MASS MEDIA 3

MURDOCH'S ARROGANT EMPIRE MUST BE REINED IN
WHEN ARE THE MET COPS, WHO GET RETAINERS FROM MURDOCH FOR ALL THE PRIVILEGED INFORMATION COPS PROVIDE FOR HIS NEWS RAGS, GOING TO INVESTIGATE HIS PART IN FUNDING THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES OF JOURNALISTS WHO WORK FOR HIS SCUMBAG NEWS NETWORK?

News International has become too influential for the good of British society, writes Henry Porter

Rebekah Brooks, chief executive of News International Controlling Influence? The managing editor of News International, Rebekah Brooks. Photograph: Phil Noble/Reuters News International executives may hope that the departure of Andy Coulson will take the heat out of the phone-hacking story, but it has almost certainly come too late. Although the interception of perhaps thousands of public figures' messages took place during his editorship, it has recently become clear that Coulson was simply a prominent distraction.

Of course, the Labour leadership seems satisfied with the scalp because it allows Ed Miliband to make predictably disparaging remarks about David Cameron's judgment, but the real case against News International is being made by the former Labour deputy prime minister, Lord Prescott, who has cast doubt on the investigation by the Metropolitan Police and the follow-up by the Crown Prosecution Service. The apparent failure of both organisations, together with the cover-up by News International, are the radioactive elements of the story. They are what Ed Miliband should be focusing on. What is so striking about this affair is that we know so much. There is a long list of well-known people who are suing News International, which has already spent millions of pounds to prevent the issue being aired in court. Despite Murdoch's insistence that News International has zero tolerance of criminal activity and will do everything in its power to comply with police investigations, the company is still paying the legal costs of Glenn Mulcaire, the private detective who ran the hacking operation and is the one man who knows the identities of all the executives who were aware of his activities. Names are surfacing: first it was Ian Edmondson, the news editor of the News of the World who was suspended before Christmas, and now Greg Miskiw, a former assistant editor.

The gossip mill is throwing up more names, and quite by chance last week I met a well-known person whose phone was hacked but who decided on balance that News International was just too powerful and vindictive to take on. When a company is so influential that it skews the legitimate means of redress in a civil society, that society should take note, ask if it serves the people's best interests and question whether it should be allowed to increase that power, in this instance through a merger with BSkyB. News International has shown a shocking arrogance since the imprisonment of royal correspondent Clive Goodman for listening to the phone messages of Prince William and Prince Harry, and more particularly the absence of the moral standards that we expect to inform the judgment of a large public company.

At the heart of everything is Rupert Murdoch's considerable personal power, which he wields to menace any government that stands in the way of his commercial ambitions or offends his basically conservative agenda. Around News International there exists a kind of dark energy that is capable of influencing matters without Murdoch executives even having to lift the phone to deliver a threat. People know what the company wants and tend to step aside, which partly, I suspect, explains the failure of the police to investigate the case with anything resembling enthusiasm. That may also apply to the Crown Prosecution Service, though last week it began to act with much more vigour.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • News of the World phone hacking: CPS to undertake urgent review of evidence
  • Phone-hacking scandal could dog the government for months
  • Brown asks Scotland Yard to investigate if he was hacked
  • COULSON QUITS: SHERIDAN HELPED BRING DOWN PM CAMERON'S SPIN DOCTOR
    THE Tommy Sheridan trial was a factor in Andy Coulson's decision to quit as the Prime Minister's chief spin doctor, after months of speculation over his role in the News of the World phone tapping scandal, senior Downing Street figures have revealed.

    His resignation is a major blow to David Cameron, and opponents have questioned his judgment in employing and standing by a man whose past was under such close scrutiny. There were concerns among senior Tories last night that Mr Cameron would struggle to find somebody to replace Mr Coulson with someone who had the "same connection to the real world" outside the "old Etonian elite" in Downing Street. In a statement, Mr Coulson said he had become the story and was unable to give the "110 per cent required" to be director of communications at Downing Street.

    He had come under increasing pressure over the practices at the News of the World of phone tapping politicians, sports stars and celebrities under his editorship. While denying any knowledge of phone tapping and claiming the paper's former royal correspondent Clive Goodman, who went to prison, had been "a rogue reporter", he said that dealing with the allegations was becoming too much of a distraction. "I stand by what I've said about those events but when the spokesman needs a spokesman it's time to move on," he said.

    One of those distractions, which is said by insiders to have finally helped make up his mind, was his appearance at Sheridan's perjury trial in Glasgow last month. The charges related to statements Sheridan made in court when he successfully sued the News of the World about stories regarding his involvement with swingers clubs. A Downing Street insider told The Scotsman: "While the Tommy Sheridan trial is not the reason he resigned, it is fair to say that it certainly didn't help.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • CAMERON'S COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER A DODGY NOTW PHONE HACKER (VIDEO)
  • NEWS OF THE WORLD PHONE TAPPERS CLUB (VIDEO)
  • MORE ON SHERIDAN AND MURDOCH'S NEWS OF THE WORLD HACKING SCANDAL HERE
  • COULSON RESIGNS OVER 'NEWS OF THE WORLD' PHONE HACKING VIDEO

    Coulson the communications director of tory toff Cameron's government is a spy who Rupert Murdoch used to destroy any party that dares challenge the corrupt political parties that are run behind the scenes by the masonic establishment. He was responsible, like Murdoch , for bringing down the Scottish Socialist party by criminally bugging Tommy Sheridan's phone and paying £200,000 to Sheridan's former pal to video him. THEY ARE THE UTTER SCUM OF THE EARTH and undermining democracy by protecting the crooks running the House of commons.

  • Is Murdoch paying so much to met cops they wont investigate phone hacking?
  • THIS IS WHAT WIKILEAKS AND THE MEDIA HAS KEPT HIDDEN FROM YOU VIDEO

    FULL SCREEN
    PART 2 PART 3 PART 4 PART 5 PART 6

    This is a Press Conference at The Marine's Memorial Club & Hotel San Francisco, California February 19, 2010 Eric Lawyer, founder of Firefighters for 911 Truth, who pointed out the many ways in which long-established protocols for handling crime scenes involving fire and building collapse were egregiously violated, consistent with a cover-up. WikiLeaks Julian Assange was suddenly around this time catapulted to the attention of the world by all news networks.

    Yet none of the media there on this day released the shown Press Conference . The Firemen from 911 have come out long ago folks. Many of whom have died from cancer and 100s of more expecting to die from cancer they now have. We cannot wait until these brave witnesses expire to help them. It is our duty as Strong Americans to stand for those that stand for us when we are weak. It has been said that more than 100 first responders have died of cancer and that more than 600 have confirmed cases of cancer since 911. It is estimated that thousands people exposed to the event of 911 will contract and die of cancer. It is now that we must stand and fight for the truth. We know the ones involved and they must be brought to justice.

    They are at war with the citizens of this Great Nation. They have media assets such as Assange staging events to cause the direct control of truth on the internet the same as China does to their citizens. If we fall to act with due force now the chance may never be allowed to us again. Not knowing is NO EXCUSE; as a blind man could see 9/11/2001 is a conspiracy from the top of the highest corporate ladder to the top of our own Govt. This is a plea to all able; take up what you must and sacrifice today so that tomorrow our children and their children may have a free Republic. Thank You May God Bless The Republic Of The United States Of America
    MAINSTREAM MEDIA LOSING ITS MOJO VIDEO

    FULL SCREEN
    (BRILLIANT) JOHN PILGER: THE WAR YOU DON'T SEE VIDEO

    FULL SCREEN
  • JOHN PILGER: THE WAR YOU DON'T SEE(FULL LENGTH VIDEO HERE)
  • New Pilger film 'The War You Don't See' on ITV 14 DEC 2010 10.35pm
  • THE GREAT BRITISH MASONIC SMEARING MACHINE ATTACKS STUDENT PROTESTS
    royals battered As men who see the season of domestic violence fast approaching with the run up to Christmas always a favourite time for the radical feminists behind women's aid being wheeled out by the masons who ruthlessly control British tv, radio and newspapers. We are used to the slurs and despicable allegations made against heterosexual males by a state machine that steals men's assets on a grand scale in the divorces shortly after each New Year.

    The season of goodwill has been turned into a propaganda campaign for the Crown's crooked judges and lawyers to seize victims assets in their tyranny. These same lawyers and judges require that regular smearing to justify forcing men into homelessness ,making them penniless and childless and who with their allies in the media are only to happy to provide the backdrop of nasty propaganda that psychologically induces a hatred of men in the general population.

    Now we have another target for the sick psychopaths behind the media smearing network, our students. We have been proud to walk alongside the student protests reporting that when they have been kettled , battered with cop batons and intimidated and crushed by mounted charges that despite their composure have been smeared by the BBC, ITV and SKY news for daring to stand up against a state machine that is anything but democratic. We are seeing a bunch of groomed Eton public school twats decimate the lives of millions while propping up the richest and most evil oligarchy on the planet the British Royal family.

    An assault of any kind on that fascist regime requires a massive media retaliation on those who dare to challenge the might of the most evil dynasty on the planet. We have already exposed why, if anyone dares protest at any event where the British Royal family are present, that they are quietly taken away to the many psychiatric gulags across the UK and lobotomized. They can no longer get away with the age old hung ,drawn and quartered regime they used during the middle ages but they have a modern day version in the many masonic doctors / psychiatrists trained to chemically destroy any dissenter of the Royal family. Now their media have turned their attention on the students who have risen up as the serfs throughout history have done only to be tarred and feathered by the scumbag reporters, editors and owners of the toe rag newspapers and tv controllers who have been expert at providing the smearing and propaganda of anyone who dares challenge the might of the fascist UK state and its masonic crown figureheads.

    TO ALL STUDENTS WHO HAVE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB OF ORGANISING THESE PROTESTS THAT THEY SHOULD KNOW THAT THEY ARE NOT ONLY FIGHTING FOR THEIR OWN FUTURES BUT THE FUTURES OF ALL THOSE DEMEANED AND UNDERMINED BY A RUTHLESS AND ULTRA VIOLENT STATE MACHINE . A MACHINE THAT IS ONLY TO HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MASS MURDER OF FOREIGN WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN IRAQ , AFGHANISTAN AND PALESTINE WHILE CRUCIFYING ANYONE WHO DARES CHALLENGE THEIR VERY WARPED PERSPECTIVE OF HOW THEY REPORT VIOLENCE AND WHO ARE THE REAL THUGS MASQUERADING WITHIN THE MANY ARMS OF THE MASONIC NETWORK THAT CONTROLS THE UK FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ROYAL SCUM WHO CONTINUE TO LIVE OPULENT LIFESTYLES WHILE THE REST OF US ARE CRIPPLED BY MASSIVE DEBTS CREATED BY THEIR BANKERS IN THE CITY, AND THEIR JUDGES IN THE UTTER DENS OF INIQUITY.

  • Student has emergency brain surgery after 'being beaten around the head with police truncheon' during protest
  • Bank of England, City of London and The Queen
  • MORE ROYAL SCAMS HERE
  • DOES FOX NEWS LIE ? VIDEO

    FULL SCREEN
    THIS IS HOW ISRAEL CONTROLS YOUR MEDIA VIDEO

    FULL SCREEN
    HEATH LEDGER WAS MURDERED BY THE HOLLYWOOD MAFIA
    Fugitive actor Randy Quaid has claimed Perth star Heath Ledger was one of many celebrities "whacked" by a group of Hollywood criminals from whom he is now on the run.

    Quaid and his wife Evi are seeking refugee status in Canada after fleeing over the border from the United States, claiming their lives were at risk. The actor, who played a supporting role alongside Ledger in the Oscar-winning film Brokeback Mountain, said he was being hunted by a gang of Hollywood "star-whackers" who already had a long list of celebrity victims. "Up until a year ago Evi and I had never had any run-in with the law whatsoever," he said.

    "We are not criminals nor are we fugitives from justice. Nor are we crazy. We are simply artists and filmmakers who are being racketeered on." The brother of actor Dennis Quaid then broke down when he told a gathered media pack about how the criminal group had some of Hollywood's biggest names in its sights. "We believe there to be a malignant tumour of 'star-whackers' in Hollywood," he said. "How many people do you know personally who have died suddenly and mysteriously in the last five years? "I have personally known eight actors, all of whom I have worked with and was close to - Heath Ledger, Chris Penn, David Carradine among them. "I believe these actors were whacked and I believe many others, such as Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan and Mel Gibson, are being played to get at their money."

    The couple are wanted in the United States on vandalism charges. The day after they arrived in Canada last Sunday, a California judge issued an arrest warrant for them after they failed to appear at a mandatory court hearing on charges they had been illegally squatting in a home they owned years ago. Quaid was arrested in September on suspicion of burglary and entering a building without consent. Evi Quaid was booked on those charges, as well as resisting arrest. This year, they were arrested on charges of failing to pay their bill at a California hotel. Evi Quaid was forced to pay $US10,500 in restitution in that case and she pleaded no contest to defrauding an innkeeper.

  • SOURCE
  • WESTMINSTER MEDIA CIRCUS DURING TORY TOFFS DRACONIAN SPENDING REVIEW VIDEO
  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE
  • ROW GROWS OVER DAVID CAMERON'S LINKS WITH MEDIA BARON RUPERT MURDOCH
    David Cameron is in a bitter row over his links with media baron Rupert Murdoch, it was revealed last night.

    The Prime Minister has been told to publish a full list of all the people he has met so far in Number 10 - and when they turned up. But senior sources said the PM is stalling over providing dates because they show Mr Murdoch, 79, was one of the first through the door when the ConDems took over in May. Insiders say the move has led to bitter internal rows within It can't be Downing Street. Civil servants are insisting the dates must be published if the Government is to meet its commitment to be open and transparent.

    But sources add Mr Cameron fears being seen as "in the pocket" of the Murdoch empire. Sky TV boss Mr Murdoch is believed to have gone into Number 10 for a 45-minute session within 24 hours of Mr Cameron becoming PM. And his lieutenants are thought to have held at least two other meetings there in the first week of the Conservative-led adminis-tration. It has led to fears the ConDems are preparing a war on the BBC to give Sky a bigger share of the TV market.

    The row comes as Mr Cameron increasingly uses Downing Street as a base to host parties for leading right-wingers. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger - star of The Terminator films - arrived yesterday. As the Republican posed on his doorstep, the PM joked: "He's going to help me terminate the budget deficit."

  • SOURCE
  • 25 RULES OF DISINFORMATION
    disinformation From the Resonant Resurrections Dept: This wise little version of "Cover-ups for Dummies" has been floating on the Net since the late '90s at least. Given the government/media handling of 9/11, the resulting wars, and recent electoral fraud it often seems our top officials must read it everyday. If we're to bring the truth alive in 2005, it may help to occasionally remind ourselves how the pros play the game. - Editor

    Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

    1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

    2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.

    3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.

    4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

    5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia", "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

    6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

    7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

    8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

    9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

    10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

    11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the "high road" and "confess" with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

    12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

    13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.

    14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.

    15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

    16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

    17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

    18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".

    19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

    20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

    21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

    22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

    23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

    24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

    25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.


  • SOURCE
  • 67% SAY THEY ARE BETTER INFORMED THAN 10 YEARS AGO
    knowledge is power While newspapers and broadcast outlets struggle to survive in the Internet age, two-out-of-three Americans (67%) feel they are more informed today than they were 10 years ago. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just eight percent (8%) consider themselves less informed these days, while 22% think their level of knowledge is about the same.

    Women are more confident than men that they are better informed now. Adults ages 30 to 49 believe that more strongly than those in any other age group. Forty-four percent (44%) of all adults say the Internet is the best way to get news and information. Television comes in second, with 36% who still turn to the tube. Print newspapers are a distant third with just 11% who view them as the best source for news and information. Only nine percent (9%) still rely on radio. Although more people turn to the Internet, they're less sure about the quality of the information they find there. Only 29% say the Internet is the most reliable source of credible news information. The plurality (40%) says broadcast news is the most reliable source. Twenty-one percent (21%) view newspaper that way.

    In July 2009, 46% considered network television news programs a more reliable source of news than the Internet, while 35% relied on online news more. This past June, Americans expressed more confidence in local newspaper reporting than in online news sources. The survey of 1,000 Adults was conducted on September 15-16, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

    Men tend to view the Internet as the best source of news and information more than women do. Women rely on television more. The majority of Americans under 50 regard online sources as the best for news and information. Older Americans trust television more. Print newspapers have been struggling for several years in a market now dominated by free online news sources, and many papers have gone out of business or are barely surviving. However, most Americans (61%) are confident that if newspapers go out of business, online and other news sources will be able to make up the difference and report things people want to know about. That finding is unchanged from April 2009 and includes 31% who are Very Confident that other news sources will be able to pick up the slack.

    Thirty-four percent of voters are not confident that other news sources will be able to compensate for the loss of traditional print newspapers, including five percent (5%) who are Not At All Confident. Americans continue to oppose government-driven solutions for the newspaper industry’s problems in large part because of their concern that they threaten the press’ independence. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is considering several ways to help the struggling newspaper industry, but Americans strongly reject several proposed taxes to keep privately-owned newspapers going. But 84% oppose a three percent (3%) tax on monthly cell phone bills to help newspapers and traditional journalism.

    Despite the emphasis more and more newspapers are putting on their online editions, most Americans still would rather read the printed version. However, in early January, over half of Americans said they would rely mostly on television for 2010 political news

  • SOURCE
  • JIMMY CARTER ON FOX NEWS DISTORTIONS OF THE TRUTH VIDEO
  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE
  • MAN WITH BOMB MAKING EQUIPMENT CRASHES WARNER BROS STUDIO'S
    warner bros BURBANK, Calif. (KABC) -- Police were still trying to figure out the motives of a man who drove his car through the security gates at Warner Brothers studio Friday afternoon with a trunk full of liquid explosives.

    The driver, 43-year-old Michael Rodriguez-Cintron, burst through Gate 5 at around 3:30 p.m. and then proceeded to drive in circles around the lot. Studio security pulled him over for trespassing, but when they searched his trunk they found a duffel bag with liquid explosives in it and an replica firearm, which drew the attention of the bomb squad. Police also found several ignition sources, all signs that detectives said could point to an act of terrorism.

    Detectives said the man was very cooperative with studio security but they must take situations like these seriously where possible terrorism is involved. Authorities were still struggling to answer questions about what the man wanted to do on the studio lot. "Anytime you have someone who trespasses on a studio lot there's a couple things that could come up, whether they want to look for a particular actor or actress or have a script they want to deliver," said Lt. John Diibert, Burbank Police Department. The driver faces several charges, including possession of a destructive device. He was being held on $500,000 bail.

  • SOURCE
  • NOW RUPERT MURDOCH FEELS HEAT OVER PHONE HACKING
    The News of the World phone-hacking scandal refuses to fade away. The problem for those who wish it to disappear — such as Rupert Murdoch, David Cameron and the man who links them, Andy Coulson — is that there are just too many people out there able to keep it alive.

    Yesterday, the shadow foreign minister, Chris Bryant, confirmed that he is seeking a judicial review, as are three other supposed hacking victims — the actress Sienna Miller, former Scotland Yard deputy assistant commissioner Brian Paddick and freelance journalist Brendan Montague. Comedian Steve Coogan and TV presenter Chris Tarrant are also taking legal action. There will undoubtedly be others contacting their lawyers soon because Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator employed by the News of the World on a £100,000-a-year contract, had a list of 3000 named “targets” and a list of 92 mobile phone pin codes. You can well understand the anger of people who believed they were “persons of interest” to that paper, especially since — in the majority of cases — they remained ignorant of the fact because the Metropolitan Police did not inform them.

    Instead, the only charges brought against Mulcaire and the News of the World's then royal editor, Clive Goodman, involved the royal family. That led them to be jailed in 2007 and prompted Coulson's immediate resignation. The hacking trail appeared to go cold, despite protestations from some media commentators, including me, that the whole business deserved closer scrutiny. I was convinced that Goodman had not acted alone and that his actions should have been seen within the context of an editorial culture that, even if not overtly condoning law-breaking in order to obtain stories, was ethically questionable. I based that on my own knowledge of what happens within tabloids and I have not changed my mind.

    However, I readily concede that there is no hard evidence. As Donald Trelford pointed out in Monday's Independent, there will not be a paper trail within the paper and proof of hacking itself is extremely hard to prove. What we have to go on therefore are allegations from former (mostly disenchanted) News of the World staff and what I like to call “informed speculation”. So let me rehearse my speculative argument. On the balance of probabilities, it beggars belief that a single reporter and an investigator required to work for several members of the newsroom staff managed to conceal their activities from other journalists, including the paper's executives. Similarly, given the nature of the paper's internal editorial tensions — during which, at various times, the news and features departments have been in competition with each other to break stories — it is unlikely that reporters were unaware of how their colleagues managed to obtain exclusive stories.

    Add to that the fact that, on red-top tabloids, editors tend to be hands-on operators. I have never heard an editor say to a journalist, and certainly never said myself in my days at The Sun and the Daily Mirror: “Please don't tell me how you got that scoop.” Just the opposite. Knowing how each story is obtained is part of the editing process. Coulson, who learned his craft at The Sun, would surely be aware of the provenance of the stories he published. That said, it is just possible that senior executives did conceal the truth from Coulson. I'm going to be candid here because there were occasions during my assistant editorship at The Sun in the 1980s when I felt it unnecessary, and even unwise, to inform the editor, Kelvin MacKenzie, of every detail involved in landing an exclusive. This usually had to do with masking the amount of money spent on buying a story.

    The following anecdote gives some idea of how important concealment could be within a tabloid culture. In 1985, I negotiated the buying up of footballer George Best's exclusive story of his time in prison (for assorted crimes, including assaulting a policeman and skipping bail). It was a multi-tiered deal that involved, aside from a straightforward payment, the cost of a Sussex hotel stay, followed by a first-class flight to Mauritius for him and his girlfriend to stay at the island's most expensive hotel, plus the expense of sending an accompanying writer and photographer. For a variety of reasons, costs escalated to such an extent that it seemed prudent not to inform the editor of the exact amounts of the invoices but, of course, he found out. The result was a loud bawling-out by MacKenzie, followed by my suspension. We made it up within a week, but the episode is symbolic of the kind of internal pressures within a tabloid that can lead to duplicity. Editors make unreasonable demands of their executives. In their turn, executives then do the same to their reporters. And, naturally enough, reporters who wish to keep their jobs, sail very close to the wind. Some will inevitably be prepared to take giant ethical, and possibly legal, risks into order to please their masters (or mistresses).

    This should not be read as a defence for Coulson. I stick to my view that he either knew, or should have known, what his reporters were doing. But it does give an insight into the kind of culture that exists within tabloids. Nowhere has this pressure cooker atmosphere been more obvious than at the News of the World, where exclusives are demanded on a weekly basis. I must not overlook one other key pressure point, the one applied on an editor by the boss. No newspaper owner is more knowledgeable, and therefore more exacting, than Murdoch. Every one of his editors is aware that they work under his continual scrutiny. Murdoch has the ultimate power of hire and fire. Even if he doesn't get involved in the nuts and bolts — and he rarely does — he sets the tone. His editors can scream for ever that they are entirely independent of him, but the reality is that they know his views and would not go out of their way to displease him.

    This discreet exercise of Murdochian power, incidentally, is why media consultant Claire Enders has urged the government to block the bid by Murdoch's News Corporation for the 60.9 per cent of BSkyB it does not already own. She thinks it represents a “Berlusconi moment” for Britain, referring to the media dominance in Italy of the country's prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi. Enders argues that Murdoch's papers and Sky News might merge into a single stream of fact and opinion, thus compromising the current media plurality. That may be so, though it seems far-fetched. What should concern us, however, is Murdoch's baleful influence on journalistic ethics. The value of the phone-hacking scandal is that it has given that matter a public profile for the first time.

  • SOURCE
  • POLITICAL PUPPETS AGREE NO PHONE TAPPING UNLESS IT'S THE STATE VIDEO
  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE
  • Commons declares war on 'media barons and their red-topped assassins'
  • UK ROYALS HAD RESOURCES TO CATCH MURDOCH'S NEWS OF THE WORLD PHONE TAPPERS
    royal family Only the British royals had the power and resources to catch Murdoch's News of the World phone tapping

    Tabloid Hack Attack on Royals, and Beyond

    IN NOVEMBER 2005, three senior aides to Britain’s royal family noticed odd things happening on their mobile phones. Messages they had never listened to were somehow appearing in their mailboxes as if heard and saved. Equally peculiar were stories that began appearing about Prince William in one of the country’s biggest tabloids, News of the World.

    The stories were banal enough (Prince William pulled a tendon in his knee, one revealed). But the royal aides were puzzled as to how News of the World had gotten the information, which was known among only a small, discreet circle. They began to suspect that someone was eavesdropping on their private conversations. By early January 2006, Scotland Yard had confirmed their suspicions. An unambiguous trail led to Clive Goodman, the News of the World reporter who covered the royal family, and to a private investigator, Glenn Mulcaire, who also worked for the paper. The two men had somehow obtained the PIN codes needed to access the voice mail of the royal aides.

    Scotland Yard told the aides to continue operating as usual while it pursued the investigation, which included surveillance of the suspects’ phones. A few months later, the inquiry took a remarkable turn as the reporter and the private investigator chased a story about Prince William’s younger brother, Harry, visiting a strip club. Another tabloid, The Sun, had trumpeted its scoop on the episode with the immortal: “Harry Buried Face in Margo’s Mega-Boobs. Stripper Jiggled . . . Prince Giggled.” As Scotland Yard tracked Goodman and Mulcaire, the two men hacked into Prince Harry’s mobile-phone messages. On April 9, 2006, Goodman produced a follow-up article in News of the World about the apparent distress of Prince Harry’s girlfriend over the matter. Headlined “Chelsy Tears Strip Off Harry!” the piece quoted, verbatim, a voice mail Prince Harry had received from his brother teasing him about his predicament. The palace was in an uproar, especially when it suspected that the two men were also listening to the voice mail of Prince William, the second in line to the throne. The eavesdropping could not have gone higher inside the royal family, since Prince Charles and the queen were hardly regular mobile-phone users. But it seemingly went everywhere else in British society. Scotland Yard collected evidence indicating that reporters at News of the World might have hacked the phone messages of hundreds of celebrities, government officials, soccer stars — anyone whose personal secrets could be tabloid fodder. Only now, more than four years later, are most of them beginning to find out.

    AS OF THIS SUMMER, five people have filed lawsuits accusing News Group Newspapers, a division of Rupert Murdoch’s publishing empire that includes News of the World, of breaking into their voice mail. Additional cases are being prepared, including one seeking a judicial review of Scotland Yard’s handling of the investigation. The litigation is beginning to expose just how far the hacking went, something that Scotland Yard did not do. In fact, an examination based on police records, court documents and interviews with investigators and reporters shows that Britain’s revered police agency failed to pursue leads suggesting that one of the country’s most powerful newspapers was routinely listening in on its citizens. The police had seized files from Mulcaire’s home in 2006 that contained several thousand mobile phone numbers of potential hacking victims and 91 mobile phone PIN codes. Scotland Yard even had a recording of Mulcaire walking one journalist — who may have worked at yet another tabloid — step by step through the hacking of a soccer official’s voice mail, according to a copy of the tape. But Scotland Yard focused almost exclusively on the royals case, which culminated with the imprisonment of Mulcaire and Goodman. When police officials presented evidence to prosecutors, they didn’t discuss crucial clues that the two men may not have been alone in hacking the voice mail messages of story targets.

    “There was simply no enthusiasm among Scotland Yard to go beyond the cases involving Mulcaire and Goodman,” said John Whittingdale, the chairman of a parliamentary committee that has twice investigated the phone hacking. “To start exposing widespread tawdry practices in that newsroom was a heavy stone that they didn’t want to try to lift.” Several investigators said in interviews that Scotland Yard was reluctant to conduct a wider inquiry in part because of its close relationship with News of the World. Police officials have defended their investigation, noting that their duties did not extend to monitoring the media. In a statement, the police said they followed the lines of inquiry “likely to produce the best evidence” and that the charges that were brought “appropriately represented the criminality uncovered.” The statement added, “This was a complex inquiry and led to one of the first prosecutions of its kind.” Officials also have noted that the department had more pressing priorities at the time, including several terrorism cases.

  • FULL LENGTH ARTICLE HERE
  • PRETENTIOUS PRICKS WHO WRITE FOR THE CORPORATE MEDIA
    rupert murdoch The media mafia across the globe that write for the likes of Murdoch and the old time media barons are the utter scum and dregs of this earth. Their primary goal is to mock the lower orders and treat the poor, sick and vulnerable like punch bags while concealing their Zionist masters opulence, greed and enslavement. Most of the scumbag journo's are nothing but inbred public school twats with extreme right wing leanings and that is no matter how hard they try and persuade us they are one of us.

    The propaganda network they have so closely guarded for so long under their rich benefactors has, since the inception of the internet, been falling on its arse . Yet few of them really notice and are still busily conspiring to create manufactured bullshit to hide the real truth of what the hell is going on in this world that has led us to a point were creepy and satanic oligarchs dominate our lives and who bankroll the dodgy politicians who ensure the sheeple are always kept in their lowly place. The arty farty commentary that disguises the true nature of what the media has been all about no longer fools those that are awakening to the diabolical truth of how we have all ,in one way or another, been manipulated by the most persuasive and subtle distortions of the truth. That making us believe we have choice and freedom, when in fact we have none.

    History is being rewritten ensuring their so called war hero's, inventors, artists , judicial scum, legal mafia, banking mafia, cop thugs and royals who the media expect us to worship with their propaganda, are in fact shown to be evil and twisted toe rags, crooks and despots that have ruled us for far to long with an iron fist .

    THEY ARE ANYTHING BUT THE HEROES THAT THE COMPLICIT CORPORATE MEDIA WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE.

  • RUPERT MURDOCH'S NEWS OF THE WORLD AND HIS PHONE TAPPERS CLUB
  • The 'culture of fear' inside News of the World HQ
  • Only British royals had the power and resources to expose Murdoch's News of the World phone tapping
  • PRIVATE EDUCATION PRODUCES MORE THAN HALF OF UK'S TOP JOURNALISTS
  • Jewish media overload despite only being 2 per cent of the population!
  • Credit Crunch? Not for the five best-paid hedge fund managers who are all jewish
  • NEWS OF THE WORLD PHONE TAPPERS CLUB VIDEO
  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE
  • Cameron's media chief set to meet police as officers probe new phone-hacking evidence
  • HOW THE ZIONIST FOX NEWS RIGS AMERICANS AND SLANDER MUSLIMS VIDEO
  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE
  • WHO OWNS THE AMERICAN MEDIA? VIDEO
  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE
  • THE BBC'S ANDREW MARR ON A NEW FORM OF JOURNALISM
    HOW ABOUT THE CORPORATE MEDIA TELL A FEW HOME TRUTHS?

    As people find new ways to access news in a post-print world, so the demands on those that deliver it is changing, says Andrew Marr, and this new media age could bring with it a better, more rigorous kind of journalism. The winds of media revolution are gusting fiercely.

    In the past few days we have the Guardian's estimate of a near 90% drop in the online readership of its rival, the Times, since the pay wall went up; and Amazon's announcement that sales of digital books for its e-reader Kindle are outstripping hardback books in the US, at the rate of 143 e-books for every 100 hardbacks over the past three months. I just wanted to follow up my earlier "conversion confession" on this site.

    These two whirling straws were given perfect context at a seminar on Tuesday by John Warnock, co-founder of Adobe and a fabled figure in the Silicon Valley story. Speaking at Nottingham University's computer science school, he predicted a cascade of new iPad-like tablets in many sizes arriving by the end of this year, producing turmoil for cinemas (which will mostly go), bookshops (ditto), and broadcasters. Hollywood now gets just 15% of its revenue from cinema releases, while newspaper publishers find their traditional strengths - expensive printing plants and sophisticated distribution chains - have become merely costs. Book publishers ask what they bring to the new party. A public has emerged which doesn't watch traditional sequential television, or even understands the notion of "channels". I've just come back from Washington where I was doing interviews with grandee journalists and historians in the wood-panelled magnificence of the city's National Press Club.

    But downstairs, in the coffee bar, everyone seemed to reading on iPads and phones. Getting into the lift and returning to street level felt like time-travelling, from the Age of the Press, to tablet-world. But getting back to the big question, which is the future for journalism, two things struck me. The first is that I've started to spend quite a lot on buying online reading material, from books and magazines to news material; and that the quality's pin-sharp, easy on the eye and addictive.

    This leads me to think that perhaps Rupert Murdoch's pay wall gamble is a better bet than the Guardian figures currently suggest; but that the proposition will need to be redefined. People pay for magazines, television channels, DVDs and endless apps. The notion that they shouldn't ever pay for news is actually quite bizarre and a historic anomaly. I'm interested in politics, social policy, business, technology and the arts. I am not interested in sport, fashion, property, crime stories or celebrity. In this new world, where I'm being sold new propositions, I no longer see why I should buy material I'm not interested in, just because it's been bundled up by one publisher rather than another. Am I alone? I'll pay. I'll buy. But I want to be more discriminating.

    Fast food, fast news

    The second thought is that journalism may be on the edge of a great new age. How good have we been, honestly, at telling the truth to the powerful? When a crisis blows up, or a problem of deep complexity has to be confronted, few reporters have the specialist knowledge or time to really confront government, or a company. Further, the daily competition for newness - always on to the next story, the next headline - means the media's attention span has been limited. Too rarely do we return to stories that have "faded away" and ask, what happened next? Our appetite for long-term campaigning and focus fritters away. Fast news has had the same effect on our minds as fast food has had on our physiques. The next media age may be differently configured. We may have a group of very large "aggregators" bringing busy people the most important new news of the day, rather as now, but there will be fewer of them.

    But underneath that, we will have large numbers of specialist news sites - for specific companies or sectors, for different environmental issues, for overseas crises - which bring together journalists, academics, specialists, campaigners, professionals, lobbyists and so on. These will be where the expertise and longer-term attention span will be found. They will pile the pressure onto the powerful, and keep asking the questions. And from time to time their work will break upwards, to the aggregators (we need a better word) and the global headlines. Or so I hope. There's the real chance of a better kind of journalism in all this; something to comfort ourselves with as we pad to the bookshop, or head for the cinema while it's still there.

  • SOURCE
  • HOW MASONIC ZIONIST BULLYBOY COWELL USES THE VULNERABLE TO MAKE MILLIONS
    COWELL THE UTTER BULLYING BASTARD TAKES VULNERABLE AND MENTALLY UNSTABLE INDIVIDUALS AND LINES THEM UP FOR AN AUDIENCE THAT IS REMINISCENT OF MEDIEVAL TIMES AND THE STOCKS WERE PETTY CRIMINALS WERE TORTURED AND RIDICULED. THE BRITISH MEDIA CONTROLLED BY ZIONISTS LOVE PROMOTING BASTARDS LIKE BULLYING ZIONISTS SIMON COWELL AND ALAN SUGAR, WE ARE SOMEHOW EXPECTED TO LOOK UP TO ARROGANT THUGS AND BULLYBOYS WHO CONTROL THE UK AS IF THEY ARE TO BE RESPECTED WHEN THEY ARE THE UTTER SCUM OF THE EARTH.

    In the week a Britain's Got Talent singer sued for £2.5m... Watch out Mr Cowell, she's not your only victim out for revenge

    You can spot them as soon as they take those first awkward steps on to the stage and into the judges' firing line - the eccentric, deluded and often very vulnerable individuals who line up to make their bid for fame on TV talent contests. They'll most likely be the wrong side of 40; or the wrong side of 15st. They may have a nervous twitch, a rictus grin, or an unusually intense stare. And just in case those telltale signs weren't quite clear enough, the camera will cut to a close-up of Simon Cowell as he rolls his eyes towards heaven - pretending, of course, that he doesn't owe a large part of his vast fortune to humiliating the people who selflessly provide that vital 'freak show' ingredient in his recipe for rocketing ratings.

    It's almost a decade since Pop Idol - the first of a new generation of TV talent search shows - introduced us to Cowell and the formula he has since made his own. The ritual humiliation of hopeless contestants in the early rounds of all the various TV shows the original format spawned, including Britain's Got Talent and X Factor - is now as familiar to the average viewer as the fairytale that will unfold for the winner. We the viewers perhaps think it's a bit of harmless fun - something to cheer us up on a rainy Saturday night as we chuckle at them making fools of themselves. But what of the contestants who, in the pursuit of fame, have offered themselves up as sacrifices at Cowell's altar?

    Surely, you could argue, it is impossible to enter without knowing beforehand that those who do not meet Cowell's exacting standards run the risk of humiliation. But while it is one thing to be deluded, it is quite another to have that lack of self-knowledge exploited for cheap entertainment in front of an audience of nearly 20 million. Well, one of his victims is fighting back. At a pre-hearing for an employment tribunal this week, 54-year-old former nurse Emma Amelia Pearl Czikai, who appeared on Britain's Got Talent, launched a claim for £2.5 million against Fremantle Media,

    Simon Cowell's company Syco, Simon Cowell himself and Amanda Holden, insisting that it was dreadfully unfair to be crushed so comprehensively on television. Emma claims that despite being told she was a dreadful singer, she can actually sing 'beautifully', but, thanks to the judges' behaviour, was never given a fair chance. She also says she was discriminated against, because despite informing the product ion team of several physical disabilities she had which required special dispensation - including having the music turned down to a volume that would not cause vibrations in her neck, which had been injured in an accident - they did not accommodate her requests.

    Always a winner? Judge Simon Cowell has had to defend a claim at an employment tribunal 'A few friends had warned me that it could be a nasty business to get into, but I went to the auditions with an open mind,' she says. 'I had seen the final stages of the previous series, and I thought it looked like a nice show. All I knew at the time was that the finalists got to go on tour together and earn a bit of money.'

    But what she hadn't considered at all was the possibility that she would barely get through the first line of her chosen song before the judges' mauling began. Dressed in an elaborate and revealing ballgown - which she claims she was encouraged to wear by members of the production team - she made three tuneless attempts to sing boy band Westlife's power ballad, You Raise Me Up. Each time, just words in, she was interrupted by the judges' buzzer. Cowell said she had a 'horrible singing voice', while Amanda Holden, whom Emma describes as 'pure poison', said: 'I just can't see how she can't see that she can't sing.' Emma recalls: 'Amanda Holden was so horrid to me, and Piers Morgan said I was utterly deluded to think I could sing.'

    On the basis of her audition, it is hard not to agree with his verdict - and even Emma admits it was the worst performance of her life. But should that have given them the right to turn her failure into a humiliating TV clip? Emma insists absolutely not. 'Would you stand on stage and attempt to tell an audience of 2,000 people, who have been whipped up to behave like a pack of hounds, all about the various physical conditions that make being in that situation very difficult? 'Or would you do what I did? Put on a brave face and attempt to get off stage with some dignity. 'Awful': Emma Chawner was apparently unaware of quite how bad at singing she was, but claims she was exploited

    'I tried to make other excuses, but that just gave the judges more ammunition. But it's not about winning, and it's not about money. Even if I'd won, I'd still be doing everything in my power to change the way this show works. 'The exploitation, the degradation, the humilation, the cruelty ... the way that the ordinary man or woman in the street is used to make the rich richer. It's not right. 'Everyone - Simon Cowell included - should treat others as they would wish to be treated themselves.' And perhaps if she had hit her notes with the same precision that she has hit upon the ugly truth about Britain's Got Talent and shows of its type, Emma would be as famous as she feels she deserves to be.

    She is also hoping to get the law changed to ensure all hopefuls are paid minimum wage for their time spent at auditions. 'Someone's got to take a stand,' she says. 'This programme is spreading throughout the world, raking in the money. How many people like me are left in its wake, feeling cheated and used?' It's hard to say, but Emma certainly isn't the only one. Being the butt of the joke on primetime TV is impossible to live down, as Daniel Webster - also known as Daniel Sun - can testify. 'These shows prey on people who are different, or have difficulties and disabilities,' the 26-year- old says. 'In those early rounds, they're looking for laughs as much as talent.'

    Daniel is the first to admit he does not blend easily into the crowd. He has Asperger's syndrome, a condition on the autistic spectrum which affects his ability to communicate. 'I remember, on audition day, a girl complained that she hadn't got through to the next round because "the judges were letting all the nutjobs through". Looking back, I think she should have been grateful, because it's the "nutjobs" who end up getting exploited.' In 2003, he auditioned for the second series of Pop Idol and, dressed in a gold sequinned jacket and bow-tie, gave a memorably eccentric - but not terrible - rendition of Soft Cell's Tainted Love. 'I'm different; I interpret situations differently to "normal" people, but I am also an extrovert,' he says.

    'I enjoy singing and dancing and being in the spotlight, so I thought I'd audition for Pop Idol because it looked like something I'd enjoy. 'The irony is that I was very lonely at the time, and I hoped that Pop Idol would be a good way to meet new people. But I'm still living with the consequences of that decision. 'Although I have learned to accept and embrace the fact that I will always be known as one of reality TV's original oddballs, for a long time I was too frightened to go out because everywhere I went people shouted "Psycho!" at me. I became extremely self-conscious and agitated.' The show's producers quickly spotted the comic potential of Daniel's performances, and promoted him through all of the preliminary rounds to ensure that he got to sing for the panel.

    At that time, the show's reputation was not so well-established, so Daniel arguably had less idea of the risk he was taking. 'The producers told me that if I said something outrageous, I had a better chance of getting through to the next round. So I mentioned to the judges that I knew where they lived - not because I'm a stalker, but because I'd done a lot of background reading. 'And I told the singing coach, Nicky Chapman, that I knew what song she'd sung at dinner the previous night - not because I'd seen her myself, but because Kate Thornton, the backstage presenter, had just told me about it.'

    As a result of what he thought was an innocuous exchange, a tabloid newspaper ran a story about Daniel, who was then just 19, which suggested that the judges had found him genuinely frightening - which is either untrue or unfair. When the show was broadcast in full, music from the classic horror movie Psycho provided the backing track to his audition scenes. 'And London's Capital FM DJ Dr Fox described me as the scariest man in the UK,' says Daniel. 'Of course I was upset. I'm a nice guy. I remember, on audition day, a girl complained that she hadn't got through to the next round because "the judges were letting all the nutjobs through".

    Sparkling contender: Daniel Webster was told he had a chance but ended up too scared to leave his house after public abuse 'Looking back, I think she should have been grateful, because it's the "nutjobs" who end up getting exploited.' 'Yes, it was completely out of order and, as a result, I am still a public figure of fun,' says Daniel, who continues to pursue his music career and is a part-time radio DJ.

    'But I decided to play Simon Cowell at his own game and exploit the whole thing for my own gain. So I've grown a thick skin and learned to play up to my reputation.' Some, of course, see it coming - and when husband-and-wife dance music duo Craig and Deborah Stephens (aka Othelio) made it through to the semi-finals of Britain's Got Talent, they pulled out.

    'We just had a bad feeling about it,' says Craig. 'It was clear the contestants had so little control over their act, and we didn't want to be humiliated any more. 'It was clear Simon Cowell didn't like us - he didn't want us to get through the first round.' In fact, Cowell and Craig, 41, had met once before when, years earlier, Craig sent Simon a demo tape of his act. 'He hated and rejected it, and we traded insults after,' recalls Craig. 'Looking back, I'm sure Cowell fancied having another pop at us. It was totally set-up by the production team. That's why we pulled out.'

    It's a decision they don't regret. They say they are now signed to a small label and are hoping to release a single for the Aids charity, TAC. 'They gave me dirty looks, they criticised what I was wearing. Simon said I sang like a baby. I still find it painful to think about. I think they singled me out because of my weight.' Emma Chawner, now 20, is also an unlikely winner amongst reality TV's most famous losers. It's hard to believe that three years after 18- stone Emma warbled her way (really terribly) through Celine Dion's My Heart Will Go On, wearing a meringue-style bridesmaid's dress designed by her devoted dad, she is now starring in her second reality TV series - Lorraine Kelly's Next Big Fat Challenge. Although she remains convinced that singing is where her talent really lies, she's enjoying the unexpected niche she has found as the poster girl for overweight and work-shy young Britons.

    'I try not to think about the negatives of auditioning for X Factor because, overall, it's been positive,' says Emma. 'But it is upsetting to think about the way they humiliated me. 'I sang for the producers of the show first, and they kept saying: "Oh, you're good - you're through to the next round!" I sailed through each stage. 'So, of course, I was really shocked when I got in front of the proper judges and they all laid into me. 'They gave me dirty looks, they criticised what I was wearing. Simon said I sang like a baby. I still find it painful to think about. I think they singled me out because of my weight.'

    'It's no wonder the woman who is trying to sue him thought she was going to win - she probably made the mistake of believing everything the production team said to her. They set her up for a fall.' On talent shows, being ostensibly untalented is not remotely the worst thing you could be.

    Being 'different', daring to challenge the judges, or, worst of all, having more self-belief than talent, will earn you the harshest punishment. Perhaps those who voluntarily stand before a baying mob have no right to complain about uncivilised treatment. But should someone profit so handsomely from their public humiliation? The boundary between what is light entertainment and what is simply a circus of humiliation grows thinner every year.

  • SOURCE
  • Compensation culture ruining UK but can't think of better man to fall foul of it than Cowell
  • HOW THE TIGHTLY CONTROLLED MEDIA PROMOTE THE WORLDS BIGGEST DESPOT VIDEO
  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE
  • WIKILEAKS INSPIRED 'NEW MEDIA HAVEN' PROPOSAL PASSES IN ICELANDIC PARLIAMENT
    iceland The WikiLeaks advised proposal to build an international "new media haven" in Iceland, with the world's strongest press and whistleblower protection laws, and a "Nobel" prize for for Freedom of Expression, has unanimously passed the Icelandic Parliament.

    50 votes were cast in favor, zero against, one abstained. Twelve members of parliament were not present. Vote results are available at HERE. One of the inspirations for the proposal was the dramatic August 2009 gagging of of Iceland's national broadcaster, RUV by Iceland's then largest bank, Kaupthing available HERE

    Two changes were made to the proposal from its original form as per the opinion of the parliament's general affairs committee HERE . The first of these altered slightly the wording of the first paragraph so as to widen the arena for research. The second of these added two new items to the list of tasks for the government:

    - That the government should perform a detailed analysis, especially with respect to operational security, for the prospect of operating data centers in Iceland.

    - That the government should organize an international conference in Iceland regarding the changes to the legal environment being caused by expansion of cloud computing, data havens, and the judicial state of the Internet.

  • SOURCE
  • Video footage from the proposal's vote 1
  • Video footage from the proposal's vote 2
  • DOMINIC LAWSON:THE ZIONIST SCUMBAG MURDOCH EMPLOYEES TO ATTACK THE POOR
    dominic lawson Rupert Murdoch is using RICH jews to attack the poor in his disgusting rags . Here is the background to Zionist Dominic Lawson and his article about attacking the poorest sections of society. Typical of Murdochs extreme right wing bile and lover of anything rich jews write about those least able to defend themselves.

    Educated at Westminster School and then Christ Church, Oxford, he is the son of a former Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer Lord Lawson and socialite Vanessa Salmon, heir to the Lyons Corner House empire, who died of liver cancer in 1985. Lawson had three sisters - TV chef and writer Nigella Lawson; Horatia; and Thomasina, who died of breast cancer in 1993 whilst in her early 30s. Through the Salmons he is a cousin to the journalist and environmentalist George Monbiot and the solicitor Fiona Shackleton.

    Lawson is married to The Honourable Rosamond Mary Monckton, daughter of the 2nd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, born plain 'Miss' Rosa Monckton in 1953 - prior to her grandfather being titled (the 1st Viscount) in 1957. Lawson joined the BBC as a researcher, and then wrote for the Financial Times. From 1990 until 1995 he served as the editor of The Spectator magazine, a post his father had occupied from 1966 to 1970. In his capacity as editor of The Spectator he conducted, in June 1990, an interview with the cabinet minister Nicholas Ridley in which Ridley expressed opinions immensely hostile to Germany and the European Community, likening the initiatives of Jacques Delors and others to those of Hitler. Lawson added to the damage caused, by claiming that the opinions expressed by Ridley were shared by the Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. Ridley was forced to resign from the cabinet shortly after this incident.

    Lawson has several times been accused of working with MI6 (by for instance Richard Tomlinson), but has denied being an agent. From 1995 Lawson was editor of The Sunday Telegraph until 2005, when he was dismissed and replaced by Sarah Sands. He is currently an Editorial and Opinion writer for The Independent and other titles including the Mail on Sunday. Since 2006, he has been a columnist for The Independent newspaper, where he usually takes lines contrary to the newspaper's general political position. For example he does not believe global warming is caused by increased greenhouse gas emissions, attributing it to solar radiation. The solar radiation argument formed the basis of Channel 4's "The Great Global Warming Swindle" programme. Also he writes a weekly column for The Sunday Times.

  • SOURCE
  • LAWSON'S ATTACK ON THE POOR IN THE TIMES
  • Zionist Dominic Lawson worked for Britain's spy service MI6
  • THE VILE GUTTER PRESS AND ATTACKS ON THE POOR
    One of the MAIN agenda's of the corporate media , especially those that are owned by media moguls like Murdoch are to ensure the rich are protected while sniping and attacking the poor. In their megalomania and masonic agenda, the rich and vast inequality, only remains so dire across the world thanks to lying devious media attacks. While the British monarchy and their many offshoots are held up as some sort of light for justice and humanity the poorest sections of society are used as punchbags by the scumbag corporate media owners who use very persuasive psychology to have the SHEEPLE believe that the cause of ALL the world's woes are due to the poor.

    As a group we almost weekly befriend the homeless and hand out information on where to seek advice and support and try and get feedback on those organisations that claim, as a charity, to help the homeless when they ONLY help pay for the directors fancy car and home. We can say with certainty there is more honesty, humanity and humility in these poor victims hearts individually than the scurrilous media mafia who have been getting away with murder attacking the poor as if they are lepers.

    The British and American establishment have been expert at increasing the widening gap between the ultra rich and poor thanks to their evil buddies running their corporate media empires . Hopefully the internet will bring massive change to the brainwashed sheeple who have gone along with these vile attacks on the most vulnerable in society. They, for to long, have been the rich media tycoon's punchbags that we as a group hope to change with our increasing presence across the globe thanks to changing technology and the internet. Our planet has become a VILE place to live thanks to those in power spending vast sums in space, on nuclear arsenals, the large hadron collider at Cerne, Olympic villages (Greece only one of the recent victims), wars and a myriad of advanced physics fields that provide very little reward, yet require billions in research money. All of it while our streets are paved, not with gold, but with the residue of a world that has turned a blind eye to the suffering of the poor who continue to be derided and castigated by the gutter press. Murdoch and his ilk are the UTTER SCUM OF THE EARTH.

    EVEN IF ONLY ONE POOR SOUL REMAINS HOMELESS, AND THEIR ARE MILLIONS, WE ARE ALL ONLY EVER ONE STEP AWAY FROM THE SAME DESTRUCTIVE PATH AND IS USED BY THE RICH TO KEEP US IN OUR PLACE , ENSLAVED AND BOUND BY THIS WRETCHED SYSTEM .

  • MORE ON HOMELESSNESS HERE
  • MIND CONTROL THEORY AND TECHNIQUES USED BY THE MASS MEDIA
    tv Mass media is the most powerful tool used by the ruling class to manipulate the masses. It shapes and molds opinions and attitudes and defines what is normal and acceptable. This article looks at the workings of mass media through the theories of its major thinkers, its power structure and the techniques it uses, in order to understand its true role in society.

    Most of the articles on this site discuss occult symbolism found in objects of popular culture. From these articles arise many legitimate questions relating to the purpose of those symbols and the motivations of those who place them there, but it is impossible for me to provide satisfactory answers to these questions without mentioning many other concepts and facts.

    I’ve therefore decided to write this article to supply the theoretical and methodological background of the analyzes presented on this site as well as introducing the main scholars of the field of mass communications. Some people read my articles and think I’m saying “Lady Gaga wants to control our minds”. That is not the case. She is simply a small part of the huge system that is the mass media.

    Programming Through Mass Media

    Mass media are media forms designed to reach the largest audience possible. They include television, movies, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, records, video games and the internet. Many studies have been conducted in the past century to measure the effects of mass media on the population in order to discover the best techniques to influence it. From those studies emerged the science of Communications, which is used in marketing, public relations and politics. Mass communication is a necessary tool the insure the functionality of a large democracy; it is also a necessary tool for a dictatorship. It all depends on its usage.

    In the 1958 preface for A Brave New World, Aldous Huxley paints a rather grim portrait of society. He believes it is controlled by an “impersonal force”, a ruling elite, which manipulates the population using various methods.

    “Impersonal forces over which we have almost no control seem to be pushing us all in the direction of the Brave New Worldian nightmare; and this impersonal pushing is being consciously accelerated by representatives of commercial and political organizations who have developed a number of new techniques for manipulating, in the interest of some minority, the thoughts and feelings of the masses.”
    - Aldous Huxley, Preface to A Brave New World

    His bleak outlook is not a simple hypothesis or a paranoid delusion. It is a documented fact, present in the world’s most important studies on mass media.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • UNPLUG THE SIGNAL: THE TRUTH WILL NOT BE TELEVISED
    tv A flow of information is constantly streaming from the television set; a bombardment of words and pictures. The speed at which this information is communicated makes it easy for the signal to take control, switching the viewer’s brain to stand-by as information is absorbed without analysis or question. Today the television’s constant signal shapes the conclusions of the masses and produces the collective norm.

    The signal prescribes what is news and what is truth through the words of so-called experts and authorities, gelding the consciousness and independent thoughts of those subjected to it. Through television, the masses can be made to accept the most monstrous distortions of reality. The signal is a chill wind of continuous oppression over the minds of the masses. It controls the management of society and culture, creating uniformity across all subjects. The fuel for this vehicle of mass deception is a technique known as perception management where an array of psychological techniques are used to alter the truth, leading the viewer to a desired conclusion. Some call this spin or propaganda while others know it as lying. According to Joseph Goebbels, Propaganda Minister for Adolph Hitler, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it… It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Most of what can be found on the nightly news is nothing but advertisements selling more government and a false reality that benefits only those in control. Television is the dictator of information; newspaper and radio are the whisper campaign of the television’s message.

    It is expected that Americans will consistently prescribe to the doctrine of the television. It is subtly communicated that one should stay within the collective and never challenge the message, for doing so may be considered an aggression towards culture. The message is, “Be a good consumer; always obey authority; you know nothing; listen only to experts; be content and never question or express new ideas.” This signal is being broadcast across millions of screens, indoctrinating the unconscious minds of those who choose this as their only reality. Self-censorship occurs when these individuals become so deeply indoctrinated that they are afraid to discuss any information outside the paradigm of television-created culture; they police their thoughts to ensure they won’t conflict with this culture. Sadly, many people’s reality today does not allow any outside information to process, instead it is written off as conspiracy or blatant lies. Our consciousness has been destroyed so much that fiction has become reality. An entire lifestyle of poisonous foods, pharmaceuticals, and fluoridated water are accepted as safe and sold to us at the cost of our health and well being.

    Those of the establishment are using the incredibly powerful weapon of mass psychology as a method of controlling the minds of the masses and altering the behavior of individuals. Edward Bernays, a pioneer in the field of public relations in the 20th century, applied Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis to manipulate the masses by engineering consent. According to Bernays, “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it.” Advertisers and psychologists of the billion dollar culture creation industry manufacture trends through the proliferation of insecurities; and manipulating desires and emotions. These concepts are also employed to control how individuals think about politics, as well as the possibilities and limitations within society. Those wielding power within our streams of mass communication market their plans into each generation as individuals adopt specific ways of thinking and never suspect that all the major events and trends within their lifetime are actually planned by an elite few before they are even born. In our society today, culture is created from the top down. Virtually all forms of culture are created by the ruling class to build a false sense of reality, ensure social compliance, and control the future course of cultural evolution.

    Predictive programming is a tool used by the establishment to acclimate the public to new ideas, trends, beliefs, and threats. It is used through television by including certain situations or ideas within the plots of many fictional shows, familiarizing the viewer with these concepts no matter what they may be watching. When similar situations occur or like ideas are circulated in the world we think that these particular things are quite natural for we have unknowingly been made familiar with them through television. By viewing nearly any popular show on television, one can see the same propaganda that will be aired on the nightly news. Propaganda on a wide array of subjects has been interwoven into a great number of television shows. Just a few of these subjects include global warming, vaccinations, torture, terrorism, national security, the militarization of police, and the degradation of the family unit. Through predictive programming, television shapes culture and prevents individuals from asking questions.

    Crises are created on a daily basis and broadcast across the airwaves to keep individuals in a state of panic and fear. Whether it be the threat of a pandemic or terrorism, the constant state of crisis has created a form of mental illness as we are slowly acclimated into an age of crisis. By using Hegelian dialectic, the television promotes the problem, guides our reaction, and presents the solution. The problem of terrorism was exclaimed, a strong emotional response was evoked, and it was stated that our rights need be sacrificed in order to protect us from the threat. We’ve lost personal sovereignty under the guise of terrorism; we’re stopped and searched; we’re watched by cameras as we go about our lives; and we’re encouraged to spy on our neighbors. We have been trained to accept the life of a prisoner.

    America is in a state of enlightened despotism where most individuals live only to satisfy selfish inner desires and remain ignorant of the state of the world around them. In most public places one can find a television transmitting propaganda around the clock ensuring the masses remain focused on trivial matters. From birth we take the world as it’s presented on television. We don’t question it and any serious criticism of TV is becoming psychologically impossible in society. Who would suspect getting born into a world where everything around you is a continuous lie? The youth of today are convinced that the experts and personalities on television are the authority of credible information while parents and older generations are foolish with dated ideas. Children are conditioned to disconnect from what is truly important to their well being and instead focus on mindless trivia, sports, celebrity gossip, and buying an array of material things. They invest their psychological worth in fantasy characters on television while ignoring or even scorning individuals contributing to the betterment of humanity. They are discouraged from getting involved in their local community and often lack the ability to think independently or to resist corruption. As their children’s minds are molded by television, there is barely a murmur from the public.

    For over half a century, our society has lived under this signal of mental programming and conditioning. The message is clear: don’t be a leader, don’t engage in critical thinking, and don’t care about the people in your life. Until individuals become aware of the current information war, our standard of living and our liberties will continue to be degraded and we will continue to lose communities and meaningful relationships between people. Currently, pockets of resistance are beginning to spring up everywhere as some unplug the signal and regain control of their own thoughts. Informed individuals are canceling their cable and satellite subscriptions and instead spending time with their families and children while participating in meaningful experiences. They are seeking alternative news sources. They are reading about those who wield incredible influence over culture like Edward Bernays, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Charles Galton Darwin, Plato, Bertrand Russell, and Aldous Huxley. However, it is a continuous battle to educate the masses for the television remains our greatest threat to individual sovereignty and the largest obstacle to becoming a truly informed individual. Fortunately, unplugging from the signal is easy. The television can simply be turned off. Through doing so, you may realize nearly our entire world is now a hoax; things once known as truth are fake. We have been trained like dogs to be obedient to our television; our master has had our minds on a tight leash. Let us never forget the truth will not be televised.

  • SOURCE
  • WHAT AMERICAN'S HAVE TO PUT UP WITH: A LUNATIC RIGHT WING MEDIA VIDEO

  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE
  • ZIONIST MASONIC MEDIA OWNERS MANIPULATE ELECTION CHARADE
    uk dictatorship Here's how it goes Brown, Cameron, Cameron, Brown ,Clegg, Cameron, Brown, Brown, Cameron, Cameron, Brown ,Clegg, Cameron, Brown, Brown, Cameron, Cameron, Brown ,Clegg, Cameron, Brown.

    Then its Brown's wife, Cameron's wife, Cameron's wife, Brown's wife, Clegg's wife, Cameron's wife, Brown's wife, Cameron's wife, Cameron's wife, Brown's wife, Clegg's wife, Cameron's wife and on and on.

    The British media and its ultra rich owners like the Barclay Brothers , Murdoch or the many viscount's a full list HERE, are behind the biggest, devious and dangerous propaganda machine come election time.

    The media mafia are NOT interested in any other party that is NOT backed and controlled by Zionist masons like the Rothschild's. Israel controls the world using its rich Zionists across the globe interfering and undermining the REAL democracy which is sadly lacking in Western supposed democracies. Israel and its jewish lackeys use secret societies and their masonic goons to create a worldwide network of oligarchs who's power is in how they have used the banking network to give them supreme power over all aspects of our lives, for THEIR own enrichment. This system will NEVER be challenged as long as the British sheeple believe they have CHOICE, when that choice is purely the duped goons they put up come election time for us to be FORCED to vote for.

    You will seldom hear of ANY alternative as they cannot afford to have anyone in political power that they cannot control , blackmail is a common way using satanic oaths sworn at their masonic indoctrination ceremonies. The British public have a long way to go before they realise how they have been FOOLED for so long as neither Cameron, Brown or Clegg have any interest in the ordinary, enslaved public only in their rich backers come election time , and the only period you see these numpties on our streets DESPERATE for your vote. They give the illusion of difference when they ALL work for the same Zionist masters, so how long will it take to educate the sheeple about the real truth behind this charade?

  • UK ELECTION SPECIAL 2010 HERE
  • FULL LIST OF MEDIA TOFFS HERE
  • British newspaper publishers
  • FAIR AND BALANCED FOX NEWS ON AMERICANS BEING FED UP WITH GOVERNMENT VIDEO
  • FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE