Saturday, December 3, 2016

Fake News: NEWSWEEK didn’t write or read fake ‘Hillary won’ cover story


Fake News Alert!!!


Do you remember Newsweek‘s November 8, 2016 “Special Commemorative Edition” — the one declaring Hillary Clinton as the winner of an election that hadn’t yet taken place? (See “The fix is in: Newsweek already has an issue in print declaring Hillary Clinton the winner”)

newsweek-hillary-edition1

Believing in the media’s rigged election polls, Newsweek was so confident Hillary would be the winner that they had the “Madame President” issue already in print and sent to vendors before the election results. The National Enquirer reports:
Newsweek was left with a huge stash of magazines to burn — after their Special Edition ‘Madam President’ cover featuring Hillary was sent out to news vendors. An alternate cover celebrating ‘President Trump’ was also prepared, but the publishers had only printed copies of Hillary’s ‘winning’ issue.
According to Topix Media, 17 of the 125,000 “Madam President” issues had been sold before they were recalled by Newsweek.

The following is a quote pulled from the fawning “Madam President” cover story, in which Trump and his supporters are demonized as “deplorable,” fearful and hateful, who want to repeal the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which gave women the right to vote:
“…as the tone of the election grew darker and more bizarre by the day, President-Elect Hillary Clinton ‘went high’ when her opponent went even lower. No stranger to trudging through the mire of misogyny in her career as first lady, senator, and secretary of state, President-Elect Clinton continued to push for an issues-based campaign even as a handful of Trump’s most deplorable supporters, seeing the wide margins Clinton held among female voters, called to repeal the 19th amendment. On election day, Americans across the country roundly rejected the kind of fear and hate-based conservatism peddled by Donald Trump and elected the first woman in U.S. history to the presidency. The culminating election of a career in politics spanning 3 decades and arguably more experience than any other incoming president, 2016’s was not an easy race to watch, comment on or be a part of–but when the dust cleared it revealed a priceless moment in American history. The highest glass ceiling in the Western World had [been shattered]…”
I don’t recall Trump or his supporters calling for the 19th Amendment to be repealed, do you?

Even more ridiculous is the fact that Newsweek‘s political editor, Matthew Cooper, admitted that no one at Newsweek had either written or read the “Madam President” story.

matthew-cooper-newsweek-political-editor

Appearing on FoxNews’ Tucker Carlson Show on Nov. 30, 2016, Cooper said, referring to the “Madame President” issue (1:07 mark):
“It’s embarrassing. Let me tell you how it happened, and what we’re doing to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Newsweek, like a lot of publications, puts out special commemorative issues . . . these are big parts of the magazine business. What we did for the election was the company that we subcontract to . . . produced two editions: One, ‘President Trump’, and ‘Madame President’. They both . . . the ‘Madame President’ one mistakenly went out, which was the first embarrassment, it should never have happened. But it can happen . . . not up to our editorial standards. . . . No one on our staff wrote it, we subcontracted it out . . . [no one] read it before it went out . . . . You see, we subcontract these commemorative issues out to a company. This is pretty common in the magazine business . . . . It’s sort of been done on a separate track, and we did not review it before it went out.


As you heard from the video, Newsweek is blaming its premature “Madame President” issue on its subcontractor, Topix Media:
From the Editors: 2 special edition covers for 2016 election outcomes were produced by a Newsweek licensee, Topix Media, and not by Newsweek 
                                   — Newsweek (@Newsweek) November 7, 2016
In other words, Newsweek‘s own editors and reporters don’t read the magazine. Kinda like Congress not reading a bill before they pass it, or as Nancy Pelosi put it in perfect Orwellian Newspeak: “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it.”


The question then is:
If Newsweek’s own staff don’t write or read the magazine, why are you?
Finally, the question must be asked:
So who actually wrote the McCarthyist “Madame President” cover-story?
Take our poll!😀
Who really wrote Newsweek's "Madame President" cover story?


H/t ZeroHedge


~Eowyn

Threat to Alternative Media: House passes HR 6393 ‘Russian propaganda’ bill



Three days ago, on November 30, 2016, the House of Representatives passed a bill that can be used against the Alternative Media, maliciously labeled “fake news” by the corrupt MSM — proxies of Hillary Clinton, the Obama administration, and the ironically-named Democratic Party.


The bill is H.R 6393: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, sponsored by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) and co-sponsored by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA). See full text of HR 6393 here.

devin-nunes-adam-schiff

HR 6393’s purpose is to authorize FY2017 appropriations for the conduct of intelligence and intelligence-related activities of various federal government agencies, including the CIA; FBI; the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, State and Army, Navy and Air Force; and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Where the Alternative Media come in is where HR 6393, in its Title V: Matters Relating to Foreign Countries, addresses alleged efforts on the part of the Russian government to secretly influence American politics.
ACTIVE MEASURES BY RUSSIA TO EXERT COVERT INFLUENCE.—The term “active measures by Russia to exert covert influence” means activities intended to influence a person or government that are carried out in coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly, including the following: 
(A) Establishment or funding of a front group.
(B) Covert broadcasting.
(C) Media manipulation.
(D) Disinformation and forgeries.
(E) Funding agents of influence.
(F) Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
(G) Assassinations.
(H) Terrorist acts.
To counteract the alleged covert Russian efforts, HR 6393 “places travel restrictions on personnel and consulars of the Russian Federation in the United States,” as well as “establishes an executive branch interagency committee to counter active measures by the Russian Federation to exert covert influence over peoples and governments.”

HR 6393 Section 501 (e) says the duties of this special interagency committee shall be as follows:
(1) To counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence, including by exposing falsehoods, agents of influence, corruption, human rights abuses, terrorism, and assassinations carried out by the security services or political elites of the Russian Federation or their proxies. 
(2) Such other duties as the President may designate for purposes of this section. [Note from Eowyn: The vagueness and open-endedness of this clause should concern every American who cherishes our civil liberties.]
As Kurt Nimmo of Activist Post — one of the List of 200 websites, including FOTM, identified by a shadowy and anonymous group called Is It Propaganda Or Not? as as “fake media” sites that “reliably echo Russian propaganda,” whether consciously or unconsciously — points out:
“It’s easy to see how this law, if passed by the Senate and signed by the president, could be used against [alleged] ‘fake news’ websites. 
At this point it is unknown if the bill will work its way through the Senate and become law and if it will be used to shut down or curtail websites anonymously characterized as useful idiots or willing participants in disseminating supposed Russian propaganda.”
Contact your senators (click here) and ask them to vote against HR 6393 in its present version that contains the dangerous Section 501!

~Eowyn

Monday, November 28, 2016

NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK: It was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control


by Jim Fetzer

"It ain't what we don't know that hurts us; it's what we think we know that ain't so"--Will Rogers
Sandy Hook has become a celebrities' cause

The Sandy Hook experience has divided Americans, most of whom have been convinced by media coverage that it was a real event, where a young man massacred 20 children and six adults before killing himself.

Another substantial segment of the US population has taken a closer look at the evidence and drawn the conclusion it was a hoax, where no children really died: it was an elaborate psy-op to promote gun control.

Americans are hard pressed to sort these things out, because they are hit with a blizzard of reports that appear to confirm the official account, leaving them in the predicament of not being able to tell if it was real or fake.
It matters even more today because gun control has become one of the defining issues of politics in America, where leading Democrats (Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton) are using their authority as President (in the first instance) to issue Executive Orders constraining our 2nd Amendment rights and (in the second) threatening to impose liability laws upon their manufacturers for their use by those who buy them. Ben Carson, on the Republican side, has observed that Jews would have been better able to fend off The Third Reich had they not been disarmed; and Matt Drudge has challenged the President to demonstrate his sincerity by giving up his (heavily armed) Secret Service protection.
The appeals to Sandy Hook (shooting 20 children), the Charleston shooting (of nine blacks) and the  Oregon shooting (where college students were asked their religion and those responding "Christian" were shot in the head) have struck some observers as appearing to be calculated to instill fear into specific targeted subpopulations of the American community: parents, blacks and Christians, for example, where it's as though we were experiencing a series of psy-ops to convince the public that we ought to give up our guns. That troubles many, because disarming populations has all-too-often occurred to set the stage for tyranny in world history past. What if Sandy Hook was only an illusion?


Probabilities vs. Certainties



Knowledge of historical events (based upon documents and records, photos and videos and witness testimony, for example) can never be “definitive and certain”. You only know your own origin in life (where and when you were born and the parents who brought you into this world) on the basis of information that could have been faked. Even DNA comparisons can be invalid or mistaken on purpose or by accident. Your belief about today’s day/month/year is something else of which you have no direct and certain knowledge but rather have a host of sources of information, such as newspapers and television reports, which collectively confirm your belief but could be fabricated or faked, but which are almost always accurate and true.

The occurrence of an elaborate hoax intended to fool the people does not occur often, but there can be no doubt that it does sometimes occur. The Warren Report (1964), for example, provides an indictment of Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone assassin of JFK, where the evidence for that conclusion was carefully selected and, in some cases, completely fabricated. The backyard photographs were faked, for example, and the home movies of the assassination were edited. That he had been captured in a famous photo taken during the shooting was suppressed. (Check out The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003) or many articles about JFK at jamesfetzer.blogspot.com for abundant proof, if you like.) These things can and sometimes do happen. And one of them happened here.
If you only read the government’s account, you might very well be convinced that JFK had been killed by Lee Oswald. And if you only paid attention to the mass media, you would probably believe that 20 children died at Sandy Hook. Once you acknowledge that some of the evidence has been fabricated or faked, however, the case begins to assume a completely different character. This does not mean we cannot know what happened in this instance, but it should not have been necessary to frame a guilty man.  New evidence or alternative hypotheses may thus require us to revised our position by rejecting hypotheses we previously accepted, accepting hypotheses we previously rejected and leaving others in suspense. We now know more about Sandy Hook.

Inference to the best explanation


The principle known as “inference to the best explanation”, has the potential to turn every American into a critical thinker  in comparing alternative hypotheses. In relation to Sandy Hook, there are two alternatives, which have consequences that would also be true (or probably true) if they were true and others that would be false (or probably false) if they were not (setting the alleged suicide by Adam Lanza to the side):
(h1) Sandy Hook was a real event, where 20 children and 6 adults were killed at a school;
(h2) Sandy Hook was an elaborate hoax, where a drill was conducted and no children died.
But the key to understanding is making an appraisal of which of these hypotheses is better supported by the evidence. We can think of the evidence as effects of one or another hypothesis as their cause.  When one hypothesis makes the effects more probable than the other, it is more likely to be true and the alternative false. For the shooting to have been real, the school had to have been operational in 2012; yet we have indication after indication that it had been abandoned by 2008 (which you will discover in Chapters 2 and 3), including not only its deplorable physical condition (both inside and out), but also that it was not in compliance with both federal and state laws required in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act: 
Analogously, we know from past experience that the names, ages and sex of victims of crimes are almost invariably printed in newspaper accounts of crimes. In this case, however, the final reports coming from the Connecticut authorities did not include them. That is a very odd aspect of this event, but an attempt has been made to explain it away on the ground of preserving the privacy of the families of the victims. But if there were victims, their families already know they are dead. There is no evident benefit to the families, if it was real, but a major element of the cover up, if it was not. 
From the date of the event, we have a photograph taken from a CT State Police chopper at 9:15 AM/ET, which is 20 minutes before the first 911 call came in; there was no surge of EMTs into the building to rush those little bodies off to hospitals, where doctors could pronounce them dead or alive; virtually all of the emergency vehicles were kept at the Firehouse, which became the center of activity as opposed to the school; the parents were not even allowed to identify their children, which was done using photos. As a parent myself, I can emphasize that there is no way I could have been kept from viewing the body of a child of mine, where the conduct of the "parents" in this case is unlike that of any parents I have ever known, where these many oddities are confirmed by Chapter 5.
Other circumstantial anomalies 


If the school had been abandoned, then the shooting has to be an illusion, since there would have been no students present for Adam Lanza to shoot. And if that were the case, then we might not be surprised if any number of measures were taken at the time by authorities to suppress relevant information (and thereby making it unavailable) or by otherwise circumventing what would have been the ordinary and normal procedures of investigation and administration by local and state authorities. But the measures that were taken were rather extraordinary, including these examples:
* the Attorney General of Connecticut argued against releasing the 911 calls, where the court ruled against him;
* the Clerk of Newtown entered into secret negotiations with the state legislature to avoid issuing death certificates;
* a special panel of the state legislature recommended that any state employee who released information about Sandy Hook other than via Freedom of Information Act request be prosecuted as an E-felony with a five year sentence; and,
those who were hired to participate in the demolition of the school building were required to sign life-time gag orders that prohibit them from talking about what they saw or did not see during its destruction.
Each of these qualifies as a “fact” insofar as its truth can be confirmed by research you can conduct yourself. Admittedly, if all the information accessible via the internet about Sandy Hook were fabricated or faked, that would not be the case. But I know of no one who seriously contests any of these points.  So ask yourself, what is the probability that these five claims (if we also include the missing names, ages and sex from the final report) would be true if Sandy Hook had been a real event? And by comparison, what is the probability these five claims would be true if Sandy Hook had been a hoax? Which hypothesis is more likely to be true?

The Governor's Press Conference



The day of the shooting, Governor Dan Malloy and his Lt. Governor held a press conference, during which he observed that they had been “spoken to” that something like this might happen. That got me thinking about, “something like this”? What could that mean. There are only two alternatives: 


(a) that he had been told there would be a shooting in a school in his state, in which case he, as governor, should have warned school districts to be on high alert and make sure it did not happen, which he did not do; or, 

(b) that he had been told they would be taking an abandoned school and using it as a prop for a drill, which would be presented to the public as real to promote an aggressive gun-control agenda, which is the case here.

And when I looked into recent visits with the Governor to determine by whom he might have been "spoken to", I discovered that Attorney General Eric Holder had met with him on 27 November 2012 to discuss "Operation Longevity", a special interest of the Attorney General and the President of the United Staes for promoting gun control. Mark my words. The evidence presented here demonstrates that the school was closed by 2008; that there were no students to evacuate; that Adam Lanza appears to have been a work of fiction; and that the teachers, the parents, the Newtown School Board, the State Police, the Medical Examiner and the Governor--and by extension the Attorney General and the President--were all complicit in the deception


We have the FEMA manual 


Our collaborative research, you will find for yourself, is extensive, through and detailed--and leaves this matter resolved beyond any reasonable doubt. We have 50 photos that show the preparation of the Lanza home as a prop and another 50 documenting the refurbishing of the school as a stage (in Chapters 7 and 8). Doubt in this case would be reasonable were there a reasonable alternative explanation. But, as you are about to discover, there is none here.




And I am not just talking about the sign, "Everyone must check in", the Port-a-Potties, the boxes of bottled water and pizza cartons at the Firehouse, the name tags on lanyards and parents bringing their children to (what was supposed to be) a child shooting massacre! WE HAVE THE FEMA MANUAL. It stipulates that everyone must register and that refreshments and restrooms will be provided. Some participants did not realize that the official event was not until the 14th: We now know why some of the donation pages went up a day early and why Adam Lanza was recorded as having died on the 13th! Don't take my word for it, because you can read it for yourself. I included it here as Appendix A. 

The Requirement of Total Evidence

Indeed, scientific reasoning specifically and rational inquiries generally must satisfy the requirement of total evidence: in the search for truth, reasoning must be based upon all of the available relevant evidence, where evidence is relevant when its presence or absence (or truth or falsity) makes a difference to the outcome, typically on the basis of considerations of probability.  According to the official report on Sandy Hook by Danbury States Attorney Stephen Sedensky (to which we refer as "The Sedensky Report"), there were 489 children present that day. Minus 20 murdered, there ought to have been 469 to evacuate (as well as around 70 more teachers, administrators and staff). But we have no pictures of their evacuation. What we have instead this "iconic" photograph:


It has sometimes been said that "You can't prove a falsehood true!" But that assertion overlooks the role of false clams and fabricated evidence. We have here a photograph purporting to show a string of children being led away from the school to safety by a policewoman on the scene. This photo was published on the front page of virtually every newspaper in the world--and shown endless times on television. It was undoubtedly the single most important form of proof in convincing the public around the world that Sandy Hook was real. But there is a catch: the photograph was staged! And we know that not on the basis of the weaker evidence that there are too many leaves on the trees and no frost for this to be a 28 degree day in December but because Shannon Hicks took a second photograph!


Rearranging the kids to get a better shot  

It's bad enough that we have a series of parents looking on, some with their arms cross or their hands in their pockets--which is certainly not what we would expect in an emergency situation. It gets much worse when you realize that the police woman has stopped the children to rearrange them to get "a better shot"! Here's a comparison that shows what was going on and demonstrates--as conclusively as anyone could have the right to expect--that the first photograph was staged to create the false impression that there was an emergency and that these kids needed to be removed from a threat at the earliest possible opportunity--which would not leave time to stop and rearrange them as follows:



We not only know that Shannon Hicks was "in on the game" by taking these photos (as early as in October) in preparation for this elaborate charade but we also know that there was no evacuation. The claim is sometimes made that “You can’t prove a negative!” But that turns out to be false. When evidence that ought to be present if an hypothesis were true is not present, then the absence of evidence qualifies as evidence of absence. Suppose you were told there is an elephant in your living room. If you go there and find no indications of the presence of an elephant, you are completely justified in inferring that there is no elephant in your living room. 




If 469 kids should have been there, if the event was real, but they are not there, you are completely justified in inferring it was not real. An evacuation would have looked something like this, with strings of children led by other police officers or teachers performing their duty under stress. But we have DashCam footage at the locations in the parking lot where, according to official police records, the evacuation was taking place--and there is nothing there! Just as the absence of signs of the presence of an elephant in your living room is proof of the absence of an elephant, the absence of signs of the presence of children undergoing evacuation is proof that no evacuation was taking place. 

More parking lot anomalies--and a stunner!




Inspection of the vehicles in the parking lot in front of the school shows that they are parked in the wrong direction (which should have been nose-in), given the arrangement for driving into the lot. The image itself suggests of a group of drivers methodically filling up the lot with used or abandoned cars, driving straight into the designated parking places without regard for how they should have been arranged. Once again we ask, “What is the probability that the lot would be filled with cars parked in the wrong direction, if this had been a real event? What if this had been a drill?” Truly stunning, however, is the discovery of a series of photographs that display setting the stage early in the morning for the events that would transpire this day, including this one from Chapter 8:




Notice that the windows of Classroom 10 are not shot out and the flag is up. Wayne Carver can be seen behind the man in the blue evidence suit. This photograph is taken from one of the elevated cameras we have discovered that were mounted around the parking lot to record the drill. The mortuary tent is not there yet, which makes this early morning. Could we have more decisive proof? 

When an hypothesis has been confirmed by abundant evidence and no alternative explanation is reasonable, it has been established “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Hypothesis (h1), that Sandy Hook was real, has been falsified and (h2), that this was an elaborate hoax, has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt.


Benefits to the Participants 


The benefits to those who participated in the Sandy Hook hoax have been substantial. The donation sites created by "families of the victims" have hauled in over $27,000,000 or in excess of $1,000,000 per family. Other substantial grants have been given to alleviate the pain and suffering of those who responded to the event. On Friday, 12 December 2014, for example, Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) and Representative Elizabeth Esty (CT-5) announced a $775,914 grant from the Department of Justice's Office for Victims of Crimes and their families, first responders and members of Newtown community in the wake of the shooting to "help fund continued mental health services and other support services", which sounds like a lot for participating in a charade.



Other pay-offs, bribes and hush-money--and under the circumstances, is there something more appropriate to call it?--are documented in Chapter 5. When debate was taking place over the choice between refurbishing the old school or constructing a new one, The Newtown Bee published about the presence of asbestos, lead and PCBs in the building, which had no doubt factored in the earlier decision to abandon the school in 2008. Newtown received $50,000,000 to build a brand new K-4 elementary school. I surveyed the cost of comparable cost for K-4 schools across the nation and discovered they average $7,000,000, which reflects the generous benefits that a community might accrue from cooperating covertly with the federal government in the pursuit of its political agenda.  


The Gun-Control Agenda 





We are told that fewer guns means less crime. But when you look into serious studies of crime rates in relation to gun laws, that is not what you discover. Appendix D, for example, "Comparing Murder and Homicide Rates before and after Gun Bans", suggests something closer to the opposite is the case; and Appendix E, "Comparing Death Rates from Mass Public Shootings in the US and Europe", demonstrates we are not the nation with the highest rates of mass public shootings, contrary to our president's claims. Barack
Obama himself praised the sweeping gun confiscation that took place in Australia in the late 1990s and said:

“Couple of decades ago, Australia had a mass shooting, similar to Columbine or Newtown,” Obama said. “And Australia just said, well, that’s it, we’re not doing, we’re not seeing that again, and basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws, and they haven’t had a mass shooting since.” 
And while they haven’t seen a mass shooting since, local officials say that gun violence on the continent is much worse than it was before the tougher gun policies went into effect.
Meanwhile, the one thing that the President failed to recognize is that gun crime in the U.S. is on the decline. According to a PEW research study, gun crime is down 49% since 1993. Another study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that non-fatal gun crime is actually down 70% since the same time.  Even the President’s own study performed by the Center for Disease Control reached a similar conclusion: “Firearm-related death rates for youth ages 15 to 19 declined from 1994 to 2009,” the report states. “The number of public mass shootings of the type that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School accounted for a very small fraction of all firearm-related deaths.” What these studies show is there’s a clear agenda being carried out by the Mainstream Media to make it seem like mass shootings are the norm. As soon as a mass shooting happens, it reverberates through all the major news networks for weeks, much like an echo after the initial shot. Because of this, much of the nation seems to believe that gun violence, particularly school shootings, is on the rise even with evidence that points to the contrary
The reasons behind this aggressive behavior by the administration, even when gun violence has been falling in the United States, involves deep questions about the role of DHS in our society and why America has been devolving into a totalitarian state. I was born a year-and-a-day before Pearl Harbor, as my father used to put it; and I would never have imagined in my wildest dreams that the United States of American could descend into a bottomless pit of lies, deceit and deception. 


Faking a school shooting to instill fear into a population is an act of terrorism, where it has become clear that this instance was brought to us by officials at every level of the Connecticut government from the teachers and reporters to the State Police and the Newtown School board to the Governor and the Attorney General and the President himself. And this is the ugly legacy of Barack Hussein Obama.

NOTE: This is the republication of my blog for 24 October 2015 as we approach the fourth observance of an elaborate scam. The book was banned by amazon.com less than four months after having been placed on sale and having sold over 500 copies between 22 October and 19 November 2015. We now have a new publisher and the book can be obtained again at moonrockbooks.com in both black-and-white and color editions.

Wayne Madsen: The Major Purveyor of ‘Fake News’ is the CIA-Corporate Complex


Wayne Madsen

The Major Purveyor of ‘Fake News’ is the CIA-Corporate Complex

The US corporate media, its strings pulled by the modern version of the Central Intelligence Agency’s old Operation MOCKINGBIRD media influencing operation, is laughably accusing Russia of generating «fake news» to influence the outcome of the American presidential election. In a November 24, 2016, article in the CIA-connected Washington Post, reporter Craig Timberg reported: «Russia’s increasingly sophisticated propaganda machinery — including thousands of botnets, teams of paid human ‘trolls,’ and networks of websites and social-media accounts — echoed and amplified right-wing sites across the Internet as they portrayed Clinton as a criminal hiding potentially fatal health problems and preparing to hand control of the nation to a shadowy cabal of global financiers». The Post’s article is worthy of the CIA-generated propaganda spun by the paper at the height of the Cold War-era MOCKINGBIRD.
Contrary to what the Post reported about right-wing accounts of Hillary Clinton’s ties to «a shadowy cabal of global financiers, the vanquished Democratic presidential nominee and her husband, via the slush fund known as the Clinton Foundation, was closely linked to a variety of «shadowy global financiers», including those who serve as executives of Goldman Sachs and J P Morgan Chase. The Clinton cabal was more at home in the gatherings of the secretive syndicates of the Bilderberg Group, Bohemian Club, and the Council on Foreign Relations than they were at labor union and student meetings.
The Post was clearly fed its poorly-sourced and anecdotal-based article on Russian «fake news» by the usual suspects of Russia-bashers and CIA mouthpieces, including The Daily Beast; former US ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul; Rand Corporation; George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs; the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia; and a website called «PropOrNot.com» or «Is It Propaganda Or Not?», which is linked not only to George Soros-funded anti-Russia websites but also to conveyors of CIA disinformation like Snopes.com. The Post article is nothing more than an advertisement for PropOrNot.com, which bills itself as a «Propaganda Identification Service, since 2016».
The media influencing operation targeting Russia appears to be an outgrowth of the US State Department’s Counter-Information Team of the Bureau of International Information Programs. The team, established under the George W. Bush administration, was a resurrection of the Cold War-era US Information Agency’s (USIA) Bureau of Information, which was designed to counter «Soviet» disinformation. The truth of the matter was that many of the news reports from TASS, Radio Moscow, and Novosti, branded as «Soviet disinformation» by USIA, were, in fact, truthful reports on CIA covert operations, including political assassinations, biological warfare, and weapons and narcotics smuggling. Today, the media mouthpieces for the CIA and Soros replace Soviet-era media outlets as their main targets for derision with RT television and Sputnik News.
In 2013, Amazon signed a $600 million contract with the CIA to provide cloud computing services to the agency. Amazon’s owner, Jeff Bezos, also happens to own The Washington Post. Considering the long close relationship between the newspaper and the CIA, the Post is the last media outlet that should be writing about fake news. In 1981, the Post published a fake news story about a 7-year old heroin addict named «Jimmy». Not only was the story fake, but the Post’s assistant managing editor, Bob Woodward of Watergate infamy, submitted the fake Jimmy story to the Pulitzer Prize award committee. The Post reporter who wrote the piece, Janet Cooke, did receive a Pulitzer but had to return it after the story was deemed to be fake. Cooke was fired by the paper but Woodward, a longtime US intelligence mouthpiece, kept his job. So much for The Washington Post and fake news.
In its piece on «fake news», the Post linked to a «blacklist» of alleged «fake news sites» maintained by the mysterious PropOrNot.com. A November 25, 2016, article in Fortune magazine by Mathew Ingram rightfully criticized the Post’s reliance on PropOrNot.com for its story. Ingram wrote: «PropOrNot’s Twitter account, which tweets and retweets anti-Russian sentiments from a variety of sources, has only existed since August of this year. And an article announcing the launch of the group on its website is dated last month».
It is very likely that PropOrNot.com is a creation of The Washington Post’s cloud computing business partner, the CIA. PropOrNot.com calls itself a group of «concerned American citizens with a wide range of backgrounds and expertise, including professional experience in computer science, statistics, public policy, and national security affairs». There are more than enough CIA employees who possess such «professional experience».
PropOrNot.com published a list that would make disgraced Senator Joseph McCarthy, the purveyor of «red lists» of Communists in the 1950s, very proud. PropOrNot.com lists 200 sites, which it claims are «routine peddlers of Russian propaganda». On the list are Strategic Culture.org, globalresearch.ca, drudgereport.com, counterpunch.com, wikileaks.com, wikileaks.org, wikispooks.com. zerohedge.com, and truthdig.com. RT.comand Sputniknews.com also appear on the list. Not on the list are media outlets that have notoriously engaged in fake news reporting. These include The New York Times, USA Today, NBC News, CBS News, The New Republic, CNN, and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Outrageously, the blacklist includes USSLIBERTYVETERANS.org, a website maintained by survivors of the willful and unprovoked 1967 Israeli air and naval attack on the US intelligence ship «USS Liberty» in the eastern Mediterranean. The attack killed 34 American Navy sailors and intelligence personnel and the website, in part, is dedicated to their memory. The inclusion of the Liberty veterans’ website strongly suggests the involvement of pro-Israeli shills, all neoconservatives, who nest within a number non-profit think tanks in Washington, DC and may be associated with PropOrNot.com.
The inclusion of some white nationalist «hate sites» on the PropOrNot.com list is reminiscent of the tactics of the misnamed «Southern Poverty Law Center» (SPLC) in Montgomery, Alabama. The center is neither «Southern» or suffering from poverty since it has $175 million in the bank and owns two buildings in Montgomery, both of which have been dubbed by critics as «Poverty Palaces». The Washington Post often quotes SPLC officials in attacking president-elect Donald Trump and his advisers.
PropOrNot.com utilizes a very subjective methodology to come up with its black list: «it does not matter whether the sites listed here are being knowingly directed and paid by Russian intelligence officers, or whether they even knew they were echoing Russian propaganda at any particular point: If they meet these criteria, they are at the very least acting as bona-fide ‘useful idiots’ of the Russian intelligence services, and are worthy of further scrutiny». And who does PropOrNot.com propose for placing other websites on its blacklist and putting them under «further scrutiny?» Perhaps they want the CIA, National Security Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, or US Cyber Command to engage in harassment in violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Other alleged «Russian propaganda» websites included on the blacklist are infowars.com, intrepidreport.com, intellihub.com, informationclearinghouse.info, corbettreport.com, moonofalabama.org, floridasunpost.com, opednews.com, oilgeopolitics.com, gatesofvienna.net, blackagendareport.com, mintpressnews.com, ahtribune.com, thefreethoughtproject.com, consortiumnews.com, washingtonsblog.com, asia-pacificresearch.com, filmsforaction.com (which advances the rights of Native Americans), thirdworldtraveler.com, and activistpost.com.
Many of the blacklisted websites have something in common: they supported Trump for president. The Washington Post heartily endorsed Hillary Clinton for president, which makes the blacklist appear to be, in part, nothing more than sour grapes on the part of the Post and its unnamed «experts» working for PropOrNot.com.
PropOrNot.com also managed to salt its list with a few obvious fake news websites, including www.superstation95.com, which purports to be a New York FM radio station; baltimoregazette.com; and veteranstoday.com. This has the effect of tarnishing the legitimate sites on the list by associating them with fabulists and cyber-grifters.
Two members of the Ronald Reagan administration, Director of the Office of Management and Budget David Stockman (davidstockmanscontracorner.com) and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy Paul Craig Roberts (paulcraigroberts.org) find their websites on the blacklist. Also blacklisted is former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (ronpaulinstitute.org).
The blacklist highlighted by The Washington Post appears to be more of a censorship target list developed for the not-to-be Hillary Clinton administration. For the Post to engage in blacklisting other press outlets merely because it does not care for their news content is shameful beyond belief. If any outlet should be ordered to cease its operations for not acting in the public interest, it is The Washington Post for grossly distorting the news and misleading the public from the end of World War II to the present day.
If one wants «fake news» the intelligence-corporate complex is the place to go. From corporate media reports about bogus Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and the Pentagon’s hiring of British public relations firm Bell Pottinger to create fake news stories about terrorist attacks in Iraq to the use of a group called the «White Helmets» that pumps out fake stories regarding the Syrian government, the corporate media is full of «fake news» fed to it by an omnipresent US intelligence-run psychological warfare infrastructure.
Tags: CIA  US  Clinton 
Wayne MADSEN
Investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. A member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) and the National Press Club