Saturday, February 2, 2019

The Science Of Mind Control

Snopes & AP Suddenly Quit As Facebook Fact-Checkers


Two of Facebook's four fact checkers, Snopes and the Associated Press, have abruptly ended their fact-checking relationship with the social media giant. In a Friday press release, Snopes said that it had "elected not to renew our partnership with Facebook," and while declining to reveal specifics, added that "Forgoing an economic opportunity is not a decision that we or any other journalistic enterprise can take lightly." 

Snopes co-founders David and Barbara Mikkelson. Barbara is no longer involved in the company following David's infidelity with prostitutes and alleged embezzlement.

While Snopes initially agreed to fact check for free, they eventually accepted $100,000 for its fact-checking services last year. 

The announcement comes on the heels of a December report that the two-year relationship between Facebook and its fact checkers was in disarray. 

Current and former Facebook factcheckers told the Guardian that the tech platform’s collaboration with outside reporters has produced minimal results and that they’ve lost trust in Facebook, which has repeatedly refused to release meaningful data about the impacts of their work. Some said Facebook’s hiring of a PR firm that used an antisemitic narrative to discredit critics – fueling the same kind of propaganda factcheckers regularly debunk – should be a deal-breaker. -The Guardian

"They've essentially used us for crisis PR, said former Snopes managing editor Brooke Binkowski. "They’re not taking anything seriously. They are more interested in making themselves look good and passing the buck … They clearly don’t care."

Brooke Binkowski, former managing editor of Snopes

Binkowski left Snopes last year and started her own factchecking site, truthorfiction.comShe told The Guardian last year that Facebook ignored her concerns about the spread of misinformation in Myanmar during the anti-Muslim Rohingya crisis when over 500,000 refugees fled Bangladesh amid persecution. 

"I was bringing up Myanmar over and over and over," said Binkowski. "They were absolutely resistant."

Facebook also pushed its fact checkers to prioritize debunking misinformation that affected its advertisers, according to Binkowski, something she said crossed a line. "You’re not doing journalism any more. You’re doing propaganda," she said - a charge Facebook denied in a blogpost

While Snopes and it's factcheckers grievances are well known, AP gave no explanation for their decision, though they noted in a statement to TechCrunch that while it was "no longer doing fact checking work for the program, it is not leaving it altogether."

One current Facebook factchecker not authorized to speak publicly questioned why they're working for the same company that paid a PR firm to promote anti-Semitic fake news about billionaire George Soros

"Why should we trust Facebook when it’s pushing the same rumors that its own factcheckers are calling fake news?" said the factchecker. "It’s worth asking how do they treat stories about George Soros on the platform knowing they specifically pay people to try to link political enemies to him?"

"Working with Facebook makes us look bad," added the journalist. 

Another factchecker told The Guardian in December that they were demoralized. "They are a terrible company and, on a personal level, I don’t want to have anything to do with them."


PROVEN: Eating organic food lowers cancer risk



by Tracey Watson, Natural News:  If, like many other people, you’re convinced that organic produce is nothing more than an over-priced and unnecessary fad, you might be intrigued to learn that a study conducted by researchers from France’s equivalent of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, known as Inserm, has confirmed that organic fruit and veg […]

The post PROVEN: Eating organic food lowers cancer risk appeared first on SGT Report.


Thursday, January 31, 2019

The Single Stupidest Argument In The Entire Stupid Salad Of Russiagate


Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via,

The other day Hawaii congresswoman and Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard came out with what remains the strongest rejection of the Trump administration’s regime change interventionism in Venezuela out of anyone likely to run for the presidency in 2020.

“The United States needs to stay out of Venezuela,” Gabbard tweeted.

“Let the Venezuelan people determine their future. We don’t want other countries to choose our leaders  -  so we have to stop trying to choose theirs.”

Boom. Unambiguous, unequivocal, and without any of the “Yeah Maduro is an evil monster, but” modifiers that other officials (including Bernie Sanders) have been prefacing their feeble objections to Trump’s campaign to topple the Venezuelan government with. Which of course outraged all the usual war pundits, including the Washington Post’s most reliable military-industrial complex fluffer Josh Rogin.

Again, @TulsiGabbard shares the same foreign policy position as Russia and the Assad regime,” Rogin tweeted in response to Gabbard’s statement. “It’s probably just a coincidence. #TusiAssad2020”

Again, @TulsiGabbard shares the same foreign policy position as Russia and the Assad regime. It's probably just a coincidence. #TulsiAssad2020

— Josh Rogin (@joshrogin) January 28, 2019

This man calls himself a journalist. He works for one of the most respected and influential news outlets in America.

Rogin’s post is obnoxious and idiotic for a whole host of reasons, among them the fact that Trump is consistently painted as a Kremlin stooge by pundits like Rogin, yet opposing Trump is somehow being depicted as Kremlin servitude. But the reason his tweet deserves an article of its own today is because the argument he is using is one you see recurring over and over again in the psychotic, pants-on-head, screaming-at-traffic stupid salad that is collectively referred to as Russiagate.

Another way to write Rogin’s tweet would be as follows:

“Hmmm, you think the US should refrain from destroying countries all around the world? You know who else thinks that? The Kremlin! Hmmm, it’s very interesting that you and the Kremlin share that same view all the time, hmmmm, hmmmmmmm, hmmmmmmmmmmm probably just a coincidence though!”

You see this obnoxious McCarthyite talking point regurgitated over and over and over again by people eager to paint anyone who objects to US interventionism and the political establishment responsible for it as Russian agents, and it’s about as moronic an argument as any you’ll ever see.

Last year I had a brief interaction with a popular Twitter account calling itself Conspirador Norteño, an anonymous user who spends their time promulgating conspiracy theories about Russian bots and Kremlin trolls using those weird “who’s tweeting about subject X” graphs that Russiagaters like to use as imaginary evidence. The account is often cited by the Atlantic Council’s NATO propaganda firm DFR Lab, and by its allied narrative control firms Bellingcat and PropOrNot, as well as mainstream media outlets like the BBCand Mother Jones.

If a Twitter account a) consistently parrots the views of the Kremlin over a period of several years and b) uses Russian state media as major primary sources, as @Ian56789 does, then it is reasonable to classify that account as propaganda. Opinion doesn't enter into it.

— Conspirador Norteño (@conspirator0) April 25, 2018

Conspirador Norteño and his goon squad of counterintelligence-LARPing followers spent the entirety of our interaction attempting to argue that because a private British citizen named Ian Shilling sometimes shared Russian state media and often found himself in agreement with Russia on foreign policy, he could fairly be labeled a propagandist for the Russian Federation.

“If a Twitter account a) consistently parrots the views of the Kremlin over a period of several years and b) uses Russian state media as major primary sources, as @Ian56789 does, then it is reasonable to classify that account as propaganda,” the account insisted.

“You’re also ignoring the fact that his positions are in lockstep with the Kremlin’s; pushing the viewpoint and agenda of a government is propaganda, regardless of which government it is,” the account claimed.

The reason this popular McCarthyite argument is so face-meltingly stupid is simple: there are many, many reasons for someone to oppose the interventionism and foreign aggression of the US and its allies besides having loyalty to the Russian Federation. Russia opposes the interventionism of the US-centralized empire because it is a nation with its own allies and agendas, and because it is a longtime target for subversion and undermining by imperial government agencies since it refuses to be absorbed into the blob of the western power alliance. This does not mean that Russia’s reasons for opposing western interventionism are the only reasons to oppose western interventionism, and anyone who believes that it is is a slobbering idiot.

This is a non-satirical version of the “Hitler drank water” meme, which mocks this style of argumentation by pointing out the fact that both Adolf Hitler and Donald Trump drank water, implying they must therefore be aligned.

The argument that is advanced by all the Josh Rogins and Conspirador Norteños of the gibbering McCarthyite mad house holds that the only possible reason anyone could possibly oppose an establishment which is in an endless state of regime change interventionism, which is pushing us ever closer to the likelihood of nuclear armageddon by escalating tensions between nuclear superpowers, and which is shoving us toward extinction via climate chaos with a policy of unchecked ecocidal corporatism, is some form of Kremlin servitude. They claim there’s no acceptable reason anyone could be “in lockstep with the Kremlin” on foreign policy, despite the fact that a worldview which opposes western interventionism necessarily will be the same as the position of the Kremlin’s because Russia, like so many other sovereign nations, opposes western interventionism.

US-led interventionism is literally always disastrous and literally never helpful in modern times, and you don’t need to be aligned with Moscow or Damascus to see that. The power establishment which crushes any nation that refuses to bow to its demands is responsible for the deaths of untold millions of human beings, and wanting that power establishment to crumble is a very legitimate and reasonable thing. Every good and decent person in the world should want the same

*  *  *

Thanks for reading! My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2


America's Apocalyptic Debt Crisis: 63 Of America's Largest 75 Cities Are Completely Broke


Authored by Mac Slavo via,

The debt crisis in the United States of America has reached apocalyptic proportions.  A new and horrifying report out details the reason why 63 of America’s largest cities are completely broke: debt and overspending.

According to a recent analysis of the 75 most populous cities in the United States, 63 of them can’t pay their bills and the total amount of unfunded debt among them is nearly $330 billion. Most of the debt is due to unfunded retiree benefits such as pension and health care costs.  That means those depending on that money, likely won’t see a dime of it. 

“This year, pension debt accounts for $189.1 billion, and other post-employment benefits (OPEB) – mainly retiree health care liabilities – totaled $139.2 billion,” the third annual “Financial State of the Cities” report produced by the Chicago-based research organization, Truth in Accounting (TIA), states. TIA is a nonprofit, politically unaffiliated organization composed of business, community, and academic leaders interested in improving government financial reporting.

Many state and local governments are not in good shape, despite the economic and financial market recovery since 2009,” Bill Bergman, director of research at TIA, told

The top five cities in the worst financial shape are New York City, Chicago, Philadelphia, Honolulu, and San Francisco. These cities, in addition to Dallas, Oakland, and Portland, all received “F” grades. In New York City, for example, only $4.7 billion has been set aside to fund $100.6 billion of promised retiree health care benefits. In Philadelphia, every taxpayer would have to pay $27,900 to cover the city’s debt. In San Francisco, it would cost $22,600 per taxpayer.

By the end of Fiscal Year 2017, 63 cities did not have enough money to pay all of their bills, the report states, meaning debts outweigh revenue. In order to appear to balance budgets, TIA notes, elected officials “have not included the true costs of the government in their budget calculations and have pushed costs onto future taxpayers.”

Hartford City News Times

To say that more simply: your children have been sold into debt slavery and owned by the governments; both local and federal. The government is officially punishing the unborn for their inability to handle money.

What a time to be alive…

One major problem area TIA identifies is that city leaders are lying. (What a shock! A lying politician…) These political masters have acquired massive debts despite the balanced budget requirements imposed on them by scamming the public and enslaving them.

“Unfortunately, some elected officials have used portions of the money that is owed to pension funds to keep taxes low and pay for politically popular programs,” TIA states.

“This is like charging earned benefits to a credit card without having the money to pay off the debt. Instead of funding promised benefits now, they have been charged to future taxpayers. Shifting the payment of employee benefits to future taxpayers allows the budget to appear balanced, while municipal debt is increasing.”

It’s only a matter of time until this system built on debt and theft comes crashing to the ground.

How prepared are you?


Who Will Guard Us From The Guardians? YouTube "Protects" Users By Hiding "Conspiracy Theories"


Authored by Robert Bridge via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Flat earth, 9/11 ‘inside job’, and the Kennedy assassination ‘cover-up’. These are just some of the ‘conspiracy theories’ that YouTube will baby proof going forward, hiding such content from users as if they were not cognitively thinking adults capable of making rational decisions.

This month, disgraced Buzzfeed performed yet another astonishing feat of shoddy, agenda-driven journalism by reporting that it took just nine mouse clicks on YouTube to go from a PBS report on the 116th Congress to a video entitled ‘A Day in the Life of an Arizona Rancher,’ produced by a Washington immigration reform group known as The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).

The video that so enraged Buzzfeed details the story of Richard Humphries, an Arizona resident and former narcotics officer living just miles from the US-Mexico border. Humphries, increasingly concerned with the number of illegals traversing his 75-acre ranch, built a watchtower on his sprawling property to help him and federal border agents track illegal aliens. Considering the ‘extremist nature’ of the content, is it any surprise that the CIS was branded in 2016 a ‘hate group’ by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a group itself that has been portrayed as touting a leftist agenda, yet is quietly partnering with YouTube to flag ‘hate’ content?

The Buzzfeed article took exception with many other ‘right-wing’ videos that had the audacity to rear their racist heads in YouTube’s auto-select function. One of those channels is called PragerU, which hosts popular liberal bugbears, including Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, James Damore and Charlie Kirk. The channel, which filed a lawsuit to stop Google and YouTube from illegally censoring its educational videos and discriminating against its right to freedom of speech, operates on the principle of providing “knowledge and clarity on life's biggest and most interesting topics… ranging from history and economics to science and happiness.”

Sounds pretty radical, yes? Well, only if you happen to be situated on the left of the political spectrum, as the overwhelming bulk of the IT undoubtedly is. Then yes, all that free right-wing speech may seem radical and worth tweaking the almighty algorithm to ensure they never see the light of day. Never mind that the original YouTube algorithm was built on a market-driven principle where the most popular videos shot to the top in the feeds, a phenomenon that presented a direct threat to the mainstream media message. Given the Left’s hot embrace of Cultural Marxist principles, it shouldn’t come as any surprise that Silicon Valley shuns the free market when it works against its own interests.

Now YouTube, obeying the Buzzfeed dog whistle, has pledged to turn the screws even more on ‘conspiratorial’ (i.e. right-wing) creators by “taking a closer look” at how the “Up Next” videos that autoplay after each video ends can lead viewers astray into the dense field of conspiracy-theory, pockmarked as it is with rabbit holes of various sizes and shapes.

Google announced it will begin “reducing recommendations of borderline content and content that could misinform users in harmful ways—such as videos promoting a phony miracle cure for a serious illness, claiming the earth is flat, or making blatantly false claims about historic events like 9/11.”

Although Google said the changes will not affect “whether a video is available on YouTube,” judging by the personal experience of several popular YouTube commentators, for example, Mark Dice, the new algorithm is so effective that even when the exact title of one of his ‘controversial’ videos is entered into the channel’s search field it will not yield the correct result.

The New York Times reported on this latest crackdown against social media creators by saying YouTube and other communication platforms have faced rising criticism for “failing to police the content” that creators share.

That is an extremely disconcerting comment when it is considered that we are not talking about hate speech, but rather ideas that have not been awarded the stamp of approval by both the government and the mainstream media. Yet it is the media – the hallowed Fourth Estate – that was originally designed to keep government in check on behalf of the people. The mainstream media, due to its incestuous relationship with Corporate America has failed dramatically on that score. Now we find the two agencies closely aligned in not only promulgating a particular narrative on every major story that surfaces, but cracking down on those alternative voices that would dare suggest a different version of events.

The number of YouTube commentators that have been purged from the video platform is simply staggering, and reveals the true nature of ‘American democracy,’ which is more concerned with fortifying the status quo than bothering itself with truth and justice.

Tragically, the American Founding Fathers, when they were setting down the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights, which has been in force since December 15, 1791, could not have foreseen the development of two major obstacles that would greatly offset their freedom-loving legislation.

The first is the advancement of powerful private corporations, which fly under the radar of the First Amendment. This would have tremendous implications on free speech since corporations, which have largely cornered the market on all communications, are free to establish their own rules with regards to what they want their customers to see and hear. They are powerful enough to tell their customers ‘if you don’t like our policies, you don’t have to use our services,’ while knowing full well that there are not many alternative options. And since the major IT companies all tend to hold neo-Liberal political views, it is their vision of the world that is being pushed to the forefront.

Meanwhile, and this leads us to the second obstacle to free speech, an increasing number of voices from the political right are being smeared and silenced on the pretext of promoting ‘conspiracy theories.’ It should be kept in mind that no police detective worth his or her salt would stop following a particular lead in a case for fear of being branded a ‘conspiracy theorist.’ Indeed, the world-famous detective Sherlock Holmes would not have been able to solve a single crime had he been accused of being a ‘conspiracy theorist’ by his colleagues, many of whom could not follow his subtle train of thought.

In closing, allow me to just reproduce, for those who have forgotten its essence, the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

When will corporations be forced to live up to the law of the land, especially considering they have in many cases become an actual arm of the government?


The Alt-Media Has Way More Fun than the Mainstream Media

The corporate-state media lives in terror that the truth will somehow leak out of the corporate-Imperial fortress, imperiling their jobs and perks.
It's not exactly news that the Alternative Media is under assault: skeptical inquiry and dissenting narratives are smeared as "fake news," and new suspiciously corporate entities (NewsGuard et al.) claim to be "protecting" consumers from "fake news" as cover for their real agenda, which is limiting public exposure to skeptical, dissenting independent analysis.
Social Media and Search corporations are also censoring non-corporate, non-state media, again under the purported guise of stripping out "fake news."
Despite this semi-official censorship, we in the Alt-Media are having way more fun that the anxiety-ridden serfs in the Mainstream Media. There are many hard-working, honest journalists slaving away in the Mainstream (more accurately, the corporate-state) Media, but there's the neofeudal reality of their employment: If what they report undermines the ruling elites, they're not allowed to do their job.
MSM journalists have no agency: they report what they're told to report. They also have no control over what gets by their employers' editorial / corporate filters: question a big advertiser and your report will quietly be buried. Question the approved narrative and conclusion, and you'll be shunned, blacklisted, etc. If you make a fuss, you'll be let go in the next round of lay-offs.
Everyone who labors in the corporate-state media lives in fear of the truth getting out: hence the full-spectrum freak-out whenever an insider turns leaker / whistleblower: oops, the happy-story cover is blown and the ugly truth is now revealed, including the collusion of the corporate-state media. (In the U.S. PBS / NPR is the quasi-state media, analogous to Japan's NHK, Britain's BBC or France's France24.)
The corporate-state media lives in terror that the truth will somehow leak out of the corporate-Imperial fortress, imperiling their jobs and perks. Their job isn't to report any truth that lays waste to the self-serving interests of the ruling elites; their job is to protect the ruling elites by "reporting" politically-correct narratives and playing up culturally divisive incidents to distract the masses from any awareness of their political invisibility and lack of financial independence or agency.
The MSM's other job is to scrub any mass dissent from their "news." So for example, U.S. corporate-state media coverage of the yellow vest movement in France is near zero. This is not random; it is all part of skewing the "news" to meaningless controversies and fawning politically correct / approved narratives stories.
A working-class rebellion against political and financial invisibility is anathema to America's ruling elites and their corporate allies in the MSM and hence the minimal coverage. You basically have to understand French to follow on-the-ground Alt-Media coverage in France of the yellow vest protesters.
The American MSM dutifully regurgitates the bogus narrative being pushed by France's elitist corporate-state media, that the yellow vest protesters are violent and thus need to be crushed by overwhelming paramilitary force. That the protesters are being beaten and provoked to respond to state-ordered violence is left unreported.
We in Alt-Media are confident the truth will eventually come out despite the efforts of the ruling elites and their MSM / social media corporate minions. It's a lot more fun being on the side of skeptical inquiry and dissent than being behind the leaky dike, anxiously trying to stop the actual facts of the matter from entering the public awareness.
It's more fun being on the side of free inquiry and meaningful analysis than being on the side of censorship, fear-mongering, propagandistic sowing of discord and the promotion of the corporate-state party line.
You won't find any MSM reporting on the neofeudal structure of America's economy and society:
My book Money and Work Unchained is now $6.95 for the Kindle ebook and $15 for the print edition. Read the first section for free in PDF format.

If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via

NOTE: Contributions/subscriptions are acknowledged in the order received. Your name and email remain confidential and will not be given to any other individual, company or agency.
Thank you, Ron D. ($50), for your momentously generous contribution to this site -- I am greatly honored by your steadfast support and readership.
Thank you, Cosmin L. ($5/month), for your superbly generous contribution to this site -- I am greatly honored by your support and readership.
Go to my main site at for the full posts and archives.


Fluoride Action Network | Water Fluoridation

Finland's Grooming Gangs Exposed


Authored by David Brown via The Gatestone Institute,

  • Much of the coverage of the same problem in Great Britain said that Jay had accused the Rotherham council and police of failing to tackle sexual exploitation because of misplaced "political correctness." Yet Jay says those are not the words she would use: "I have an aversion to phrases like that," she said. Instead, she believes the Labour-dominated council turned a blind eye to the problem because of "their desire to accommodate a community that would be expected to vote Labour, to not rock the boat, to keep a lid on it, to hope it would go away."

  • What hits hardest in the little town of Oulu in Finland is a disturbing sense that history is repeating itself here and nothing has been learned from the well-documented lessons of the past. Instead there seems to be a hope that with a few overdue statements this problem will go back underground and the noise will go away.

  • Despite bold assertions that action would be taken and the laws regarding asylum seekers would be tightened, in recent conversations regarding the numbers of migrants to be accepted from the EU quota system, politicians such as the interior minister were still campaigning to increase the refugee quota tenfold.

  • In January, the Andalus Islamic Center of Kastelholm in Helsinki's Puolinharju area, published a message to its followers on Facebook. It featured a picture of two lollipops. One was unwrapped, dirty and covered with insects; the other was not. "This is why the Hijab plays an important role in Islam," it said.

In December 2018, police in Oulu, Finland reported the arrest of seven migrant men accused of repeatedly raping a ten-year-old girl. The police say the girl has allegedly been subjected to multiple sexual assaults over several months in the suspects' homes. (Image source: Pixabay)

Finland is a curious place. Tucked up under the arm of its celebrity sister Sweden and with Russia as a neighbour, it is one of the world's most northern and geographically remote countries. It takes a hardy kind of European to withstand the severe climate. The Finns in Oulu, the most populous city in northern Finland, go about their lives as normal in -25 degrees Fahrenheit.

With a national population of just over 5.5 million, trees easily outnumber people; two-thirds of this country is blanketed in thick woodland, making it the most densely forested country in Europe.

Yet, this strange, seemingly forgotten land has a hideously metropolitan problem: Finland's daughters are the target of grooming gangs.

In December 2018, Oulu police reported the arrest of seven men accused of repeatedly raping a ten-year-old girl. The police say the girl has allegedly been subjected to multiple sexual assaults over several months in the suspects' homes.

The men, aged 20 to 40, all arrived in Finland as migrants or refugees in recent years (32,000 sought asylum here during the migrant wave in 2015) and are thought to have made contact with the victim on social media.

Locals in Oulu told Gatestone that many have observed the majority-Muslim migrant gangs in action in the local shopping mall; they send out their best-looking, nicely-scented friends to hook in young Finnish girls. Parents here are fearful for their children.

Finland's Prime Minister Juha Sipilä took to Twitter to express his shock and anger, writing that "a sexual offence against a child is an inhumane act, and its wickedness cannot be comprehended."

His naïveté seems startling. Internationally acknowledged studies on grooming gangs in the UK clearly evidence that this is a "wickedness" well-documented and well understood. There is no reason for it to come as a surprise.

His country's official statistics from 2017 reveal that -- nationally -- Iraqi and Afghan migrants were represented up to 40 times more amongst sexual assault suspects than native Finns.

In Britain, the 2015 Jay Report into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham was an independent report into how child sexual exploitation (CSE) cases were handled by social services and police. It clearly identified how these grooming gangs operate, the brutality endured by their victims, and the "blatant" failure of police and politicians to act to protect the girls.

The findings in Professor Alexis Jay's report clearly suggest that the numbers of victims and aggressors in Finland will keep rising as networks are uncovered and more girls have the courage to come forward.

Sure enough, Oulu's police now suspect 16 foreign-born men of rape or other sexual abuses of girls aged between the ages of 10 and 15, and have added another four men to their investigation.

In addition, police in Finland's capital, Helsinki, have acknowledged that they have arrested three foreign-born men on similar charges.

It seems cruel to reduce such violations to mere statistics or probability, but the truth can be unkind. Helsinki has a population of 630,000. Oulu's population is just 200,000. There are two other cities of a similar size in this fridge cabinet of Europe: Turku and Tampere. The UK's experience teaches us that it is a statistical probability that these cities will not be immune to having their children being targeted by the gangs.

It is a barbaric cruelty these children face. Professor Jay sets it out in black and white in her report:

"In just over a third of cases, children affected by sexual exploitation were previously known to services because of child protection and neglect. It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten, and intimidated. There were examples of children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone. Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of male perpetrators."

It was evidently the "blatant" failings of police and politicians that allowed these men to continue raping and abusing these children; the authorities reportedly remained silent either for political gain or to avoid professional damage.

Much of the coverage of the same problem in Great Britain said that Jay had accused the Rotherham council and police of failing to tackle sexual exploitation because of misplaced "political correctness." Yet Jay says those are not the words she would use:

"I have an aversion to phrases like that," she says. Instead, she believes the Labour-dominated council turned a blind eye to the problem because of "their desire to accommodate a community that would be expected to vote Labour, to not rock the boat, to keep a lid on it, to hope it would go away.

What hits hardest in the little town of Oulu in Finland is a disturbing sense that history is repeating itself here and nothing has been learned from the well-documented lessons of the past. Instead there seems to be a hope that with a few overdue statements this problem will go back underground and the noise will go away.

Initial reports suggest that the abused girls and their parents were not necessarily believed; the police responded only after the strong intervention of the father and step-father of one victim, who set a trap for one of the groomers online. It was this intervention that led a local councilman to uncover the fact that in a two-day period, "a total of 8 men with migrant names had been incarcerated for child sexual abuse, aggravated child sexual abuse and aggravated rape."

Only after this information became public did the local police finally issue a warning to parents about the threat faced by their children:

"Recently, in the Oulu region, cases have emerged that foreign-born, often non-Finnish men have attracted minors to get in contact with them. At worst, contacts have led to serious sexual offences."

The Oulu police say they have recently been informed of dozens of cases where adult men tried to lure young girls online. "That's the reason for our warning," said Detective Superintendent Markus Kiiskinen.

All of this uproar comes at a politically awkward time for Finnish politicians, just three months before parliamentary elections scheduled for April 14. Prime Minister Juha Sipilä, who maintained a firm silence on the matter during all of December 2018, has now changed course to appear concerned and action-oriented.

He expressed "grief and disgust" at the spate of sexual crimes, and claimed that he understood the worry and anxiety that many people are feeling. In a statement, he stressed that everyone who comes to Finland should respect Finland's laws and the principle of personal integrity. He also emphasised that Finland's asylum system cannot protect criminals, and called the assaults "completely inhumane and reprehensible."

It would be generous to describe ordinary Finns as skeptical of his stance. Most sneer openly at the hypocrisy of a man who was hugely afflicted by the migrant madness of 2015, welcoming 32,000 migrants to this tiny country, and even telling the state's media that his exclusive family home in Kempele, located 500km north of the capital Helsinki, could be used to accommodate asylum seekers.

"We should all look in the mirror and ask ourselves how we can help... My house is not being used much at the moment. My family lives in Sipoo and the prime minister's residence is located in Kesaranta," he told Finnish state television. Al Jazeera TV ensured that news of his offer was shared widely.

Despite bold assertions that action would be taken and the laws regarding asylum seekers would be tightened, in recent conversations regarding the numbers of migrants to be accepted from the EU quota system, politicians such as the interior minister were still campaigning to increase the refugee quota tenfold. There is stark contrast between words and actions here in this country.

As well as the hypocrisy of this position, there is also a grating apathy prevalent in the administration. In Oulu's City Hall, the Administrative Director, Ari Heikkinen, said that he has not heard the details of the problem and could not be certain of any action that might need to be taken, but acknowledged there was a problem with "online communications."

Maddeningly, there is no sense of urgency here; more a sense that Finnish authorities are sitting on a problem the potential scale and seriousness of which they have yet to comprehend. Perhaps the habitual Finnish talent for understatement is working overtime.

A brave few have broken cover to address the problem head-on. Seida Sohrabi's Kurdish family sought asylum in Finland when she was five years old. Her interview for Ilya Sanomat, one of the two main tabloid newspapers in Finland, was so keenly observed that the emotionally cool Finns, from both the political left and right, took a sharp collective intake of cold breath.

Her words are chillingly familiar to the experiences of victims of grooming gangs in the UK. One British victim described her ordeal:

"As a teenager, I was taken to various houses and flats above takeaways in the north of England, to be beaten, tortured and raped over 100 times. I was called a "white slag" and "white c***" as they beat me. They taught me; 'Muslim girls are good and pure because they dress modestly, covering down to their ankles and wrists, and covering their crotch area. They stay virgins until marriage. They are our girls.

"White girls and non-Muslim girls are bad because you dress like slags. You show the curves of your bodies (showing the gap between your thighs means you're asking for it) and therefore you're immoral. White girls sleep with hundreds of men. You are the other girls. You are worthless and you deserve to be gang-raped."

This is something taught in mosques in Finland, too. Anter Yasa , the founder and co-chair of Secular Immigrants of Finland says he has been black-listed from appearing in TV interviews because of his honesty about the problem -- a problem perpetuated by imams in Finnish mosques.

In January, the Andalus Islamic Center of Kastelholm, in Helsinki's Puolinharju area, published a message to its followers featuring a picture of two lollipops. One was unwrapped, dirty and covered with insects; the other was not.

"This is why the Hijab plays an important role in Islam," it said. The evident message to their Muslim and non-Muslim followers is that an uncovered woman is dirty, literally, and can be used by anyone.

Perhaps the danger to our daughters is not hackneyed phrases like "online communications" or a "lack of integration." It is that this thinking -- the thinking of the grooming gangs -- is being taught and pushed in mosques, today, in our own towns and cities.

For now, the fight back is being led by the Finns Party, a nationalist party leading the conversation on this matter in the country, and which -- unlike the others -- has been consistent in its message on asylum-seekers and the dangers of Islam in Western society. Somewhat controversially in these liberal lands, it seeks to put Finns first. Unsurprisingly since speaking out, the Twitter account of the leader of the Finns Party -- Jussi Halla-aho -- has been locked for a period.

Whatever the politicians say, it is clear that we are not learning the lessons of our past. Evidence from other countries has shown, repeatedly, the link between a conservative branch of Islam and sexual aggression. While the police and politicians remain keen to keep the problem under wraps, and the media and digital giants censor voices speaking openly about it, the gangs will continue to flourish.

Oulu and Helsinki are at least arresting and sentencing the wrongdoers. In addition, other Finnish cities are unlikely to be immune from the grooming gang problem. Yet there is a real feeling that the country's leaders and population are still hoping that the whole subject, or at least the noise around the subject, will simply go away.

Alarmingly for the daughters of Finland, this veritable unknown compared to its Swedish sister, hope and silence will not keep them safe.


France's Red Scarves: Ready-Made Counter-Protest And New Media Darlings


Authored by Whitney Webb via,

The pressure will now grow to disperse the Yellow Vest movement while also attempting to use the Red Scarves to manufacture support for draconian government policies and police crackdowns aimed at finally ending the establishment-threatening protests.

As the “Yellow Vest,” or Gilet Jaunes, protest in France continues to perplex and concern the French government and European elites, a new “counter-protest” has emerged in response to the popular protest movement now entering its 12th week.

Protesters branding themselves as the “Red Scarves,” or Foulards Rouge, descended on Paris this past Sunday in order to protest the “violence” of some Gilet Jaunes protesters and a desire to see the country return to “normalcy.” The French government, which has sought to weaken and disperse the Yellow Vests movement since its inception, stated that the Red Scarves numbered around 10,500 in Paris, while other reports claimed that the demonstration was significantly smaller than the government-supplied figure.

The group has been described as “diverse” — much like the Yellow Vests, who have drawn support from across the French political spectrum — and “apolitical,” as its leadership have stated that the Red Scarves are not necessarily supportive of French President Emmanuel Macron, whose ouster is being sought by Yellow Vests demonstrators. Some participants who were interviewed on Sunday stated that they were not protesting against the Yellow Vests but instead in favor of protecting the integrity of France’s political institutions. This has led the Red Scarves themselves, as well as subsequent media reports, to portray the group as representing France’s “silent majority” that – until now – had refrained from demonstrating.

According to reports from mainstream outlets, the Red Scarves movement – which was joined by another pro-government counter-protest group, the “Blue Vests” — was a direct response to violence from some members of the large Yellow Vests protest movement that has resulted in the destruction of property and clashes with police. Yellow Vest organizers have disavowed the use of violence and have blamed “black bloc” groups for using the movement as a pretext for committing violent acts.

Notably, reports of such clashes largely declined to mention the role of French police in causing and fomenting violence, despite the abundance of video evidence documenting hundreds of instances of police brutality against unarmed and even prone protesters, as well as innocent bystanders. The Red Scarves themselves have also overlooked this aspect, both by “urging respect for French authorities” and by chanting pro-police slogans, as well as by asserting that French policemen have acted responsibly in response to the Yellow Vests despite the fact that the vast majority of injuries suffered since the protests first began last November were caused by the actions of militarized riot police. Over 2,000 have been injured and 10 have been killed since the protests began.

6/ elderly men getting hit and his wife started to go on a screaming rant "Pease don't hit him" I am begging you, please stop please please please. The elderly men was taken into custody but got released earlier today. The wife of the elderly men has filled an police complaint.

— Sotiri Dimpinoudis (@sotiridi) January 15, 2019

Organic or synthetic?

Given their relatively sudden appearance and sympathetic media coverage within France and throughout the Western world, the Red Scarves have drawn skeptical scrutiny from Yellow Vest members, some of whom have described them as “pro-Macron stooges.” While it is difficult to know if the origins of the Red Scarves are as organic as has been portrayed in mainstream reports, there are certain aspects of the movement that have raised suspicion among journalists reporting from France and other observers.

For instance, evidence reported on by French media and journalists who have been closely covering the protests has shown thatat least half of the Red Scarves who participated in Sunday’s demonstrations had been bused into Paris for the demonstration. This has led to speculation about the movement’s actual extent of popular support, both in Paris and nationwide, as well as speculation that some Red Scarves had been paid to travel to Paris to participate in the demonstration.

There is also the fact that the Red Scarves is a formal, state-recognized association, as opposed to the Yellow Vest movement, which is a grassroots entity. According to investigative journalist Vanessa Beeley, who lives in France, the fact that the Red Scarves is a formal association shows that it was planned long before the Yellow Vest movement was accused of fomenting violence. Beeley told MintPress News that, because of the length of the process needed to navigate French bureaucracy, in order for the Red Scarves to have been created on December 21st, the three directors of the group would have had to have initiated the process soon after the Yellow Vests protests began in mid-November.

A red scarf protester stands next to a police van in Paris, France, Jan. 27, 2019. Kamil Zihnioglu | AP

If this is the case, it greatly undercuts the prevailing narrative that the Red Scarves movement is a response to recent acts of violence associated with the Yellow Vests protests. Indeed, even the founder of the Red Scarves – Fabien Homenor, a computer scientist – told French media that he would have “donned a Yellow Vest” during the first weeks of the protest because he agreed with their initial concerns — i.e., the controversial fuel tax that Macron’s government has since scrapped following the success of the protests. This raises the question, why would Homenor create an association to counter the Yellow Vests at a time when he claims he supported their efforts?

Playing up, playing down, the numbers

An examination of mainstream reports on Sunday’s demonstration suggests an effort to inflate the Red Scarves’ importance and to build their image as “non-violent” and diminish the comparative significance of the Yellow Vests movement. For instance, the Washington Post stated that “Approximately 10,500 people marched in Paris [as part of the Red Scarves demonstration] on Sunday, according to police figures. That was more than twice the number that donned yellow vests in the capital the day before, when about 4,000 marched in Paris and 69,000 marched nationwide, according to the Interior Ministry.”

Thus, while the Post notes the available statistics, it claims that the Red Scarves demonstrations, which occurred only in Paris, were larger than Yellow Vests protests a day prior in the same city — but conflates Saturday’s Paris protest with the nationwide Yellow Vests protest in which a combined 73,000 people participated. A more accurate portrayal of the situation may have noted that, when both are examined from the national perspective, the Yellow Vests in their 11th week saw nearly seven times more participation than the Red Scarves in their first demonstration. The Post also failed to mention that the Red Scarves protesters were largely bused into Paris from other French cities.

The Post also called the demonstration “the long-awaited intervention in a story line that, until now, had featured just one side of a national conversation on social inequality,” even though the Red Scarves were not explicitly protesting against the Yellow Vests’ demands relating to inequality, but instead focusing on the alleged methods of some of their members.

Notably, the Post’s article barely mentions the horrific wounding of Jerome Rodrigues, a key figure in the Yellow Vest movement, whom witnesses have said was deliberately targeted by French police with a flashball grenade launcher at close range. As a consequence, Rodrigues suffered a horrific injury to his right eye and will now be disabled for the rest of his life, according to his lawyer. Other mainstream reports similarly focused on the Red Scarves movement and relegated mention of Rodriques’ injuries to the final paragraphs.

Jérôme Rodriguez blessé lors du #acteXI des ##GiletsJaunes11

— Xenia__Sputnik (@XseniaSputnik) January 26, 2019

Exploiting, or manufacturing, the backlash

Whether or not the Red Scarves movement is an establishment-backed effort to divide the highly successful Yellow Vest protests remains to be seen. However, it ultimately matters little if the Red Scarves’ motives are genuine or not, as the French government and a sympathetic international press have already shown they are all too eager to push to divide the Yellow Vests movement, or at least weaken it, by playing the two groups off of each other.

While the French government and well-known media outlets had already been busy demonizing the group despite strong popular support across France, with a new group having emerged as its apparent antithesis, the pressure will now grow to disperse the Yellow Vest movement while also attempting to use the Red Scarves to manufacture support for draconian government policies and police crackdowns aimed at finally ending the establishment-threatening protests.


Wednesday, January 30, 2019

Twitter Suspends Jared Beck, Attorney For Plaintiffs In DNC Fraud Lawsuit


Earlier today, Twitter suspended the account of Jared Beck, an attorney representing the plaintiffs in the DNC Fraud Lawsuit. Disobedient Media has consistently covered the ongoing litigation of the suit, which has resulted in questions regarding a number of deaths, bizarre phone calls, and other unusual occurrences.


NSA Clapper, CIA Brennan NOT charged for LYING to Congress, So why Roger Stone?


Ben Swann ON: Roger Stone arrest is theater on the part of Mueller team, FBI, CNN and Stone himself. Plus, if head of NSA, Clapper and head of CIA, Brennan were never charged with lying to Congress, why is Stone?


US Pending Home Sales Crash Most In 5 Years


Following Case-Shiller's report that home price gains are the weakest in four years,  Pulte Homes' CEO admission that 2019 will be a "challenging year," and existing home sales carnage, Pending Home Sales were expected to very modestly rebound in December.

But it didn't!

Pending home sales dropped 2.2% MoM (versus a 0.5% expected rise) to the lowest since 2014...


This is the 12th month in a row of annual sales declines...and the biggest annual drop in 5 years...

Yet another sign the housing market is struggling amid elevated property prices and borrowing costs - but there's always hope...

“The stock market correction hurt consumer confidence, record high home prices cut into affordability and mortgage rates were higher in October and November for consumers signing contracts in December,” NAR Chief Economist Lawrence Yun said in a statement.

But with mortgage rates declining recently and the Fed less likely to raise borrowing costs, “the forecast for home transactions has greatly improved.”

Finally,  the Realtors group forecasts a decline in annual home sales to 5.25 million this year from 5.34 million in 2018, which would mark the first back-to-back drops since the last recession.


New Regulations Cause California Soup Kitchen to Close Its Doors


For the past four years, Deliverance San Diego has been delivering hot meals to the city’s homeless population every Friday, averaging 200 donated meals on any given evening. Now, due to new guidelines passed by the State Legislature of California, the non-profit is ceasing operations and will dissolve by the end of the month.

Through their existing model, hot meals were prepared in volunteer homes and distributed on the streets.

“Volunteers from various churches gather at 17th and Commercial downtown to load four food wagons with chili, soup, cornbread, water, and other snacks,” the group’s web site explains. “…We offer prayer and spiritual support, but one of the easiest things we do is get someone’s name and remember it.”

Through the new requirements, set forth by the San Diego Department of Environmental Health, Deliverance would need to use licensed, state-approved kitchens, implement hand-washing stations, and meet a variety of other requirements.

With a yearly budget of less than $7,000, according to the non-profit’s treasurer, Deliverance determined it can no longer sustain operations without extensive and expensive organizational changes. “We’re on a shoestring budget,” explains volunteer Gary Marttila, “so working out all those logistics became too big of an obstacle to overcome.”

ABC 10 News in San Diego tells more of their story:

As the San Diego Union Tribune explains, several of the law’s backers have expressed surprise at the closure of Deliverance. According to Heather Buonomo, a program coordinator with the Department of Environmental Health, some sort of workaround may have been available or achievable. “We’re happy to work with them to find a solution that works for their charitable organization,” she said. According to Monique Limón, one of the bill’s authors, “The law would encourage more charities to provide food for the needy while also creating a level of oversight to ensure they follow proper health guidelines.”

Yet it’s unclear what exactly would or could have been done if Deliverance had have tried to negotiate with the state and find “a solution that works.” And the fact that it didn’t even try or think it could try says something about the pressure that these policies put on small and vulnerable charities and institutions who don’t feel they have political sway.

Likewise, one can make any number of arguments about food safety, as Limón does, but it’s hard to imagine a scenario in which more burdens, more requirements, and tighter regulations will somehow encourage “encourage more charities to provide food for the needy.”

The reality is that the state’s dream of regulated soup and sandwiches is taking precedence over the bottom-up activity of neighbors who are passionate about loving their neighbors. Is that really an acceptable trade-off, particularly in an area that so desperately needs an intimate and personalized approach?

“We’ve sought to provide comfort to those who are going through an incredibly difficult time,” says Deliverance’s press release on the closure. “In many situations, they are without a home due to no fault of their own. This action by the state creates significant barriers to those organizations like ours who simply want to show God’s love through a hot meal and some conversation.”

Given the good—and thus far, safe—work of organizations like Deliverance, such regulations represent a prime example of the “unseen costs” of government action.

In some cases, well-intended government policies lead to trade imbalances or economic surpluses or corporate cronyism or community inequities—all of which yield their own forms of social corrosion. But in cases such as these, we see the ill effects of these policies on charitable activity, resulting in real and tangible barriers to human love and relationship.

Is it really worth it?


This article has been republished with permission from Acton Institute.

[Image Credit: U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Bryan Reckard]


If Half of Facebook Accounts Are Fake… What Is Facebook Worth?

Add up the clone accounts and the fake accounts, and one wonders if the total number of fake accounts is more than half of all Facebook accounts. The question that naturally arises is: what’s Facebook worth if half or more of its 2.2 billion accounts are fake?
What’s Facebook worth when it can’t even weed out the most obvious cloned and fake accounts? What’s it worth if perhaps it doesn’t want to eliminate all those fake accounts?


Dershowitz: Why Was Stone Arrested Instead Of Being Asked To Surrender?


Authored by Alan Dershowitz via The Gatestone Institute,

  • If there was no legitimate reason for the arrest and handcuffing of this presumed innocent defendant, what was the illegitimate reason? The illegitimate purpose of the arrest was to intimidate the potential witness -- namely Stone -- into not invoking his constitutional right to remain silent, rather than to testify as a government witness.

  • As Judge T.S. Ellis, III, who presided over the Manafort trial observed: "You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud – what you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment."

  • The ACLU has been absolutely silent in regard to the questionable tactics employed by Mueller. They, too, would have been up in arms had these tactics been employed against their favorite candidate and mine, Hillary Clinton. Their silence speaks volumes about their partisanship and lack of neutral standards of civil liberties.

  • Congress must act to prevent these abuses from recurring.

Judge T.S. Ellis (right), who presided over the first Manafort trial, observed that flipped witnesses sometimes have an inducement not only to "sing" but to "compose" -- that is, to embellish. (Image source: Fox News video screenshot)

The reasons given thus far for Roger Stone's pre-dawn arrest by armed FBI agents are utterly unconvincing. He was not a flight risk, as evidenced by the low bail and easy conditions of release set by the judge without objection from the government. Stone knew he was going to be indicted and if he wanted to flee, he had plenty of time to do so. The same is true of destroying evidence, wiping his electronics or doing anything else that would warrant an arrest rather than a notice to his lawyer to appear in court at a specified time. A search was conducted of various residences pursuant to a search warrant. No arrest was necessary to conduct these searches.

So, if there was no legitimate reason for the arrest and handcuffing of this presumed innocent defendant, what was the illegitimate reason? To paraphrase the indictment against Stone, the illegitimate purpose of the arrest was to intimidate the potential witness -- namely Stone -- into not invoking his constitutional right to remain silent, rather than to testify as a government witness.

The arrest was nothing more than a show of toughness -- a foretaste of what Stone could expect if he did not cooperate with Mueller. Police do this all the time: "Look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." The tough arrest with handcuffs and shackles was a demonstration of the hard way.

Prosecutors have enormous power and discretion whether and how to use it. All too often they use it the way Mueller has been using it during this investigation: to pressure witnesses to testify against Trump. As Judge T.S. Ellis, III, who presided over the Manafort trial, observed:

"You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud -- what you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment."

Judge Ellis also pointed out the dangers of this tactic:

"This vernacular to 'sing' is what prosecutors use. What you got to be careful of is that they may not only sing, they may compose."

If Hillary Clinton had been elected president and if a special prosecutor had arrested one of her associates in the rough and demeaning manner by which Stone was arrested, civil libertarians would be up in arms. They would correctly argue that to marshal dozens of armed FBI agents to arrest an elderly man accused of non-violent crimes is an abuse of authority and a waste of FBI resources. They would complain that it constitutes intimidation and violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. But because the arrest is of a Trump associate and the purpose is to get evidence against President Trump, we have not heard from fair-weather civil libertarians who use civil liberties and constitutional rights as tactics to serve their partisan political agendas.

The ACLU has been absolutely silent in regard to the questionable tactics employed by Mueller. They, too, would have been up in arms had these tactics been employed against their favorite candidate and mine, Hillary Clinton. They would have demanded an explanation as to why the extraordinary power of arrest, which is supposed to be reserved only for cases warranting this use of force, was employed in this case. Their silence speaks volumes about their partisanship and lack of neutral standards of civil liberties.

The American public is entitled to an honest explanation of why Stone was arrested. We have not received the truth. Congress should hold a hearing and call as witnesses those who ordered the arrest and demand they explain and justify it. It is unlikely that a plausible and credible explanation will be offered, but Mueller and his FBI agents should at least have an opportunity to set the record straight. Maybe there is a good reason for why the arrest was necessary, but if so, we have not heard it and it is unlikely that the reason involves national security or other secrets. These hearings should lead to legislation setting enforceable standards for when the kind of arrest to which Stone was subjected should be permissible. The power to arrest, using armed FBI agents, handcuffs and shackles must not become a tactic to be used by law enforcement for impermissible reasons. Nor should it become routine. Congress must act to prevent these abuses from recurring.


Tuesday, January 29, 2019

‘Perfect accuracy’: WikiLeaks hits back at ‘neocon’ app NewsGuard, which labeled it untrustworthy — RT World News

Censoring 2020 Has Already Begun As Big Tech ‘Pulls Out All The Stops’ To Prevent Independent Media From Countering The ‘Official Narrative’



by Stefan Stanford, All News Pipeline: As more and more Democrats throw their hat in the ring, already announcing they’ll be running for president in 2020, big tech has begun to pull out all the stops to prevent Independent Media (IM) from bypassing the mainstream media narrative by not only limiting the reach of IM […]

The post Censoring 2020 Has Already Begun As Big Tech ‘Pulls Out All The Stops’ To Prevent Independent Media From Countering The ‘Official Narrative’ appeared first on SGT Report.


NewsGuard: A Neoconservative Contrivance Which Promotes an Establishment View


There’s a new thought policeman in town. He calls himself NewsGuard and he promises to restore “Trust and Accountability” to what one reads online. His website elaborates that “NewsGuard uses journalism to fight false news, misinformation, and disinformation. Our trained

The post NewsGuard: A Neoconservative Contrivance Which Promotes an Establishment View appeared first on Global Research.