Monday, November 28, 2016

Fake News

For those only interested in the topic "Fake News" feel free to skip the following disclaimer and head right to the post below.


The below post is out of character for a blog addressing the things of God...or is it?

Why am I writing a post about fake news? Even though my blog is about God, God is also a God of truth. Not only so, but also because lies are powerful and very destructive. Also, it saddens me to see all the divisiveness in our nation and the world. I would suggest this is possibly being deliberately stirred up and hope this post will help explain why, at least in part.

I have been aware of media control for years (in large part due to working in the financial services industry for 11 years [holding a series 6 and 63 license in the securities industry] and later in areas related to tax law through an estate planning business I partnered and co-directed for 14 years). In light of the recent presidential election, it became clearer to a larger number than ever before that something was going on, in and through the mainstream media outlets. Statistics now show only 30% to as low as 6% in America believe the news media is telling us the truth. Therefore, I felt now was a good time to peek behind the curtain so to speak. I trust why will become apparent as you read the below.

This is not a typical post for this blog. While I seek only to speak the truth, this particular post is about the truth of a practical, not theological kind. For my regular readers who come to see the truth of the theological variety, this kind of non-theological discourse may be of no interest to you. So I am letting you know up front this is about deception within the mainstream news media, before you take any more time to read on (though I certainly encourage you to).
If you find this topic of fake news of no interest, thanks for taking the time you have so far!  

I trust you will return in the future for my usual posts on

"Thoughts about God"

Now to the topic at hand...

Fake News

The following is an excerpt from no less than the Congressional Record of 1917 on page 2949. The key excerpt is immediately below and the full page is at the end of this post to verify it is from the Congressional record.

I have reproduced the text immediately following this snapshot for easier reading.

I challenge you to give serious thought to what you are about to read. The ramifications affect all of us right now on a daily basis. So without further ado,

The following is a reproduction of the above text:

"In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interests, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press of the United States. 

These 12 men worked the problem out by selecting 179 newspapers, and then began, by an elimination process, to retain only those necessary for the purpose of controlling the general policy of the daily press throughout the country. They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. The 25 papers were agreed upon: emissaries were sent to purchase the policy, national and international, of these papers; an agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interest of the PURCHASERS (emphasis my own).

This contract is in existence at the present time (1917), and it accounts for the news columns of the daily press of the country." (emphasis mine)


Now the quote again below but with some emboldened comments interjected, preceded with >>>, and sections quoted from the Congressional Record lead by ...

"In March 1915,

>>> 1915 is not a typo. This has been going on for a looooong time. So long that when we DO hear the truth in media we often don't even know it.  

...the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interests, and their subsidiary organizations,

>>> J.P. Morgan also happened to be a stakeholder in the privately-owned (often thought to be government-owned) Federal Reserve bank. For more click here. There is tons of information on this if you find the one link inadequate. Just do a YouTube or general search on "Federal Reserve Deception" or the like. You will find more than you have time to read. together 12 men high up in the newspaper world

>>> Do you think this may have carried through to other forms of communications today, such as mainstream TV news, entertainment, such as movies, TV shows, music industry,  public education, sports,  the government itself...even Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. All of these internet information outlets are beginning to censor news that goes contrary to the mainstream narrative if you haven't been following it. For more on this click here. It also happens to be that executive types from Google (who own YouTube) made more visits to the white house during the Obama administration than any other area of business. Does this prove anything? Not necessarily, but it's worth raising the question why all the visits. Especially in light of what we see recently with censorship of "fake news" on FB, Twitter, and YouTube. To see an example of this click here

...and employed (i.e. paid) them to select the influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press of the United States (emphasis added by me).

These 12 men worked the problem out...

>>> Problem? What problem? Who's got a problem? We the people? NO, JP Morgan and "interests!" selecting 179 newspapers, and then began, by an elimination process, to retain only those necessary for the purpose of controlling the general policy of the daily press throughout the country.

This is the second reference to "controlling"  When something is mentioned once, it's important...twice, it's critical. 

>>> What does that mean... to control the general policy of the press? The rest of the report clarifies. The point I wish to make here is the media is controlled, which is not the intent of the founders and also why freedom of the press is vital i.e. they are not to be controlled by any special interests but are there simply to report facts and raise awareness of what was going on in the world and in government for the benefit and protection of the nation as a whole i.e. you and I, and not for a select group within America with private special interests (sometimes referred to as the "1%" or the "elite").

...They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. The 25 papers were agreed upon: emissaries were sent to purchase the policy, national and international, of these papers...

>>> emissaries.

1. a representative sent on a mission or errand: emissaries to negotiate a
2. an agent sent on a mission of a secret nature, as a spy (not conspiracy theory but plain old fashion conspiracy).

... an agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interest of...

>>> To properly supervise and edit?! For whose benefit!? NOT the citizens, not even our country BUT...

...the PURCHASERS  (i.e. J.P. Morgan and interests. My emphasis)

>>> Freedom of the Press was and is totally ignored in this arrangement and has been ignored for the last 100 + years of this nation's existence!! It is with good reason the founders thought freedom of the press was so important. We are seeing the fruit of ignoring their wisdom today. 

...This contract is in existence at the present time (as of this report which was in 1917), and it accounts for the news columns of the daily press of the country."


If you wish to see another online copy of this quote click here

For a short video (just over 4 minutes) also addressing this CLICK HERE

The immediately above clip is older but the only difference now is new "players" have been added. If you have followed all the recent chatter there is reason to believe Twitter, FaceBook and YouTube (owned by Google) are also now part of controlled media. In fact, they have recently gone on a very open campaign to censor anyone that does not go along with their narrative. Project Veritas has done some interesting undercover reporting exposing their agenda.

The 4-minute clip above refers to the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations). To see the "who's who" of the CFR in 2008 click here. For a current "who's who" specifically in media alone click here. You can go to the CFR's own site for this as well. Listings are in alphabetical order. To understand more of the CFR's global agenda click here.

As somewhat of a side note, but very relevant, 3 very important pieces of legislation were put in place in 1913, just two years prior to J.P. Morgan buying up control of the top 25 newspapers of the country. It just so happens that J.P. Morgan had financial interests and are part owners of the Federal Reserve Bank. Coincidence?  
  • 1. The Income Tax Act, which resulted in a direct tax on the earnings of all US Citizens for only the 2nd time in our countries history (The first was the Wilson–GormanTariff Act of 1894, which was overturned by the Supreme Court later in the Pollack Decision).
  • 2. The 16th Amendment was added which gave the appearance of authorization for this direct tax (later to be struck down by the Supreme Court only to be ignored by Congress).
  • 3. The Federal Reserve Act, which turned over our monetary system to a privately owned bank called the Federal Reserve Bank. Federal in name only.  
So what does the income tax have to do with the Banking system? Taxes according to former Fed Chairman Beardsley Ruml are used to mask "inflation" caused by the creation of money through the Federal Reserve Bank. To read the actual speech click here or here.  

What effect has the above circumvention of the free press, begun over 100 years ago, have on us today?

If we are not getting straight information on "...militarism (wars), financial policies (banking, the financial markets, etc), and other things of national and international (terrorism, pandemics etc) nature..." could that play any part in influencing the masses to accept the policies our government wishes to push through? Policies not truly in the interest of the people (only made to look like they were), but in the "financial interests" of those who control the news? Keep in mind this means that what would drive the news is economic in nature but not to present the truth or for the benefit of the country but in the best interest of the "Purchasers" the 1%, the elite, etc.

To say it directly, we are only hearing those things that unknowingly sway us to support actions that help best line up with the agenda and the pockets of the purchasers, not what is in the best interest of you and me, the people.
For those who object to the current President tweeting, keep in mind he is bypassing the mainstream news media in doing so. It's also worth mentioning MSM took most issue with his Tweeting when he first got in office. Wonder why!? He had been posting tweets long before he was elected. 
And guess what makes the most money for lenders? Lending money, i.e. DEBT. Especially when they collect interest on money that is being printed out of thin air. How would you like to collect interest on a $1 million loan that costs you NOTHING (outside of admin costs) to make it? The more I lend (at only the admin costs to lend it), the more I make. That is 100k/yr at 10% interest and 100 million/yr on a billion dollars!! Now do the numbers on our current debt of just under 20 TRILLION. Remember, I am not coming out of pocket to make the loan, I am simply having the money printed. Pretty nice business (if you can live with being a thief), don't you think?

Guess what is one of the main generators of debt? War! Nothing like a perpetual war on terrorism to drive demand for loans aka debt. This present war on terror began under Bush and has not just continued but increased under the Obama administration in great part by a failed policy in the middle east. In the 8 years under Obama, we doubled what it took our entire 240 plus year history to reach (we were around 10 billion debt in 2004 and are now close to 20 billion. An estimated 7 trillion has been spent on conflicts in the middle east and the so-called war on terror under the Bush and Obama administrations. Most of it under Obama).

For a powerful visual example of how much this debt is watch the 2-minute video at the top of the site here.

Here's the million (or maybe I should say trillion) dollar question? Who does our government owe close to 20 TRILLION dollars to, themselves?! If that was the case, why not simply dismiss the debt?

"Hey self! What? You know that money I owe you. I'm just going to cancel it." Self replied, "OK! Great!" (I am using an absurd conversation to make a point. It is in fact absurd). 

NO! The government doesn't owe this money to themselves. They owe it to a private banking system called the Federal Reserve Bank (owned in part by JP Morgans and interests. Remember that guy?!)

Now you may be wondering why the government would even allow this arrangement to occur or continue. Though it's involved, generally, with this arrangement the government can get all the money they want and need (not real money with actual value, mind you, but simply have the private bank lend it) to do whatever they wish without getting the direct ok of the people to raise taxes i.e. it removes or at least postpones accountability for their decisions. Decisions hidden from the public eye, because the public is never consulted in what the government borrows and the amount of debt isn't disclosed until after the fact. Decisions that are only now beginning to bear their ugly fruit.

If you wish to learn more, just do a YouTube search on the Federal Reserve Scam as mentioned before. OR for a quick overview 3-minute video click here.

If you want to really dig in, there is also an excellent series called "The Hidden Secrets of Money" by Mike Mahoney. I highly recommend it for a thorough explanation. It's a 7 part series. Click here for the first episode.

Now, let's take it to the next level. What if someone started questioning the honestly of the "official" news (i.e. mainstream media) and provided evidence these "official" information outlets were in collusion with government/politicians and the political decisions they make? How would the "official news" (and politicians) likely respond? Would they be happy? Might they attempt to discredit their accusers? Maybe even assert they are "Fake News?"

What if someone (such as the mainstream news [I put FoxNews in this group as well] or other centers of influence such as entertainment, sports, the public school system, the government itself, etc.) had a history of lying and folks, over time, started to catch on. And some of these folks catching on (those annoying, inconvenient whistleblowers) even started to point it out and provide evidence we were being lied to? What would those "official" information outlets do then (outlets that have had a significant amount of influence/power over the ones they have lied to allowing them to maintain control over them and the policies of those who govern them)? Might those outlets start to accuse the whistleblowers of being charlatans, liars i.e. **FAKE NEWS? And might those outlets trot out others who will lie (not always, but strategically, subtly, when and where needed...called "fact-checkers") to "prove" the whistleblowers are fake?

*This was originally written before the hysteria over COVID-19 AKA Coronavirus. We are now at 24 Trillion mainly to help small businesses keep their staff, many of which are not working due to the shutdown. For some additional thoughts on the virus click here.

**btw one of the main whistleblowers labeled as "fake news" is the "Drudge Report." I mention them to show the absurdity of the claim. If you have ever been to Drudge, what they do is find articles from other sources and link to them. They simply scour the internet for news articles that often slip under the radar (aren't always headlines) and list them on their site. That's it! The articles then have to stand or fall on their own merits. The point is these are not articles written by the Drudge Report. Many are even articles from mainstream sources but buried on the 5th or back page. What is most interesting is Drudge has been labeled as an "alt-right" media source by the mainstream media. Are you starting to get the picture yet?

(There is truth even in the mainstream often, but it's usually buried never to be repeated. They know most folks are busy and won't dig so they will likely never notice these buried articles. This gives them a certain "plausible deniability" of never reporting the truth. Clue: when you see a story hammered on over and over again and on the front page, there is usually some really important news buried, sneaking under the radar, somewhere else in the back pages. Also often when a front-page story is proven false, if there is ever a retraction, it's also buried in the back, if one is ever made at all. Check it if you don't believe me. I have been watching this happen for years now). 

How many reports have you read or did you read by the major news outlets (or other media) during this past election season that simply proved to be either error (sloppy reporting) or a flat out fabrication i.e. lie (with rarely a retraction when caught)? Of course, if you only listen to the mainstream media (and other centers of influence listed above) you won't even be aware the problem exists. How can you? You are only listening to those who are pushing the elite narrative posing as truth-tellers, not those the mainstream media is accusing of lying i.e. what they are calling "Fake News." You may wish to actually check into alternative media. If you never have, you may be surprised at the level of research and collaboration of facts actually given.'s usually far more than what mainstream news gives us. Mainstream stories (notice I didn't say reporting) are often innuendo, conjecture and anonymous sourcing with little third party collaboration. 

(I have known about the history above behind controlled media for several years and had seen their lies over time. I noticed it heavily during Ron Paul's two presidential runs. This past election the misleading reports were so over the top it actually exposed this to the masses for the first time). 

The mainstream media has several problems however as a large majority of America have figured their agenda out in the last 18 months. They are controlled and there are third-party sources to verify this (not provided by the mainstream news, however. Surprise, surprise! Only from the so-called "fake news" i.e. the whistleblowers who are actually telling us the truth). The mainstream news has been caught lying repeatedly. And there is information that has inconveniently been leaked (thanks in great part to *WikiLeaks) from their own mouths to verify this. The best source to collaborate with any story is the perpetrator, i.e. the source themselves and direct eyewitnesses. Everything else is **"hearsay"
** hearsay:

unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another andnot part of one's direct knowledge:
I pay no attention to hearsay.
an item of idle or unverified information or gossip; rumor:
a malicious hearsay. 
Very in depth interview with Wikileaks head Assange dispelling much of the confusion and myths around Wikileaks as of 1/3/17 click here
For information that Assange may now be free click here. We'll keep you posted.  

The wheels of the fake news media continue to come off

CNN agenda exposed.  

3 CNN reporters resign over fake news.

For more on what exactly WikiLeaks is and does click here

Bottom line. The actual fake news is coming from those who are calling the truth-tellers fake i.e. the "gatekeepers" mainstream news, entertainment (comedy, movie, TV, sports, etc) and other centers of influence and information outlets are the actual perpetrators of fake news. Accusations, however, are nothing more than accusations, but only hearsay. To become fact, they have to be substantiated.

The following is a list of mainstream "reporters" who, by their own emails (i.e. their own words) admit they colluded with the Clinton campaign this past election. You will notice, these are the stations that have been pushing the "fake news" accusations regarding the actual truth-tellers (whistleblowers). These are also the outlets that are labeling the whistleblowers as "alt-right" media. Also note CNN is listed most, with NY Times and MSNBC tied for 2nd and ABC third.

Just a tad different view than that held by the founders of this country. 

Not all conspiracies are theory

By way of an Analogy: 

I offer you the following as an analogy of our present situation regarding the "fake news" discussion.

Think of Grima, known as Wormtongue, the chief adviser to King Theoden in The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Thanks to Gandalf, Wormtongue was exposed and Middle Earth eventually saved.

Click here to see the scene from Lord of the Rings.

As you watch it, the following is some food for thought:

Gandalf - represents the whistleblowers and truth-tellers, known as the "Fake News" by the mainstream media.

Grima Wormtongue - The mainstream news along with other centers of influence such as music and entertainment media (comedy shows, movies, sports etc).

King Theoden under a trance. American before it woke up.

King Theoden freed from his trance. American awakened.  
The Matrix is another good analogy. Morpheus is the "fake news" guy (who was actually telling the truth) and Neo is someone who believed the mainstream information outlets. 

Of course, this is all a "great right-wing conspiracy" according to the greatest "truth-teller" of all time, Hillary Clinton herself.

By the way, if you think all this is nuts let me know. I have personal friends who worked in government psyops that will be glad to explain it.

1 comment:

  1. yes and the big biz on the board of profit sharing. When you sell a chair out of the companies interest you change the policy to benefit all others so as there would be no conflict of interest. When doing so you put at risk the companies vested interest. and then you weaken the company. And if you don't comply with that chair member you just sold to. The company can be sued for big money. And that chair now holds more stock and it soon takes over that said company... That is control of the view and how it presents the coverage in the media and stock holders


Thanks for dropping by. Feel free to leave any comments, questions or thoughts and I will try to reply within 48 hours.

If you like our posts please feel free to subscribe to our blog and recommend others to the same. Just click on the home page at the far left of the navigation bar up top for instructions.

Grace to you
Jim Deal