Western Media Finally Investigates Alleged Chemical Attack in Syria and Finds “NO EVIDENCE”

syriasyria

Douma, Syria – Critically acclaimed war reporter Robert Fisk published a stunning account of the alleged chemical attack in the Damascus suburb of Douma on April 7, which included testimony from a doctor who works at the hospital featured in the widely circulated video purported to be the aftermath of a Syrian government chemical strike.

In an exclusive first-hand report for the Independent, Fisk, who has twice won the British Press Awards’ Journalist of the Year prize and is a seven-time winner of the British Press Awards’ Foreign Correspondent of the Year, reported:

This is the story of a town called Douma, a ravaged, stinking place of smashed apartment blocks–and of an underground clinic whose images of suffering allowed three of the Western world’s most powerful nations to bomb Syria last week. There’s even a friendly doctor in a green coat who, when I track him down in the very same clinic, cheerfully tells me that the “gas” videotape which horrified the world– despite all the doubters–is perfectly genuine.

War stories, however, have a habit of growing darker. For the same 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.

Contrary to the narrative faithfully reported by western mass media, the bombshell report from Fisk—who became famous for being among the few reporters in history to conduct face-to-face interviews with Osama bin Laden, which he did on three occasions between 1993 and 1997—found, after interviewing numerous local Douma residents, there was no evidence to substantiate the reported chemical attack as claimed by Saudi-sponsored jihadist group Jaish al-Islam (Army of Islam).

Fisk reports that the Syrian doctor, Dr Assim Rahaibani, who works at the hospital told him:

“I was with my family in the basement of my home three hundred metres from here on the night but all the doctors know what happened. There was a lot of shelling [by government forces] and aircraft were always over Douma at night–but on this night, there was wind and huge dust clouds began to come into the basements and cellars where people lived. People began to arrive here suffering from hypoxia, oxygen loss. Then someone at the door, a ‘White Helmet,’ shouted ‘Gas!’ and a panic began. People started throwing water over each other. Yes, the video was filmed here, it is genuine, but what you see are people suffering from hypoxia–not gas poisoning.”

Witnesses told Fisk that the infamous White Helmets, officially known as Syria Civil Defence, actually operate as a civil defense for the “terrorist” rebel forces. The White Helmets are largely funded by the U.S. and UK governments and were founded in 2013 by James Le Mesurier, a former British military intelligence officer, and private security specialist.

Providing perhaps additional evidence that the White Helmets operate not a civil defense, but a defense on behalf of the Islamist terrorists, Fisk reports:

The White Helmets–the medical first responders already legendary in the West but with some interesting corners to their own story–played a familiar role during the battles. They are partly funded by the Foreign Office and most of the local offices were staffed by Douma men. I found their wrecked offices not far from Dr Rahaibani’s clinic. A gas mask had been left outside a food container with one eye-piece pierced and a pile of dirty military camouflage uniforms lay inside one room. Planted, I asked myself? I doubt it. The place was heaped with capsules, broken medical equipment and files, bedding and mattresses.

Of course we must hear their side of the story, but it will not happen here: a woman told us that every member of the White Helmets in Douma abandoned their main headquarters and chose to take the government-organised and Russian-protected buses to the rebel province of Idlib with the armed groups when the final truce was agreed.

See how that works—the terrorists leave the city and White Helmets are gone. So, when people perpetuate the lie that the White Helmets are Syrian civil defense, be sure to correct them and note that they are the civil defense for the Islamist jihadi forces that are attempting to overthrow the government and not the Syrian people.

In regards to purported “moderate rebels” you hear about in the western press, the Syrians that Fisk interviewed had a vastly different outlook on who they were:

Before we go any further, readers should be aware that this is not the only story in Douma. There are the many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had “never believed in” gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups. These particular jihadis survived under a blizzard of shellfire by living in other’s people’s homes and in vast, wide tunnels with underground roads carved through the living rock by prisoners with pick-axes on three levels beneath the town. I walked through three of them yesterday, vast corridors of living rock which still contained Russian–yes, Russian–rockets and burned-out cars.

So the story of Douma is thus not just a story of gas–or no gas, as the case may be. It’s about thousands of people who did not opt for evacuation from Douma on buses that left last week, alongside the gunmen with whom they had to live like troglodytes for months in order to survive. I walked across this town quite freely yesterday without soldier, policeman or minder to haunt my footsteps, just two Syrian friends, a camera and a notebook. I sometimes had to clamber across 20-foot-high ramparts, up and down almost sheer walls of earth. Happy to see foreigners among them, happier still that the siege is finally over, they are mostly smiling; those whose faces you can see, of course, because a surprising number of Douma’s women wear full-length black hijab.

With a policy platform of destroying ISIS and fighting terrorism, the Trump Administration has seemingly chosen the all too familiar path of the U.S. covertly aligning itself with insurgent groups meant to operate as a proxy army to foment regime change that Washington deems of significant geostrategic importance.

While most Americans understand that Saudi Arabia is the most prolific state sponsor of terrorism in the world, the close relationship being forged between Trump and Mohammed Bin Salman leads one to believe that the perceived financial incentives (Aramaco IPO) of strategic partnering with the Kingdom seems to outweigh Trump’s voiced concerns over Saudi involvement in 9/11 and their funding of global terrorism.

What is irrefutable is that the Saudis have chosen to supply massive amounts of arms and funding to numerous Islamist jihadi groups active in trying to overthrow the Assad government, as evidenced by internal diplomatic cable, released by WikiLeaks in 2015, revealing the Saudi government was set on Assad’s violent ouster “by all means available.”

Noting the rigorous independence of his reporting, Fisk wrote that he came to Douma as part of a convoy of journalists escorted by the Syrian government, but according to Fisk, “once a boring general had announced outside a wrecked council house ‘I have no information’… I just walked away.”

While Fisk is sure to come under attack by critics, the New York Times has previously referred to him as “probably the most famous foreign correspondent in Britain” while The Guardian has called him “one of the most famous journalists in the world.”

Additionally, a report from Douma, Syria, by One America’s Pearson Sharp, confirmed Fisk’s reporting, noting that residents there deny an attack happened and instead claim it was staged by rebel forces in an effort to precipitate a response from western forces.

Sharp said that he interviewed between 30 to 40 residents of Douma, and in a series of social media posts, he wrote:

I just spoke with a Syrian woman who lives in Douma. I asked her about the attack there, and she laughed, and said no! There was no chemical attack or any other kind of attack. 

She told me the area in question was in her neighborhood, and that if an attack had happened, she and her family would be dead. 

I asked her what did happen, and she said the rebel terrorists lied, created the event from nothing, and used it as a cover to convince America and Europe to attack Assad’s forces. 

Not making this up. Just reporting what people who actually live here are telling me.

Sharp emphasized that his reporting was not scripted or staged, but with actual local residents of Douma. He said that not one person told him that no chemical attack had taken place, but residents confirmed that they believe the alleged attack was staged by “terrorists rebels” so they could escape the oncoming Syrian army.

You can watch Sharp’s full report from Douma below:

DASH cryptocurrency and The Free Thought Project have formed a partnership that will continue to spread the ideas of peace and freedom while simultaneously teaching people how to operate outside of the establishment systems of control like using cryptocurrency instead of dollars. Winning this battle is as simple as choosing to abstain from the violent corrupt old system and participating in the new and peaceful system that hands the power back to the people. DASH is this system.

DASH digital cash takes the control the banking elite has over money and gives it back to the people. It is the ultimate weapon in the battle against the money changers and information controllers.

If you’d like to start your own DASH wallet and be a part of this change and battle for peace and freedom, you can start right here. DASH is already accepted by vendors all across the world so you can begin using it immediately.

Source Article from https://thefreethoughtproject.com/western-media-finally-goes-to-syria-to-report-on-alleged-chem-attack-find-no-evidence/

CENSORED! How Online Media Companies Are Suppressing Conservative Speech

Please support MRC Culture today! (a 501c3 non-profit production of the Media Research Center)

DONATE


Source Article from https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/ashley-rae-goldenberg/2018/04/16/censored-how-online-media-companies-are-suppressing

Just Like 1984: New California Bill Seeks Control Over Social Media & News Stories



Next Story

Recently, Senator Richard Pan of the California State Legislature introduced legislation entitled ‘False Information Strategic Plans,’ a bill that would task all social media sites that have a physical presence in California not only to have a plan to fully distinguish between the truth and falsity of all the content they publish and share, but also to “mitigate the spread of false information through news stories,” presumably through some remarkable discipline of self-censoring, or by “placing a warning on a news story containing false information.”

Where do we even start with this one?

For us to believe that Mr. Pan actually harbours expectations that the state could succeed in compelling social media sites to make the enormous effort to implement such a plan is ludicrous for so many obvious reasons.

Arbiters Of Truth

To begin with, fully distinguishing what is true from what is false is the stuff of spiritual masters who have reached enlightenment. Few, if any in our society, are in a position to be arbiters of truth. Those of us who are earnestly seeking to find the truth are muddling along slowly but surely, improving our discernment along the way.

Authentic truth-seekers do not have the least desire to censor that which is false, even if this falsity is blatantly deliberate; rather, they see falsity as an opportunity to hone the very discernment of truth that marks their progress. Conversely, those who want to limit or control the unfettered proliferation of information and opinion are not searchers of truth; they are agents of control.

The Legislation Of Control

As so often is the case with legislation, it is not so much about what it is asking us to do as it is about what the State gains the power to do if, based on their own subjective definitions, we do not comply with the regulations.

To the casual observer, the ‘False Information Strategic Plans’ Bill does not seem to contain any overtly oppressive measures. It is simply requesting social media sites to help in the effort to protect the public from the perils of fake news. The deception is by design. The introduction of this bill is an attempt to lay the foundation for unmitigated powers of censorship and suppression of information in the hands of the Deep State.

Imagine, if you will, a website—Collective Evolution (California branch), for example. And they publish a story—say, a story that criticizes Deep State efforts to gain more control over freedom of information. Well, if the bill introduced by Richard Pan became law, it could very well give the state the power to shut down the website entirely, based on the state’s subjective assessment that the social media organization had not conformed to the requirements by law to “mitigate the spread of false information through news stories.”

1984 All Over Again?

The parallels with the dystopian state of George Orwell’s 1984 are unavoidable. Richard Pan’s legislation portends the eventual creation of some form of state-run ‘Ministry of Truth’. And as has been the case for decades, invoking the famous novel as a prism through which to assess our current level of enslavement at the hands of our governing body is instructive.

However, there is no longer a need to fear or despair the revelation of such parallels. It’s not 1984. It’s 2018. We as a collective are not the suppressed and alienated citizens of Oceania; we are a formerly sleeping giant whose awakening is well underway.

We no longer succumb passively to state-sponsored dictums such as ‘Ignorance is Strength’. We grasp ever more immediately the irony inherent in the proclamations of those who would ‘protect’ us by limiting our freedoms.

Rising Perspective

And so, as we turn our attention to a matter such as this, we can quickly discern Senator Richard Pan for what he is—a stooge of the Deep State, an object of ridicule. Note that he also introduced a bill to eliminate parents’ ability to prevent their children from being vaccinated via the conscientious objection. It’s second nature for us to imagine how much Big Pharma contributes to his campaign.

From our rising perspective, we can identify efforts like his as desperate attempts of a dying beast that has been backed into a corner. In fact, the whole ‘fake news’ narrative appears to be backfiring on the Deep State, allowing Donald Trump to lead the way in suggesting how much mainstream media has employed selective, misleading reporting to control our perception all along. Continuing to shed light on shadowy initiatives such as Richard Pan’s bill–one of our main responsibilities as alternative media journalists–will only increase our collective perception of what is true, and move us closer to a tipping point where we are able to create a world in which only truth prevails.


Get Your FREE In Depth Numerology Reading

Your life path number can tell you A LOT about you.

With the ancient science of Numerology you can find out accurate and revealing information just from your name and birth date.

Get your free numerology reading and learn more about how you can use numerology in your life to find out more about your path and journey. Get Your free reading.

×

Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Collective-evolution/~3/v4rTZhVjsxg/

WATCH: Mainstream Media Cuts General’s Mic As He Tells the Truth On Syrian Gas Attack

attackattack

An interview between Sky News and one of Britain’s former senior military officials on reports of a chemical attack in Syria was cut short when Major-General Jonathan Shaw started to question the logic behind the narrative that the Syrian government would intentionally launch an attack on its own people.

After serving as the commander of the British Armed Forces in Iraq, Major-General Jonathan Shaw has seen a side of the United States’ War on Terror that is hidden from the general public and covered up by the mainstream media.

In the interview with Sky News, Anchor Samantha Washington asked Shaw about whether Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s denial of responsibility for a reported chemical attack last week would force the UK to seek approval from Parliament before launching airstrikes targeting the Syrian government.

You know, quite apart from all that, the part that seems to be missing from this—and this was actually mentioned by the ambassador—is what possible motive might have triggered Syria to launch a chemical attack at this time in this place?” Shaw replied. “The Syrians are winning, don’t take my word for it, take the American military’s word for it.”

The general referenced comments made by the commander of United States Central Command, Joseph Votel, during a hearing with the Senate Armed Services Committee Transcript last month. In an exchange with Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, Votel discussed the current state of the war in Syria:

GRAHAM: Is it too strong a statement to say that, with Russia and Iran’s help, Assad has won the Civil War in Syria?

VOTEL: I do not think that is too—that is too strong of a statement. I think they have provided him the wherewithal to—to be ascendant at this point.

GRAHAM: Is it still our policy that Assad must go?

VOTEL: I don’t—I don’t know that that’s our particular policy at this particular point. Our focus remains on the defeat of ISIS.

As General Shaw noted during his interview with Sky News, even U.S. officials are admitting that the “civil war” between the Syrian government and the Islamic State has come to an end—so why would Assad carry out an attack on his own people that would result in greater intervention from world superpowers, such as the U.S. and the UK?

“He said that Assad has won this war, and we need to face that,” Shaw said. “And then last week, you’ve got a Tweet by Trump that America is finished with [the Islamic State] and we’re going to pull out soon, very soon. And then suddenly you have a gas attack…”

Washington then jumped in and cut Shaw off mid-sentence, insisting that they were “out of time” after he had only been speaking for less than one minute.  

This interview serves as a reminder that while the mainstream media conduct interviews with experts and officials to make it look as though it is open to sharing different voices and opinions, Major-General Shaw appears to have shared the wrong opinion and the points he was highlighting are ones that clashed directly with narrative Sky News was selling to its viewers. This was further evidenced by the fact that the UK later teamed up with the U.S. and France to launch airstrikes targeting the Syrian government that have the potential to spark World War 3.

The question over what motive Assad would possibly have to launch a chemical attack on his own people when he knows that reports of chemical attacks in the past—even though they were unverified—have resulted in increased aggression from the United States, serves as a reminder that nearly every war in U.S. history has been started based on lies and propaganda that were used to blind the American people into believing the war was being fought “for their freedom.”

Watch the full interview below:

DASH cryptocurrency and The Free Thought Project have formed a partnership that will continue to spread the ideas of peace and freedom while simultaneously teaching people how to operate outside of the establishment systems of control like using cryptocurrency instead of dollars. Winning this battle is as simple as choosing to abstain from the violent corrupt old system and participating in the new and peaceful system that hands the power back to the people. DASH is this system.

DASH digital cash takes the control the banking elite has over money and gives it back to the people. It is the ultimate weapon in the battle against the money changers and information controllers.

If you’d like to start your own DASH wallet and be a part of this change and battle for peace and freedom, you can start right here. DASH is already accepted by vendors all across the world so you can begin using it immediately.

Source Article from https://thefreethoughtproject.com/watch-mainstream-media-cuts-generals-mic-when-he-questions-the-syrian-gas-attack/

NBC Comedy: ‘All White Guys Insensitive,’ ‘Brainwashed by White-Run Media’

Vince: Hey, guys, you’re never gonna believe what Michael accused me of last night.

Britney: Wearing the same jeans for too long between washes? We’ve all noticed.

Vince: He said I was culturally insensitive. That’s crazy, right?

Shabaz: [Laughter] Well, you did spend my entire first week here trying to figure out if I was Muslim or not.

Vince: No, I didn’t. What? No. I wanted to know why you didn’t eat bacon. You know, I love Muslims. It’s the vegetarians I don’t trust.

Bud: Look, truth be told, when I wanted to take Columbus Day off to celebrate my Italian roots, you–you laughed right in my face.

Vince: Come on, in New York, Italian’s not an ethnicity. It’s, like, normal.

Britney: You just called Italian normal, like everyone else isn’t normal. Am I not normal, Vince?

Vince: Okay, no-no-no, for–for one thing, it’s a whole different system for hot girls.

Shabaz: Whoa. Man.

Ruby: That’s not really…

Vince: Okay, look, guys, I just wanted him to have the best time possible in high school, like I did. Now he’s really upset, so… maybe I should just cancel the camping trip.

Ruby: Whoa-whoa-whoa-whoa, whoa, whoa, cancel-

Britney: What? What? What?

Ruby: Cancel the trip?

Vince: Yeah.

Ruby: No one’s calling you a racist. They’re just saying you’re being insensitive, like a–like a patriotic grandparent.

Britney: I mean, we dated. Would a racist person date me? Or Michael’s mother, Priya? You’re not racist; you’re a fetishist.

Ruby: Exactly.

Bud: Perfect.

Vince: What?

Ruby: Shabaz, do you have anything encouraging to say?

Shabaz: Not really.

Ruby: I just–think you do. Come on.

Shabaz: Look. All white guys are a little bit insensitive. But it’s not your fault. You’ve been brainwashed by the white-run media. And it’s not just them. It’s the government; it’s school systems. In some ways, you’re the real victim.

Bud: You get it, Shabaz.

Source Article from https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/lindsay-kornick/2018/04/12/nbc-comedy-all-white-guys-insensitive-brainwashe-white-run-media

50 Facts Illustrating Mainstream Media’s Relationship With The US Government



Next Story

James F. Tracy is a PhD from the University of Iowa. A former professor of communications at Boca Raton, Florida Atlantic University. He is one of many critical thinkers within the world of academia, and as result of presenting the following information that might spark some cognitive dissonance, he has been singled out due to his activism efforts.

For example, he was fired from his tenured professorship at Florida Atlantic University for questioning official narratives of terror events. Now, his Blog has been taken down by WordPress with no clear explanation.

You can listen to what he has to say on the matter here.

You can support the James Tracy Legal Defense Fund, and find out about what is going on with him at the moment HERE. He made national headlines, as many academics who are not afraid to stand up for truth do, in an attempt to ridicule them. 

He is well researched, and now reports on several different matters of escalating importance. Below is an article he wrote in August of 2015, and is relevant today given all of the “fake news” campaigns that have been directed against alternative media.

Since the end of World War Two the Central Intelligence Agency has been a major force in US and foreign news media, exerting considerable influence over what the public sees, hears and reads on a regular basis. CIA publicists and journalists alike will assert they have few, if any, relationships, yet the seldom acknowledged history of their intimate collaboration indicates a far different story–indeed, one that media historians are reluctant to examine.

When seriously practiced, the journalistic profession involves gathering information concerning individuals, locales, events, and issues. In theory such information informs people about their world, thereby strengthening “democracy.” This is exactly the reason why news organizations and individual journalists are tapped as assets by intelligence agencies and, as the experiences of German journalist Udo Ulfkotte (entry 47 below) suggest, this practice is at least as widespread today as it was at the height of the Cold War.

Consider the coverups of election fraud in 2000 and 2004, the events of September 11, 2001, the invasions Afghanistan and Iraq, the destabilization of Syria, and the creation of “ISIS.” These are among the most significant events in recent world history, and yet they are also those much of the American public is wholly ignorant of. In an era where information and communication technologies are ubiquitous, prompting many to harbor the illusion of being well-informed, one must ask why this condition persists.

Further, why do prominent US journalists routinely fail to question other deep events that shape America’s tragic history over the past half century, such as the political assassinations of the 1960s, or the central role played by the CIA major role in international drug trafficking?

Popular and academic commentators have suggested various reasons for the almost universal failure of mainstream journalism in these areas, including newsroom sociology, advertising pressure, monopoly ownership, news organizations’ heavy reliance on “official” sources, and journalists’ simple quest for career advancement. There is also, no doubt, the influence of professional public relations maneuvers. Yet such a broad conspiracy of silence suggests another province of deception examined far too infrequently—specifically the CIA and similar intelligence agencies’ continued involvement in the news media to mold thought and opinion in ways scarcely imagined by the lay public.

The following historical and contemporary facts–by no means exhaustive–provides a glimpse of how the power such entities possess to influence if not determine popular memory and what respectable institutions deem to be the historical record.

1. The CIA’s Operation MOCKINGBIRD is a long-recognised keystone among researchers pointing to the Agency’s clear interest in and relationship to major US news media. MOCKINGBIRD grew out of the CIA’s forerunner, the Office for Strategic Services (OSS, 1942-47), which during World War Two had established a network of journalists and psychological warfare experts operating primarily in the European theatre.

2. Many of the relationships forged under OSS auspices were carried over into the postwar era through a State Department-run organization called the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) overseen by OSS staffer Frank Wisner.

3. The OPC “became the fastest-growing unit within the nascent CIA,” historian Lisa Pease observes, “rising in personnel from 302 in 1949 to 2,812 in 1952, along with 3,142 overseas contract personnel. In the same period, the budget rose from $4.7 million to $82 million.” Lisa Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” in James DiEugenio and Lisa Pease, The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X, Port Townsend, WA, 2003, 300.

4. Like many career CIA officers, eventual CIA Director/Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Richard Helms was recruited out of the press corps by his own supervisor at the United Press International’s Berlin Bureau to join in the OSS’s fledgling “black propaganda” program. “‘[Y]ou’re a natural,” Helms’ boss remarked. Richard Helms, A Look Over My Shoulder: A Life in the Central Intelligence Agency, New York: Random House, 2003, 30-31.

5. Wisner tapped Marshall Plan funds to pay for his division’s early exploits, money his branch referred to as “candy.” “We couldn’t spend it all,” CIA agent Gilbert Greenway recalls. “I remember once meeting with Wisner and the comptroller. My God, I said, how can we spend that? There were no limits, and nobody had to account for it. It was amazing.” Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, New York: The New Press, 2000, 105.

6. When the OPC was merged with the Office of Special Operations in 1948 to create the CIA, OPC’s media assets were likewise absorbed.

7. Wisner maintained the top secret “Propaganda Assets Inventory,” better known as “Wisner’s Wurlitzer”—a virtual rolodex of over 800 news and information entities prepared to play whatever tune Wisner chose. “The network included journalists, columnists, book publishers, editors, entire organizations such as Radio Free Europe, and stringers across multiple news organizations.” Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 300.

8. A few years after Wisner’s operation was up-and-running he “’owned’ respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS, and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all, according to a CIA analyst. Each one was a separate ‘operation,’” investigative journalist Deborah Davis notes, “requiring a code name, a field supervisor, and a field office, at an annual cost of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars—there has never been an accurate accounting.” Deborah Davis, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post, Second Edition, Bethesda MD: National Press Inc, 1987, 139.

9. Psychological operations in the form of journalism were perceived as necessary to influence and direct mass opinion, as well as elite perspectives. “[T]he President of the United States, the Secretary of State, Congressmen and even the Director of the CIA himself will read, believe, and be impressed by a report from Cy Sulzberger, Arnaud de Borchgrave, or Stewart Alsop when they don’t even bother to read a CIA report on the same subject,” noted CIA agent Miles Copeland. Cited in Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 301.

10. By the mid-to-late 1950s, Darrell Garwood points out, the Agency sought to limit criticism directed against covert activity and bypass congressional oversight or potential judicial interference by “infiltrat[ing] the groves of academia, the missionary corps, the editorial boards of influential journal and book publishers, and any other quarters where public attitudes could be effectively influenced.” Darrell Garwood, Under Cover: Thirty-Five Years of CIA Deception, New York: Grove Press, 1985, 250.

11. The CIA frequently intercedes in editorial decision-making. For example, when the Agency proceeded to wage an overthrow of the Arbenz regime in Guatemala in 1954, Allen and John Foster Dulles, President Eisenhower’s Secretary of State and CIA Director respectively, called upon New York Times publisher Arthur Hays Sulzberger to reassign reporter Sydney Gruson from Guatemala to Mexico City. Sulzberger thus placed Gruson in Mexico City with the rationale that some repercussions from the revolution might be felt in Mexico. Pease, “The Media and the Assassination,” 302.

12. Since the early 1950s the CIA “has secretly bankrolled numerous foreign press services, periodicals and newspapers—both English and foreign language—which provided excellent cover for CIA operatives,” Carl Bernstein reported in 1977. “One such publication was the Rome Daily American, forty percent of which was owned by the CIA until the 1970s.” Carl Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media,” Rolling Stone, October 20, 1977.

13. The CIA exercised informal liaisons with news media executives, in contrast to its relationships with salaried reporters and stringers, “who were much more subject to direction from the Agency” according to Bernstein. “A few executives—Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times among them—signed secrecy agreements. But such formal understandings were rare: relationships between Agency officials and media executives were usually social—’The P and Q Street axis in Georgetown,’ said one source. ‘You don’t tell William Paley to sign a piece of paper saying he won’t fink.’” Director of CBS William Paley’s personal “friendship with CIA Director Dulles is now known to have been one of the most influential and significant in the communications industry,” author Debora Davis explains. “He provided cover for CIA agents, supplied out-takes of news film, permitted the debriefing of reporters, and in many ways set the standard for the cooperation between the CIA and major broadcast companies which lasted until the mid-1970s.” Deborah Davis, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post, Second Edition, Bethesda MD: National Press Inc, 1987, 175.

14. “The Agency’s relationship with the Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials,” Bernstein points out in his key 1977 article. “From 1950 to 1966, about ten CIA employees were provided Times cover under arrangements approved by the newspaper’s late publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. The cover arrangements were part of a general Times policy—set by Sulzberger—to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible.” In addition, Sulzberger was a close friend of CIA Director Allen Dulles. “’At that level of contact it was the mighty talking to the mighty,’ said a high‑level CIA official who was present at some of the discussions. ‘There was an agreement in principle that, yes indeed, we would help each other. The question of cover came up on several occasions. It was agreed that the actual arrangements would be handled by subordinates…. The mighty didn’t want to know the specifics; they wanted plausible deniability.’” Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

15. CBS’s Paley worked reciprocally with the CIA, allowing the Agency to utilize network resources and personnel. “It was a form of assistance that a number of wealthy persons are now generally known to have rendered the CIA through their private interests,” veteran broadcast journalist Daniel Schorr wrote in 1977. “It suggested to me, however, that a relationship of confidence and trust had existed between him and the agency.” Schorr points to “clues indicating that CBS had been infiltrated.” For example, “A news editor remembered the CIA officer who used to come to the radio control room in New York in the early morning, and, with the permission of persons unknown, listened to CBS correspondents around the world recording their ‘spots’ for the ‘World News Roundup’ and discussing events with the editor on duty. Sam Jaffe claimed that when he applied in 1955 for a job with CBS, a CIA officer told him that he would be hired–which he subsequently was. He was told that he would be sent to Moscow–which he subsequently was; he was assigned in 1960 to cover the trial of U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers. [Richard] Salant told me,” Schorr continues, “that when he first became president of CBS News in 1961, a CIA case officer called saying he wanted to continue the ‘long standing relationship known to Paley and [CBS president Frank] Stanton, but Salant was told by Stanton there was no obligation that he knew of” (276). Schorr, Daniel. Clearing the Air, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1977, 277, 276.

16. National Enquirer publisher Gene Pope Jr. worked briefly on the CIA’s Italy desk in the early 1950s and maintained close ties with the Agency thereafter. Pope refrained from publishing dozens of stories with “details of CIA kidnappings and murders, enough stuff for a year’s worth of headlines” in order to “collect chits, IOUs,” Pope’s son writes. “He figured he’d never know when he might need them, and those IOUs would come in handy when he got to 20 million circulation. When that happened, he’d have the voice to be almost his own branch of government and would need the cover.” Paul David Pope, The Deeds of My Fathers: How My Grandfather and Father Built New York and Created the Tabloid World of Today, New York: Phillip Turner/Rowman & Littlefield, 2010, 309,

17. One explosive story Pope’s National Enquirer‘s refrained from publishing in the late 1970s centered on excerpts from a long-sought after diary of President Kennedy’s lover, Mary Pinchot Meyer, who was murdered on October 12, 1964. “The reporters who wrote the story were even able to place James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s head of counterintelligence operations, at the scene.” Another potential story drew on “documents proving that [Howard] Hughes and the CIA had been connected for years and that the CIA was giving Hughes money to secretly fund, with campaign donations, twenty-seven congressmen and senators who sat on sub-committees critical to the agency. There are also fifty-three international companies named and sourced as CIA fronts .. and even a list of reporters for mainstream media organizations who were playing ball with the agency.” Pope, The Deeds of My Fathers, 309.

18. Angleton, who oversaw the Agency counterintelligence branch for 25 years, “ran a completely independent group entirely separate cadre of journalist‑operatives who performed sensitive and frequently dangerous assignments; little is known about this group for the simple reason that Angleton deliberately kept only the vaguest of files.” Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

19. The CIA conducted a “formal training program” during the 1950s for the sole purpose of instructing its agents to function as newsmen. “Intelligence officers were ‘taught to make noises like reporters,’ explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management. These were the guys who went through the ranks and were told ‘You’re going to he a journalist,’” the CIA official said.” The Agency’s preference, however, was to engage journalists who were already established in the industry. Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

20. Newspaper columnists and broadcast journalists with household names have been known to maintain close ties with the Agency. “There are perhaps a dozen well known columnists and broadcast commentators whose relationships with the CIA go far beyond those normally maintained between reporters and their sources,” Bernstein maintains. “They are referred to at the Agency as ‘known assets’ and can be counted on to perform a variety of undercover tasks; they are considered receptive to the Agency’s point of view on various subjects.” Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

21. Frank Wisner, Allen Dulles, and Washington Post publisher Phillip Graham were close associates, and the Post developed into one of the most influential news organs in the United States due to its ties with the CIA. The Post managers’ “individual relations with intelligence had in fact been the reason the Post Company had grown as fast as it did after the war,” Davis (172) observes. “[T]heir secrets were its corporate secrets, beginning with MOCKINGBIRD. Phillip Graham’s commitment to intelligence had given his friends Frank Wisner an interest in helping to make the Washington Post the dominant news vehicle in Washington, which they had done by assisting with its two most crucial acquisitions, the Times-Herald and WTOP radio and television stations.” Davis, Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post, 172.

22. In the wake of World War One the Woodrow Wilson administration placed journalist and author Walter Lippmann in charge of recruiting agents for the Inquiry, a first-of-its-kind ultra-secret civilian intelligence organization whose role involved ascertaining information to prepare Wilson for the peace negotiations, as well as identify foreign natural resources for Wall Street speculators and oil companies. The activities of this organization served as a prototype for the function eventually performed by the CIA, namely “planning, collecting, digesting, and editing the raw data,” notes historian Servando Gonzalez. “This roughly corresponds to the CIA’s intelligence cycle: planning and direction, collection, processing, production and analysis, and dissemination.” Most Inquiry members would later become members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Lippmann would go on to become the Washington Post’s best known columnists. Servando Gonzalez, Psychological Warfare and the New World Order: The Secret War Against the American People, Oakland, CA: Spooks Books, 2010, 50.

23. The two most prominent US newsweeklies, Time and Newsweek, kept close ties with the CIA. “Agency files contain written agreements with former foreign correspondents and stringers for both the weekly newsmagazines,” according to Carl Bernstein. “Allen Dulles often interceded with his good friend, the late Henry Luce, founder of Time and Life magazines, who readily allowed certain members of his staff to work for the Agency and agreed to provide jobs and credentials for other CIA operatives who lacked journalistic experience.”  Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

24. In his autobiography former CIA officer E. Howard Hunt quotes Bernstein’s “The CIA and the Media” article at length. “I know nothing to contradict this report,” Hunt declares, suggesting the investigative journalist of Watergate fame didn’t go far enough. “Bernstein further identified some of the country’s top media executives as being valuable assets to the agency … But the list of organizations that cooperated with the agency was a veritable ‘Who’s Who’ of the media industry, including ABC, NBC, the Associated Press, UPI, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, and others.” E. Howard Hunt, American Spy: My Secret History in the CIA, Watergate, and Beyond, Hoboken NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2007, 150.

25. When the first major exposé of the CIA emerged in 1964 with the publication of The Invisible Government by journalists David Wise and Thomas B. Ross, the CIA considered purchasing the entire printing to keep the book from the public, yet in the end judged against it. “To an extent that is only beginning to be perceived, this shadow government is shaping the lives of 190,000,000 Americans” authors Wise and Ross write in the book’s preamble. “Major decisions involving peace and war are taking place out of public view. An informed citizen might come to suspect that the foreign policy of the United States often works publicly in one direction and secretly through the Invisible Government in just the opposite direction.”Lisa Pease, “When the CIA’s Empire Struck Back,” Consortiumnews.com, February 6, 2014.

26. Agency infiltration of the news media shaped public perception of deep events and undergirded the official explanations of such events. For example, the Warren Commission’s report on President John F. Kennedy’s assassination was met with almost unanimous approval by US media outlets. “I have never seen an official report greeted with such universal praise as that accorded the Warren Commission’s findings when they were made public on September 24, 1964,” recalls investigative reporter Fred Cook. “All the major television networks devoted special programs and analyses to the report; the next day the newspapers ran long columns detailing its findings, accompanied by special news analyses and editorials. The verdict was unanimous. The report answered all questions, left no room for doubt. Lee Harvey Oswald, alone and unaided, had assassinated the president of the United States.” Fred J. Cook, Maverick: Fifty Years of Investigative Reporting, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1984, 276.

27. In late 1966 the New York Times began an inquiry on the numerous questions surrounding President Kennedy’s assassination that were not satisfactorily dealt with by the Warren Commission. “It was never completed,” author Jerry Policoff observes, “nor would the New York Times ever again question the findings of the Warren Commission.” When the story was being developed the lead reporter at the Times‘ Houston bureau “said that he and others came up with ‘a lot of unanswered questions’ that the Times didn’t bother to pursue. ‘I’d be off on a good lead and then somebody’d call me off and send me out to California on another story or something. We never really detached anyone for this. We weren’t really serious.’” Jerry Policoff, “The Media and the Murder of John Kennedy,” in Peter Dale Scott, Paul L. Hoch and Russell Stetler, eds., The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond, New York: Vintage, 1976, 265.

28. When New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison embarked on an investigation of the JFK assassination in 1966 centering on Lee Harvey Oswald’s presence in New Orleans in the months leading up to November, 22, 1963, “he was cross-whipped with two hurricane blasts, one from Washington and one from New York,” historian James DiEugenio explains. The first, of course, was from the government, specifically the Central Intelligence Agency, the FBI, and to a lesser extent, the White House. The blast from New York was from the major mainstream media e.g. Time-Life and NBC. Those two communication giants were instrumental in making Garrison into a lightening rod for ridicule and criticism. This orchestrated campaign … was successful in diverting attention from what Garrison was uncovering by creating controversy about the DA himself.”  DiEugenio, Preface, in William Davy, Let Justice Be Done: New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, Reston VA: Jordan Publishing, 1999.

29. The CIA and other US intelligence agencies used the news media to sabotage Garrison’s 1966-69 independent investigation of the Kennedy assassination. Garrison presided over the only law enforcement agency with subpoena power to seriously delve into the intricate details surrounding JFK’s murder. One of Garrison’s key witnesses, Gordon Novel, fled New Orleans to avoid testifying before the Grand Jury assembled by Garrison. According to DiEugenio, CIA Director Allen “Dulles and the Agency would begin to connect the fugitive from New Orleans with over a dozen CIA friendly journalists who—in a blatant attempt to destroy Garrison’s reputation—would proceed to write up the most outrageous stories imaginable about the DA.” James DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed: JFK, Cuba, and The Garrison Case, Second Edition, New York: SkyHorse Publishing, 2012, 235.

30. CIA officer Victor Marchetti recounted to author William Davy that in 1967 while attending staff meetings as an assistant to then-CIA Director Richard Helms, “Helms expressed great concerns over [former OSS officer, CIA operative and primary suspect in Jim Garrison’s investigation Clay] Shaw’s predicament, asking his staff, ‘Are we giving them all the help we can down there?’” William Davy, Let Justice Be Done: New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation, Reston VA: Jordan Publishing, 1999.

31. The pejorative dimensions of the term “conspiracy theory” were introduced into the Western lexicon by CIA “media assets,” as evidenced in the design laid out by Document 1035-960 Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report, an Agency communiqué issued in early 1967 to Agency bureaus throughout the world at a time when attorney Mark Lane’s Rush to Judgment was atop bestseller lists and New Orleans DA Garrison’s investigation of the Kennedy assassination began to gain traction.

32. Time had close relations with the CIA stemming from the friendship of the magazine’s publisher Henry Luce and Eisenhower CIA chief Allen Dulles. When former newsman Richard Helms was appointed DCI in 1966 he “began to cultivate the press,” prompting journalists toward conclusions that placed the Agency in a positive light. As Time Washington correspondent Hugh Sidney recollects, “‘[w]ith [John] McCone and [Richard] Helms, we had a set-up when the magazine was doing something on the CIA, we went to them and put it before them … We were never misled.’ Similarly, when Newsweek decided in the fall of 1971 to do a cover story on Richard Helms and ‘The New Espionage,’ the magazine, according to a Newsweek staffer, went directly to the agency for much of the information. And the article … generally reflected the line that Helms was trying so hard to sell: that since the latter 1960s … the focus of attention and prestige within CIA’ had switched from the Clandestine Services to the analysis of intelligence, and that ‘the vast majority of recruits are bound for’ the Intelligence Directorate.” Victor Marchetti and John D. Marks, The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1974, 362-363.

33. In 1970 Jim Garrison wrote and published the semi-autobiographical A Heritage of Stone, a work that examines how the New Orleans DA “discovered that the CIA operated within the borders of the United States, and how it took the CIA six months to reply to the Warren Commission’s question of whether Oswald and [Jack] Ruby had been with the Agency,” Garrison biographer and Temple University humanities professor Joan Mellen observes. “In response to A Heritage of Stone, the CIA rounded up its media assets” and the book was panned by reviewers writing for the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Chicago Sun Times, and Life magazine. “John Leonard’s New York Times review went through a metamorphosis,” Mellen explains. “The original last paragraph challenged the Warren Report: ‘Something stinks about this whole affair,’ Leonard wrote. ‘Why were Kennedy’s neck organs not examined at Bethesda for evidence of a frontal shot? Why was his body whisked away to Washington before the legally required Texas inquest? Why?’ This paragraph evaporated in later editions of the Times. A third of a column gone, the review then ended: ‘Frankly I prefer to believe that the Warren Commission did a poor job, rather than a dishonest one. I like to think that Garrison invents monsters to explain incompetence.’” Joan Mellen, A Farewell to Justice: Jim Garrison, JFK’s Assassination, and the Case That Should Have Changed History, Washington DC: Potomac Books, 2005, 323, 324.

34. CIA Deputy Director for Plans Cord Meyer Jr. appealed to Harper & Row president emeritus Cass Canfield Sr. over the book publisher’s pending release of Alfred McCoy’s The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, based on the author’s fieldwork and Yale PhD dissertation wherein he examined the CIA’s explicit role in the opium trade. “Claiming my book was a threat to national security,” McCoy recalls, “the CIA official had asked Harper & Row to suppress it. To his credit, Mr. Canfield had refused. But he had agreed to review the manuscript prior to publication.” Alfred W. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade, Chicago Review Press, 2003, xx.

35. Publication of The Secret Team, a book by US Air Force Colonel and Pentagon-CIA liaison L. Fletcher Prouty recounting the author’s firsthand knowledge of CIA black operations and espionage, was met with a wide scale censorship campaign in 1972. “The campaign to kill the book was nationwide and world-wide,” Prouty notes. “It was removed from the Library of Congress and from college libraries as letters I received attested all too frequently … I was a writer whose book had been cancelled by a major publisher [Prentice Hall] and a major paperback publisher [Ballantine Books] under the persuasive hand of the CIA.” L. Fletcher Prouty, The Secret Team: The CIA and Its Allies in Control of the United States and the World, New York: SkyHorse Publishing, 2008, xii, xv.

36. During the Pike Committee hearings in 1975 Congressman Otis Pike asked DCI William Colby, “Do you have any people paid by the CIA who are working for television networks?” Colby responded, “This, I think, gets into the kind of details, Mr. Chairman, that I’d like to get into in executive session.” Once the chamber was cleared Colby admitted that in 1975 specifically “the CIA was using ‘media cover’ for eleven agents, many fewer than in the heyday of the cloak-and-pencil operations, but no amount of questioning would persuade him to talk about the publishers and network chieftains who had cooperated at the top.” Schorr, Clearing the Air, 275.

37. “There is quite an incredible spread of relationships,” former CIA intelligence officer William Bader informed a US Senate Intelligence Committee investigating the CIA’s infiltration of the nation’s journalistic outlets. “You don’t need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are Agency people at the management level.” Bernstein, “The CIA and the Media.”

38. In 1985 film historian and professor Joseph McBride came across a November 29, 1963 memorandum from J. Edgar Hoover, titled, “Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,” wherein the FBI director stated that his agency provided two individuals with briefings, one of whom was “Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency.” ” When McBride queried the CIA with the memo a “PR man was tersely formal and opaque: ‘I can neither confirm nor deny.’ It was the standard response the agency gave when it dealt with its sources and methods,” journalist Russ Baker notes. When McBride published a story in The Nation, “The Man Who Wasn’t There, ‘George Bush,’ C.I.A. Operative,” the CIA came forward with a statement that the George Bush referenced in the FBI record “apparently” referenced a George William Bush, who filled a perfunctory night shift position at CIA headquarters that “would have been the appropriate place to receive such a report.” McBride tracked down George William Bush to confirm he was only employed briefly as a “probationary civil servant” who had “never received interagency briefings.” Shortly thereafter The Nation ran a second story by McBride wherein “the author provided evidence that the Central Intelligence Agency had foisted a lie on the American people … As with McBride’s previous story, this disclosure was greeted with the equivalent of a collective media yawn.” Since the episode researchers have found documents linking George H. W. Bush to the CIA as early as 1953. Russ Baker, Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America’s Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years, New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2009, 7-12.

39. Operation Gladio, the well-documented collaboration between Western spy agencies, including the CIA, and NATO involving coordinated terrorist shootings and bombings of civilian targets throughout Europe from the late 1960s through the 1980s, has been effectively expunged from major mainstream news outlets. A LexisNexis Academic search conducted in 2012 for “Operation Gladio” retrieved 31 articles in English language news media—most appearing in British newspapers. Only four articles discussing Gladio ever appeared in US publications—three in the New York Times and one brief mention in the Tampa Bay Times. With the exception of a 2009 BBC documentary, no network or cable news broadcast has ever referenced the state-sponsored terror operation. Almost all of the articles referencing Gladio appeared in 1990 when Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti publicly admitted Italy’s participation in the process. The New York Times downplayed any US involvement, misleadingly designating Gladio “an Italian creation” in a story buried on page A16. In reality, former CIA director William Colby revealed in his memoirs that covert paramilitaries were a significant agency undertaking set up after World War II, including “the smallest possible coterie of the most reliable people, in Washington [and] NATO.” James F. Tracy, “False Flag Terror and Conspiracies of Silence,” Global Research, August 10, 2012.

40. Days before the April 19, 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City DCI William Colby confided to his friend, Nebraska State Senator John DeCamp his personal concerns over the Militia and Patriot movement within the United States, then surging in popularity due to the use of the alternative media of that era–books, periodicals, cassette tapes, and radio broadcasts. “I watched as the Anti-War movement rendered it impossible for this country to conduct or win the Vietnam War,” Colby remarked. “I tell you, dear friend, that the Militia and Patriot movement in which, as an attorney, you have become one of the centerpieces, is far more significant and far more dangerous for American than the Anti-War movement ever was, if it is not intelligently dealt with. And I really mean this.” David Hoffman, The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror, Venice CA: Feral House, 1998, 367.

41. Shortly after the appearance of journalist Gary Webb’s “Dark Alliance” series in the San Jose Mercury News chronicling the Agency’s involvement in drug trafficking, the CIA’s public affairs division embarked on a campaign to counter what it termed “a genuine public relations crisis for the Agency.” Webb was merely reporting to a large audience what had already been well documented by scholars such as Alfred McCoy and Peter Dale Scott, and the 1989 Kerry Committee Report on Iran-Contra—that the CIA had long been involved in the illegal transnational drug trade. Such findings were upheld in 1999 in a study by the CIA inspector general. Nevertheless, beginning shortly after Webb’s series ran, “CIA media spokesmen would remind reporters seeking comment that this series represented no real news,” a CIA internal organ noted, “in that similar charges were made in the 1980s and were investigated by the Congress and were found to be without substance. Reporters were encouraged to read the “Dark Alliance’ series closely and with a critical eye to what allegations could actually be backed with evidence.” http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/DOC_0001372115.pdf

42. On December 10, 2004 investigative journalist Gary Webb died of two .38 caliber gunshot wounds to the head. The coroner ruled the death a suicide. “Gary Webb was MURDERED,” concluded FBI senior special agent Ted Gunderson in 2005. “He (Webb) resisted the first shot [to the head that exited via jaw] so he was shot again with the second shot going into the head [brain].” Gunderson regards the theory that Webb could have managed to shoot himself twice as “impossible!” Charlene Fassa, “Gary Webb: More Pieces in the Suicided Puzzle,” Rense.com, December 11, 2005.

43. The most revered journalists who receive “exclusive” information and access to the corridors of power are typically the most subservient to officialdom and often have intelligence ties. Those granted such access understand that they must likewise uphold government-sanctioned narratives. For example, the New York Times’ Tom Wicker reported on November 22, 1963 that President John F. Kennedy “was hit by a bullet in the throat, just below the Adam’s apple.” Yet his account went to press before the official story of a single assassin shooting from the rear became established. Wicker was chastised through “lost access, complaints to editors and publishers, social penalties, leaks to competitors, a variety of responses no one wants.” Barrie Zwicker, Towers of Deception: The Media Coverup of 9/11, Gabrioloa Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2006, 169-170.

44. The CIA actively promotes a desirable public image of its history and function by advising the production of Hollywood vehicles, such as Argo and Zero Dark Thirty. The Agency retains “entertainment industry liaison officers” on its staff that “plant positive images about itself (in other words, propaganda) through our most popular forms of entertainment,” Tom Hayden explains in the LA Review of Books. “So natural has the CIA–entertainment connection become that few question its legal or moral ramifications. This is a government agency like no other; the truth of its operations is not subject to public examination. When the CIA’s hidden persuaders influence a Hollywood movie, it is using a popular medium to spin as favorable an image of itself as possible, or at least, prevent an unfavorable one from taking hold.” Tom Hayden, “Review of The CIA in Hollywood: How the Agency Shapes Film and Television by Tricia Jenkins,” LA Review of Books, February 24, 2013,

45. Former CIA case officer Robert David Steele states that CIA manipulation of news media is “worse” in the 2010s than in the late 1970s when Bernstein wrote “The CIA and the Media.” “The sad thing is that the CIA is very able to manipulate [the media] and it has financial arrangements with media, with Congress, with all others. But the other half of that coin is that the media is lazy.” James Tracy interview with Robert David Steele, August 2, 2014,

46. A well-known fact is that broadcast journalist Anderson Cooper interned for the CIA while attending Yale as an undergraduate in the late 1980s. According to Wikipedia Cooper’s great uncle, William Henry Vanderbilt III, was an Executive Officer of the Special Operations Branch of the OSS under the spy organization’s founder William “Wild Bill” Donovan. While Wikipedia is an often dubious source, Vanderbilt’s OSS involvement would be in keeping with the OSS/CIA reputation of taking on highly affluent personnel for overseas derring-do. William Henry Vanderbilt III, Wikipedia.

47. Veteran German journalist Udo Ulfkotte, author of the 2014 book Gekaufte Journalisten (Bought Journalists) revealed how under the threat of job termination he was routinely compelled to publish articles written by intelligence agents using his byline. “I ended up publishing articles under my own name written by agents of the CIA and other intelligence services, especially the German secret service,” Ulfkotte explained in a recent interview with Russia Today. “German Journo: European Media Writing Pro-US Stories Under CIA Pressure,” RT, October 18, 2014.

48. In 1999 the CIA established In-Q-Tel, a venture capital firm seeking to “identify and invest in companies developing cutting-edge information technologies that serve United States national security interests.” The firm has exercised financial relationships with internet platforms Americans use on a routine basis, including Google and Facebook. “If you want to keep up with Silicon Valley, you need to become part of Silicon Valley,” says Jim Rickards, an adviser to the U.S. intelligence community familiar with In-Q-Tel’s activities. “The best way to do that is have a budget because when you have a checkbook, everyone comes to you.” At one point IQT “catered largely to the needs of the CIA.” Today, however, “the firm supports many of the 17 agencies within the U.S. intelligence community, including the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate.” Matt Egan, “In-Q-Tel: A Glimpse Inside the CIA’s Venture Capital Arm,” FoxBusiness.com, June 14, 2013.

49. At a 2012 conference held by In-Q-Tel CIA Director David Patraeus declared that the rapidly-developing “internet of things” and “smart home” will provide the CIA with the ability to spy on any US citizen should they become a “person of interest’ to the spy community,” Wired magazine reports. “‘Transformational’ is an overused word, but I do believe it properly applies to these technologies,’ Patraeus enthused, ‘particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft’ … ‘Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters — all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing,” Patraeus said, “the latter now going to cloud computing, in many areas greater and greater supercomputing, and, ultimately, heading to quantum computing.” Spencer Ackerman, “CIA Chief: We’ll Spy on You Through Your Dishwasher,” Wired, March 15, 2012.

50. In the summer of 2014 a $600 million computing cloud developed by Amazon Web Services for the CIA began servicing all 17 federal agencies comprising the intelligence community. “If the technology plays out as officials envision,” The Atlantic reports, “it will usher in a new era of cooperation and coordination, allowing agencies to share information and services much more easily and avoid the kind of intelligence gaps that preceded the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.” “The Details About the CIA’s Deal With Amazon,” The Atlantic, July 17, 2014.

Original source of this article is Memory Hole


The Shamanic Way of Healing

The Sacred Science follows eight people from around the world, with varying physical and psychological illnesses, as they embark on a one-month healing journey into the heart of the Amazon jungle.

This incredible true story details how ancient shamanic healing methods can work to shift our bodies and minds. here.

Read the incredible true story here.

The Shamanic Way of Healing

8 people with illnesses go into the jungle to heal naturally… read the incredible true story here.

×

Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Collective-evolution/~3/DFPNugOcVXg/

FLASHBACK: Before They Loved James Comey, the Liberal Media Trashed Him

The hype for James Comey’s book tour (set to launch on ABC Sunday evening with an hour-long George Stephanopoulos special) began last November 2 when CBS’s Gayle King teased it during an interview with the former FBI director: “We’re getting a first look this morning at fired-FBI Director James Comey’s new memoir….His publisher says the book will explore good, ethical leadership.” Co-host Norah O’Donnell exclaimed: “Something tells me that’s going to be a good book!” 

And while liberal journalists are clearly hoping for Comey to dish the dirt on President Donald Trump, there was a time when they hammered him as a partisan hack whose investigation into then-candidate Hillary Clinton’s e-mail scandal was sneaky sabotage of an all-but-certain Democratic victory in 2016. 

 

 

Just days before Election Day – when Comey announced that FBI was pursuing new leads into the investigation Clinton’s e-mail server scandal – CNN’s senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin called it a “stink bomb.” On the October 30 edition of NBC’s Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd wondered if “Comey has put the finger on the scale for Donald Trump.” His colleague Andrea Mitchell fretted “This is just the worst possible situation for the FBI, for the country, for Hillary Clinton.”  

At that time The Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) networks went into attack mode against Comey, turning what should have been a scandal about Clinton into a rampage against the FBI director. From October 28 through October 31, 2016  MRC analysts reviewed all statements (by reporters, analysts, and partisans) that took a position on Comey and Clinton and found criticisms of Comey (88) swamped those of Clinton (31) by a ratio of almost 3 to 1. There were a handful of statements that praised either Comey (10) or Clinton (4).

MRC analysts also discovered that the Big Three networks’ evening (ABC’s World News Tonight, CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News) and morning show programs (ABC’s Good Morning America, CBS This Morning, NBC’s Today) devoted a total of 2 hours, 19 minutes and 49 seconds to the Comey story during those four days.

 

 

The following are just some of the media’s worst overreactions to Comey’s investigation of Clinton during and even after the 2016 campaign: 

Comey’s “Stink Bomb” 

“Even I, as a lowly assistant U.S. Attorney in the 1990s, knew there was a bedrock principle at the Justice Department….you don’t interfere in elections. Two months before, you go dark. You don’t start making public disclosures. You don’t issue subpoenas, you don’t issue indictments on the eve of election and I don’t see what possible justification James Comey had to violate that principle….Why throw that stink bomb at the very end of the campaign?” 
— CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin on CNN Newsroom with Brooke Baldwin, October 31, 2016.

 

Comey “Put the Finger on the Scale” for Trump

“John Podesta, the campaign chairman wrote on Medium, he said, ‘By being vague and obfuscating, Comey opened the door to conspiracy theories’ – which you’ve been saying. And there’s now a surge of fund-raising for Trump and his team. Do you think Comey has put the finger on the scale for Donald Trump?”
— Moderator Chuck Todd question to Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook on NBC’s Meet the Press, October 30, 2016. 

 

Comey’s Decision “Worst Possible Situation for…the Country”

“This is just the worst possible situation for the FBI, for the country, for Hillary Clinton certainly….If she’s elected, she has to live with James Comey who has a ten-year term. That is a very hostile situation and a dangerous situation.”
— Correspondent Andrea Mitchell on NBC’s Meet the Press, October 30, 2016. 

 

Did Comey Forever Destroy FBI’s Credibility? 

“A lot of Democrats are incensed by James Comey’s actions. Dianne Feinstein, senator Dianne Feinstein, called his actions ‘appalling.’ Howard Dean, former Democratic candidate for president, says, quote, ‘He may have destroyed the credibility of the FBI forever. Put himself on the same side as Putin.’ Do you agree with that?”
— Moderator George Stephanopoulos to Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine on ABC’s This Week, October 30, 2016. 

 

Can Clinton and Dems Survive “Comey Effect?”

Correspondent Andrea Mitchell: “The 2016 campaign now again turned upside down by FBI Director James Comey, this time deciding that those Hillary Clinton e-mails on Anthony Weiner’s laptop were either all duplicates or not related to government business. The question is now, though, is it too late to undo the political damage?….Can the e-mail damage be undone? With polls opening just 24 hours from now, the Clinton campaign worries the good news may not catch up to the bad news of Comey’s first letter 10 days ago.”…
Meet the Press host Chuck Todd: “I think at the end of the day, we’re going to look back and say, this may have cost the Democratic Party one or two Senate seats. What this also did down the ballot to galvanize Republicans to basically vote like Republicans again….we may look at the makeup of the Senate and say, a Comey effect.”
— NBC’s Today, November 7, 2016. 

 

Comey’s “Integrity and Impartiality” Questioned 

 

 

Host Chris Hayes: “Whether or not Comey’s intervention has affected the presidential race, it’s clear that his disclosure and the spate of now competing, one might say warring FBI leaks that have followed have raised serious questions about the FBI’s integrity and impartiality.”…
American Urban Radio Networks correspondent April Ryan: “What does this do to an election a few days out? And it sets a precedent. It’s a bad precedent. We’ve never seen this before.”
Hayes: “Nope.” 
Ryan: “And I just tell you, the integrity of Comey as well as the FBI is in question. It makes you wonder. You go back in history and think about some of the things we read in the history books about things that were happening to leaders like Dr. King and others. You know, you just wonder, you just wonder.”
— MSNBC’s All In with Chris Hayes, November 2, 2016. 

 

J. Edgar Comey?

“Since President Obama named James B. Comey director of the F.B.I. in 2013, the 6-foot-8 former prosecutor has spoken often of dark chapters in the bureau’s history, notably J. Edgar Hoover’s order to wiretap the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and use the tapes to try to drive the civil rights leader to suicide. ‘The reason I do those things,’ Mr. Comey said in a talk at Georgetown University last year, ‘is to ensure that we remember our mistakes and that we learn from them.’ His point: The nation’s leading law enforcement agency must preserve investigations from any taint of political motive or extralegal influence. So it may be especially painful to Mr. Comey that today, after his second sensational public statement on the F.B.I.’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email, some critics and historians are comparing him to Hoover….But before Mr. Comey, Hoover was the last F.B.I. director to be accused – at least by some historians – of trying to influence a presidential election, by feeding useful scraps of information on Harry S. Truman, a Democrat, to the campaign of Thomas E. Dewey, a Republican.”
— Scott Shane and Sharon LaFraniere in October 31, 2016 New York Times article.

 

Clinton Team “Upset” with Comey and “They Should Be” 

Co-host Mark Halperin: “James Comey is getting horrible advice. He is interfering in this election, he is responding to Congress. Congress has no business knowing about the closing and opening of criminal probes. I don’t understand what the guy is doing. But from a pure political point of view: It’s a nightmare for the Clinton administration – campaign. I know why they’re upset, they should be.”…
Co-host John Heilemann: “At this moment it does seem like we have a problem with the FBI Director. And I actually think whether you are a Democrat or a Republican. If you are just looking on the merits, you would agree on the one thing – one thing that John Podesta said –  which is that James Comey should come out, and stand  in front of a podium and explain what the hell you’re doing here.”
— Bloomberg New’s With All Due Respect, October 28 2016.

 

Comey Has Turned the FBI Into “A Wing of the Republican Party”

 

 

Host Anderson Cooper: “Jeff, first of all, on this whole Marc Rich document dump from the FBI, is it just a coincidence that it happened now?”
Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin: “Well, perhaps. It is certainly bizarre….Coming on top of the director, Comey’s very unusual and controversial release last week, it just makes the FBI look like a wing of the Republican party.”
— CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360, November 1, 2016.

 

Comey “Destroyed” His Reputation by “Trying to Swing “Election” 

“If we don’t hear more from Comey, we just have to conclude that he was trying to swing election. And *that* should be the story.”
— October 28, 2016 tweet by New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.

“Mr. Comey was subjected to a constant barrage of demands that he prosecute her for…something. He should simply have said no. Instead, even while announcing back in July that no charges would be filed, he editorialized about her conduct – a wholly inappropriate thing to do, but probably an attempt to appease the right. It didn’t work, of course. They just demanded more. And it looks as if he tried to buy them off by throwing them a bone just a few days before the election. Whether it will matter politically remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: he destroyed his own reputation.”
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman in October 31, 2016 article “Working the Refs.” 

 

Comey Fail

“Comey has said high-profile investigations make him feel pressured to things quickly, and do it well. Tonight, his critics are wondering if he has failed on both counts.”
— Correspondent Jeff Pegues on CBS Evening News on October 28, 2016.

 

“Unprecedented” That FBI Director “Injected” Himself Into Political Process

 

 

“What is also striking is the extent to which the FBI director of the United States is allowing himself to be injected into this political campaign. Unprecedented that he would have released the information he released after a decision not to recommend indictment.” 
— Former NBC’s Meet the Press host and CNN political analyst David Gregory on CNN’s Wolf, October 28, 2016. 

 

Hillary Lost Because of Sexism in Comey’s FBI?

“I think what Jim Comey did was to throw overboard Justice Department procedures because of political reasons – his own internal politics – because of the hatred for Hillary Clinton within the FBI and because of this delicate balancing act he was trying to pull off with Republicans in Congress principally. And I think that, that was a horrendous decision on his part and one that he should and probably does regret. I think there was misogyny. And I think we tolerate sexism in this country, whether it’s in, you know, the legal profession or corporations or in our politics.”
— CNN political analyst David Gregory on CNN’s New Day, May 3, 2017. 

 

Pressing for Comey to Resign

Bernie Sanders: “I think that Comey acted in an outrageous way during the campaign. And, you know, no one can say that this was the decisive and this was what elected Trump, but clearly his behavior during the campaign in terms of what he said in the week or two before the election was unacceptable. And it is interesting that he is not doing investigations about the possible – possible ties between Trump’s campaign and the Russians.
Moderator George Stephanopoulos: “Should he step down?”
— ABC’s This Week, January 15, 2017.

Source Article from https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/geoffrey-dickens/2018/04/11/flashback-before-loved-james-comey-liberal-media-trashed

Matthews Admits Media Show Trump Tape Because It’s ‘Fun,’ Trump’s ‘Wagging the Dog’ on Syria

MSNBC’s Hardball
April 11, 2018
7:08 p.m. Eastern        

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Ashley, your paper and you especially with a few other people have been amazing at getting close to the President, figuring out what he’s up to. Does he know that every move he makes right now especially with the use of military weaponry, those missiles he talks about being nice and smart and all that, if he uses them, it will be suspect that he does. Does he know he’s under suspicion that he might be wagging the dog? 

ASHLEY PARKER: I will say that people in the White House sort of outright dismiss the wag the dog theory, and their argument is that on something as serious as what to do with Syria and launching possible air strikes that there has been a very deliberative process in place, you know, from the National Security Council principals meeting this week to smaller briefings for the President and I will say my reporting shows that the White House has largely been focused on an orderly, methodical process at least and perhaps only when comes to Syria. That said, the President tweet this morning sort of threatening Russia and talking about the U.S. smart missiles that may rain down caught everyone, the Pentagon, his own aides, his own advisors totally by surprise and they sort of had to scramble to figure out how to respond. So, even within something as serious as this and a process they are working to be disciplined on because they do understand the stakes, especially those around the President, something like an impulsive early morning tweet will still occur as we saw and can sort of throw everything into chaos at least for several hours. 

MATTHEWS: This is a strange time and you cannot satirize it. You’re my age pretty much. I have to tell you. I’ve never seen anything like this. A couple of things. You get the Access Hollywood thing, which networks and us included love to play it over and over again. It’s a — it’s fun. There it is. It so amazes me where he’s saying these horrible embarrassing things that cost Billy Bush his job but not him doing the whole thing here for the show and at the same time, you’ve got him talking in almost like caressing language about my nice, smart missiles. I mean, it’s strange. Senator, to hear — well, you see the whole thing. It’s all on television except the words the president used. He’s talking back to the Russians who if nothing else are Marshall in their use of weapons. That’s all they’ve got is a gas station and an arsenal and he’s saying we’ve got nicer smarter missiles than you.

CONNECTICUT DEMOCRATIC SENATOR RICHARD BLUMENTHAL: And he is in effect telegraphing in a way that he said he never would criticize other presidents for doing what the military moves may be. He is sitting with his generals and using that time which should be devoted to talk about the Syrian threat to denounce the Department of Justice and call a raid in New York on his lawyer a disgrace to the nation. It is beyond strange and embarrassing. It actually undermines the credibility of the United States of America abroad and the office of presidency is so diminished as a result. 

MATTHEWS: Peter Baker, we all know from past times we thought a quick military strike would be our solution. The consequences within six hours, every European newspaper will have to the pictures of the hospital scenes. It’s always there. Absolutely predictable. The people being brought into the hospitals on gurneys, bloodied faces, missing whatever and that is the first reaction. Imagine that across the front page, atop of the fold from the latest Access Hollywood still. It seems like this is going to be connected whatever good thinking people believe is the best for this President, everyone’s going to be thinking wag the dog. 

PETER BAKER: Well, it’s unfortunate timing obviously, but I think the one thing that the White House has going for it is because we have been in this scenario before and we have considered the United States has considered action like this before, there’s less suspicion of it this time than in the past. At this point, a chemical attack last year, Trump ordered a missile strike. The idea that there’s another chemical attack and he might consider it does not seem out of place given his own history, given the history that President Obama considered something like this in 2013 and you’ve got Theresa May in Britain and Emmanuel Macron in France both likely it seems like to participate in an operation so it would not be a unilateral move by President Trump, but you’re right. The timing is unfortunate and it’s something that will be cited and used against President Trump and against the United States. 

Source Article from https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/curtis-houck/2018/04/12/matthews-admits-media-show-trump-tape-because-its-fun-trumps