C.I.A. Ties to Journalists

saki

Established
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
141
Likes
273
#1
....this is from 1976....
I had heard that Walter Cronkite ("the Most Trusted Man in America") was covertly on the payroll of the CIA...
...this article from the past seems to pretty much confirm CIA influence on our national newscasts for the purpose of influencing public opinion....

https://www.nytimes.com/1976/01/28/...de-concern-is-voiced-in-press-corps-over.html


C.I.A. Ties to Journalists
By NICHOLAS M. HORROCK
JAN. 28, 1976



This is a digitized version of an article from The Times’s print archive, before the start of online publication in 1996. To preserve these articles as they originally appeared, The Times does not alter, edit or update them.



VIEW PAGE IN TIMESMACHINE

January 28, 1976, Page 10Buy ReprintsThe New York Times Archives

WASHINGTON, Jan. 27—A draft copy of a report by the House Select Committee on Intelligence last week said that 11 full‐time officers of the Central Intelligence Agency were posing as journalists overseas in connection with their intelligence work. The report said further that until 1978 live agents posed as full‐time correspondents with organizations that have “major general news impact.” Moreover, the report said, some 15 news organizations had cooperated with the C.I.A. in providing “cover” for C.I.A. operatives.

News Analysis

This is not the first time that C.I.A. infiltration of news organizations has been charged. But it is the most authoritative ‘report on the subject yet and it has caused widespread suspicion in the national press, corps.

However, the main concern here is that readers, viewers and listeners will begin to believe that their news is colored by the C.I.A.

Also, new organization and reporters. in pressing the Government for disclosure of many; of its previously secret activities, must be doubly certain themselves to make public any: secret arrangements they may have knowingly had with such Government agencies as the C.I.A.

Disclaimer by Colby

William E. Colby, who steps down this week as Director of Central Intelligence, has reportedly said in private sessions of the committee that the C.I.A. never intended to manipulate the news flowing to Americans.

Mr. Colby has said on several occasions that the C.I.A. no longer has covert relationships with staff members of major general‐service news organizations. This practice, he said, was ended in 1973. But he said that the C.I.A. still did not feel that there was anything wrong with hiring “stringers,” or part‐time correspondents, who sell their information to news organizations in this country.

The agency, he and others contend, simply recognized that a journalist was a very good cover job for a spy. A journalist can travel about asking questions, even snapping photographs, and justify his activities by saying he is on a story.

But using an American press card for cover, even if the intelligence officer is not going to write misleading articles for American readers, creates peculiar problems in the United States. Press freedom here is protected from Government intrusion under the First Amendment to the Constitution and thus a reader, viewer or listener has the right to expect that the news will not be slanted to conform to a governmental position

An agent reporting from abroad to the United States would face an impossible task in sorting out his allegiance to his real employer, the C.I.A., from that to his news organization and its readers.

Moreover, if American journalists are thought to be spies then they are bound to face greater distrust and, in some countries, greater danger than they would normally.

C.I.A. Bars Disclosure

Many senior intelligence officers at the C.I.A. acknowledge that infiltrating or manipulating organizations that distribute news here runs counter to the concept of a free press. But these officials and the C.I.A. have formally refused to make public the names of which American news agencies in the past, or currently, “cooperate” with the C.I.A., which ones allowed themselves to be used as a cover and the names of the newsmen who secretly worked for the C.I.A.

In November 1973, The Washington Star reported that about three dozen American journalists, including five full‐time correspondents, were working abroad on the C.I.A.'s payroll. According to Mr. Colby, that article, which gave no names, had resulted from a discussion he had had with the paper's editorial board in which he conceded that the agency had infiltrated news organizations. (Mr. Colby assured The New York Times that same month, in response to a question, that nobody connected with The Times was involved.)

C.I.A. officials argue that to disclose the names of individuals involved would endanger their lives, hold them up to ridicule and censure if they are still in journalism and destroy them as sources of information if they are still active in intelligence.

The agency has refused to disclose the names of the news organizations on the ground that if these names were made public the individuals could be easily identified.

In this vacuum, however, suspicion is rapidly rising. On Capitol Hill, virtually every major news organization is rumored to have been a cover for the C.I.A.

Newsmen who have risen quickly to prominence, are conservative or were once C.I.A. employees are under suspicion. Newsmen who have served in certain foreign posts are suspect because they did, and others are suspect because they did not.

Last Friday, Sam Jaffe, a former television newsman who admits he was an informant for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, said he had been told that Walter Cronkite of CBS, John Chancellor of NBC and William Sheehan, persident of ABC News, were on a list of 20 to 200 journalists who were paid by the C.I.A.

Denials Issued

Mr. Cronkite and Mr. Chancellor denied any C.I.A. links and ABC issued a similar denial for Mr. Sheehan. Before the day was out the C.I.A. had discounted the story and staff members of both Congressional committees investigating intelligence activities said they had no evidence there was such a list.

Senator Frank Church, chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, told newsmen at a breakfast several weeks ago that he would release the names of news organizations that had been infiltrated, if they disseminated news to Americans.

But late last week, though he said his committee was pressing for the names and details, he said that he would favor releasing the details only “if we find that this was intended by the C.I.A. in order to influence American opinion within our own country.”

Privately, members of the committee's staff are worried that the disclosure of names and organizations might harm a news agency unfairly, destroy or harm the career of a reporter unfairly and whether the news media really want to know who in their midst secretly compromised objectivity to provide cover for Government agencies.

There is no question that broad disclosure about relations between news organizations and the C.I.A. may be painful for some. Already several well‐known newsmen who served as intelligence officers before entering journalism have been hurt by suspicion.

But interviews with newsmen on all levels in Washington showed that most thought an authoritative disclosure would end the suspicion, permit the news organizations involved to make a statement on their future policy and remove suspicion from the hundreds of reporters and dozens of news organizations that have no questionable connection with the C.I.A.

A version of this archives appears in print on January 28, 1976, on Page 10 of the New York edition with the headline: C.I.A. Ties to Journalists. Order R
 





Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
3,632
Likes
6,265
#4
Yes, most media heads are like robot puppets.

Just look at how they are trained to talk. It's usually very monotone and authoritative. It's all a very obvious attempt and brainwashing, which I liken to simple schoolyard bullying tactics.

At least they are consistently bad though. What I'm wondering is if the CIA has sunk its teeth into late-night comedy. Have you seen those guys after a national tragedy? They start crying and getting all serious, which is quite frankly one of the most jarring things on Television.

It's like oh today we are going to get serious about politics. Tomorrow we will go back to making fun of the same people we were just pleading with. Lol wtf?? I view comedians like I view a meme creator on the internet. And those people are part of the problem.

Don't get me wrong I cut the professional comedians of the world some slack. My main issue is all the people trying to emulate the worst, and most mean spirited parts of comedy.
 





saki

Established
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
141
Likes
273
#5
....more evidence that "the news" is not to be trusted...

https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/23/cnn-msnbc-15-spooks-mccabe/
15 Former Spooks Who Work At CNN And MSNBC Now



CHUCK ROSSINVESTIGATIVE REPORTER

August 23, 20191:33 PM ET
  • CNN added to its stable of retired FBI and CIA officials Friday by hiring Andrew McCabe, who was fired by the bureau due to a lack of candor during an internal probe.
  • McCabe is the 10th ex-FBI or CIA official hired by the network in recent years, with MSNBC having hired five.
  • A vast majority of the 15 CNN/MSNBC analysts have pushed the now-debunked theory that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia.
CNN added to its deep roster of former FBI and CIA officials-turned-analysts Friday with the hiring of Andrew McCabe, the former FBI deputy director fired for lack of candor during an investigation last year.

McCabe is the tenth ex-FBI, CIA or intelligence community official CNN has hired during the Trump administration, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation analysis. MSNBC has followed closely behind, having hired five former officials, including former CIA Director John Brennan.

CNN was widely mocked on Friday after announcing the McCabe hiring, largely because the network has criticized its competitors for hiring former Trump administration officials. But the personnel move is also part of a larger trend that has come under scrutiny from some media observers.

Jack Shafer, a media critic who writes for Politico, noted the potential pitfalls of networks like CNN and MSNBC having a stable of ex-spies and G-men as paid, on-air contributors.

“But the downside of outsourcing national security coverage to the TV spies is obvious,” Shafer wrote in a Feb. 5, 2018 article at Politico. “They aren’t in the business of breaking news or uncovering secrets. Their first loyalty — and this is no slam — is to the agency from which they hail.”

Glenn Greenwald, an editor at The Intercept who covers national security issues, echoed that sentiment during a Fox News interview in March.

“And not only did MSNBC and CNN use those people as their sources, they hired them as their news analyst. So if you turn on CNN or MSNBC, it was basically state TV. It was CIA TV,” he told Tucker Carlson March 26.

Greenwald and others have noted the lopsided analysis offered up by the former officials, especially on the topic of the Trump-Russia probe.

Most have hewed to their networks’ general viewpoint that Trump or his associates conspired with Russia. Others, like McCabe, Brennan, and former national intelligence director James Clapper, have all defended the investigation of the Trump campaign. They’ve maintained their defense even in the wake of the special counsel’s report, which debunked the theory that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia.

Here is a rundown of CNN and MSNBC’s most prominent analysts.

CNN
James Clapper, director of national intelligence under President Obama. As the nation’s top intelligence official, Clapper was intimately involved in the investigation of possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russian government. He set up a now-infamous Jan. 6, 2017 meeting with top intelligence officials and then-President-Elect Donald Trump. During that briefing, then-FBI Director James Comey told Trump about the existence of the Steele dossier.


Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper testifies to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing on “Russia’s intelligence activities” on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S. January 10, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

Four days later, CNN reported that the briefing occurred. Hours after that, BuzzFeed News published the Steele dossier in full.

Republicans have accused Clapper of leaking information to CNN for its report, though he has denied it.

Andrew McCabe, former FBI deputy director. CNN announced on Friday that McCabe would serve as a law enforcement analyst.

McCabe was fired from the FBI on March 16, 2018 upon the recommendation of the bureau’s Office of Professional Responsibility. An investigation determined that McCabe lacked candor under oath regarding his authorization of a leak to the media in October 2016 regarding the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation. (RELATED: CNN Hires Andrew McCabe As A Contributor)

McCabe sued the Justice Department and FBI Aug. 8, claiming that he was fired due to pressure from Trump.

James Baker, former FBI general counsel. Baker, a CNN legal analyst, left the FBI in May 2018 under a cloud of suspicion. In a congressional interview on Oct. 18, Baker’s lawyer revealed he was under criminal investigation for an unauthorized leak to the media.

Baker was also deeply involved in the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation. He personally reviewed the surveillance warrant applications against Trump aide Carter Page. The applications relied heavily on the unverified Steele dossier.

Baker had contact prior to the 2016 election with Mother Jones reporter David Corn, his longtime friend. Corn passed Baker parts of the Steele dossier in hopes of confirming the FBI was investigating claims from the salacious documents. Baker also told Congress he met in September 2016 with Michael Sussmann, a lawyer for the DNC. Baker said that Sussmann provided him with documents alleging there were covert communications between a Russian bank and the Trump Organization.

Josh Campbell, former FBI aide to James Comey.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reported on Feb. 8, 2018 that the FBI circulated a flyerin honor of Campbell’s gig, saying that he was embarking on a “new endeavor defending the bureau.” Like McCabe and Baker, Campbell often appears on CNN to defend the FBI’s investigation of Trump.

Asha Rangappa, former FBI special agent and leading collusion conspiracy theorist.

Steven Hall, former CIA Moscow station chief and outspoken critic of Trump.

Phil Mudd, former FBI and CIA official. Mudd, who is known for his fiery presentations on CNN, has largely been a critic of President Trump. But he has also pushed back on some of the underlying aspects of the Trump-Russia probe.

He predicted June 4 that an inspector general’s investigation into the Steele dossier will “not end up well” for Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote the salacious document.

Susan Hennessy, former attorney for the National Security Agency. Hennessy has also been a leading proponent of the now-debunked theory that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia.

Samantha Vinograd, former adviser to the Obama administration’s National Security Council. On March 2, Vinograd said on CNN that a speech Trump made reminded her of Adolf Hitler. She also said that Trump’s speech included items on “Putin’s to-do list.”

James Gagliano, former FBI supervisory special agent. Gagliano typically discusses breaking news stories regarding active shootings, terrorism incidents. He has been an outspoken critic of both James Comey and Andrew McCabe.

MSNBC
John Brennan, former CIA director. Brennan appeared frequently on the network during the Russia probe, and has been a fierce critic of Trump. In the weeks before the special counsel’s report was released, Brennan inaccurately predicted that members of Trump’s family would be indicted in the investigation.


Former CIA director John Brennan (2nd L) and former director of National Intelligence James Clapper (R) arrive at a closed hearing before the Senate (Select) Intelligence Committee May 16, 2018 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Frank Figliuzzi, former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence. On Aug. 6, Figliuzzi floated a theory on air that Trump’s decision to lower flags in honor of mass shooting victims earlier this month was somehow tied to white supremacy. Figliuzzi noted that Trump’s order to lower the flags would expire on Aug. 8. Using numerology, Figliuzzi argued that the date, 8/8, is significant for white supremacists because it translates into “Heil Hitler.” (RELATED: MSNBC Analyst Uses Numerology To Tie Donald Trump To White Supremacy)

Chuck Rosenberg, former chief of staff to James Comey and administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration. Like most of his colleagues, Rosenberg’s analysis has typically perpetuated the theory that Trump & Co. conspired with Russia. Rosenberg also argued in a report published at Lawfare on Dec. 14 that the Steele dossier “holds up well over time, and none of it, to our knowledge, has been disproven.”

That assessment has not held up well in the months since Rosenberg published the piece. The special counsel’s probe undercut the dossier’s core claim that the Trump campaign took part in a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” with the Russian government. The investigation also undercut the dossier’s most specific claim of collusion: that former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen visited Prague in August 2016 to meet with Russian intelligence officials.

Malcolm Nance, former Naval chief petty officer. Nance has also been noted for pushing the collusion conspiracy theory.

Jeremy Bash, former CIA chief of staff.
 





Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
3,452
Likes
6,892
#7
I had heard that Walter Cronkite ("the Most Trusted Man in America") was covertly on the payroll of the CIA...
"He also was a member of the Houston chapter of DeMolay, a Masonic fraternal organization for boys"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Cronkite
....more evidence that "the news" is not to be trusted...

https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/23/cnn-msnbc-15-spooks-mccabe/
15 Former Spooks Who Work At CNN And MSNBC Now



CHUCK ROSSINVESTIGATIVE REPORTER

August 23, 20191:33 PM ET
  • CNN added to its stable of retired FBI and CIA officials Friday by hiring Andrew McCabe, who was fired by the bureau due to a lack of candor during an internal probe.
  • McCabe is the 10th ex-FBI or CIA official hired by the network in recent years, with MSNBC having hired five.
  • A vast majority of the 15 CNN/MSNBC analysts have pushed the now-debunked theory that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia.
CNN added to its deep roster of former FBI and CIA officials-turned-analysts Friday with the hiring of Andrew McCabe, the former FBI deputy director fired for lack of candor during an investigation last year.

McCabe is the tenth ex-FBI, CIA or intelligence community official CNN has hired during the Trump administration, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation analysis. MSNBC has followed closely behind, having hired five former officials, including former CIA Director John Brennan.

CNN was widely mocked on Friday after announcing the McCabe hiring, largely because the network has criticized its competitors for hiring former Trump administration officials. But the personnel move is also part of a larger trend that has come under scrutiny from some media observers.

Jack Shafer, a media critic who writes for Politico, noted the potential pitfalls of networks like CNN and MSNBC having a stable of ex-spies and G-men as paid, on-air contributors.

“But the downside of outsourcing national security coverage to the TV spies is obvious,” Shafer wrote in a Feb. 5, 2018 article at Politico. “They aren’t in the business of breaking news or uncovering secrets. Their first loyalty — and this is no slam — is to the agency from which they hail.”

Glenn Greenwald, an editor at The Intercept who covers national security issues, echoed that sentiment during a Fox News interview in March.

“And not only did MSNBC and CNN use those people as their sources, they hired them as their news analyst. So if you turn on CNN or MSNBC, it was basically state TV. It was CIA TV,” he told Tucker Carlson March 26.

Greenwald and others have noted the lopsided analysis offered up by the former officials, especially on the topic of the Trump-Russia probe.

Most have hewed to their networks’ general viewpoint that Trump or his associates conspired with Russia. Others, like McCabe, Brennan, and former national intelligence director James Clapper, have all defended the investigation of the Trump campaign. They’ve maintained their defense even in the wake of the special counsel’s report, which debunked the theory that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia.

Here is a rundown of CNN and MSNBC’s most prominent analysts.

CNN
James Clapper, director of national intelligence under President Obama. As the nation’s top intelligence official, Clapper was intimately involved in the investigation of possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russian government. He set up a now-infamous Jan. 6, 2017 meeting with top intelligence officials and then-President-Elect Donald Trump. During that briefing, then-FBI Director James Comey told Trump about the existence of the Steele dossier.


Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper testifies to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing on “Russia’s intelligence activities” on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S. January 10, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

Four days later, CNN reported that the briefing occurred. Hours after that, BuzzFeed News published the Steele dossier in full.

Republicans have accused Clapper of leaking information to CNN for its report, though he has denied it.

Andrew McCabe, former FBI deputy director. CNN announced on Friday that McCabe would serve as a law enforcement analyst.

McCabe was fired from the FBI on March 16, 2018 upon the recommendation of the bureau’s Office of Professional Responsibility. An investigation determined that McCabe lacked candor under oath regarding his authorization of a leak to the media in October 2016 regarding the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation. (RELATED: CNN Hires Andrew McCabe As A Contributor)

McCabe sued the Justice Department and FBI Aug. 8, claiming that he was fired due to pressure from Trump.

James Baker, former FBI general counsel. Baker, a CNN legal analyst, left the FBI in May 2018 under a cloud of suspicion. In a congressional interview on Oct. 18, Baker’s lawyer revealed he was under criminal investigation for an unauthorized leak to the media.

Baker was also deeply involved in the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation. He personally reviewed the surveillance warrant applications against Trump aide Carter Page. The applications relied heavily on the unverified Steele dossier.

Baker had contact prior to the 2016 election with Mother Jones reporter David Corn, his longtime friend. Corn passed Baker parts of the Steele dossier in hopes of confirming the FBI was investigating claims from the salacious documents. Baker also told Congress he met in September 2016 with Michael Sussmann, a lawyer for the DNC. Baker said that Sussmann provided him with documents alleging there were covert communications between a Russian bank and the Trump Organization.

Josh Campbell, former FBI aide to James Comey.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reported on Feb. 8, 2018 that the FBI circulated a flyerin honor of Campbell’s gig, saying that he was embarking on a “new endeavor defending the bureau.” Like McCabe and Baker, Campbell often appears on CNN to defend the FBI’s investigation of Trump.

Asha Rangappa, former FBI special agent and leading collusion conspiracy theorist.

Steven Hall, former CIA Moscow station chief and outspoken critic of Trump.

Phil Mudd, former FBI and CIA official. Mudd, who is known for his fiery presentations on CNN, has largely been a critic of President Trump. But he has also pushed back on some of the underlying aspects of the Trump-Russia probe.

He predicted June 4 that an inspector general’s investigation into the Steele dossier will “not end up well” for Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote the salacious document.

Susan Hennessy, former attorney for the National Security Agency. Hennessy has also been a leading proponent of the now-debunked theory that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia.

Samantha Vinograd, former adviser to the Obama administration’s National Security Council. On March 2, Vinograd said on CNN that a speech Trump made reminded her of Adolf Hitler. She also said that Trump’s speech included items on “Putin’s to-do list.”

James Gagliano, former FBI supervisory special agent. Gagliano typically discusses breaking news stories regarding active shootings, terrorism incidents. He has been an outspoken critic of both James Comey and Andrew McCabe.

MSNBC
John Brennan, former CIA director. Brennan appeared frequently on the network during the Russia probe, and has been a fierce critic of Trump. In the weeks before the special counsel’s report was released, Brennan inaccurately predicted that members of Trump’s family would be indicted in the investigation.


Former CIA director John Brennan (2nd L) and former director of National Intelligence James Clapper (R) arrive at a closed hearing before the Senate (Select) Intelligence Committee May 16, 2018 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Frank Figliuzzi, former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence. On Aug. 6, Figliuzzi floated a theory on air that Trump’s decision to lower flags in honor of mass shooting victims earlier this month was somehow tied to white supremacy. Figliuzzi noted that Trump’s order to lower the flags would expire on Aug. 8. Using numerology, Figliuzzi argued that the date, 8/8, is significant for white supremacists because it translates into “Heil Hitler.” (RELATED: MSNBC Analyst Uses Numerology To Tie Donald Trump To White Supremacy)

Chuck Rosenberg, former chief of staff to James Comey and administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration. Like most of his colleagues, Rosenberg’s analysis has typically perpetuated the theory that Trump & Co. conspired with Russia. Rosenberg also argued in a report published at Lawfare on Dec. 14 that the Steele dossier “holds up well over time, and none of it, to our knowledge, has been disproven.”

That assessment has not held up well in the months since Rosenberg published the piece. The special counsel’s probe undercut the dossier’s core claim that the Trump campaign took part in a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” with the Russian government. The investigation also undercut the dossier’s most specific claim of collusion: that former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen visited Prague in August 2016 to meet with Russian intelligence officials.

Malcolm Nance, former Naval chief petty officer. Nance has also been noted for pushing the collusion conspiracy theory.

Jeremy Bash, former CIA chief of staff.
They forgot this one..Ken Dilanian (same MSNBC guy trashing Epstein conspiracy theories)
THE CIA’S MOP-UP MAN: L.A. TIMES REPORTER CLEARED STORIES WITH AGENCY BEFORE PUBLICATION
https://theintercept.com/2014/09/04/former-l-times-reporter-cleared-stories-cia-publication/

The NYT
"Accusing the press of treason is dangerous. We described the article to the government before publication. As our story notes, President Trump’s own national security officials said there were no concerns." https://t.co/MU020hxwdcpic.twitter.com/4CIfcqKoEl

— NYTimes Communications (@NYTimesPR) June 16, 2019
 





saki

Established
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
141
Likes
273
#8
"He also was a member of the Houston chapter of DeMolay, a Masonic fraternal organization for boys"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Cronkite


They forgot this one..Ken Dilanian (same MSNBC guy trashing Epstein conspiracy theories)
THE CIA’S MOP-UP MAN: L.A. TIMES REPORTER CLEARED STORIES WITH AGENCY BEFORE PUBLICATION
https://theintercept.com/2014/09/04/former-l-times-reporter-cleared-stories-cia-publication/

The NYT
"Accusing the press of treason is dangerous. We described the article to the government before publication. As our story notes, President Trump’s own national security officials said there were no concerns." https://t.co/MU020hxwdcpic.twitter.com/4CIfcqKoEl

— NYTimes Communications (@NYTimesPR) June 16, 2019
...I've often wondered how/why Fox News Channel was started, and what explains its rapid growth and how it kills CNN/MSNBC in virtually every time slot in the ratings... at first, I was content with the "unmet needs" explanation.... prob best summarized by H. Ross Perot, when asked by a high schooler how he could become wealthy like Mr Perot....

something like: "look for the unmet needs which are all around you, and figure out how to meet just one of those unmet needs faster and better than anybody else" (I used "quotes" for something I only heard about once, but cannot yet find a reference for it... but it sounds good, and it fits my premise, so I'm going with it).

ie: Rupert Murdoch looked at American broadcast media and saw that very few media outlets were geared to be supportive to conservative views. And the ones which did were considered 'fringe outlets' (like the John Birch Society) and not worthy of watching/listening to, etc....

And I used to be satisfied with that 'responding to the marketplace' explanation... now, I'm having serious doubts....

[Please Note! this is not being put up on VC to start a debate of Right vs Left politics... there are better venues for that]!!!

I'm raising the question as to whether Murdoch/Ailes/FNC/Hannity/Tucker C. et al, are maybe part of a much deeper plot (wittingly or not) to aid/foster/incubate destabilization and infighting amongst the American population on a left/right axis of division... ie: Left-leaning has their channels, now lets give the Right/far right/alt-right, etc a channel of their own to help fire those crazy nuts up a little bit... to prep both sides for a much bigger showdown and American Civil War II at a time of our (elitist) choosing...(?)

I've tried to find out if some of the persons I suspect are Freemasons or not, such as Rupert Murdoch... nothing useful yet... no "ah-ha! I see you, you scoundrel" moment... thus far, the best 'answer' to my inquiry comes from Yahoo Answers... so consider the source...

https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110719131237AAlpKnd

the second answer satisfies me most of the three, but feel free to go with whichever one you like....

...for certain, he's in 'The Club', but whatever 'Club' he belongs to isn't necessarily or likely to be found on a Google search, and not all of the evil which surrounds us operates under something so banal and 'knowable'(?) as Freemasonry.... I can imagine that, at his level of influence, power and wealth, he's beholden to a much deeper and sinister master with an agenda and name we are not permitted to know or see, and the success of Fox News is not purely driven by market forces...

...and yes... I am perfectly aware that Rupert Murdoch has stepped away/retired from FNC and Roger Ailes (5/15/1940 - 5/18/2017) is deceased, so is H. Ross Perot (6/27/30 - 7/0/2019)... I'm too tired to go back and make certain that everything I wrote is in proper agreement with respect to whether those referenced are living or deceased....

to distill: is the creation and success of Fox News Channel part of a deeper scheme to raise the temperature of society and take us closer to open civil conflict and 'war in the streets'? Like is happening now in Portland, but with firearms?
 





Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
587
Likes
937
#10
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and The New World Order

"Since 1934 almost every United States Secretary of State has been a CFR member; and ALL Secretaries of War or Defense, from Henry L. Stimson through Richard Cheney."
"The CIA has been under CFR control almost continuously since its creation, starting with Allen Dulles, founding member of the CFR and brother of Secretary of State under President Eisenhower, John Foster Dulles. Allen Dulles had been at the Paris Peace Conference, joined the CFR in 1926, and later became its president."

https://www.conspiracyarchive.com/2...oreign-relations-cfr-and-the-new-world-order/
 





saki

Established
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
141
Likes
273
#11
....or, then again, like Frank Badfinger said, they're all involved, and maybe I've been chasing the wrong rabbits down the wrong holes... looking for Freemason connections when it's really CFR, or similar....
I'm sure that with CFR, just like the Masons, what little we know about their business is what they want us 'useless eaters' to know... and that anything 'leaked' to the media is a preplanned 'plant' of disinformation to sow confusion and send us chasing after the shiny object....
 





Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
587
Likes
937
#12
....or, then again, like Frank Badfinger said, they're all involved, and maybe I've been chasing the wrong rabbits down the wrong holes... looking for Freemason connections when it's really CFR, or similar....
I'm sure that with CFR, just like the Masons, what little we know about their business is what they want us 'useless eaters' to know... and that anything 'leaked' to the media is a preplanned 'plant' of disinformation to sow confusion and send us chasing after the shiny object....
The CFR, like the Bilderberg Group and others are the think tank groups - the script writers. Plotting in advance how THEY want to see the world and then using the controlled media to produce and direct their plans and narratives.
 





Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,841
Likes
3,442
#13
The CFR, like the Bilderberg Group and others are the think tank groups - the script writers. Plotting in advance how THEY want to see the world and then using the controlled media to produce and direct their plans and narratives.
Idk if you’ve ever noticed when they release the list of attendees for the Bilderberger group it’s always different people...I wonder why they change it up if it’s “them” writing the script?
 





Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
587
Likes
937
#14
Idk if you’ve ever noticed when they release the list of attendees for the Bilderberger group it’s always different people...I wonder why they change it up if it’s “them” writing the script?
I don't believe that all attendees are actually writing the script. I believe many are simply privy to what the script is and how the plot relates to their role in the future.
 





Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
71
Likes
98
#18
Forget journalists. I've long suspected most of our Congressmen and women are actually CIA. It would explain a lot.