from YES to NO for procedural reasons. This allows him to bring up the bill again later if a compromise is created, and the creation of such a compromise is certainly already underway.

Vermont’s law is set to take effect on July 1. It’s imperative you take action now by contacting your senators. Ask them to oppose any compromise that would block or delay Vermont’s labeling law. It’s critical that we flood Senators’ phone lines — it’s now or never for GMO labeling.

Non-GMO Food Resources by Country

If you are searching for non-GMO foods, here is a list of trusted sites you can visit.

Read more great articles at mercola.com

New Poll Shows Only 6% of People Trust The Mainstream Media

Mainstream media

By Joe Jankowski | Activist Post

At this point, most Americans are aware of the staggering dishonesty and reality twisting that the mainstream, corporate news media engages in on a daily basis.

And it is showing.

Numbers released by Pew Research show that major news channels like CNN, Fox News and MSNBC are in a decline of prime time viewers.

Even reporters within the major networks have admitted that the media has been corrupted by political and corporate interests.

This is what former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson had to say:

There is unprecedented, I believe, influence on the media, not just the news, but the images you see everywhere. By well-orchestrated and financed campaign of special interests, political interests and corporations. I think all of that comes into play.

But if there was any indication that the mainstream press has no credibility and is on its way to extinction, this latest poll is it.

From the Associated Press:

Trust in the news media is being eroded by perceptions of inaccuracy and bias, fueled in part by Americans’ skepticism about what they read on social media.

Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public’s view of other institutions. In this presidential campaign year, Democrats were more likely to trust the news media than Republicans or independents.

Nearly 90 percent of Americans say it’s extremely or very important that the media get their facts correct, according to the study. About 4 in 10 say they can remember a specific incident that eroded their confidence in the media, most often one that dealt with accuracy or a perception that it was one-sided.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court’s 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama’s health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and “another shock to journalism’s credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry.”

There is only one thing that can save the mainstream media, and that is the truth.

But the truth is not why networks like MSNBC exist. They exist to deceive and play lapdog for the establishment.

More than ever the American people want the truth and accuracy when it comes to their news. This is why we are seeing a huge rise in alternative media.

By just taking a look at the popular commercial web traffic data and analytics site, Alexa.com, we see that alternative news sites are ranking very high inside the United States and globally.

The very popular and accurate ActivistPost.com is ranked in the top 16,000 websites inside the United States and in the top 35,000 globally!

Just to put that in perspective, there are over 1 billion websites in all globally.

Considered to be the tip of the spear of the alternative news, Alex Jones’s Infowars.com is ranking in the top 1,200 websites in the U.S. and the top 3,200 globally!

Alexa.com gathers data on a web page’s daily unique visitors and daily pageviews.

Another great example of alternative news rising to mainstream popularity is James Corbett’s CorbettReport.com. This stunning website is ranking in the top 150,000 globally and in the top 60,000 in the U.S.

There is only one way to conclude this article:


Joseph Jankowski is a contributor for Planet Free Will.com. His works have been published by recognizable alternative news sites like GlobalResearch.ca, ActivistPost.com and Intellihub.com.

Follow Planet Free Will on Twitter @ twitter.com/PlanetFreeWill

Read more great articles at Activist Post.

Musical Icon Steve Miller Becomes Whistleblower at Rock Hall of Fame

By Ray Waddell | Billboard


Steve Miller is not a grumpy guy. Miller, who was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame on April 9, has been at the center of a media cyclone ever since due to some rather inflammatory comments he made in an interview with Rolling Stone immediately following his induction by the Black Keys’ Dan Auerbach and Patrick Carney. In the interview, Miller not only called the induction ceremony “unpleasant,” but went on to slam the whole music business. Sample sentence: “This whole industry fucking sucks and this little get-together you guys have here is like a private boys’ club and it’s a bunch of jackasses and jerks and fucking gangsters and crooks who’ve fucking stolen everything from a fucking artist.”

OK, then. In another post-ceremony interview with Rolling Stone, Auerbach told the magazine that he regretted inducting Miller, adding that “the most unpleasant part was being around [Miller].” Hall of Fame CEO Joel Peresman also responded to Miller’s comments, defended the Hall, and said he “felt badly” for Miller. So, this has been fun.

On a follow-up interview with Billboard, Miller is far from unpleasant. He laughs frequently, and doesn’t back down.

However unpleasant his evening was, Miller’s Hall of Fame credentials are undeniable. A native of Dallas, Texas, Stevie “Guitar” Miller became a pivotal figure in the late ’60s San Francisco music scene that profoundly impacted rock and roll. By the ’70s, the singer/songwriter/guitarist had evolved from a bluesy, groove-based sound that would fit seamlessly into today’s jam band scene to a more radio-friendly pop rock style that produced a wealth of hits still ubiquitous on classic rock radio today, including “The Joker,””Fly Like an Eagle” and “Take the Money and Run.” Miller is also contributing his time to serving on the welcoming committee of the Department of Musical Instruments of New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, and as a board member of Jazz at Lincoln Center, where he curates and hosts shows at both institutions.

But, this past week, all of the talk surrounding Miller — and there has been a lot — has been centered on his take on his Hall of Fame induction. In an exclusive interview withBillboard, he explains that night, the resulting fallout, and what the proceeding week was like. Not surprisingly, he told us exactly how he feels about the whole thing.

Billboard: So, it’s been a pretty interesting week, no?

Steve Miller: Pretty action packed, yeah.

Billboard: How would you describe your week following the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony?

Steve Miller: The last week has been pretty interesting; I played three concerts in New York at Jazz at Lincoln Center with Jimmie Vaughan; I did the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony; and now I’m in San Diego. Tonight will be three shows that I’ve done in the last four days out here on the West Coast. The Steve Miller Band is busy, the Jazz at Lincoln Center projects have been great, and the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame was just one of those things in the middle.

Billboard: Has the reaction to your comments following your Hall of Fame induction surprised you?

Steve Miller: Well, not really. I’ve gotten hundreds of emails from artists and pals and peers just saying, “right on, man, I can’t believe you had the balls to say that,” that kind of stuff. The reaction from the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and Rolling Stonemagazine has not surprised me at all.

Billboard: I imagine you were aware when you were saying the things you did that some of it might not go over so well.

Steve Miller: You have to speak truth to these people. It has really been a long, long slog for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, and for some reason, I don’t understand why, they really have made it tough. It’s not a pleasant experience for the people being inducted — at least from my personal experience it certainly wasn’t. The whole process feels like you’re dealing with a company that wants you to give them everything and they’re going to go make all this money and they’re going to do everything with it, and you have no input into it, no say about any of it, take it or leave it. Probably what the general public thinks and what it really is are two different things.

Billboard: You said some pretty harsh things, do you stand by all of that?

Steve Miller: Of course I do, yeah. I spoke the truth as I experienced it, and as I have experienced it over the years. Basically, as everybody that has had a taste of the record business knows, they aregangsters and crooks. The history just proves it. If you’re naïve as a musician when you go into it, you learn your lessons quickly. I remember when I was a kid and signed with Capitol Records I thought, “boy, this is great, I’m going down to L.A., I’m going to record at Capitol tower.” I went in there and the engineering staff walked out because they didn’t like me because I was a hippie [laughs]. That was my first experience. I was thrown into a pool of sharks, where all the bands were fighting for the same resources, managers were wheeling and dealing, and it was a lot more than I thought. I was pretty naïve when I started and, over the years, my record companies have grossed over $1 billion from my work, and I’ve spent 50 years auditing them to force them to pay me what my contracts call for. I caught them illegally selling hundreds of thousands of my records in markets worldwide. They’ve broken their contracts, they’ve broken their word. They have built-in theft in all their accounting. I’ve had to threaten to use the RICO statutes against them. It’s a business with built-in theft and cheating, that’s just considered normal, and I’m just not the kind of guy who tolerates that, I don’t go for that. If it’s not fair, and if it’s not clean and clear, then I’m going to work to make it that way.

Billboard: So that billion dollar figure you used in theRolling Stone interview you didn’t just pull that out of thin air?

Steve Miller: [Laughing] No! And that was when a billion was a billion, not like today. Millions and millions and millions of records worldwide, it’s just been 50 years of auditing and arguing and lawsuits. I’m just a walking library of what it’s like dealing with a business that’s designed to cheat. It always has and it always will.

[Read more here]

Originally entitled “Miller Talks Rock Hall Rancor, Who He Wishes Had Inducted Him and How He’d Fix the Whole ‘Rude’ Process”

Revealed: Tribeca Film Festival May Have Connections to Nazi Agenda

By Mike Adams | Natural News


With a massive backlash now mounting against Robert De Niro for censoring an independent film on vaccines, the Tribeca Film Festival has been subjected to intense scrutiny across independent media as journalists seek to discover who got to De Niro and what did they threaten him with?

After being threatened by vaccine industry totalitarians and science bullies, De Niro blackballed the VAXXED documentary from the Tribeca Film Festival, playing right into the hands of state-run medical propagandists who are all pro-vaccine.

This betrayal of a powerful, historic indy film has not gone unnoticed by the people of America. In effect, Robert De Niro has become a traitor to his own film industry that was founded on freedom of expression. He has just announced to the world that any film which dares challenge the official narratives of criminal vaccine corporations will be blackballed at Tribeca and not allowed to see the light of day.

But far beyond that, we’ve now learned that the Tribeca Film Festival has a strategic partnership with the Nazi-linked Sloan Foundation, founded by Alfred P. Sloan, a Nazi collaborator and hater of blacks and Jews. Sloan, much like Bill Gates, was a globalist eugenics promoter who believed in eliminating the “undesirable” people from the planet, leaving only a superior race in charge.

A Zen Gardner article also reveals how the Sloan Foundation held corporate stock in the Merck corporation, the world’s largest manufacturer of vaccines:

Industrialist Alfred P. Sloan, as head of General Motors, was a Nazi collaborator, and ardent admirer of Hitler. Sloan’s hatred of blacks was almost as intense as his hatred of Jews. He had a close connection with the eugenics movement which eventually became the Human Genome Project. The Sloan Foundation, together with the Rockefeller nexus, held a long standing interest in population reduction, including their involvement with the introduction of mysterious new vaccines together with the World Health Organization, which has a stated policy of population reduction, as clearly set forth in Agenda 21. (truthaboutagenda21.com).

This dubious enterprise led to a massive vaccine initiative to vaccinate against relatively rare tetanus in The Philippines, Nicaragua, and Mexico. These vaccine vials, distributed by the WHO, were found to contain hCG, which when combined with tetanus toxoid carrier, stimulated formation of antibodies against human chorionic gonadotropin, rendering women incapable of maintaining a pregnancy and potentially inducing a covert, involuntary abortion. Population control under the cover of health care. (ethiofreedom.com).

This seemingly altruistic Sloan Foundation also funded the Community Blood Council of Greater New York, Inc., which allowed more than 10,000 hemophiliacs and countless others to become fatally infected with HIV/Aids. Moreover, The Sloan Foundation held 24,000-53,000 shares issued by Merck and Co., whose president George W. Merck was director of America’s biological weapons industry and whose Hepatitis C and polio vaccines have been suspected of transmitting AIDs; and who knows what else. (Population Control: Aids/Ebola and other man-made diseases, S.R. Shearer, July 29, 2014). Dr. Leonard Horowitz’s seminal work, Aids and Ebola: Nature, Accident or Intentional, contends that both Ebola and Aids were bio-engineered by scientists working for the CIA.

The Sloan Foundation is currently headed by Paul Joskow, a member of the global elite who’s also a key leader of the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), the same group that includes all the corrupt banksters from Goldman Sachs and the Federal Reserve. In all, globalists like Joskow and Bill Gates seek to rid the planet of excess human population, and vaccines are the key element for accomplishing this task, which is exactly why covert sterilization chemicals are being routinely hidden in vaccine test runs deployed in Africa, furthering the goal of genocide against blacks (and it’s all WHO-approved, too).

Living in the Age of Transparency

We are all living in a transition time, moving out of the Age of Secrecy for humanity, and into the Age of Transparency where all the dirty secrets of the globalists, the vaccine corporations and the false front group non-profits are eventually exposed.

Nearly all the large disease non-profits (cancer, diabetes, etc.) are actually front groups for Big Pharma. Nearly all the vaccine research being conducted today is scientifically fraudulent. AIDS vaccines, for example, were promised to humanity in the 1980s, yet decades later, they still don’t exist and don’t work. Prominent AIDS vaccine researchers have been found to be criminals committing outright scientific fraud and fabrications. From Natural News:

A scientist from Iowa State University who admitted to lying about the efficacy of a vaccine he helped develop for the AIDS virus has been sentenced to four-and-a-half years in prison, according to new reports. Dong-Pyou Han, 58, recently confessed to altering blood samples to make it seem as though he’d made a huge discovery on the AIDS front, only to be later outed for flagrant scientific fraud.

Besides his prison term, Han will also be forced to pay $7.2 million in fines to the federal government after entering a plea agreement back in February, in which he admitted to two counts of making false statements.

As we reported back in February, two former Merck scientists who filed a False Claims Act against the company back in 2010 had came forward with evidence showing that Merck tampered with study data and ultimately lied about the safety of the MMR vaccine. Like Han and his colleagues, Merck scientists tampered with blood samples in order to artificially induce a fake antibody response, all in order to create the illusion that MMR is safe and effective.

Robert De Niro following in the footsteps of Joseph Goebbels

Today, just as Americans are waking up to the shocking fact that the vaccine industry has been systematically poisoning their children for decades while committing scientific fraud to hide the evidence of harm, Robert De Niro has followed in the footsteps of Joseph Goebbels as the Tribeca Propaganda Minister of Truth, silencing independent filmmakers who have extraordinary contributions to offer the world.

This silencing of filmmakers is entirely consistent with the Nazi regime’s book burning agenda to destroy knowledge they didn’t want citizens to access. It is this destruction of knowledge and oppression of independent science that now infects the vaccine industry, an industry steeped in fraud, criminality and medical violence against children.

Similarly, while the Nazi Holocaust murdered six million Jews in the name of cleansing the population, today’s vaccine medical holocaust murders and maims children in the name of cleansing public health. The justifications are identical, too: Nazis justified the killing of Jews as a way to achieve the “greater good” of a superior society. Today’s vaccine pushers invoke precisely the same logic, saying that even if a few children die from vaccines, that’s acceptable “for the greater good” of society.

[Read more here]

Originally entitled: “Full history exposed: Tribeca Film Festival carrying out Nazi agenda of genocide, eugenics and extermination via ‘science’ and medicine”

Robert O'Leary 150x150Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield (MA), New England & “virtually” the world, with his website. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.



VAXXED: The Film on Vaccines and Autism Robert De Niro Won’t Let His Audience See

vaccine into baby

By Jon Rappoport |NoMoreFakeNews

Robert De Niro, who has a child with autism, was going to personally introduce the film, Vaxxed, to the audience at his Tribeca Film Festival in New York.

He thought the film was important.  It makes a case for a connection between vaccines [ specifically the MMR] and autism. He wanted to inspire discussion.

Then, an uproar ensued, pressure was brought to bear, and De Niro decided to cancel the screening at his festival.

Hello, goodbye.

One of the angles used to pressure him?  People might agree with the film’s content and decide not vaccinate their children, or they might decide to space the vaccines out over a longer period of time.  This horrible act might endanger lives.  It might kill children.

Therefore, don’t let people see the film.  Don’t let them be contaminated.  Don’t let them make up their own minds.  Don’t let them have access to information.  You see, the parents themselves are children wandering in the wilderness, with no ability to analyze information.  They must defer to the experts.  They mustn’t listen to other voices.  They mustn’t be permitted to think.

Free speech?  Never, ever heard of it.

You see, this is Science.  Only certain people know what science says or means.  They are the chosen few in the palace.  They decide for the rest of us.  They are the little gods and the censors.

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of this bullshit.

On big screens all over the country, you can put up movies depicting people being torn limb from limb, drowning in their own blood, you can put up movies with panting soft-porn money shots, you can put up movies that blow up half the world; but you can’t show a movie that questions the effects of vaccines.

That’s show biz, where the stars are co-opted on a daily basis, and if they move off the dime, they’re attacked in the press.

But so what?

Listen, Robert, you could have shown the film, and you could have laid on a live presentation afterwards, with speakers delivering both sides of the issue right there in the theater.  You could have stood up and said you weren’t going to be bulldozed.  You could have said Film itself is based on the sanctity of free speech and there was no way you were going to sacrifice that principle.  You could have drawn a line in the sand.  You could have parlayed your reputation and awards in the industry to make a point.  You could have explained who pressured you and why.  You could have refused to let the moment pass.  You could have broken the back of censorship, and you could have enlisted the aid of a few of your famous friends, right up on stage, to back you up.  You could have turned the whole thing around, because after all, you were just preparing to show a film.  That’s what you were doing.  With enough force behind your words (you know how to do that, don’t you?), you could have exposed the whole insane sham of Don’t Show a Film.  You could have said, “This is not the Censored Tribeca Film Festival.  That’s not the name of this event and it never will be.”  You could have blown the doors apart.  You could have gone live and done in public, for once, what you do on the screen.  You could have hit the censors in their snake eyes and put them away.  You could have gone on The View and Fallon and Kimmel and Oprah and made your case against the people who want to shut down free speech. And you know you could have scored a victory.

But you didn’t do that.  You backed down.

It’s not too late.  You can still fire up your courage and your outrage and show the film.  It’s your festival.  You’re the boss.

Do you realize the size of the rock you’re standing on?  Do you know what the First Amendment really means?

So what if you’re shy in public.  So what if you need a script?

I’ll give you a script.  I’ll give you one.  It’ll melt the spines of those arrogant cowards who want the public to obey and keep their mouths shut and submit to wall-to-wall surveillance and march all the way to their graves without a whimper in the land of the free and the home of the brave.


“Reality” Edited in Real Time: New Tech Shows Why You Can’t Trust Anything You See on the News


By Melissa Dykes | Activist Post

Talk about wag the dog. I’m not even sure what to write for a description of the video you are about to watch.

So-called “reality” can be edited in real-time.

It’s the matrix.

The project is a joint effort in progress between Stanford, the Max Planck Institute for Informatics, and the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg. According to the project’s abstract, via Stanford University:

We present a novel approach for real-time facial reenactment of a monocular target video sequence (e.g., Youtube video). The source sequence is also a monocular video stream, captured live with a commodity webcam. Our goal is to animate the facial expressions of the target video by a source actor and re-render the manipulated output video in a photo-realistic fashion. To this end, we first address the under-constrained problem of facial identity recovery from monocular video by non-rigid model-based bundling. At run time, we track facial expressions of both source and target video using a dense photometric consistency measure. Reenactment is then achieved by fast and efficient deformation transfer between source and target. The mouth interior that best matches the re-targeted expression is retrieved from the target sequence and warped to produce an accurate fit. Finally, we convincingly re-render the synthesized target face on top of the corresponding video stream such that it seamlessly blends with the real-world illumination.We demonstrate our method in a live setup, where Youtube videos are reenacted in real time.

While it may not be “pixel-perfect” YET, Tech Crunch’s response is the same thing on everyone’s mind after watching the original video (which is well on its way to a million views even though it’s only been up for three days):

Even in the relatively low-res clips we’re shown, there’s an uncanny valley effect of something being not quite right. But hot damn is it impressive (and, well, more than a little spooky) even in this early stage.

Why spooky? Technology like this will serve to make video less inherently believable. The video’s use of politicians as the editing target is pretty self-aware. In that regard, political hoaxes will hit a lot harder when it’s a video instead of a ‘shopped picture being forwarded around.

Yeah, nothing about this is comforting. But also, how long has this technology really been available? We all know that whatever technology the general population is being shown currently exists, the military-industrial complex is likely decades ahead of it.

In the original video’s comments section, scores of people pointed out the dangers of this technology in the Orwellian nightmare we currently find ourselves living in. One person said it should be stopped because of a scary potential for misuse, to which someone else replied, “Potential for misuse? I can’t think of a reason you’d want this technology in the first place besides abusing it.”

If government use of propaganda against US citizens has now been legalized (and it has)…

If video of a world leader giving a speech can be hijacked and edited in real-time, complete with, say, a full soundboard created by government software that can take ten minutes of a person talking and match the speech patterns to make convincing audio of a person saying anything they want him to…

And if drills can look as real as the real thing… Can you trust anything you see on “the news”?

And if seeing and hearing aren’t believing…

How virtual has our reality already become before virtual reality even goes global?

Full video: Face2Face: Real-time Face Capture and Reenactment of RGB Videos
And this is definitely worth a watch if you haven’t seen it: We Need to Talk about Sandy Hook

H/T Dag Wood

Melissa Dykes (formerly Melton) is a co-founder of TruthstreamMedia.com. She is an experienced researcher, graphic artist and investigative journalist with a passion for liberty and a dedication to truth. Her aim is to expose the New World Order for what it is — a prison for the human soul from which we must break free.

Read more great articles at Activist Post.

How Mainstream Media Enabled Donald Trump by Destroying Politics First

The mainstream media is to blame for Donald Trump’s rise, but not for the reasons most people think.

It is more than a little ironic that the Republican Establishment and the mainstream media are both now in full panic mode over the possibility of Donald Trump winning the GOP nomination. You would think that the Republican Party, which has been, let’s face it, hate-spewing, poor-bashing, government-stopping and corporation-loving for decades, ought to be the leading culprit for having paved the way for Trump’s success. As for the media, Marco Rubio, who claims to be exactly where he wants to be after losing 14 primaries and caucuses and winning only one, holds them responsible, which, from a candidate who has demonstrated little support outside the media, is a bit disingenuous. Still, even Rubio is occasionally right. The media did have a lot to do with enabling the rise of Donald Trump. Just not how Rubio or most people think.

To enable Trump, what the media did is fulfill what almost seemed to be a longtime mission: to create the first “pseudo-campaign” with the first “pseudo-candidate.” And now they are having buyer’s remorse.

I’ve never seen anything like this, and this is going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going. — Le Moonves, CBS

That is not the standard line. The standard line on how the media are to blame is that they give him far more attention than any other candidate, and far more than his empty, sloganeering campaign warrants. According to the Lexis-Nexis tracker, which follows the coverage for each candidate on the web, Trump laps the field. This past Thursday, he was the subject of 52,683 articles. Bernie Sanders was next at 4,400. In a measure of what LexisNexis calls “voice,” which tallies both web mentions and mentions on social media like Twitter, Trump received 84 percent of the Republicans’ share. No surprise there.

How much of this attention is driven by the media itself and how much by public fascination is hard to determine since these two feed each other. We do know, as Rubio said, that the media gives Trump attention because he is a ratings-getter, and he has cleverly played off this. CBS head Les Moonves gave away the game earlier this week when he admitted, “It may not be good for America,” meaning the Trump-dominated campaign, “but it is damn good for CBS,” meaning the ratings. And then he kept doubling down: “The money’s rolling in and this is fun.” “I’ve never seen anything like this, and this is going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going.” “Donald’s place in this election is a good thing” – presumably for CBS stockholders. To which I can only say that the networks were granted licenses to the public airwaves, our airwaves, by promising to provide a public service. Moonves just blew that pretense all to hell.

But the media’s absorption with Trump wasn’t Rubio’s sole plaint. He also grumbled that they were not only giving Trump free time, but also pretty much of a free pass. This certainly isn’t true when it comes to the press’s characterization of Trump. “Stop” has this week replaced “Donald” as Trump’s first name. And both left and right certainly purport to hate what he represents. Yet Rubio is largely correct when it comes to challenging Trump for what he says. The media should be pounding Trump not for his bloviation or his braggadocio or his bad manners or even his implied racism and explicit nativism. They should be pounding him for what he purports he will do as president. But they don’t, and Trump knows they won’t. He knows he can easily bulldoze the press because it is too cowardly to take him on face to face – though, truth be told, Fox News, which has a particular animus toward him, did a pretty good job of taking him on in Thursday’s debate.

The far more grievous crime is what the media have been doing to our politics for decades now – something for which Trump just happens to be the chief beneficiary.

But even that cowardice isn’t the most important way in which the media have enabled Trump and nudged him to the brink of the Republican nomination, even as they wail about the prospect. The far more grievous crime is what the media have been doing to our politics for decades now – something for which Trump just happens to be the chief beneficiary. Nearly 60 years ago, the historian Daniel Boorstin in his seminal book The Image described a society in which things were increasingly staged expressly for the media without any intrinsic merit of their own – things like photo ops, press conferences, award ceremonies. He labeled these “pseudo-events” because they only looked like real events, while being hollow inside. And Boorstin defined pseudo-people too – people whose activities, as he put it, had no intrinsic value either. He called them “celebrities,” and he defined them as people who were known for being well-known.

Politics would seem a far cry from the pseudo, if only because it determines real things with real effects, namely how our country is governed. But almost from the time Boorstin was writing, the media had been growing increasingly bored with traditional politics. The media, after all, were in the business of getting an audience, not educating it, which is why campaigns began to assume the contours of movies, and why personalities began to overshadow policies. Still, campaigns retained some grain, however small, of seriousness. Issues were debated. Party ideologies were contrasted. Qualities of leadership were dissected.

Until 2016. If the media were spoiling for a pseudo-campaign, they finally got their wish this year at the point where all the usual trimmings and frivolities of a campaign moved to the center, and the center disappeared. Just look at the horse race aspect, which has long consumed 95 percent of our election coverage. Trump is the horse-race candidate, expatiating on little else besides his lead in the race. But let’s be clear: Donald Trump did not create this situation. He is its heir, and simply the most gifted practitioner of the pseudo-campaign, though Cruz and Rubio, equally pseudo, try hard to purvey the same lack of substance. And let’s be clear about something else: we only tolerate this state of affairs because the media have changed our expectations of a campaign. Having given us nothing in election after election but a show, we expect nothing but a show.

Donald Trump was born for this. If he is the heir to our first pseudo-campaign, he is also our first pseudo-candidate because he is, in Boorstin’s terms, a celebrity who stands for little besides his celebrity, which doesn’t mean that he isn’t potent. He is. It just means that he is not held to the standards to which politicians have been traditionally held, not because, as Rubio would have it, the media benefit financially from the drama that surrounds him, though clearly they do, but because they treat him like a celebrity and not a real political candidate. Celebrities aren’t expected to be substantive. In any case, while celebrity may not be much of a recommendation for the presidency, it is a hell of a recommendation for a presidential aspirant performing before a media that is far more interested in creating a reality show than presenting a process for selecting a leader. Trump is the Kardashian of politics.

Of course, just about everyone in the media now, excepting Les Moonves, is bemoaning the inevitability of Trump’s nomination, which is a bit like the boy who kills his parents and then throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan. The media may say they regret it, but they did this. They systematically destroyed our politics in the name of entertainment. They systematically conditioned us to anticipate a show. And, frankly, they will keep on doing it. In fact, Moonves seems to indicate that he would fire anyone who didn’t.

So the media can cry all they want and hope to exculpate themselves by trying to stop Trump. But in the end, Trump could only make a mockery of our politics because the media already had.


Neal Gabler is an author of five books and the recipient of two LA TImes Book Prizes, Time magazine‘s non-fiction book of the year, USA Today‘s biography of the year and other awards. He is also a senior fellow at the Lear Center for the Study of Entertainment and Society and is currently writing a biography of Sen. Edward Kennedy.

How the Establishment Elite Are Rigging the Presidential Election (Great Video!)

Video Source: WeAreChange

In this video Luke Rudkowski documents how the mainstream media and establishment are manipulating you and rigging the 2016 Presidential election. We go over just some of the media manipulation from Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary and how many media organizations and social media platforms are capitulating to power.

CNN Stokes Racist and Fear-Mongering Rhetoric in GOP Debate & Gets Slammed On Social Media

"The moderators of last night's CNN presidential debate provided a two hour platform for every Republican candidate to further fear and hatred against Muslims," said Steven Renderos of the Center for Media Justice.):

“The moderators of last night’s CNN presidential debate provided a two hour platform for every Republican candidate to further fear and hatred against Muslims,” said Steven Renderos of the Center for Media Justice.):

By Sarah Lazare | Common Dreams

From calls to ban non-American Muslims to pledges to carpet bomb densely-populated cities, the rise of hateful rhetoric among 2016 presidential candidates—and the real, violent consequences for those communities targeted—has raised widespread concern.

Related Article: All the World’s a Stage … And all the World is Staged

But also on display during the fifth GOP debate on “national security” was the role of corporate media outlets such as CNN in stoking racist and dangerous rhetoric, observers argued Wednesday, in a bid to boost ratings.

“Framing the problem of political violence as a struggle of ‘us’ against ‘ them,’ of creating a demonized other by stoking fear, is a tried and true strategy for building an audience,” Jim Naureckas, the editor of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting’s watchdog journal Extra!, toldCommon Dreams.

“The debates are seen not as a public service but as a money-making opportunity for the networks,” Naureckas added. “More than anything, they want high ratings.”

Such a strategy, Naureckas argued, was egregiously displayed Tuesday night when CNN debate moderator Hugh Hewitt indicated that, to qualify for the presidency, a candidate must be willing to kill “thousands” of children.

“It’s horrifying to see our leading cable news network offering, as a litmus test for becoming president of United States, a willingness to kill thousands of innocent children.” —Jim Naureckas, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting

Addressing retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, Hewitt posed: “People admire and respect and are inspired by your life story, your kindness, your evangelical core support. We’re talking about ruthless things tonight—carpet bombing, toughness, war. And people wonder, could you do that? Could you order air strikes that would kill innocent children by not the scores, but the hundreds and the thousands? Could you wage war as a commander-in-chief?”

“It’s horrifying to see our leading cable news network offering, as a litmus test for becoming president of United States, a willingness to kill thousands of innocent children,” Naureckas argued. “To equate that with toughness and seriousness about protecting the United States is a violent fantasy of the sort that motivates the people who carry out mass shootings.”

Such violence also surfaced in statements by veteran anchor Wolf Blitzer, the main host of the debate, critics note.

In addressing multi-billionaire Donald Trump’s proposed ban on non-American Muslims from entering the United States, Blitzer appeared to accept that the proposal, widely acknowledged as racist and discriminatory, is worthy of debate—and that those who oppose the plan should be on the defensive.

Related Article: Trump Calls to Ban Muslim Immigration and 8 Other Absurd Reactions to CA Shooting

Turning to former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Blitzer stated: “You called Mr. Trump ‘unhinged’ when he proposed banning non-American Muslims from the United States. Why is that unhinged?”

What’s more, the fact that Trump has previously sought to justify his proposed ban on non-American Muslims by drawing comparisons with the U.S. internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II at no time entered the conversation as a point of concern.

“Debate moderators entertained proposals like carpet bombing children and innocent civilians, killing the families of suspected terrorists, deporting all Muslims in the U.S., and allowing corporations and law enforcement agencies to spy on anyone deemed a threat.” —Steven Renderos, Center for Media Justice

And to Florida Senator Marco Rubio, Blitzer suggested that the alleged popularity of Trump’s Islamophobic policy proposal among the Republican base overrides civil rights concerns. “You have said banning Muslims is unconstitutional. But according to a recent ABC News-Washington Post poll, a majority of Republicans support Mr. Trump’s idea,” said Blitzer. “Why are they wrong?”

Steven Renderos, national organizer for the Center for Media Justice, told Common Dreams that the premise that racist and hateful policies are justified or reasonable “boils over into actualized violence against the communities it’s directed towards, and CNN‘s role in furthering this problematic discourse is shameful.”

And indeed, communities across the country have warned that hate crimes are soaring, from violence against Muslim communities to attacks on Black Lives Matter protesters endorsed by Trump himself.

“The moderators of last night’s CNN presidential debate provided a two hour platform for every Republican candidate to further [incite] fear and hatred against Muslims,” said Renderos. “Debate moderators entertained proposals like carpet bombing children and innocent civilians, killing the families of suspected terrorists, deporting all Muslims in the U.S., and allowing corporations and law enforcement agencies to spy on anyone deemed a threat.”

However, in a debate on “national security,” Naureckas noted that the greatest dangers were completely absent from the discussion and questioning: right-wing and white-supremacist violence, which—a recent study shows—poses the biggest domestic threat.

Related Article: Bravo Jon Stewart: Comedian Forgoes Jokes to Examine Charleston & Racism in the U.S.

“It’s as though we didn’t just have an attack on a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado. It’s as though there wasn’t just a racist murder of nine people in a church in Charleston in an effort to start a race war,” said Naureckas. “That kind of violence just disappears from the conversation. It’s all about who we should bomb abroad and who we can we keep out.”

Read more great articles at Common Dreams.

Image source: https://flic.kr/p/oRQMN1

6 Positive Signs That Mainstream Media is Collapsing


By Phillip Schneider | Waking Times

There is an information awakening taking place right now, and mainstream media is being outed for what it really is: corporate and government controlled propaganda. People are turning to alternative news sources more swiftly than ever now, and as a result, the old guard of media is collapsing at free-fall speeds.

Related Article: International Truth Bombs Are Being Dropped – Exposing Mainstream Media Lies

Here are 6 positive signs of the collapse of mainstream media:

1. Mainstream Media is Owned by a Handful of Corporations and the People Know It

It’s no secret anymore that nearly everything we see, read, and hear comes from just a handful of mega-corporations. Thanks to the alternative media, it has become a widely known fact that just six corporations control 90% of the media we consume. These big six have the ability to make key decisions and delegate the news to their lower subsidiary companies by cutting out important stories or alternative points of view. People recognize this and are moving over to the indy media as a result.

2. Fox Stops Disclosing Live Viewership Ratings

Fox News, a subsidiary company owned by Rupert Murdoch of News Corp and top mainstream media outlet has just announced that it will stop disclosing its ratings for live TV viewership. They argue that these statistics are no longer relevant because of how many record their television shows, but it is also being seen as a way to hide a decaying audience. Fox will now be repackaging statistics on a weekly basis to make even the most modest results appear positive.

3. 98% of Young Adults Do Not Trust Mainstream Media

A recent poll shows that only 2% of young adults trust the mainstream media to do the “right thing” on a regular basis. This poll, which was conducted at the Harvard Institute of Politics on over 3,000 18-29 year olds, shows that only 2% of young adults trust the media to “do the right thing” “all of the time.” Furthermore, 10% said that they do the right thing “most of the time”, while 49% said “some of the time” and a whopping 39% said that the media “never” does the right thing.

Related Article: CBS News Journalist Exposes How Mainstream Media Brainwashes The Public (Video)

4. Mainstream Media is Hog-Tied by Corporations and the People Know It

An excerpt from the documentary The Corporation illustrates in their own words the story of two journalists working for Fox News in the mid 1990’s. Here is an excerpt from the film, of an investigation of the “human health implications” of injecting Bovine Growth Hormone into the cows which were used for producing milk:

“With Monsanto, I didn’t realize how effectively a corporation could work to get something on the marketplace,” said journalist Jane Akre. Before the story aired, a letter was received from Monsanto saying that there would be “dire consequences for Fox News” if it does. After receiving the letter, the general manager at Fox in Florida called them into his office and demanded that the story be altered. The next thing that he said was “We just paid three billion dollars for these television stations. We’ll tell you what the news is. The news is what we say it is…if you refuse to present this story the way we think it should be presented you’ll be fired for insubordination(defiance).”

You can tell by the amount of protesters at “March Against Monsanto” protests that the corporate controlled media does not have a stranglehold on information like they once did.

5. Mainstream Media is Literally Lying to Us So Blatantly that Nobody Pays Attention Anymore

A recent analysis conducted by PunditFact revealed that, according to this study, over half of all statements made by Fox News are false. Now this is not surprising, but what might be is that NBC/MSNBC is right up there at 46% of their statements being anywhere between “Mostly False” to “Pants on Fire.” CNN and ABC rated better, but national new shouldn’t be a race to the bottom.

6. Independent Media More Successful than Ever Before

The positivity that comes out of this is simple: people are waking up to this madness. No longer are we in a situation where the media controls the narrative like they once did, because the new media is there to pick up the ball and roll out the stories that the mainstream media refuses to get into.

Related Article: RT Shames Mainstream News With Mindblowing Report on the Paris Terrorist Attacks

The alternative media is making such enormous waves now that the older media is actually starting to listen to alternative voices and stories that are being published by new media outlets. The fact that Kevin Folta, a University Professor at the University of Florida, was receiving large unrestricted grants from Monsanto to promote GMO’s and round-up was even reported on by the New York Times thanks to alternative media making it such a big story that if they hadn’t they would have lost credibility: “If the Times is telling us the truth, then why didn’t they tell us about Kevin Folta?”

As long as the independent media keeps moving, there’s nothing that can stop the truth from getting out.

Read more great articles at Waking Times.

About the Author

Phillip Schneider is a student and a contributing author to Waking Times.


This article (6 Positive Signs That Mainstream Media is Collapsing) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Phiillip Schneider and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

All the World’s a Stage … And all the World is Staged


By Chris Veritas | Activist Post

One man believes the Democrats will solve America’s problems, that climate change is the world’s greatest threat, and that social progress is paramount; while another believes Republicans trump Democrats, Liberals can’t be trusted, and that radical extremists are an omnipresent omniscient threat. (The only thing they both agree on is that we are in constant danger.)

Related Article: CBS News Journalist Exposes How Mainstream Media Brainwashes The Public (Video)

The training for this mindset starts early, as children are taught practically from the cradle that the pilgrims were thanksgiving heroes (and not litigious cranks), that America is a nation of destiny (and therefore cannot be undermined by the dark forces), and that one ought to trust implicitly the politicians and the press (despite their mercurial perfidy).

This early training, that is: worldview sculpting, is largely responsible for the irrepressible hope Americans have that next set of rascal politicians will be the ones to save the day. And of course, one must belong to one of these parties. You are an American, aren’t you?

In this way, the public is groomed from birth to serve a sociopolitical dichotomy engineered to generalize individuals, with Big Media bearing the lion’s share of the edge rounding.

Depending on your Network Programming, with CNN and FOX being the chief dialectical agents, you will more or less receive a worldview created for you by Big Money (which hides behind Big Media), thinking wholeheartedly you are objectively informed, and that by tuning in you are being a responsible citizen.

This sort of sincerity is exactly what is being played upon, as the Media trades on the trust its forebears enjoyed, exerting such authority wantonly, and brutalizing its audience with ubiquitous installments of quotidian fear.

Meanwhile, Big Media skirts you past crucial knowledge pertaining to the real Globalist threat, through the looking glass, down the rabbit hole, past Alice and the Cheshire Cat, Blitzer O’Reilly and Wolf Shepherd, and back again, none the wiser.

Related Article: International Truth Bombs Are Being Dropped – Exposing Mainstream Media Lies

But don’t look too closely at the Foundations that corrupt through charity; the Food Giant that began by making poison; the Space Program that appears to be installing Control Grid infrastructure; the Science Insiders turned worldview promulgators; and let’s not forget those other worldview formulators, the Ad Agencies/Temptation Brigades.

But why cover these dreary things when you can harp endlessly on Slick Hilly’s emails?

Indeed, the American politician and his corresponding outlet exist in a scripted vacuum, where fireworks fly and fingers rise in a transfixing drama, with cardboard heroes and villains, where the stakes are real but the play is staged.

The Perception Machine paints over reality and fact in a pure confidence game, doubling down by charading constantly (thus daring you to unmask it), and doing so by employing blatant word repetition downloads.

Here is a recent example:

Extremist, Extremist, Extremist. ISIS, ISIS, ISIS. I.S., Extremist, Radical, Rebel. Now multiply that times Infinity.

But perhaps I haven’t been fair to FOX and CNN. After all, their blues and reds are so pleasing to the eye, and the cascading stars that shoot across the screen look like liberty personified! If only America didn’t lock up such a high percentage of its citizens; and if only it didn’t invade countries fighting terrorism, meanwhile allying itself with the barbarous likes of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, perhaps I too could sink back into my easy chair and zone out to the soothing flicker rate.

But this is just the problem: Big Media crafts a scripted dream of liberty that no longer coincides with reality, even as it bombards with seemingly infinite information/crises from all over the world.

All the world’s problems are now our problems, and all the world must soon converge to save itself from the problems caused by going Global in the first place. The climactic moment appears to be approaching, and the climax of the networked drama seems eerily close to reaching its zenith.

With Media having taught the players how to act in the national drama, the curtain is now parting, and the stage is set for international tragedy.

To paraphrase Shakespeare: all the world’s a stage … and all the world is staged.

What it all seems to boil down to is that as the powers-that-be have become exceedingly corrupt, so too has the once venerable fourth estate. Working together, in fact merging and overlapping, they appear to be promulgating a universal narrative, twisting perception via all-encompassing Media, to create easily controllable, homogeneous clones.

Related Article: 4 Examples of Mainstream Media Fabricating News to Push for War

The mind and reason itself are the targets. Peer pressure is used to coerce consensus. And television is the medium channeling the haunting of minds.

I don’t know about you, but my television’s days are numbered.

Read more great articles at Activist Post.

You can read more from Chris Veritas at his site Some Cry Wolf.

Study Linking GMOs and Tumors Vindicated Yet Again…MSM Stays Silent


Video Source: corbettreport

If you follow the mainstream media, you’ll probably only know the Seralini 2012 rat feeding study as “that GMO cancer study that got retracted.” But, you probably won’t know that the paper has since been republished and Seralini himself has won two court victories defending his work. Join James Corbett as he breaks down the GMO truth that Monsanto doesn’t want you to know.

Related Posts: 

The Dirty Details Behind the Attacks on Seralini’s Notorious GMO Rat Study

Monsanto Wants 14-Year Reuters Veteran Reporter Fired for Talking About GMO Dangers

CBS News Journalist Exposes How Mainstream Media Brainwashes The Public (Video)

Journalist Dead and 3 More Arrested After Exposing Turkey Is Arming Syrian Extremists

Serena Shim was war correspondent for Press TV who was killed in a car crash that her employer called "suspicious."):

Serena Shim was war correspondent for Press TV who was killed in a car crash that her employer called “suspicious.”):

By Claire Bernish | The Anti Media

(ANTIMEDIA) Istanbul, Turkey — Just over a week after Cumhuriyet Editor-in-Chief, Can Dündar, represented the Turkish daily news outlet in receiving a press freedom award, he and another top editor were arrested and jailed on charges of espionage. In question was a controversial article exposing arms shipments from Turkish intelligence to Syrian extremist rebels.

“We have been arrested,” tweeted Dündar on Thursday. “Don’t worry, these are medals of honor for us.”

He explained further: “We are accused of ‘spying.’ The president said ‘treason.’ We are not traitors, spy [sic], or heroes; we are journalists. What we have done here is an act of journalism,” said Dündar before testifying on Thursday. “Of course, this prosecution will help enlighten how these incidents took place, rather than how we covered this story.”

Related Article: Terrorism Act Used as Reason for Seizing Journalist’s Computer

Now a third Turkish journalist has been arrested, according to local reports. Ertuğrul Özkök, a reporter for Turkish daily Hüriyet, has been arrested for a slanderous criticism of who is presumed to be Erdoğan — even though the president wasn’t explicitly named anywhere in Özkök’s article. As if more evidence of Turkey’s quashing free press and free speech were needed, Özkök potentially faces five years and four months in prison for expressing this opinion.

Dündar and Ankara correspondent, Erdem Gül, if found guilty on charges of spying, as well as aiding a terrorist organization, could spend the rest of their lives in a Turkish prison — for doing their job. There is a painfully ironic undercurrent in the charges considering the subject of the article is the Erdoğan administration’s complicity in arming Syrian extremists (read:terrorists).

Erdoğan himself sued Dündar and accused Cumhuriyet of releasing false information and spying when the story first exploded, stating at the time the journalist responsible would “pay a heavy price,” as the Wall Street Journal reported.

Despite Cunhuriyet’s recent honor from Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF, or Reporters Without Borders), under the paranoid, watchful eye of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, journalists — and dissenters — have faced sweeping general censorship. Dündar and Gül might be the most prominent recent examples of Erdoğan’s attempt to keep “state secrets” concealed from public scrutiny, but they’re not the first journalists to poke this particular sore spot.

In fact, the last time a reporter tried to expose Turkey’s complicity in arming Syrian extremists, she met an untimely and as-yet unexplained death under seriously suspicious circumstances that remain inscrutable to this day — even to her own family.

PressTV reporter Serena Shim, a U.S. citizen, had been investigating the flow of anti-Assad militants and weapons from Turkey’s border region into northwestern Syria amidst heavy fighting near the town of Kobanî. During this time, she attracted the attention of Turkish Intelligence (MiT — Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı). Though locals knew her and the integrity of her reporting, MiT proceeded to question them and requested her whereabouts — under the unfounded guise Shim had been acting as a spy.

In reality, Shim had uncovered evidence of secret Western assistance to the Islamic State” — a particularly touchy subject for Erdoğan, as seen in the arrests of Dünbar and Gül. Her video evidence of this assistance — reportedly “proof of Islamic State terrorists using United Nations World Food Program vehicles for a convoy” into Syria, likely akin to Dünbar and Gül’s discovery — has never been recovered. Her passport and wedding ring, seized by Turkish authorities sometime after her death, have never been returned to her family.

Related Article: James Risen on Why Journalists Must ‘Fight Back’

Serena Shim and her cousin, cameraperson Judy Irish, unlike the arguably more fortunate Dünbar and Gül, were ostensibly “hit by a truck after turning into the opposite lane on a highway access road,” as reported in wtfrly.com. Shim was killed, though discrepancies are plentiful in official reports, including whether she died at the scene or an hour later from heart failure in the hospital. Shim and Irish were inexplicably taken to hospitals over 25 miles apart from each other by Turkish military officials, not police, who ‘investigated’ the wreck. After outrage from Shim’s family, Turkish authorities — who first claimed they were unable to locate the vehicle responsible for hitting Shim and Irish — eventually produced photos of the accident, which they then claimed had been caused by a cement truck driver.

Shim’s family has yet to receive answers from either Turkish or U.S. authorities about her dubious demise. On October 20, 2014, Marie Harf of the State Department took questions from the press on a number of subjects, including rumors surrounding Shim’s death. According to the transcript:

QUESTION: Does the U.S. have any comment on reports the death of U.S. citizen Serena Shim in Turkey may be more than just a car crash, following her reports that ISIS militants are being smuggled across the Syrian border?

HARF: Yes. We can confirm that she died in Turkey on October 19th and extend our deepest condolences to her family and friends. Officials from the U.S. Consulate General in Adana are in contact with her family and providing all possible consular assistance. For any details or information about the investigation, I think local authorities in Turkey are handling that.

QUESTION: But I mean, the question was whether you believe that her death had anything other than to do than [sic] a car crash.

HARF: I just don’t have anything further for you than that.

QUESTION: Can you take the question?

HARF: I can, but I don’t think I’m going to have anything further.

On November 20th, the media again attempted to press for answers about Shim’s death during a daily briefing given by Jeff Rathke. Per the transcript:

QUESTION: It’s about the journalist Serena Shim, who died in Turkey under very suspicious circumstances. Did her death raise suspicions here at the State Department?

RATHKE: Well, I think we’ve spoken to this in the briefing room several weeks ago, after it happened. I don’t have anything to add to what the spokesperson said at the time, though.

QUESTION: But then she died several days after she claimed she had been threatened by the Turkish intelligence. Have you inquired about this? Have you asked questions? Is there really nothing new about this?

RATHKE: Well, I just don’t have any update to share with you. Again, this was raised shortly after her death. The spokesperson addressed it. I don’t have an update to share with you at this time.

This icy response sharply contrasts that given by the State for other ‘American’ journalists killed or captured in the area for whom President Obama’s administration appeared to react with care and criticism, such as with James Foley (who was beheaded by ISIS).

U.S. State Dept. spokesperson Mark Toner released a statement on Thursday concerning the arrests of Dünbar and Gül:

“We are troubled by the pre-trial arrest yesterday of senior editors of the respected Turkish newspaper Cumhuriyet.

“The investigation, criminal charges, and arrest raise serious concerns about the Turkish government’s commitment to the fundamental principle of media freedom. These events are only the latest in a series of judicial and law enforcement actions taken under questionable circumstances against Turkish media outlets critical of the government.

“We call on Turkish authorities to ensure that all individuals and organizations — including but not limited to the media — are free to voice a full range of opinions and criticism, in accordance with Turkey’s constitutional guarantees of media freedom and freedom of expression.”

Most troubling in the silencing of Shim, Dünbar, Gül, and now Özkök are the very real consequences the verity of their reports of the Erdoğan government’s complicity in arming and aiding the Islamic State could have in NATO operations in the region. Should their separate, same discoveries have merit — and considering Erdoğan’s swift and heavy-handed reaction, they likely do — Turkey’s agenda stands at cross purposes with the supposed coalition goal of stunting ISIS. Even Vice President Joe Biden implicated Turkish involvement in the ISIS arms trade, though he apologized and essentially recanted that claim shortly afterwards.

Shortly after Shim’s mysterious death, the Daily Mail revealed video of Turkish border police having friendly interactions with ISIS fighters — apparently further evidence supporting the journalists’ claims.


The U.S. and other allies of Turkey quickly reacted in solidarity with the recent downing of a Russian jet that apparently breached Turkish air space — but is it possible that alliance isn’t as committed to ending ISIS’ growth as it purports to be? Though mostly unstated by the media and State, it has been widely and criticallyrumored U.S. involvement in the Syrian imbroglio has far more to do with deposing President Bashar al-Assad than leveling the burgeoning Islamic State.

In one of Shim’s final reports from her investigation, she revealed local Turkish populations near the Syrian border simply want an end to fighting. She disclosed many refugee camps in that border region were, in actuality, training camps for militants.

Related Articles: BBC Journalist Comes Clean: “Believe Nothing You Read Or Watch”

In interviews with local residents, it became clear Erdoğan’s stance on Assad — whom they claim the president used to call “our brother” — sharply reversed after consulting with U.S. officials.

According to Shim, locals stated, “We want Turkey and Syria to be friends again. We want the Syrian militants outside of Turkey’s territory.” She also explained locals “blame their government for the entire chaos taking place across the border [in Syria], calling their Prime Minister a ‘puppet of Israel and the United States.’”


Shim’s family is still waiting for information from the U.S. about her death. Judy Irish survived the deadly ‘accident,’ but so far has not come forward with any public statements about the incident. Press freedom in Turkey, meanwhile, has become a bit of an oxymoron.

Perhaps Voltaire said it best:

“To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?”

This article (1 Journalist Dead, 3 More Arrested After Exposing Turkey Arming Syrian Extremists) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish andtheAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, emailedits@theantimedia.org.

Read more great articles at The Anti Media.

4 Examples of Mainstream Media Fabricating News to Push for War


By Dylan Charles | Waking Times

As we inch further into the future and evermore closer to the next, and certainly last, world war, it seems proper to give pause and consider the significance of the fact that much of the information provided on world events is dreadfully compromised by corporate and political propagandists.

Related Article: 3 Stories That Show the War on Terror Is A Fraud

Mainstream media, with its exceptional reach, is able to mold the public’s first impression of any global event thereby establishing the ‘official story,’ the one that is repeated again and again during the first moments of a crisis. They capitalize on the immediate shock value of an act of extraordinary violence or unrest to mold public perception into conformity with a narrative that will become the abiding fiction by which any further substantive investigation of the event must be measured against.

9/11 is perhaps the best example of this, as nearly 15 years afterwards, an incredible amount of information and research has become available the public, at least enough to unseat the official version of events and inspire a deeper investigation, yet contrary reporting is still not taken seriously at all by mainline media outlets.

“The news is all about artificially manipulating the context of stories. The thinner the context, the thinner the mind must become to accept it. If you want to visualize this, imagine a rectangular solid. The news covers the top surface. Therefore, the mind is trained to work in only two dimensions. Then it can’t fathom depth, and it certainly can’t appreciate the fact that the whole rectangular solid moves through time, the fourth dimension.” –Jon Rappoport

Sometimes the media gets caught fabricating events and twisting reality. Here’s a disturbing look at some of the more recent examples of mainstream media news deceptions, staged events and psy-ops that have been exposed by the international independent press.

Example #1 –  BBC stages a chemical weapons attack in Syria to justify NATO invasion. 

With BBC reporter Ian Pannell standing amidst a host of crisis victims while on the scene at a small rural hospital in Syria, a supposed incendiary bomb or napalm attack happened, and as they were filming and a stream of wounded patients began pouring in. A doctor was interviewed on the scene, remarking that a napalm attack had occurred.

One month later as the NATO pressed for military intervention in Syria, the exact same footage was used in a new video report, however, the audio of a crisis doctors statement had been digitally altered. The word ‘napalm,’ had beeb changed to ‘chemical weapons,’ an obvious deception.

This video ‘…shows both versions are identical and from the same speech. The BBC then digitally altered the words from ‘napalm’ to ‘chemical weapon,’ the exact justification that NATO was finding difficult to prove.” [Source]

Watch the analysis of this totally fabricated event for yourself here:


Example #2 – Staged ISIS execution videos and terror stooges.

In 2014, as the Western supplied mercenary army ISIS was rising to its prominance as the CIA’s most evil proxy army to date, a series of frightening videos emerged of ISIS executioners with heavy British accents sawing the heads off of Western hostages, including freelance journalist James Foley.

James Foley video

ISIS Staged Foley execution

Graphic videos of the slayings were posted online and shortly afterward, another video emerged online purportedly showing the movie set where the Foley beheading was fabricated. The authenticity of this video is also unverifiable, however, even technical elements in the original video suggest manipulation, and some experts agree that the Foley video is staged.

As reported by The Telegraph UK:

“…a study of the four-minute 40-second clip, carried out by an international forensic science company which has worked for police forces across Britain, suggested camera trickery and slick post-production techniques appear to have been used.”

Related Article: Just Turn It Off! Corporate Media Promoting Xenophobia & Fearmongering 24/7

The executioner was later identified by intelligence agencies as 23 year-old British rapper Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary, and like Osama bin Laden, he became a resuable icon in the propaganda campaign in the war on terror. For his media appearances he was given a catchy name, ‘Jihadi John.’ When Jihadi John’s mileage ran out, he was literally ‘evaporated’ by a night time drone strike in Raqqa, Syria. His death, like Bin Laden’s, was celebrated by many. Another brick in the wall.

He walked out of a building and got in the car. We struck it right after with zero collateral damage,’ a counter-terrorism official said. ‘The vehicle was on fire. It was a 100 per cent flawless, direct hit.’ [Source]

Jihadi John before being 'evaporated' by a drone strike.

If you recall, in the early days of the war on terror, the faces Al Qaeda’s top lieutenants were plastered on decks of playing cards, serving the same purpose as Jihadi John; terror stooges assassinated as needed to maintain public interest in the war on terror.

Al Qaeda Palying Cards

Example #3 – Scripted, staged and phony local news broadcasts.

In the following clip which contains numerous examples, CNN and other major news outlets are caught again and again fabricating news reporting with chroma key green screens in network studios, posing as thought they were engaging in front line war reporting. The use of chroma key is ubiquitous in the mainstream media, and with it they can effectively pull off just about any visual deception.

Have a look at this collage of mainstream news fakery:

In this photo, an ABC news anchors makes the blunder of wearing a green shirt to the taping of an important news segment about Kim Kardashian’s wedding. Let’s also not forget what Hollywoood is capable of these days.

Never wear a green shirt to a green screen broadcast.

Never wear a green shirt to a green screen broadcast. Source

Example #4 – Staged photo-op of political leaders after the Charlie Hebdo massacre on January 7th, 2015.



Final Thoughts

All of this is, of course, nothing new. Almost everything in our world seems to be fake these days. Remember former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s speech at the UN justifying the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

Colin Powell

There are other examples as well, including the use of crisis actors which are people who appear in press inerviews and on teh scenes in multiple public events. The amount of resources that go into creating false realities for the masses is an absurd misallocation of human effort, and an embarrasing assault on human intelligence.

Since the mainstream medias is working in concert with the military industrial complex and corrupt governments to push the world over the brink and into all out war, it’s up to individuals and independent researchers to counter the propaganda and free the minds of those who are ready to wake up.

Read more great articles at Waking Times.

About the Author

Dylan Charles is a student and teacher of Shaolin Kung Fu, Tai Chi and Qi Gong, a practitioner of Yoga and Taoist arts, and an activist and idealist passionately engaged in the struggle for a more sustainable and just world for future generations. He is the editor of WakingTimes.com, the proprietor of OffgridOutpost.com, a grateful father and a man who seeks to enlighten others with the power of inspiring information and action. He may be contacted at wakingtimes@gmail.com.

Sources are embedded throughout article. 

This article (4 Examples of Mainstream Media Fabricating News to Push for War) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Dylan Charles and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.