United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: ‘Fake news’? Time to choose: Corporate media fakes us into Orwellian illegal Wars of Aggression with lies known to be lies as they were told (2 of 15)
Source:
Washington's Blog
URL Source: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/63717.html
Published: Dec 1, 2016
Author: Carl Herman
Post Date: 2016-12-05 08:45:10 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 2763
Comments: 11
“First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. And then you win.” ~ unsourced, and attributed to Gandhi’s analysis of British empire response to having their hypocrisy exposed: claiming to bring Christian love and progress while looting resources with forced local labor. The Washington Post added to President Obama’s rhetoric for Americans to be aware of “fake news”: easily refuted lies of omission and commission in media. This article series reveals the inversion of those claims: .01% “official” news by corporate media (six conglomerates) is easily documented as fake in our most important reporting. ‘Fake news’? Time to choose article series (links added as series progresses): The totality of these article sections (among ~100 such game-changers) is a fundamental choice for Americans: The Washington Post‘s unsourced “list” places us, Washington’s Blog, as their 7th example of “fake news.” Please take a few moments to read their sensationalistic description of our “Russian propaganda.” Please contrast that “reporting” and this also from The Washington Post, with actual content of this article series. FisherOfMen’s revealing 14-minute video, beginning with CIA Director Colby’s testimony to the US Senate for the 1975 Church Committee admitting the CIA directs corporate media how to lie to the American public with “fake news” (six similar videos here): 3-minute video of Dan Rather’s fake news from November 25, 1963 to sell the lie that President Kennedy’s fatal head shot caused “violent forward motion” opposite to the fact his head was violently hit to cause backward motion (hat tip What Really Happened): How we know US wars are started with lies known to be false as they are told: In addition to the illegality of US wars, we know from the disclosed evidence of our own government that all claims for current US wars were known to be lies as they were told to the American public and not “mistaken intelligence.” Read this and this for more complete documentation; here’s the summary for lies to initiate War Crimes on Iraq and Afghanistan: There were four basic claims of facts presented by US political “leadership” to invade Iraq: Here’s what we now know about the evidence from which those claims were made: Some war liars argue that UN Security Council Resolution 687 from 1991 authorizes resumption of force from the previous Gulf War. This resolution declared a formal cease-fire; which means exactly what it says: stop the use of force. The resolution was declared by UNSC and held in their jurisdiction; that is, no individual nation has authority to supersede UNSC’s power to continue or change the status of the cease-fire (further explanation here). The idea that the US and/or UK can authorize use of force under a UNSC cease-fire is as criminal as your neighbor shooting one of your family members and claiming that because police have authority to shoot dangerous people he can do it. When US leaders claim authority they clearly and OBVIOUSLY do not have, that means this claim was a lie known to be false as it was told. War lies for unlawful war on Afghanistan: The US acknowledges the Afghanistan government had nothing to do with 9/11. The UN Security Council issued two Resolutions after 9/11 (1368 and 1373) for international cooperation for factual discovery, arrests, and prosecutions of the 9/11 criminals. The Afghan government said they would arrest any suspect upon presentation of evidence of criminal involvement. The US rejected these Resolutions, and violated the letter and intent of the UN Charter by armed attack and invasion of Afghanistan. The US government requested the cooperation of the Afghanistan government for extradition of Osama bid Laden to be charged with the 9/11 attacks. The Afghan government agreed, as per usual cooperative international law, as soon as the US government provided evidence of bin Laden’s involvement. The US government refused to provide any evidence. The Afghan government refused US troops entering their country and extradition until evidence was provided, and made their argument to the world press for the rule of law to apply to the US extradition request. The US invaded Afghanistan without providing evidence and without UN Security Council approval. President Bush stated, “There’s no need to discuss evidence of innocence or guilt. We know he’s guilty.” Because the Afghanistan government did not attack the US, there was no evidence of imminent threat, the US violated the UN Security Council’s legal authority, the Afghan government took every reasonable act to cooperate, that means this US war claim of “self-defense” was a lie known to be false as it was told. In conclusion of this section of Emperor’s New Clothes’ unlawful Wars of Aggression, all based on lies known to be lies as they were told: It’s simple enough for anyone to document the crystal-clear letter and intent of two treaties forbidding military armed attack unless under attack by another nation’s government (or imminent threat). It’s also simple to document what we now know of “reasons” for war to prove they were all known to be false as they were told, when the facts are available for objective view. If you’re interested in viewing a history of similar easy cases to establish a history of unlawful/treaty-violating wars started with lies, consider: A history leading to our world of the present of unlawful wars started with lies is vital for understanding political collapse today. If the motivation for wars includes resources and money, we need to address similar Emperor’s New Clothes’ crimes with what we use for money. Continued HERE The lies and fabrications of the MSM are not the result of “sloppy journalism”. They are deliberate and are intended to mislead the public. The mainstream media routinely uses fake images and videos in its coverage of the war on Syria. The campaign against alternative and independent media seeks to limit freedom of expression.Corporate media fakes us into Orwellian illegal Wars of Aggression with lies known to be lies as they were told (2 of 15)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 11.
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
I choose not to believe either the corporate media or the lying pack of scoundrels who write and post yellow journalism.
Really? Then why do you continue to carry water for them and parrot their propaganda? or the lying pack of scoundrels who write and post yellow journalism. Really? What part of this paragraph is untrue? George Tenet, Director of the CIA, acknowledged that all US intelligence agency reports “never said there was an imminent threat.” This was based on a long history of intelligence reports, the facts that the chemical and biological weapons under consideration were relatively weak without a delivery system, and that Iraq was highly motivated NOT to use them against the US given their understanding such use would provoke war with the world’s most powerful military. Because all 16 US intelligence agencies stated in writing in their official National Intelligence Estimate report there is no evidence of any imminent threat, and US leaders used an argument of WMD as a reason for war without documentation of evidence while refuted by every US intelligence agency’s official report, that means this claim was a lie known to be false as it was told.
Really? Most definitely!!!!
What part of this paragraph is untrue? George Tenet, Director of the CIA, acknowledged that all US intelligence agency reports “never said there was an imminent threat.” This was based on a long history of intelligence reports, the facts that the chemical and biological weapons under consideration were relatively weak without a delivery system, and that Iraq was highly motivated NOT to use them against the US given their understanding such use would provoke war with the world’s most powerful military. Because all 16 US intelligence agencies stated in writing in their official National Intelligence Estimate report there is no evidence of any imminent threat, and US leaders used an argument of WMD as a reason for war without documentation of evidence while refuted by every US intelligence agency’s official report, that means this claim was a lie known to be false as it was told.
If the intelligence community said it….it is most probably a lie. If the CIA validated it….it could definitely be a lie. Some time back, there was a 900 page report issued by the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities that show 500,000 pages of documents offering an astonishing catalogue of intelligence failures. It listed among other things, the reasons for such gross failures were simple incompetence, systemic weaknesses, poor training and outright blunders. So, you are outta your fucking mind if you expect me to validate in any way whatsoever the accuracy of intelligence community reporting of the validation of such by any asshole CIA agent.
Yet your beloved CIA controlled Mockingbird media published those lies as truth while the alternative media pointed out the lies that your "truthful" government spewed and got the U.S. into the Iraq War. Some time back, there was a 900 page report issued by the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities that show 500,000 pages of documents offering an astonishing catalogue of intelligence failures. It listed among other things, the reasons for such gross failures were simple incompetence, systemic weaknesses, poor training and outright blunders. You mean just like the "intelligence failures" on 9/11 when no one was ever fired or reprimanded for "incompetence"? You're some piece of work. Corporate media lies to you in OBVIOUS and easily verifiable ways: The Church Senate Committee hearings had the cooperation of CIA Director William Colby’s testimony for the stunning disclosure that over 400 CIA operatives were controlling US corporate media reporting on specific issues of national interest in Operation Mockingbird. This game-changing testimony was confirmed by Pulitzer Prize reporter Carl Bernstein’s research. Of course, corporate media refused to publish Bernstein’s article; it became a cover-story for Rolling Stone. Bernstein provided additional information of CIA control in the Senate report and corporate media subsequent “reporting”: “Pages 191 to 201 were entitled “Covert Relationships with the United States Media.” “It hardly reflects what we found,” stated Senator Gary Hart. “There was a prolonged and elaborate negotiation [with the CIA] over what would be said.” Obscuring the facts was relatively simple. No mention was made of the 400 summaries or what they showed. Instead the report noted blandly that some fifty recent contacts with journalists had been studied by the committee staff—thus conveying the impression that the Agency’s dealings with the press had been limited to those instances. The Agency files, the report noted, contained little evidence that the editorial content of American news reports had been affected by the CIA’s dealings with journalists. Colby’s misleading public statements about the use of journalists were repeated without serious contradiction or elaboration. The role of cooperating news executives was given short shrift. The fact that the Agency had concentrated its relationships in the most prominent sectors of the press went unmentioned. That the CIA continued to regard the press as up for grabs was not even suggested.” Importantly, US corporate media is heavily concentrated in just six corporations, making the message much easier to control. MOCKINGBIRD: The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA "You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month." - CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. - "Katherine The Great," by Deborah Davis (New York: Sheridan Square Press, 1991)
Like I said: "If the intelligence community said it….it is most probably a lie. If the CIA validated it….it could definitely be a lie." To that I add: If the Truth Throught Projected printed it....then it is the most fictitious news story to ever polute the media environment and is nothing but garbage. You keep believeing the shit that the FTP puts out....I will have no part of itl
By Melissa Dykes Fake. Definition: a thing that is not genuine; a forgery or sham. Also known as a fraud or a hoax. There’s actually a lot more than five; this video could probably go on all day. There’s a reason Secretary of State John Kerry said the Internet is making it harder to govern … because people have a lot more information at their fingertips and no longer have to rely solely on the mainstream media’s establishment propaganda machine.
You should not post and promote fake news or yellow journalism.
There are no replies to Comment # 11. End Trace Mode for Comment # 11.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestTime to choose …
#3. To: Gatlin (#1)
I choose not to believe either the corporate media
#4. To: Deckard (#3)
I choose not to believe either the corporate media or the lying pack of scoundrels who write and post yellow journalism.
#5. To: Gatlin (#4)
#6. To: Deckard (#5)
#7. To: Gatlin (#6)
(Edited)
If the intelligence community said it….it is most probably a lie. If the CIA validated it….it could definitely be a lie.
#9. To: Deckard (#7)
#10. To: Gatlin, hondo68 (#9)
#11. To: Deckard (#10)
Replies to Comment # 11.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]