Does it matter what kind of information we put in our head?
So first of all: Of course not, because the information we receive about our world changes our perception of it and it changes us. And thereby they also change the reality in which we live. Our reality formation takes place in these four steps:
1. Information available
This is potential knowledge that can be collected, processed, understood and manipulated by individuals
2. Decision-making processes
These processes take place in the human mind and appropriate decisions are made by each individual based on the information available.
3. Human behavior
The behavior of each individual is based on the quality of their decision-making processes, which in turn is based on the quality of the information available.
4. Manifest Reality
The quality of the state that manifests itself in a society is based on the overall quality of behavior in that society.
So whoever controls the flow of information determines the state of reality in which we live.
In other words, if the range of available information is limited, the decision-making options and options for action of those who only have access to this information are accordingly limited. Especially when they are not questioned.
That is why it is so important to take a closer look at our information channels. As mentioned, there is an unbelievably large amount of information available today, but a large part of the people only knows the world through the so-called ‘mainstream media’ (MSM).
The machinations behind the scenes of big money and politics are so well hidden from the majority of the population that if people really knew how things really go we would have a second revolution overnight. Henry Ford knew this well because he said:
“It is good that the people of our country do not understand our banking and currency system, because if that were the case, I believe that there would be a revolution first thing in the morning.”
Most of the people reading this have a hard time figuring out how an entire country could be fooled so well, but it really isn’t that difficult when you understand the inner workings and hierarchy of these overly revered media houses that we are into put our blind trust.
The truth is not what you think you know. Our belief in media myth is our Achilles heel. Many recognized long ago that our politicians lie to us without blinking an eye, but most have no idea that our news media are lying and deceiving just as much, if not more.
We have only been fooled to such an extent by our media because people trust our messaging system too much. They naively believe that moderators and journalists would never lie to us. This trust has been used against us with devastating consequences, to an extent unknown to most.
To understand how much you have been misled, you need to first learn how our news organizations were infiltrated (more on that later). Once you’ve learned this undeniable historical fact, it’s much easier to understand that life is not what you know it to be
Short history lesson on ‘fake news’
The old saying “knowledge is power” has become the attitude to life for many warriors and would-be rulers over the course of history.
A well-known example from the annals of history is Nathan Rothschild, the British representative of Meyer Amschel’s infamous Rothschild banking dynasty. At the Battle of Waterloo, the riders and messengers of Rothschild were able to deliver the news of Napoleon’s defeat a day before the news carriers of their own government. As history shows, Nathan was able to convince the public that he allegedly found out about Wellington’s defeat by selling heavily on the UK stock market. When panic selling ensued, Rothschild had his employees buy the stock for a few pennies. By the time news of Napoleon’s defeat actually reached the shores of Britain, Rothschild had already secured his position as one of Britain’s richest men, a fortune
Regardless of the historical veracity of the story, it serves as an illustration of the previous statement: Knowledge is indeed power. It also shows the counterpart: Misinformation is a way of building power over enemies. Again, this is an age-old idea that has been used over the centuries as a tool of psychological warfare to give armies an advantage over their enemies.
Military deception is an ancient and time honored art. Throughout recorded history, military commanders have attempted to spread false news and sow false information as part of psychological warfare to deceive, confuse, and demoralize the enemy.
During the Crusades in 1271, Sultan Baibars successfully duped the Krakow Crusaders in Syria by sending the knights stationed there a letter asking them to surrender. The letter, which supposedly came from the head of her order in Jerusalem, was actually a gross forgery, but the gambit worked. The knights surrendered and the sultan took over the castle.
It was only with the invention and widespread use of technologies such as the printing press, then radio and television, that the modern concept of “news” was developed. The ad, magazine, and newspaper began to give people a sense of the ‘news’ that was published regularly. These technologies also enabled the mechanization of “false” news to spread propaganda to the enemy.
Some of the most dramatic examples of this were in the 20th century when airplanes were used to distribute propaganda leaflets and to use radio transmissions over enemy lines to influence public opinion.
However, this was by no means limited to psy-ops (psychological operations) against the enemy. The same techniques have been used throughout history to fool your own troops in order to increase morale.
During the Civil War, false “messages” were routinely distributed to Confederate soldiers to increase their motivation before battle, from false reports of the death of Union General Ulysses S. Grant to rumors that a world war was being waged between England and France Confederate would break out.
During World War II, false news of reinforcements for the beleaguered American-Filipino garrison fighting the Japanese invasion of the Philippines caused them to fight well past the point of impending defeat.
One of the most extreme examples of “false information” disseminated to confuse, panic, or disarm a nation is messages that are entirely fictional and broadcast as if they were real. While these stories are rarer, they can be devastatingly effective if they confuse and demoralize enemies or panic the public.
The roots of fake news stories go back a long way, but the most famous was the 1938 Halloween edition of the weekly radio play ‘Mercury Theater on the Air’. This adaptation of HG Wells’ War of the Worlds was presented as a fake news broadcast of an alien invasion. As is known, many of the listeners failed to realize that the broadcast was fictional and assumed that the nation was indeed attacked. Some believed aliens had indeed landed, others assumed it was a Nazi trick as tensions rose in the lead up to WWII.
The phenomenon provoked by the show is often dismissed as a sensational media fraud, but has been the subject of intense academic research. One of the organizations particularly interested in the show was the Princeton Radio Project, a Rockefeller Foundation- funded facility that studies the impact of radio on public opinion. The group worked closely with organs of the US Psychological Warfare Program, including Hadley Cantril, who was Nelson Rockefeller’s roommate at Dartmouth College. Princeton Radio Project eventually published a study of the public’s reaction to the “War of the Worlds” story.
Since then, fake news programs have been broadcast from time to time on otherwise “mainstream” networks, often with little or no indication that the “news” story being aired is entirely fictional, but I’ll get to that.
The first attack on the media by money
First of all, let’s look over to the US. The media are said to be the watchdog over the American Republic and our democracy, but few know or realize that it was usurped nearly 100 years ago and has been completely stolen in the past thirty years since Reagan deregulation.
You don’t think so? Put the television remote control down and do your own research instead of spooning up your pre-chewed messages.
Let’s take a look at this quote from John Swinton, former editor-in-chief of the New York Times (and New York Sun) …
“At this point in world history, there is no such thing as an independent press in America. You know it and i know it! There isn’t a single one of you who dares write your honest opinions, and if you did, you already know that it would never appear in print. I get paid weekly to get my honest opinion out of the papers I write for. Others of you get similar salaries for similar things and any of you who would be so foolish to write honest opinions would be on the street looking for another job: if I allow myself my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my newspaper, too I would be rid of my job in less than twenty-four hours. The business of journalism is to destroy the truth, to lie bare, to pervert, to vilify and to lick feet, and to sell this land and its people for his daily bread. You know, I know, and what is the point of this adulation of an ‘independent’ press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping puppets, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our opportunities, and our lives are all owned by other people. We are intellectual prostitutes. ” and what is the point of this adulation of an ‘independent’ press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping puppets, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our opportunities, and our lives are all owned by other people. We are intellectual prostitutes. ” and what is the point of this adulation of an ‘independent’ press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping puppets, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our opportunities, and our lives are all owned by other people. We are intellectual prostitutes. “-John Swinton
In 1917, Congressman Oscar Callaway documented in the official record of Congress that multimillionaire JP Morgan infiltrated the US media for the purpose of exploiting and controlling it. Morgan hired twelve of the best news managers to help him identify the most influential newspapers in America. The idea was to find the main news outlets that other news outlets would go to and let themselves be influenced by. (This is documented in the ‘Official US Record’, Volume 54 of February 9, 1917.)
After the editors reached consensus, Morgan bought or infiltrated the top 25 news organizations reported to him by his news manager task force. An editor has been hired for each newspaper to ensure that all news has been checked and that the ‘watchdog of freedom’ remains officially neutered.
This was a crucial step towards comprehensive information and intelligence control in the United States that spawned censorship, disinformation, and propaganda. The founding fathers’ fundamental idea of constitutional freedom had been deeply wounded.
The second covert operation attack on the media
As if that weren’t bad enough, in the 1940s the CIA made its own foray into news control with a program to infiltrate the media, with the idea of having selected journalists parry the official line of government, all under the guise of national patriotism . Some news members were simply betrayed and naively thought they were going to help America by spreading certain news. Others were simply unscrupulous and morally inadequate in their profession, were easily bought, and spat out any disinformation and propaganda for which they were used.
This project was called “Operation Mockingbird” . The name alone indicated the mission’s goal: complete control of the US media system. Many could naively make fun of this information until they hear it straight from the mouth of the perpetrator. Former CIA director William Colby said:
“The CIA owns everyone who matters in the major media.” If that quote alone isn’t enough to raise a “Spock eyebrow” for some, consider this gem from another former CIA director, William Casey:
“ We will know that our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is right is wrong. ”
The CIA understands that information is as good as gold, and those who control information can use that data for political gain, power, and prosperity.
Over the years, time-honored radio icons such as Walter Lippmann, Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite have been lured into Operation Mockingbird, to name a few of the elite among hundreds of broadcasters and well-known journalists.
According to published Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) documents, it appears that a large number of American media companies were involved in the Mockingbird project, including more than 400 journalists who were used on numerous assignments, as well as many publishing establishments that are rumored to have also been involved .
According to reports, Carl Bernstein, Washington Post reporter, was once told:
“A journalist is worth twenty agents.”
The CIA policy is to use and manipulate these “assistants” to spread disinformation in the US, just as it has been doing abroad for years through their Office of Strategic Influence. The problem is that it is only sanctioned by Congress if they do it abroad, but it is expressly forbidden to do so domestically.
Over the years it has become increasingly clear to many observers that the CIA had taken control of the media through Operation Mockingbird. The biggest blow to the project came in 1974 when two ex-CIA agents, John D. Marks and Victor Marchetti, published a book called “The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence” (ISBN 0440203368). The book opened the door to many questions about Project Mockingbird. The CIA’s public scrutiny reached new heights, generating a wave of concern in the US, including from some on Capitol Hill ( note that MK-Ultra was also exposed at the time ).
As the Mockingbird program became known and concerns about the possible infiltration of the CIA into the US media spread, the Senate began an inquiry into the church committee to investigate government operations related to intelligence activities.
The church committee unveiled Operation Mockingbird in 1975. According to Senator Frank Church (D-ID), the total cost of the disinformation campaigns would have cost American taxpayers an estimated $ 265 million a year. That number has grown exponentially since the 1970s.
The church report found that “by 1967 over a thousand books had been produced, subsidized, or promoted by the CIA”.
Despite everything that was exposed, the commission was stopped by none other than CIA directors William Colby (73-76) and George HW Bush (76-77). The report of the Frank Church committee is said to have been deliberately buried.
Despite its exposure, that wasn’t the end of Mockingbird. FOIA documents were eventually uncovered which showed CIA agents openly boasted in internal memos that the agency still had “crucial posts” in every major news organization in the United States. In 1982 the CIA admitted to having reporters on their payroll.
The American media is making the Operation Mockingbird agenda possible by simply avoiding stories to be kept from the public, or by mixing some truth with blatant misinformation to purposely tarnish the water and obscure the true background of the story, or entirely distract.
A declassified document from the CIA archives in the form of a letter from a CIA task force to the director of the Central Intelligence Agency describes the close relationship that exists between the CIA, mainstream media, and academia.
The document states that the CIA task force “now has relationships with reporters from every major cable service, newspaper, news program, and television station in the nation,” and that “this has helped us wrap up some ‘secret service failure’ stories in ‘ And that it has contributed to the accuracy of countless others”. It also explains how the agency “convinced reporters to postpone, change, withhold or even destroy stories that may have harmed national security interests or endangered sources and methods”.
Make no mistake about it, Operation Mockingbird or some derivative of it is still alive and well as our media continues to mislead the public about anything and whatever those pulling the strings want us to get from theirs sold media dolls paid for. Be it the numerous unreported inconsistencies of 9/11, the illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the orchestrated economic collapse or the diversion of the Gulf oil spill, the media have not told us anything that comes close to the truth. More on that later.
CNN – A military psy-op
How can that happen? Why does the media just let such obvious lies get away with all the time? Are there no journalists with advice?
Yes, of course there are! One must never forget that with the whole thing, there are certainly many honest, morally driven journalists who want to make the world a little better through their work. However, they are trapped in a corrupt, immoral, and false system that spits on their morals. Many of the big news houses in the USA have also been infiltrated by covert military personnel who have completely different ideas about morality, right and wrong. Crude ideas of patriotism and a steep career in the military are quickly more important than the truth.
Amber Lyon is a three-time Emmy-winning journalist on CNN. She has stated that the mainstream media are regularly paid by the US and foreign governments to selectively report and falsify information about certain events. She has also stated that the United States government has editorial control over mainstream media content:
“I’m just afraid that the public will continue to be fed propaganda, that unassuming Americans will not realize they are being fed it.”
Then in 2000 there was this article in the most influential newspaper in the Netherlands, the Trouw. It quotes Col. Christopher Saint John, Commander of the US-Army’s 4th Psy-Ops Group as follows:
“[…] called for major operations between the armed forces and the media giants. He pointed out that some army personnel had worked for CNN for several weeks and helped produce some newscasts for the network. “
According to the article, Major Thomas Collins of the US Army Information Service confirmed the presence of these Army Psy-Op experts at CNN’s headquarters:
“ Psy-ops personnel, soldiers and officers have worked with the industry at CNN headquarters in Atlanta through our program training [whatever that program is] . They worked as regular employees of CNN. They helped with the production of news. “
The Dutch journalist responsible for the article had backed out and reported the story to CNN. They then called him angrily and accused them of endangering their reputation. In the course of the conversation it even turned out that CNN actually had five Army Psy-Ops employees – two for television, two for radio and one for satellite operations. The Pentagon’s program started shortly after the outbreak of war in Kosovo. And of course, as with all other wars, CNN’s airtime was full of supporters of the bombing, mostly from retired Army generals. No question about it, it’s still going on today.
Of course, CNN says that these Psy-Ops Army employees have no decision-making power over the reporting, but on the other hand: what else can they say? Maybe you’re right, the point is: Such close ties with the military are absolutely unacceptable to any serious news organization.
Who is surprised that not a single American news portal has reported this story!
Speaking of CNN: Anderson Cooper , the main presenter of CNN (quasi the American Klaus Kleber) and part of one of the richest families in American history, did two summer internships at the CIA before suddenly he decided to join a reporter without any journalistic training To become CNN. I’ll just leave it like that.
“ The Central Intelligence Agency has been a major force in the US and foreign news media since the end of World War II, and has exerted a significant influence on what the public regularly sees, hears and reads. CIA publicists and journalists alike will claim they have few, if any, connections, but the not-often-recognized history of their close collaboration suggests a very different story, one that media historians are reluctant to investigate. “
– James F. Tracey, a former professor of communications at Florida Atlantic University
EDIT 01/07/19: Recently an NBC and MSNBC reporter named William Arkin, who has been known since 2010 for his 3-part Washington Post series on black budget programs, came to the public. He said in an open letter that the National Security Apparatus has gotten out of hand and that the figures of the military and intelligence agencies working as ‘analysts’ at his station have not made the Middle East a safer place. Above all, he could no longer bear the Trump-Bashing circus, because he says even if he is “of course an ignorant and incompetent cheat”You have to give him credit for being the only president for several decades who has stood up to the National Security Apparatus and wants to withdraw the troops from Syria, wants to improve relations with Russia, wants to end-nuclearize North Korea, questions why the USA is in Africa fight, and dares to attack secret services like the FBI. Arkin could not bear the way Trump was attacked every day while the military and secret services in the station were courted and repeatedly called for more war without being asked. That’s why he quit the stations and aptly said that they “became ground zero for these political pathologies of militarism and bondage to state security agencies.”
And he’s not exaggerating: In early 2018, NBC hired ex-CIA Chief John Brennon as a “senior national security and intelligence analyst.” Just like MSNBC reporter Ken Diliaian who previously worked for the CIA. Or MSNBC host Nicole Wallace who was ‘Bush / Cheny Communications Director’ and had a lengthy warmonger political career before she went to television and did the same. But no, of course something like Operation Mockingbird has nothing to do with it …
Shaken, not stirred
It is also worth mentioning that the influence does not only affect the news. The film industry in Hollywood is also influenced. John Rizzo revealed that the links between the CIA and Hollywood are “very close”. In his book ‘Company Man’ he describes how actors, directors and film producers are always happy to assist the CIA. The CIA has worked covertly with Hollywood since it was founded in 1947.
But it wasn’t until the mid-1990s that the agency officially established a link with the entertainment industry and openly began pushing for favorable treatment in film and television. During the Clinton presidency, the CIA took its Hollywood strategy to a new level – it tried to control its own myth-making. In 1996, the CIA hired Chase Brandon, one of its seasoned intelligence officers, to work directly with Hollywood studios and production companies to improve its image. “We were always mistakenly portrayed as evil and Machiavellian,” Brandon later told the Guardian .”It took a long time to support projects that show us in the light in which we want to be seen.”
Here I am thinking in particular of the CIA propaganda films in the Tom Clancey series. Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information (FOIA) show that the US government has contributed to over 800 major films and over 1000 television productions. The result was that the US government could even make script changes to major productions such as James Bond, the Transformers franchise, and films from the Marvel and DC Universe.
Also involved is the Department of Defense : When a screenwriter or producer asked the Pentagon whether they would provide for his film military equipment and equipment, this first go through his script. If the Ministry of Defense (which even has its own department) disapproves of characters, dialogues or actions, changes must be made. Otherwise no equipment is provided and cheap props have to be used. If the green light is given, everything that is desired is very generously carted to the set free of charge. It looks rather bad with anti-war films.
There was also an Army TOP SECRET film studio in Laurel Canyon at Lookout Mountain Air Force Station. The project ‘TSM3K’, which was declassified in the 1990s from secrecy, produced film recordings from 1947 to 1969 and showed them on television as ‘real war missions on the front’ in the news. More than 250 employees (scriptwriters, cameramen, resource managers, etc.) worked in secret together with Warner Brother, Universal, MGM in studios that corresponded to the most modern Hollywood studios of the time. In the 22 years they produced over 20,000 films about the Army and secret service operations, more than Hollywood made at the time. Who knows how much of the Korean War or the Vietnam War in the news was even real. And who knows what other great events of the time were filmed there.
There is nothing against watching films & series, there are some very inspiring ones, but you have to keep in mind that Hollywood in particular always wants to sell you ideas and beliefs. That is why you should always stay present while watching films and try to ‘read between the lines’. Sometimes things that take place behind the scenes in films are also ‘disclosed’, and on other occasions there is more on the subject of film & Hollywood. And a ‘screen detox’ now and then doesn’t hurt either.
The third attack on the media, again through money
The new form of media control is put simply: buy in or just buy it up. Government deregulation in the 1980s enabled the transformation of our media into today’s corrupt, homogenized, castrated, seedless industry. After deregulation, the Guardian of Democracy, our sacred and once highly esteemed press, became an easy target for hostile takeover and control.
The current United States media is controlled by only half a dozen owners and CEOs. These six people have complete control over what you see and how the world’s news and information is shaped and presented to you. See for yourself in the following graphic. (Click here to see it in full)
The graphic above is a bit older but apart from the logos nothing has changed (the current ones are below). Each of these corporate giants has numerous other media assets, including television, radio, the Internet, film studios, magazines and newspapers. These six companies alone make up the bulk of the total American media. And a large part of it (especially Hollywood etc.) is distributed and consumed worldwide.
NewsCorp : Rupert Murdoch, Disney : Bob Iger, Comcast : Ryan L. Roberts, WarnerMedia : John Stankey, Viacom : Robert Bakish, CBS : Joseph Inniello after his predecessor was ousted for multiple sexual harassment
With six people in charge of our current media, it is now all too easy to propagate and manipulate people through the press. Until people give up their longstanding, naive belief in our controlled corporate news media, they will never find a way out of disillusionment or find the real truth.
All it took to get total control of the media was money and 20 years of time. We have shrunk to just 6 out of 50 large media companies. (Since CBS and Viacom split again, there are six again)
In addition, most of the news papers only copy from news agencies such as Associated Press or Reuters in order to ‘make work easier’. And these texts are then printed word for word from all local newspapers and read from the transponder by all local news moderators as if they were robots. And in exactly the same ‘moderator speech’ that you learned in your training. When the news outlets lie, everyone is lied to.
One hand washes the other
Like any other group, these media groups are profit-oriented and are therefore dependent on their advertising contracts with other groups. Sometimes the truth has to take a back seat.
So there was the incident once that Monsanto prevented US TV station FOX from broadcasting a critical report on a growth hormone called rbGH for cows that Monsanto wanted to bring to market.
The safety studies that Monsanto carried out had glaring flaws, and Monsanto either incorrectly submitted the studies to the FDA or found it unnecessary to examine them. That the FDA is riddled with corruption from top to bottom is a story of its own, about which I will report in more detail another time. In contrast to the FDA, Health Canada (the Canadian equivalent of the FDA) came to completely different results. They have not approved the substance and pointed out that the hormones can be absorbed by the human body and could cause health problems (including cancer). Monsanto sent a threatening message through its lawyers to the head of FOX NEWS in New York. The report is unscientific and biased. They threatened to dissolve the advertising contracts for the entire FOX network. Fox then withdrew the report and went through the script again. However, they found that each statement is scientifically correct and not biased. Monsanto immediately sent another letter threatening that if the report is sent, it will have serious consequences for FOX and cause severe financial damage to Monsanto. They then sent their attorneys over to run the script with the general manager and news manager of Fox’s Florida office, and they wanted to defuse the text significantly and delete words like cancer entirely. And that although even her own rbGH studies showed that there were serious health concerns, which of course was in stark contrast to her PR campaign (‘the same safe wholesome product we’ve always known’). When the FOX employees refused to play, they were offered a full year salary if they took the show off the program. They refused on the grounds that it was about more important than money, and they were fired. And they weren’t allowed to tell other news channels about rbGH. What they did not adhere to, of course, the two unpacked. In the meantime the script has been rewritten 86 times (!) Until Monsanto was satisfied with it. In the end it contained unambiguous false statements and it was broadcast anyway. This case is really terrifying and worth it to see the whole story. However, it is just one example of how corporations influence reporting. Pharmaceutical companies in particular use really shady methods in the USA to advertise their drugs, but for another time. And the question arises: How high is the number of unreported cases here? How many such cases come to light in the end? How many journalists are brave enough to risk their financial security?
By unifying the media under consolidated corporate holdings that are literally in lockstep, it has become much easier to spread disinformation, such as the infamous 9/11 link with Iraq and non-existent weapons of mass destruction to encourage entry into an oil war .
Fake News – Real Wars
Since then, fake news programs have been broadcast from time to time on otherwise “mainstream” networks, often with little or no indication that the “news” story being aired is entirely fictional.
Sometimes the fake news is deliberately spread into the public consciousness through a carefully coordinated PR campaign. In 1990 the Kuwaiti government hired the PR agency Hill & Knowlten for 10 million dollars to address the so-called “incubator lie”to be spread in the United States Congress. They were hired by the sham organization ‘Citizen for a free Kuwait’. Nayirah as-Sabah tearfully told the congressmen that during the invasion of Kuwait earlier this year, Iraqi soldiers tore premature babies out of their incubators and left them to die on the ground. This story received widespread media coverage and had a major impact on the public debate as to whether the US would intervene militarily in favor of Kuwait. The then President George HW Bush (Rest in Piss) mentioned the story at least 10 times, even Amnesty International reported twice about it. Ultimately, it was through this story that the USA entered the 2nd Gulf War. However, it was not until after the war, that is 35,000 dead Iraqis and one with Uranium-contaminated country later announced that this story was completely made up and the crying girl was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador. This shows how important it is to question supposedly reputable sources, especially if they arouse very strong emotions and are advertised as a reason for entering into war. Because as it is said so aptly:
” The first victim of war is the truth.” – Hiram Johnson.
This has always been true, even with today’s war missions. Propaganda is an indispensable tool to get the population on a war course. The Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Iraq War – all of the US military adventures since ’45 have been based on lies (and if you investigate more closely, the entry into WWII). Strictly speaking, the truth must die BEFORE the war. Her demise is a prerequisite for even thinking about war.
It is the story of the US-led West as a beacon of freedom and democracy, which throws its shining light over the dark realm of the cruel despots. In the run-up to war, an enemy image must always be created. The world has to be pressed through the black and white grid. The leader of the state who runs contrary to his own interests must be demonized and declared an incarnation of evil. His humanity must be denied to him, his mere human being. It will then be much easier to kill him.
The thousands upon thousands of innocents who inevitably go to death with him are then also reified. They are being degraded to faceless collateral damage – sorry, yes, but worth it nonetheless. It is the much-quoted women, children and the elderly, to whose protection the war was supposedly first waged. In the run-up they are hypocritical justifications, afterwards they are degraded to mere statistics.
Before every war we are assured that it is the last resort and that all diplomatic possibilities for conflict resolution have been exhausted. In order to put a stop to barbarism, war must be resorted to as the ultimate “solution”. The good has a moral obligation to stand up against the bad. We have to kill to save life. Attack becomes self-defense, minus becomes plus.
Lies upon Lies: The Vietnam War
In 1964 a civil war raged in Vietnam, the communist north fought against the US-affine south. Washington is keeping a close eye on what is going on, because after the Cold War paranoia, no further country may fall to communism and thus trigger a possible chain reaction (domino theory). Suddenly the USS Maddox is under fire from hostile North Vietnamese torpedo boats in the Gulf of Tonkin. The headline is quick on the mind. It only took President Lyndon B. Johnson two days to whip the ‘Tonkin Resolution’ through the Kogress and US bombers are flying towards Vietnam.
Agent Orange. Napalm bombs. Images of burned corpses. Eleven years of bloody war followed and claimed 5 million dead Vietnamese and 58,000 dead US soldiers. To date there are deformities due to the 76 million liters of dioxins thrown off.
And everything is based on a lie: The North Vietnamese attack on the USS Maddox never took place.
In 2003, Robert McNamara – Secretary of State under Johnson and Kennedy – confirmed the suspicions that had been circulating for a long time, and in 2005 the final evidence came with the publication of previously secret NSA documents : the US entry into the Vietnam War is based on lies, the Gulf of Tonkin incident never happened. The US leadership had only been looking for an excuse to justify the entry into the war, which had been planned and decided long in advance.
The military even openly admit that the Maddox was only sent to the Gulf of Tonkin for provocation. And again the media played along, did not question. A mockery for the victims!
Lies on Lies: The Iraq War 2003
On February 5, 2003, Colin Powell gave his historic speech on the threat potential of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq to the UN Security Council.
“My dear colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources.
They are not mere claims. Every fact and every conclusion that we present today is based on
solid intelligence work. “
With these reassuring words, Powell begins his 76-minute Powerpoint lecture , in which he presents his watertight argument to the world, based on a multitude of evidence, all of which allowed only one conclusion: Saddam Hussein must finally disappear from the world stage. The accusation: Saddam is constantly working on the production of biological, chemical and also nuclear weapons of mass destruction and thus represents an acute threat to the Middle East and the western world.
Powell literally hammered this message into global consciousness: he used the word “weapon” 96 times, on average every 47 seconds. The diffuse fear of weapons of mass destruction has since been brought into the western living room in a loop. Again, all media played along as if synchronized.
The evidence Powell brought forward was a few bland satellite recordings, wiretapped phone calls, homemade graphics of bomb kitchens hidden in trucks, and a small vial of anthrax that he had with him. The accompanying photo went around the world. The vial was a skillfully placed prop. It goes without saying that there could have been no more than baking soda in the tube and that Powell did not bring any anthrax with him to the United Nations Security Council. Photographed at the right time and placed on page 1 of newspapers around the world, a harmless bottle can become the most dangerous weapon in the battle of images. It intimidates, fears, and poisons judgment.
Today we know that everything was a lie. Powell lied to the world for 76 minutes. Weapons of mass destruction did not exist. And the US intelligence services knew this at the time of the invasion. The Bush regime did not care, it stuck to its ready-made plan to invade Iraq. Powell’s speech to the world was solely to promote the war.
A tiny tube of white and yellow powder was what kept the world standing by as Bush and Blair invaded Iraq in an illegal war of aggression, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. The chaos created was the breeding ground for the rise of the Islamic State (IS). Bush and Blair are thus directly responsible for the devastating situation in Iraq today, as the then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan analyzed in an interview with Russia Today.
It doesn’t matter that Powell later admitted the lie. He is and remains responsible for the misery the US has brought to Iraq. His lies paved the way for the mass murder of Iraqi civilians. He is a war criminal and as such should be tried, convicted and put behind bars for life. However, one must not forget that this only happened because the media unquestionably spread the lie en masse and in some cases even inflated it further. They are thus crucial accomplices, had they instead done their job right or at least questioned the statements, Powell could have been stupid and stupid, and it would not have had such a strong impact on the mass consciousness.
The past should teach us to be very careful as soon as a new enemy image is spread in the media. These proven war lies should teach us to be highly skeptical of any justification for entering a war and to look more than critically at the underlying reasoning. Blindly trusting notorious liars is not advisable.
Lies about lies to this day
We are currently finding ourselves again in many theaters of war, where we were most likely knowingly lied to in order to justify war policy. The circumstantial situation is noticeably more overwhelming, the ultimate evidence is still missing. A selection:
In 2013, more than 1,400 civilians were tortured in an attack with the nerve gas sarin in the Syrian civil war. The disturbing images went around the world. The US government quickly realized that President Assad had ordered the attacks. President Obama justified increased intervention by the US military in an attempt to overthrow Assad. It is almost certain that Washington lied here too. Much of the evidence suggests that it was not Assad’s troops but the opposition that used the sarin.
In July 2014, the Malaysian MH17 passenger plane was shot at and crashed over Ukraine. All 298 inmates die. The perpetrator is quickly identified here too: it was Putin! MH17 was the justification for increased intervention by the West in the Ukrainian civil war and also for massive economic sanctions against Russia. Evidence of Putin’s perpetration was never presented. Here, too, there are many indications that it was Ukrainian forces themselves who took the machine down from the sky.
In addition, there are various terrorist attacks in the USA, the real backgrounds of which we are also left in the dark and which are also ideally suited to justify war missions or enforce laws. From 9/11 doesn’t even want to start here, that would go beyond the scope. More on this another time. One thing is certain, however:
Politicians who talk about war lie. Every time. And the mass media are goo.
But what makes us believe these stories over and over again?
Crude propaganda. Uncertainty. The power of images. Blind trust. The vague feeling that everything will already have its correctness.
Staging: The Power of Images
In other cases, the fake news consists of staged or manipulated interviews that give the false impression that the reality on the ground is different from what it really is. For example, CNN is faking a protest, a very small group of people looks like a street from the right camera angle: Here.
Ben Works, president of the Strategic Issues Research Institute and military affairs analyst for Fox News and CNN, uncovered a hoax during the Bosnian War. At that time the Serbia set up a first aid center to receive Bosnian refugees. They were not treated like a prince there, but were given something to eat and were allowed to go when they wanted. The head of the camp drove around the international press, and a British film crew promptly turned it into the story of a concentration camp. The film crew stood in an animal stable on the camp and filmed refugees standing outside this stable through a barbed wire. Their intention was to make it look like these refugees are penned in a camp surrounded by barbed wire. And to underline the look of the concentration camp, a man with no upper body was standing in the middle who, due to a birth defect, looked as if he was extremely emaciated. No emaciation, no imprisoned prisoners, just a clumsy trick. This shows how easy it is to create a completely wrong impression with pictures. Nevertheless, the next day the photo was on all front pages including the cover of TIME Magazine with the suggestive title ‘Must it go on?’. The effect it was supposed to achieve has achieved, the world was outraged. And this outrage paved the support of the population for the (illegal) war of aggression in Kosovo. A reporter even won the Pulitzer Prize for it, even though the whole story was completely fabricated and had nothing to do with the truth, and if it weren’t for the brave people who unwrap.
However, all of these methods of psychological warfare are only as effective as they are believable. For a jaded audience, or even an audience that has learned not to trust the news from a particular source (which is known to be very biased towards certain entities), the effectiveness of such propaganda is severely limited. Here, however, a new and generally more insidious form of misinformation comes into play: the video press release.
The VNR or Video News Release is a short video production that is designed to look like a news report. The VNR, which often uses actors or PR specialists to represent the “reporter” and even the interviewees, was used as a way for companies to integrate their products and services as “news” programs into the evening news.
More worrying than the widespread use of this PR trick by companies like Microsoft and Phillip Morris is the federal government’s use of VNRs.
Pushing emotional buttons
Many American (and probably also European news) are said to use so-called ‘crisis actors’ in their reports of rampages and terrorist attacks so that the events trigger stronger emotions in viewers. These can be found at casting agencies like this one, CisisCast to be ordered by the broadcasters. Officially, these should only be used during exercises by rescue workers in order to simulate realistic conditions. Others believe that they are also used for the news. A few independent journalists believe that in several mass shootings in the USA (Sandy Hook, Auora, Oregon) and in terrorist attacks such as the Boston Marathon, the same people were interviewed as witnesses and relatives by the media. Always under different names and slightly different outward appearances, but with extremely similar facial features and stature. Most of the people tell tears what happened. In addition, many of these interviewees have had a lot of theater and acting experience or government affiliations on their résumés.
I know that this topic is very sensitive and generally to be treated with caution. But one should not immediately wipe this possibility away with the accusation of irreverence, because the past has shown that this is quite possible (see incubator lie). On the other hand, you shouldn’t immediately accuse every traumatized relative who is interviewed on television with the actor. The parents of a child shot dead in Sandy Hook sued Alex Jones after he called them ‘Crisis Actors’. Try to take a step back and watch this video from an emotional distance and decide for yourself. There is a lot about it on Youtube, but now difficult to find due to shadow cencoring. Still on LiveLeak.
Some will wipe away fears of VNRs with a wave of the hand. You will argue that psychological warfare is, by definition, something that is used against the enemies of your own people and not against your own people. However, this is indeed a false assumption and one that we have already covered in this article (see CIA Operation Mockingbird).
Another method of implanting fake news is to simply make large-scale allegations that can later be exposed as completely unfounded (see Iraq War, US election rigging by Putin). The wide spread of the original claim and the almost non-existent spread of the rectification are enough to ensure the effectiveness of this classic psyop tactic. The thick headline on the front page remains, but nobody reads the correction that appeared three days later in a small paragraph on page 6. Most of them only read headlines anyway. According to a study , in 59% of all cases the articles behind the headline remain unread. The news houses know this very well and take advantage of it.
But no, you don’t fall for something like that, after all, you only read upscale literature and only watch selected programs on television? This makes no difference.
The Web of War Propaganda – The Council on Forein Relations
People seem to have completely forgotten that when you walked into a newspaper kiosk 100 years ago, you saw dozens of completely different ways of presenting foreign policy issues. Today there is a gigantic mass of print media in a magazine store, but only one view of a current global political event is represented. The wide choice is just an illusion. The preparation of the information is of course adapted to the respective target group, but the information content and general conclusions are (almost) the same everywhere. Why is that?
As we saw above, 90% of all media in the USA are in the hands of 6 people (in Germany, by the way, it’s very similar). But isn’t there a difference of opinion among them? And isn’t there a plurality of opinions within the company? And the media in general are only neutral observers of world events.
This is unfortunately not the case. As the ‘Swiss Propaganda Research’ has found out, key leaders from each of the media and internet companies sit in political think tanks such as the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderbergers and, above all, the ‘Council on Foreign Relations’, as this graphic clearly shows. (Click here to enlarge)
For those who may not know, the CFR is a primary member of the Washington think tank circle. The private think tank focuses on foreign policy issues and was founded in 1921 by Edward M. House and a number of influential bankers, politicians, journalists and businessmen in New York. Since its inception, the Council has been accorded an ‘outstanding role in the process of formulating foreign policy strategies’ and, with the ‘Chatham House’ and ‘Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’, which are closely interwoven with the CFR, belongs to the current top 4 of the world’s most important and influential private think tanks.
The council has an average of 4500 members and under the names of the board of directors of the council there are many names that truth seekers should be familiar with: banker Paul Warburg, CIA director Allen Dulles, presidential advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, president and ex-CIA director George HW Bush, US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger & Dick Cheny and billionaire George Soros to name a few.
Here is a nice list of important presidents, vice presidents, CIA directors, military, journalists, Hollywood media moguls, NGOs, congressmen, UN ambassadors etc. who are / were members of the CFR.
As former Army Major Todd Pierce describes, this group functions as “primary provocateurs” who use “psychological suggestiveness” to create a misrepresentation of perpetual danger from an alien entity, with the aim of persistent paranoia in the United States of “an imminent one.” Risk of attack or takeover ”.
In order to continue to finance the military-industrial complex, which was inflated to gigantic size and designed for expansion during the Second World War, and to secure a long-term right to exist, a constant risk of imminent attack had to be created in the collective consciousness of the population.
Without the blind support of the tax-paying population, who always willingly and fearfully sent their sons to war, the geopolitical efforts of the USA would not be enforceable. This could only happen if fear and associated enemy images were created in the minds of the population. Without a media landscape that would pull together on foreign policy standpoints, this would not be possible. And this is exactly where consensus-building think tanks come into play.
Robert Kagan, a senior CFR member and outspoken warmonger of the neoconservatives, has even announced that the US should create an empire.
For a long time, the struggle against communism provided the appropriate basis for this, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but a new, intangible enemy had to be created against whom one can act globally. The war on Islamist terror.
The narratives created by the CFR and its cohorts are taken up by their secondary communicators, the mainstream media, who impose them on the population without any analysis or questioning. Because the simple journalist knows exactly what he can write and what headwinds to expect. The pressure from above is great, and nobody wants to be sidelined in front of their colleagues. Few have the courage to ask critical questions about foreign policy issues that are beyond the narrative, and those who do will hardly have a career.
As Swiss Propaganda Research shows, Richard Harwood, former editor-in-chief and ombudsman of the Washington Post, wrote of the Council on Foreign Relations that its members most likely correspond to the “ruling establishment of the United States .”
Harwood continued: “This council’s membership in the council, however you may think of yourself, is a recognition of your active and important role in public affairs and your ascension into the American ruling class. You do not analyze or interpret United States foreign policy; they help to make them. “
Let’s let that sink in. US Government Foreign Policy – You Make It.
Although only five percent of CFR members work in the media, this is all they need to get their members through:
-Several US presidents and vice presidents of both parties;
-Almost all foreign, defense and finance ministers;
– most chiefs of staff and commanders in the US military and NATO;
-Almost all National Security Advisers, CIA Directors, UN Ambassadors, Fed Chairs, World Bank Presidents, and Directors of the National Economic Council;
-some of the most influential members of Congress (especially foreign and security policy-makers);
– Numerous media managers and top journalists as well as some of the most famous actors;
– Numerous prominent scientists, especially in the key areas of economics, international relations, political and historical sciences and journalism;
– Numerous executives from think tanks, universities, NGOs and Wall Street;
– and key members of the 9/11 Commission and the Warren Commission (JFK)
Harvard economist and Kennedy supporter John Galbraith stated: “Those of us who took part in Kennedy’s election campaign were tolerated in the government and allowed to have a say, but foreign policy was still in the hands of the people from the Council on Foreign Relations . “
And John J. McCloy, former CFR chairman, high commissioner for Germany, co-founder of Atlantik-Brücke, World Bank president and advisor to several US presidents, said in retrospect: “Whenever we needed a man in Washington, we just leafed through the council’s membership list and made a phone call to New York [CFR headquarters]. “
This shows why the news magazine Der Spiegel once called the CFR “the most influential private institution in America and the Western world” and a “ Politburo for Capitalism” . The Roman-inspired logo of the council and its motto should also be understood in this sense: “ubique” – omnipresent.
“The directors of the Council on Foreign Relations form a sort of praesidium for that part of the establishment that holds our fate as a nation in their hands. … Rarely do they fail to get one of their members, or at least one of their allies, into the White House. In fact, they mostly succeed in ensuring that the candidates from both parties are acceptable men from their point of view. “
Until recently, this assessment was largely correct. In 1993, the former CFR director George HW Bush was replaced as US president by CFR member Bill Clinton, who was followed in 2001 by CFR “family member” George W. Bush. In 2008, CFR member John McCain was defeated by CFR candidate Barack Obama, who received the list of the names of his future cabinet from CFR Senior Fellow Michael Froman, who under Obama negotiated the TTIP and TPP free trade agreements and was then named a Distinguished Fellow returned to the CFR.
It was only in the 2016 presidential elections that it appeared that the Council, apparently, could not prevail. Trump himself is not affiliated with the Council, but he did put some of the Council’s people in positions in his Trump administration. No matter which slip of paper is thrown in the ballot box, the CFR always wins. And if not, the CFR press is used for dirty campaigns (see Trump, maybe more on that another time).
Similar agendas can also be seen in the think tank ‘Trilateral Commission’, which is more focused on the economy. The one by David Rockerfeller and Zbigniew Brzeziński ( hello again!) Founded in 1973 at a Bilderberg conference, private and political advisory think tank has around 400 highly influential members from the three major economic blocs of Europe, North America and Japan. The aim is to improve cooperation between the three economic powers and to connect political decision-makers with the private sector. Founder Brzezinski was also military advisor to the three presidents Clinton, Bush Jr. and Obama and has already written a book in 1996 in which he writes about the invasion of the Middle East by the USA, just as it took place in the 20 years that followed, mind you BEFORE justifications and associated enemy images such as 9/11, Al-Qaida, ISIS, Assad etc, the war missions had been carefully planned many years in advance. But I’ll write about Brzezinski another time.
TK members are and were, again well-known:
George HW Bush , Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Henry Kissinger, John McCain, David Rockerfeller and his brother John D. Rockerfeller II, Zbigniew Brzezinski , Paul Wolfowitz, Helmut Kohl, Gerhard Schröder, Horst Koehler, Helmut Schmidt, Josef Ackermann etc.
The German Group (a German offshoot of the Trilateral Commission) has another 20 members from politics, business and the media, many of whom are also at home in the Atlantik-Brücke at the same time, e.g. our future Federal President Friedrich Merz. Or will it be Jens Spahn who took part in the Bilderberg Conference in 2017, just as (almost) every President and Chancellor took part in a conference a year before his ‘election’? Whoever does it, Rockerfeller definitely has his man in office. And neither of them will bite the hand that has carried you up the career ladder.
Just like at the annual Bilderberg Conferences, at which David Rockerfeller was also chairman of the board for many years. They have been held in a different location every year since 1952 and invite important personalities from politics, banking and finance, business, the military, the media, universities and nobility from all over the world. All 3 think tanks have in common that you can only become a member by invitation and with all three the exchange of its members takes place in secret.
According to the Chatham House Rule, no content may be released to the public. David Rockerfeller himself once said (on an audio recording secretly recorded in 1991):
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, New York Times, Time Magazine, and other publications whose directors have attended our meetings and have honored their promises of discretion for nearly forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been exposed to the bright lights of the public during these years. But the world is more refined now and ready to march on world government. . . . The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and the world bankers is certainly preferable to national self-determination in the past centuries. “
But why the whole thing? Why the secrecy when there is nothing to hide? Why control and silence the media? Rockerfeller already addresses the why and the much deeper agenda, which I will go into in more detail another time. I will also report in great detail another time about the Rockerfeller family . I don’t want to go into the other two think tanks for the time being, as that would definitely go beyond the scope.
But luckily we live in Germany, here we are properly informed, right? Unfortunately nothing changes, the tentacles of the CFR and co. are long, but more on that in Part 2.
EDIT: Here is another nice older picture of the huge media octopus. (Enlarge here)
Finally, a few wise words from the fictional news presenter from the movie ‘The Network’ (1976):
Thanks are due to The Corbett Report and Justicenow. See Here.