JOB OPENING! BECOME a HIGHLY REGARDED (IF NOT HIGHLY PAID)
"JOURNACTIVIST" and you too can become the DARLING of the radical set
and eventually, the entire INTERNET!
* If you can type, crib, cut and paste & WRITE 'GOOD' (sic) (better than me, (sic) ---better than I?) and if you LOVE SLEUTHING --- and if you CAN MAKE sharp DEDUCTIONS FROM TONS OF feloniously re-arranged EVIDENCE (given by the BBC/ CIA PROPAGANDA MASTRS) and do it with just the Simple Power of the HUNCH, and X-RAY VISION, and LOTS OF YEARS READING NOAM CHOMSKY, then, BABE, AMERICA NEEDS YOU!
BECOME A JOURNACTIVIST! NOT HIGHLY PAID but boy oh boy can you get DATES with hotties! Cuz HOTTIES love brains!
*15 years after the 911 attacks, a global awakening has taken place, the likes of which the world has never seen. As the corporate-controlled media dwindles into non-funcionality and moral extinction, a new breed of journalists and activists has emerged. JOURNACTIVISTS!
*BIG EVENTS create cracks in the structure and when the corrupt bugs pour out, revealing their fetid breath conspiring selves, the JOURNACTIVISTS APPEAR! WE KICK INTO GEAR!
JOIN OUR CREW. Come to secret meetings where we teach the RIFF. Learn to touch type as fast as you think ( with a library typing manual that you check out for two weeks. Typing takes about ten hours to learn, break it up into five days.)
Then, go to the SIMPLETON's WEB TECH INDEX PAGE and learn advanced "Cut and Paste" technical secrets, (for DUMMIES.) Then ---peruse the radical truth-spewing SECRET INTERNET sites --- the URLS of which we give you! Crib from the masters! Rewrite them and attribute the work to them, POST their stuff ... I even add some parenthetical jots, rewriting a little if they're stiff.
You can even learn to WRITE YOUR OWN ARTICLES! It's EASY! Cuz you speak ENGLISH, not POLISH! You already know the main thing. All you have to do is learn to use SPELL CHECK. And PERFECT GRAMMAR which "ELEMENTS OF STYLE" by STRUNK give you. Download his book FREE right now!
The point is, you have this superb wits and intuition. YOU GOT TO THIS PAGE, didn't you? You already are in the upper .0000005% of the planet. To get here, you have to have seen thru the strokey flattery of current journalism, seen THROUGH those stories and smelled a clue or two leading you to a NEW TAKE on OLIGARCHS, POLS, MILITARY/ CIA, CEOS. Now, write that new take down, say it like you see it! Oh and add some graphics we teach you how. CRIB 'EM ONLINE! Then, SEND piece out to your facebookites, twitterites. your email list. POST IT to your 5$ a month web site. YEAH FTP it. Free CORE (brand name) SOFTWARE download online to FTP, Free HTM composer SEA MONKEY and FREE FILE MANAGER for editing text in DOS and a 3$ a month WEBSITE. With a cute name. REVOLUTION ORG . or THE WATCHERS.ORG . GET A REALLY CHEAP 4$ a month WEBHOST. Ask Tekkies if they know of a SUPERIOR WEBHOST or google around 'cheap' with the word 'web host' in quotes.
RUN YOUR OWN WEBSITE and you, too, can BECOME an heroic JOURNACTIVIST! Your crowning achievement (besides delivering a better world to your grandchildren and all of ours ---will be to go after the Pols who were bought by the Oligarch Masters of the Universe, the bought journalists WHO HAVE INVADED JOURNALISM posing as unbiased experts and wrest away their MASKS and their JOBS! (And maybe even their pay.)
WHY DO WE NEED YOU? CUZ Spooks Took over the News!
By Nick Davies, The Independent UK and the GUARDIAN. And guy in flick FIFTH ESTATE, ASSANGE pal.Editor's note: This is an edited excerpt from Nick Davies' book, Flat Earth News: An Award-Winning Reporter Exposes Falsehood, Distortion and Propaganda in the Global Media (Chatto & Windus). Davies' book has created enormous controversy in the UK, where many of the newsmakers Davies discusses in the book have fired back with op-eds accusing Davies of relying on the same anonymous sourcing that he condemns the commercial press for using in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq.
Posted on February 19, 2008, Printed on February 22, 2008
It's not surprising that the book strikes a tender spot in many a news-maker. It is the deepest examination of the links between the "public diplomacy" -- sometimes known as propaganda -- pushed by the Bush administration and its allies, and the media's uncritical repetition of the claims made to justify the invasion.
It's easy to forget just how easy it was to sell an unprovoked attack on a sovereign state. It was the media, after all, that promulgated the novel idea that if Saddam Hussein possessed "weapons of mass destruction," that was in and of itself a justification to go to war. How did the issue of "WMD" become a proxy for the more important question of whether Iraq was a credible threat to the United States and its allies. At the time of the invasion, there were close to 40 countries suspected of having an illicit weapons program. Twelve of them were considered "hostile" to the United States and its allies. Yet, the administration claimed that possession of old chemical or biological munitions was a de facto justification for attacking the only country among the twelve that was well-contained; a country whose air-space and imports and exports were under international control. The media embraced the idea uncritically, never mind that Saddam Hussein had not been rattling his saber or threatening any offensive action against another state.
Hussein was in a great position for a tin-pot dictator -- he and his cronies had extracted over $10 billion in corporate kick-backs and bribes which the Right spun as a UN scandal rather that what it was: the largest corporate bribery scandal in history -- and he was able to blame all of his country’s domestic woes on the U.S./British sanctions program that strangled the country.
It's always been a curiosity that public opinion could be manipulated so comprehensively, and Davies provides one more piece of the puzzle explaining where our media culture is today.
How the Spooks Took Over the News
by Nick Davies
FAKE NEWS RELEASES! FAKE DOCUMENTS. On the morning of 9 February 2004, The New York Times carried an exclusive and alarming story. The paper's Baghdad correspondent, Dexter Filkins, reported that US officials had obtained a 17-page letter, believed to have been written by the notorious terrorist Abu Musab al Zarqawi to the "inner circle" of al-Qa'ida's leadership, urging them to accept that the best way to beat US forces in Iraq was effectively to start a civil war.YEARS LATER we would KNOW that this was the FOUNDER OF ISIL!
The letter argued that al-Qa'ida, which is a Sunni network, should attack the Shia population of Iraq: "It is the only way to prolong the duration of the fight between the infidels and us. If we succeed in dragging them into a sectarian war, this will awaken the sleepy Sunnis."(YES,it ended in SAUDI SUNNIS waging years of war on EVERYBODY, YEMEN TOO.)
Later that day, at a regular US press briefing in Baghdad, US General Mark Kimmitt dealt with a string of questions about the New York Times report: "We believe the report and the document is credible, and we take the report seriously… It is clearly a plan on the part of outsiders to come in to this country and spark civil war, create sectarian violence, try to expose fissures in this society." The story went on to news agency wires and, within 24 hours, it was running around the world.
There is very good reason to believe that that letter was a fake -- and a significant one because there is equally good reason to believe that it was one product among many from a new machinery of propaganda which has been created by the United States and its allies since the terrorist attacks of September 2001.
For the first time in human history, there is a concerted strategy to manipulate global perception. And the mass media are operating as its compliant assistants, failing both to resist it and to expose it.
The sheer ease with which this machinery has been able to do its work reflects a creeping structural weakness which now afflicts the production of our news. I've spent the last two years researching a book about falsehood, distortion and propaganda in the global media.
The "Zarqawi letter" which made it on to the front page of the New York Times in February 2004 was one of a sequence of highly suspect documents which were said to have been written either by or to Zarqawi and which were fed into news media.
This material is being generated, in part, by intelligence agencies who continue to work without effective oversight; and also by a new and essentially benign structure of "strategic communications" which was originally designed by doves in the Pentagon and Nato who wanted to use subtle and non-violent tactics to deal with Islamist terrorism but whose efforts are poorly regulated and badly supervised with the result that some of its practitioners are breaking loose and engaging in the black arts of propaganda.
Like the new propaganda machine as a whole, the Zarqawi story was born in the high tension after the attacks of September 2001. At that time, he was a painful thorn in the side of the Jordanian authorities, an Islamist radical who was determined to overthrow the royal family. But he was nothing to do with al-Q'aida. Indeed, he had specifically rejected attempts by Bin Laden to recruit him, because he was not interested in targeting the West.
Nevertheless, when US intelligence battered on the doors of allied governments in search of information about al-Q'aida, the Jordanian authorities -- anxious to please the Americans and perhaps keen to make life more difficult for their native enemy -- threw up his name along with other suspects. Soon he started to show up as a minor figure in US news stories -- stories which were factually weak, often contradictory and already using the Jordanians as a tool of political convenience.
Then, on October 7, 2002, for the first time, somebody referred to him on the record. In a nationally televised speech in Cincinnati, President George Bush spoke of "high-level contacts" between al-Q'aida and Iraq and said: "Some al-Q'aida leaders who fled Afghanistan, went to Iraq. These include one very senior al-Q'aida leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks."
This coincided with a crucial vote in Congress in which the president was seeking authority to use military force against Iraq. Bush never named the man he was referring to but, as the Los Angeles Times among many others soon reported: "In a speech [on] Monday, Bush referred to a senior member of al-Q'aida who received medical treatment in Iraq. US officials said yesterday that was Abu al Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian, who lost a leg during the US war in Afghanistan."
Even now, Zarqawi was a footnote, not a headline, but the flow of stories about him finally broke through and flooded the global media on 5 February 2003, when the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, addressed the UN Security Council, arguing that Iraq must be invaded: first, to stop its development of weapons of mass destruction; and second, to break its ties with al-Q'aida.
Powell claimed that "Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al Zarqawi"; that Zarqawi's base in Iraq was a camp for "poison and explosive training"; that he was "an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al-Q'aida lieutenants"; that he "fought in the Afghan war more than a decade ago"; that "Zarqawi and his network have plotted terrorist actions against countries, including France, Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and Russia."
Courtesy of post-war Senate intelligence inquiries; evidence disclosed in several European trials; and the courageous work of a handful of journalists who broke away from the pack, we now know that every single one of those statements was entirely false. But that didn't matter: it was a big story. News organizations sucked it in and regurgitated it for their trusting consumers.
So, who exactly is producing fiction for the media? Who wrote the Zarqawi letters? Who created the fantasy story about Osama bin Laden using a network of subterranean bases in Afghanistan, complete with offices, dormitories, arms depots, electricity and ventilation systems? Who fed the media with tales of the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, suffering brain seizures and sitting in stationery cars turning the wheel and making a noise like an engine? Who came up with the idea that Iranian ayatollahs have been encouraging sex with animals and girls of only nine?
Some of this comes from freelance political agitators. It was an Iranian opposition group, for example, which was behind the story that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was jailing people for texting each other jokes about him. And notoriously it was Iraqi exiles who supplied the global media with a dirty stream of disinformation about Saddam Hussein.
But clearly a great deal of this carries the fingerprints of officialdom. The Pentagon has now designated "information operations" as its fifth "core competency" alongside land, sea, air and special forces. Since October 2006, every brigade, division and corps in the US military has had its own "psyop" element producing output for local media. This military activity is linked to the State Department's campaign of "public diplomacy" which includes funding radio stations and news websites. In Britain, the Directorate of Targeting and Information Operations in the Ministry of Defense works with specialists from 15 UK psyops, based at the defense Intelligence and Security School at Chicksands in Bedfordshire.
In the case of British intelligence, you can see this combination of reckless propaganda and failure of oversight at work in the case of Operation Mass Appeal. This was exposed by the former UN arms inspector Scott Ritter, who describes in his book, Iraq Confidential, how, in London in June 1998, he was introduced to two "black propaganda specialists" from MI6 who wanted him to give them material which they could spread through "editors and writers who work with us from time to time."
In interviews for Flat Earth News, Ritter described how, between December 1997 and June 1998, he had three meetings with MI6 officers who wanted him to give them raw intelligence reports on Iraqi arms procurement. The significance of these reports was that they were all unconfirmed and so none was being used in assessing Iraqi activity. Yet MI6 was happy to use them to plant stories in the media. Beyond that, there is worrying evidence that, when Lord Butler asked MI6 about this during his inquiry into intelligence around the invasion of Iraq, MI6 lied to him.
Ultimately, the US has run into trouble with its propaganda in Iraq, particularly with its use of the Zarqawi story. In May 2006, when yet another of his alleged letters was handed out to reporters in the Combined Press Information Center in Baghdad, finally it was widely regarded as suspect and ignored by just about every single media outlet.
Arguably, even worse than this loss of credibility, according to British defense sources, the US campaign on Zarqawi eventually succeeded in creating its own reality. By elevating him from his position as one fighter among a mass of conflicting groups, the US campaign to "villainise Zarqawi" glamorised him with its enemy audience, making it easier for him to raise funds, to attract "unsponsored" foreign fighters, to make alliances with Sunni Iraqis and to score huge impact with his own media maneuvers. Finally, in December 2004, Osama bin Laden gave in to this constructed reality, buried his differences with the Jordanian and declared him the leader of al-Q'aida's resistance to the American occupation.
Nick Davies is a veteran journalist and author of Flat Earth News: An Award-Winning Reporter Exposes Falsehood, Distortion and Propaganda in the Global Media (Chatto & Windus).
<==== If you are GAME, go to the ACTIVISTS SEMINAR WEBPAGE
<==== BACK TO THE NASTY SECRETS THAT the GOV DOES NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW-WEBPAGE
<==== BACK TO how they use PROPAGANDA and BUY JOURNALISTS to cover the truth up.
<==== BACK TO JERRY's REFRIGERATOR THE TIN FOIL HAT COLLECTION OF CONSPIRACY THEORIES