Millions Dead after Government Broadcasts and promotes “FakeNews”

Millions Dead after Government Broadcasts and promotes “FakeNews”

Legalized Domestic Propaganda led to the destruction of America

That is what headlines will read around the world as a result of “fake news”. As I see it, the biggest issue facing the United States as a result of fake news is not that Americans will believe these rampant internet rumors that on occasion (and far too often) are picked up by the mainstream media and broadcast nationwide; but that when a true and verified story is NOT taken seriously.  Due to the ever-increasing mistrust of those we once trusted to keep us informed, the likelihood of something being ignored as fake news or disregarded as an exaggeration of fact is going to be the greater of the two.

As it is, I find myself spending hours sometimes, doing additional research of a report or news article just to verify how much of it is either exaggerated, presented with bias, and/or just completely fabricated. I would say I could probably bet the farm that most Americans don’t have the time or even the inclination to do so.

The result? People are either choosing to completely disregard all media. Or worse, continue to take the media at their word. Both of which cold have deadly consequences. It is a sad state of affairs that it has come to this point. The exposure of media collusion, the media purporting fake news to only, issue a retraction later, or in some cases, just pretend they played no part, has led to a potentially fatal circumstance.

The latest bill signed into law certainly did little to restore my confidence in the integrity of our government or to the validity of future news reports. The NDAA H.R. Bill 5181 was signed by President Barack Obama December 23, 2016. This bipartisan bill introduced in the House of Representatives, written by U.S. Senators Republican Rob Portman and Democrat Chris Murphy and to was included in the National Defense Authorization Act NDAA) fiscal year 2017, cited as the “Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016”. The purpose of this bill is  “To counter foreign disinformation and propaganda, and for other purposes.”

It is no secret that the United States government maintains a relative level of secrecy, and most Americans accept that as being mostly for the safety of our country. Also, that the government has, for quite some time, had a strong influence real or perceived over the media, using it to broadcast certain propaganda. Large scale propaganda was used as early as WWI by our government who used it’s citizens and even children to promote war bonds and stamps. The government circulated advertisements to encourage Americans to grow their own food to help reduce the price of gunpowder, ammunition,  and other war associated expenses. The definition of propaganda as “biased or misleading information used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view”. In and of itself,  isn’t necessarily a bad or negative thing. The problem arises when the line between white and black propaganda is blurred. An interesting parallel to be drawn to propaganda is Psychological Operations or PsyOps as is defined by the US military. PSYOPS are defined as “planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence the emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”

This gray area between the good and the bad brought about an amendment of the  Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 (part of the National Defense Authorization Act) which repeals the domestic prohibition, allowing the government’s broadcasting to be directed at/created for Americans for the first time in over 40 years.
. This legislation previously outlined parameters under which government-generated propaganda was not to target American citizens and therefore could not be broadcast within the borders of the United States. Entities such as the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Asia,  Alhurra and a handful of others are covered by this act along with the Department of State. With it good intentions to insulate the American public from being targeted by government-sponsored content and broadcasting, meant to be directed at a global audience, this act also acts to exempt these entities from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Fred Wisner, former CIA director of the Office of Special Projects (OSP) launched “Operation Mockingbird” in 1948. This program was established to influence foreign media. As a result, by 1953 The CIA had a significant stronghold over dozens of major news outlets and media agencies, including the New York Times, The Washington Post, Newsweek and others. Reports developed by intelligence gathered by the CIA was given by the CIA to unwitting or cooperating reporters who would be then be cited and their reports repeated, resulting in the report being cited through other media services and spread wide-scale to the American public.

Fast-forward to 2016, with the release of private emails of the DNC, exposure of the collusion between former Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton and Former Interim DNC Head Donna Brazile, where Brazile gave the Clinton campaign, debate questions ahead of time; Which shamefully followed  the very recent ousting of Debbie Wasserman Shultz who resigned after it was revealed that she conspired to derail the Sanders campaign tilting favor towards Clinton. Not to mention the extensive plot to create and run a fake Craigslist ad portraying Donald Trump as a sexual predator. Intent on listing a job opening that explicitly described a potential candidate’s willingness to be accepting of unwanted, unprovoked sexual advances and other humiliating situations in order to be considered.

Throughout the presidential campaign,  there were various statements being made to the public by the current President, reporting that there was evidence that strongly suggested the leak of the emails were the result of a Russian hacking operation. Just 11 days before the election the FBI director announces that there is potentially new information to be investigated on Hillary Clinton. None of this helped to increase the faith of the people in our democratic system.

There has since been an extensive investigation ordered by President Obama to be conducted to determine the extent of Russia’s involvement in the hacking of the DNC. The publisher of these documents, Wikileaks, repeatedly denies that Russian government nor any (Russian) state party was the source of said documents. The collaborative intelligence investigation concluded that Russia, in fact, was responsible for cyber-activity designed to undermine the democratic process, aimed to discredit and undermine the electability and(presumed) future presidency of Hillary Clinton.

The declassified report, outlining the assessment and judgment of Russian cyber activities could itself be considered a form of propaganda. Although its content, being fact-based and is supported by evidence, is clearly written in a manner which, by giving selective information and use of loaded language in such a way so that its readers would likely form a consensus supporting their own narrative. That narrative was to have us believe Russia is bad and Putin is in no way acting in the best interests of the United States. While that may very well be true, this report is the perfect example of how we, the American people are at the mercy of our government no matter what we do. Our government has and will continue to enact laws and policies that will allow them to manipulate information reported to the American public in order to advance their agenda.

This report also assesses that as the public polling numbers increasingly showed that Clinton was advancing in popularity and that her prospects for winning the presidency were increasing, the Russian campaign, in response ramped up their efforts to counteract this perception. What is so interesting about this, is that the polls, as we now know, were overwhelmingly inaccurate across the board?

So if the polls were saying that Hillary Clinton was the favorable candidate (untrue) and Putin was responsible for the release of damaging evidence against the Clinton campaign(Denied bu Wikileaks), could it be possible that the reverse could also be true? What I mean is, suppose the US government in their “anti-disinformation defense strategy,” created, released and broadcast propaganda that supported the US agenda.

It would serve us well to take note that prior to the election, Russian diplomats openly and publicly criticized the US electoral process and were poised to contest the results should Clinton have won. Could that be because of information they possessed clearly showed that DNC and other government entities were setting the stage for a victory? This would certainly explain the tears and utter disbelief at the outcome of the election.

No one ever disputed the content of the leaked documents. No one ever questioned their validity or authenticity. The primary focus was always on the source. To think that our democracy is undermined is certainly not the narrative that the US government wants to advance. Furthermore, for that information to be, not only revealed to the American Public but that is was a foreign government to expose it and report it to the American people. This clearly reduces the positon of power.

That’s when they (our Government) finally realized they’ve been outsmarted. The government knew well in advance that this was happening. But they, believing their plan was going to be successful and Clinton would win the election, They  (wrongly so) believed that their counter efforts would be enough to distract Americans from the avalanche that be-felled the election by way of paid social media trolls, fake news reports and failed collusion efforts between government officials and the mainstream media.

Make no mistake, I do not condone, encourage nor agree that interference by any foreign entity that breaches our government or any homeland native that compromises our national security should be taken lightly and should have a severe consequence. However,  I can’t help but ask this question. Why would Russian go to so much trouble? The greatest concern appeared to be not just the leaking of private documents, but the more about content that is being broadcast.

The report outlines a few of the “offenses” waged against Russia and RT

1) RT broadcasts that the United States  “two-party system does not represent the views of at least one-third of the population”  (Is this not true?)

2) “RT aired a documentary about the Occupy Wall Street movement on 1, 2, and

4 November. RT framed the movement as a fight against “the ruling class” and described the current US political system as corrupt and dominated by corporations” (Is this not also True?)

3) RT has also focused on criticism of the US economic system, US currency policy, alleged Wall Street greed, and the US national debt”. (How is it Alleged?)

4) “RT hires or makes contractual agreements with Westerners with views that fit its agenda and airs them on RT” (A common practice of our own media.) 

5), Some hosts and journalists do not present themselves as associated with RT when interviewing people, and many of them have affiliations to other media and activist organizations in the United States.

(Do we not call these people “contributors”)

So, what I surmise, they just don’t want anyone else airing out our dirty laundry. They’ve been caught with their pants down and are using distraction and deflection to put out the fire. What is the most disturbing is with the new NDAA and its enclosed policies, how are we the American people supposed to determine what is real anymore? How can we determine if what we are being told is government generated “counter-disinformation” that is fact-based, or if it is counter-propaganda meant to distract us from a truth they don’t want us to know? They have enacted laws that allow them to conduct these activities, despite being illegal for over 40 years. How many years did the government deny the very existence of area 51 until it was presented in such a manner they could no longer deny? Who killed John F. Kennedy? What happened on the other side of the moon? We may never know the answers to many of these questions. But the real question we should ask ourselves is what are we being lied to about today?

References

January 9th, 2017 by