America’s News Is Heavily Censored

| |

yourmindcontrolledtv

On 7 September 2002, U.S. President George W. Bush blatantly lied to concoct a “new report” by the IAEA about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction program, and the U.S. news-media reported the statement but hid that it was a lie.

He said (and CNN and others quoted it): “a report came out of the Atomic — the IAEA that they were six months away from developing a weapon. I don’t know what more evidence we need,” when he was asked at a press conference, “Mr. President, can you tell us what conclusive evidence of any nuclear — new evidence you have of nuclear weapons capabilities of Saddam Hussein?” Immediately, the IAEA said then that there was no such “new report,” and that the last they were able to find, there was nothing left of WMD in Iraq.

The American news-media simply ignored the IAEA’s denial, and we invaded Iraq, almost six months after that boldfaced lie, a lie the press refused to expose, at all — ever. They still haven’t exposed it, even to the present day; and instead there remains a ‘debate’ as to whether George W. Bush lied or was instead merely misled by “defective U.S. intelligence.” In this particular instance, he wasn’t even citing U.S. intelligence, but instead the IAEA, and they immediately denied it, but the press failed to report that; so, really, the President was simply lying, and the press just continue to lie by saying he had only “been misled by the CIA” (which he actually controlled; but he didn’t control the IAEA). The American press hide the fact that the American President lied his nation into invading Iraq. The press lie that it was only “bad intelligence,” no lying President.

(Because of the news-media’s ignoring the IAEA’s denial of the President’s statement, the author of the IAEA’s denial, Mark Gwozdecky, spoke three weeks later, by phone, with the only journalist who was interested, Joseph Curl of the Washington Times, who headlined on 27 September 2002, “Agency Disavows Report on Iraq Arms” — perhaps that should instead have been “President Lied About ‘Saddam’s WMD’” — and Curl quoted Gwozdecky: “There’s never been a report like that [which Bush alleged] issued from this agency. … When we left in December ’98 we had concluded that we had neutralized their nuclear-weapons program. We had confiscated their fissile material. We had destroyed all their key buildings and equipment.” Other news-media failed to pick up Curl’s article. And, even in that article, there was no clear statement that the President had, in fact, lied — cooked up an IAEA ‘report’ that never actually existed — and that he never corrected his false allegation; that he compounded his lie by not correcting it.)

That’s hardly the only instance where the U.S. news-media cover for the President’s lies about foreign affairs, by merely stenographically reporting what he says, while hiding the truth that his statement was a baldfaced lie. For example, how many times have you read in the newspapers, or in a magazine, or seen on TV, or heard on the radio (all of which are supposed to report these things), that in February 2014, the Obama Administration perpetrated a bloody coup d’etat that overthrew the democratically elected President of Ukraine, and replaced his government with a racist-fascist, or anti-Russian nazi, government, so that Ukraine, which had been at peace for decades, was now suddenly torn by a racist bloody civil war – a war of ethnic cleansing? Oh?

You were instead  told that ‘democracy’ started  (instead of ended) when Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown then, in a ‘revolution,’ not in any U.S. “coup”? (The head of Stratfor, the “private CIA” firm, even admitted to a Russian newspaper that it was “the most blatant coup in history.” The U.S. news-media refused to report that, too.) And, now, Russia and Europe are both suffering from the economic sanctions that Obama placed against Russia, when Putin did what he had to do to protect Russia from this proxy attack against his country by America’s sneaky lying President (whom the U.S. news-media don’t report to be either sneaky or lying, except that Republican ‘news’ media report Obama to be a communist Muslim Kenyan, none of which are the types of sneaky liar that he actually is).

How can a democracy function with such a news-media? It can’t. And it doesn’t. But that’s a fact America’s news-media can and do report (though little enough so that only few Americans are aware of it).

One can report in major American news-media that democracy has ended in America, but one can’t report in them that either Bush or Obama lied us into vile invasions, or that the overthrow of Yanukovych was a coup instead of a ‘revolution.’ Those  things aren’t allowed, except in such few honest small-audience news-media as are publishing this article — these being the few U.S. news-media that don’t rely upon, and aren’t owned by, America’s aristocrats.

To understand how America’s news is heavily censored and for what purposes, is crucial for any American who wants to understand truthfully his/her government, and to understand that government’s relationship with the American nation’s aristocracy, which aristocracy owns the news-media and finances political campaigns and thereby overwhelmingly determines which candidates (such as Bush and Obama) will have a real opportunity to win office, and which candidates simply won’t, at all.

But the real place where the rubber hits the road for aristocrats is actually international relations, because America’s aristocrats control half of the world’s international corporations, and those corporations are thoroughly dependent upon national governments. (Note: Obama is trying to make national governments dependent upon international corporations.) Furthermore, international affairs is where the various national aristocracies compete against each other, which is a game that major aristocrats especially enjoy playing — especially in the country that has the most powerful aristocracy of all.

Censorship in national news is far less than in international news. However, a political candidate’s financial support from the aristocracy will largely depend upon that candidate’s positions on foreign policy; and, so, a candidate’s positions on foreign policy will largely determine whether that candidate even gets enough campaign-funds to be politically competitive, and this will in turn affect whether or not the candidate will be able to serve in a position to shape domestic policies such as education, taxes, health care, and the construction and maintenance of highways and bridges.

Thus: the most heavily censored news-area, which is foreign policy, will, indeed, have a big impact upon determining which domestic  policies get put into effect, and which don’t — but mainly in this indirect way, which few people even know about. In this important sense, international affairs determine domestic policies far more than domestic affairs affect international policies. A person who cares only about domestic affairs will thus be easily manipulated by the aristocracy, because the main determinants of domestic policy will be largely or totally ignored by that voter — the person will then be just an unaware pawn of big money, controlled by people and agendas the individual knows nothing about.

Here is a clear example of a big-name American news-medium actually applying censorship, and it pertains to CNN; the topic there is Bahrain. The reporter was driven out of CNN when she tried to report the truth. It ended her career, which, until that time, had been stellar. The reporter gets blackballed, because any news-medium which hires someone like that will lose advertisers — it’s counter-productive, no matter how good the reporter might happen to be (and she was). The major media don’t look for great reporters; they look for money — and the aristocracy have it.

Here’s an article about a ‘progressive’ news-medium that actually sells, to its advertisers, an audience of people who think of themselves as being progressive and who will inevitably become less and less so the more that these advertisers’ control over the ‘news’ which those readers encounter warps their understanding of international events. (Lots more is said about that news-medium in this background report about it here.)

So: both mainstream, and ‘alternative news,’ media are selling audiences to their advertisers (which can include ‘non-profits,’ such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which buys corporate stocks that Bill and Melinda Gates want to sell and that will rise in price to the extent that such ‘charities’ are buying them). (And here is a major news-medium that’s trying to keep up the price of companies that most aristocrats right now are selling.) (After those suckers buy them, these stocks will go downhill, which is why aristocrats now want to sell them; they’re dumping them and need buyers.) People who think that news-media are selling ‘news’ instead of selling audiences (“eye-balls”), don’t understand the news-business.

News-media are selling minds; it’s a form of PR. In a capitalist economy, there is no way to avoid the news-business becoming a branch of the PR-business. The dominance of propaganda over news-reporting is inevitable in any type of economic system. That’s reality — not ‘Adam Smith.’ ‘Free-market economics’ is for fantasists; it never was real; it was and is only for cultists, never for realists. The sellers of that cult are the aristocracy. And they know that it’s false. They know it first-hand, because they control it. You can’t control it and still be ignorant that it’s a fraud. This is simple reality, to them.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Eric Zuesse of Strategic Culture Foundation.

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • Someguy

    TL:DR?

    • Reverend Draco

      TS;CR?

  • Mike

    There is no honesty in the media any longer, and has not been since probably before the Carter administration.

    • There never has been, journalism is inherently biased, and it is up to your bias whether you perceive it as truth or not.

      • Mike

        I agree, but at least back before carter they were giving heck to both sides.

        • Everyone was stunned that Jimmy could lust in his heart:-) The media has bifurcated, so there is no need for everyone to give heck to everyone. The left can give heck to the right and vice versa, on their own venues.

  • olddog

    The MSM LIEberal media is complicit with the (D)NC TRAITORS in TREASON. and should be held accountable…NOW!!..MSMliveSPLATTER…

    • Maddog

      After the war they need to hung.

  • way2inform

    Tell me about a lying media. Foxnews.com has deleted all its articles about the reporter shot dead on air. Its so obviously fake, they didnt addresd the hoax. Just dropped topic AND deleted all thrir archive articles about it. CNN.com has all but deleted theirs as well. Type in the search bar reporter shot dead on air. Reporter shot in Virginia. Virgina on air shooting. ZERO RESULTS.
    How can you know this and still believe a word they will spew out?
    You have to be really dedicated to lying to yourself in your little American dream land. I showed this to all my friends and family and im still the crazy one.

    • Maddog

      “I showed this to all my friends and family and im still the crazy one.”
      They can’t help it, it’s the same for me. Most don’t even want to know. They have their heads shoved so far up their asses the media has a hard time blowing more smoke in.

      • sunshine

        Yep, same here. You can have all the evidence in the world, and they still won’t, or can’t, get it. Or they just don’t care. I’ll never understand.

      • My brother whom works for the USDA is the same way. He talks about me wearing tin foil hats. But it was ironic when he made an off comment to his boss. He said my brother says weather machine’s broken because of all the bad weather. His boss gave him a dirty look like he knew something.

    • But has the BBC explained why and how they reported to a worldwide audience that tower 7 had collapsed, 22 minutes before it happened?

      • Another Thought Criminal

        Out of curiousity, I just looked that up; and apparently they have.
        http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/03/part_of_the_conspiracy_2.html

        • I guess the presenter couldn’t have turned around and looked out the window and seen that the building was very much intact before she announced an obvious falsehood evident to those watching her. So much for corroboration.

          • Another Thought Criminal

            Well, I think their explanation was bogus; I was just curious if they had one.

          • It was based on status quo mentality, like everything they broadcast.

      • Another Thought Criminal

        This quick 2 and a half minute video is the one I think does the best of showing WTC7 was a controlled demolition.

        https://youtu.be/tuJ5-tr0C1M

        • The multiple POVs do the job well.
          The only way they could have improved it is to show actual cases of controlled demolition along side in split screen. A four part split screen with towers 1, 2, 7, and a known controlled demolition would be incontrovertible visual proof.

  • tanaberrys .

    With everything being on computers it will make it even easier to re-write history by the second!

    • Especially with the monkey minds occupied by social media.

    • sunshine

      Funny you say that because I’ve had that concern with Kindle and “e-books”. How do people know they won’t just edit them or even completely rewrite them? If there’s no paper copies out there, they can do anything. So when I come across books, if they’re useful, or controversial, I buy them.

      • tanaberrys .

        Exactly! I love real books!

    • Another Thought Criminal

      Yep, it makes Winston Smith’s job that much easier.

  • Gearmoe

    Remember the wisdom of choosing your battles, never argue with a fool? Yet we see today Donald Trump being attacked for not engaging a person in the crowd for saying Obama is a Muslim. How is this an issue? Why is it Donald Trump’s business to protect Obama? This is what the MSM is saying. Speaking on this censorship article and twisting of reality by the MSM, the American citizen is in trouble, big trouble. But too many are still asleep. Wake up!!!

    • sunshine

      That was the stupidest thing I’ve seen in a while and that’s really saying something in this country! The attitude that you “HAVE” to say or do this is bullshit. So sick of the thought and speech police and I simply can’t understand why people tolerate it.

  • Bravo sierra

    The media another good reason not to watch tv. That and your IQ goes up 20 points!!!

    • What is your good reason for watching television, then? IQ is a completely biased measurement which measures cultural understanding more than intelligence.

      • sunshine

        There aren’t any good reasons.

        • I was assisted in my own detelevisionation by a thief who stole my last one. You might have to donate or sell yours to some unsuspecting but not quite completely thinking person.
          However you get rid of it, you will be amazed by how much time you’ll get back in return.

  • Maddog

    The media was provided special protection by the founders in order to protect the freedoms of Americans by bringing light to government encroachment on our rights. I always hear sheeple say we need to “vote” in someone else to fix things. That’s complete bullshit, we (that means the fucking sheeple) need to get off their lazy asses and replace the corrupt media with truth seekers – themselves. Thanks for your efforts in this regard Eric. I have been personally using Oathkeepers to enlighten society. There are many things the sheeple can do besides waiting for a savior. Get up and DO something. WTF will you tell your children when the tyrant has his boot on their necks? I know what I’ll say, Not on my watch.

    • The media didn’t exist in 1787.

      • Maddog

        Free fucking speech did.

        • But none of the people writing back then had the need for expletives, because they knew the language better than the vast majority do now, and ad hominem is unseen in any of their most contentious prose. If anyone used gratuitous vulgarity back then, they were censored and shunned,

  • whattabunchacrap

    “How can a democracy function with such a news-media?”
    Because this is exactly how a democracy functions. Majority rule and when the majority of people are low info idiots this is what we get. This country was founded as a Constitutional Republic. The feds took over education, started dumbing down the population and now most people are so stupid that can’t see the trees through the forest.

  • Mark

    In Libertarian dreams, business and government are enemies. In the real world, it is axiomatic that big business buys off the government and manipulates the common people.

    One of the fundamental and unfixable flaws of libertarianism.

  • It is fortunate that democracy doesn’t function in America, since it isn’t one.

  • Nick

    The media in this nation is an appendage of government.

  • Ace 1

    Here is another one demonizing Assad for the chemical attack on his citizens . He did not do it as per the information below but the MSM never gives informs the masses of this https://consortiumnews.com/2015/09/16/was-turkey-behind-syria-sarin-attack-2/

  • Another Thought Criminal

    Who controls the media? Or are we not allowed to ask or think about that?

  • RandyJ/ProudSurvivor

    I believe that if and/or when The People retake this country, ALL members of the MSM should be tried for treason. I cannot believe they aren’t complicit in the lies, misinformation and failure to disclose information which is vital for citizens to be properly informed.

  • Most of the problem with our corrupt corporate owned “media news” stems from the repeal of the Smith Mundt Act. Look it up!

  • Guillotine_ready

    This is just pointing at once decaying part of the corpse of the former USA and saying look we need to fix that. No, there is no fixing it, death of the nation has occurred already, we are living in the last part of the cycle, decay.
    We need to figure out what actually makes a nation work, how freedom is protected without question, how to keep the gov monster small and accountable. We need to never ever trust anyone to represent us, we have to represent ourselves in all things.
    After we decide upon a workable solution we have to take the nation and institute it. Big job, much fighting, many will die. I know that scares the hell out of people, but the truth is the way this nation is now is the fault of the people. No one held the psychopaths and sycophants accountable and this is the result.
    Gov does not represent you at all and really never did. A few crumbs were thrown to the people but other than that nothing.
    Would you like to live in a nation at peace with the world? Greed must go. Would like to be able to sleep at night without knowing psychopaths were plotting your demise? They have to go, back into the institutions that Reagan closed down.
    Would you like to stop being at war with people who have done you no harm? All the command level officers in all services must go.
    Would you like to win wars instead of losing all the time? Stop attacking innocent people.
    Our enemies are not in some other nation, with the exception of one which we all know already.