Aflockalypse Now

Probably the strangest story of the new year is the pattern of mass deaths around the world of birds, fish and other creatures. It is so perplexing, CNN's Anderson Cooper brought on his show noted scientist Kirk Cameron to answer questions about this wacky fad. The cases are so bizarre, Gawker.com has as a headline for it's report on the subject: "Is This the End of the World?"

Here are some of the examples:

"Up to 5,000 birds fell from the sky New Year's Eve in Beebe, Arkansas"

"500 birds found dead in southern Louisiana in seemingly separate incident"

Falling birds likely died from massive trauma
January 4, 2011
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/01/03/arkansas.falling.birds/index.html

"As officials worked to figure out the cause of death of some 5,000 blackbirds that fell from the Arkansas sky this weekend, some 100 miles away another disaster was unfolding: The discovery of 100,000 dead drum fish in the Arkansas River..."

100,000 dead fish join thousands of dead birds in Arkansas
Monday, January 3rd, 2011
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/2000-dead-birds-fall-sky-arkansas

Hundreds More Dead Birds Fall From Sky In Kentucky
1/5/11
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/05/hundreds-more-dead-birds-_n_804952.html

Dead Birds Found In Sweden
1/5/11
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/05/dead-birds-sweden_n_804600.html

"Thousands of dead fish were floating in Volusia County Tuesday. They were all in Spruce Creek in Port Orange. The fish kill is unusual because it is warm, according to people who live along the creek.

It's been a week since there were freezing temperatures, but there are fish lining the banks. Some said it's the worst kill they've ever seen; thousands of fish lined the twists and turns of Spruce Creek."

Thousands Of Fish Dead In Spruce Creek
January 4, 2011
http://www.wftv.com/news/26367953/detail.html

"To add more to the mystery, a report came out today that around 1,500 endangered and protected ‘Sooty Shearwater’ (Puffinus griseus) birds have been found dead in the coast of Chile."

Arkansas & Chile: Dead Birds & Fish
Javier Ortega
January 4, 2011
http://www.ghosttheory.com/2011/01/04/arkansas-chile-dead-birds-fish

"Countless turtle doves were found scattered in the streets, in flower beds and hanging tragically from trees 'like Christmas balls' in the town of Faenza. Many of the birds that fell dead from the sky were discovered with a mysterious blue stain in their beaks."

Birds Dying In Italy: Thousands Of Turtle Doves Fall Dead From Sky
Travis Walter Donovan
1-6-11
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/06/birds-dying-in-italy-thou_n_805541.html

"The Thanet shoreline is littered with the crabs, along with dead starfish, lobsters, sponges and anemones."

40,000 crabs join slew of animal-death mysteries
Jenni Dunning
Jan 6, 2011
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/916503--40-000-crabs-join-slew-of-animal-death-mysteries


2 million fish found dead in Maryland
January 7, 2011
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/01/06/maryland.fish.kill

Major, Bizarre Fish Die-Off Along Lakefront
January 11, 2011
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/01/11/major-bizarre-fish-die-off-along-lakefront

The more popular explanations for these mass deaths on the Internet have been the testing of biological weapons and/or HAARP technologies. One Website, WhatDoesItMean.com, linked the mystery death of John P. Wheeler III, an aide to Reagan and both Bushes, to the mass animal deaths. While the mainstream media focused in its obits on his fundraising for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the site noted his "military career included writing one of the most important manuals on the effectiveness of biological and chemical weapons." Wheeler certainly fits the profile of an honest whistleblower, and this may explain why he was found dead in a Delaware landfill in a style more fitting of a Mafia squealer than a Washington insider.

Top US Official Murdered After Arkansas Weapons Test Causes Mass Death
Sorcha Faal
January 4, 2011
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1435.htm

Anderson Cooper Gives Breitbart Cover

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/anderson-cooper-gives-breitbart-cover-paint

Media Criticism
Anderson Cooper Gives Breitbart Cover by Painting the Left With the Right's Insane Brush
By karoli
Friday Jul 23, 2010

Anderson Cooper needs to stick to oil spills and hurricanes because when it comes to political commentary he's as lame as the Fox journalists. There's only one story to be told when it comes to the Shirley Sherrod fiasco: Andrew Breitbart lied. That's all. Andrew. Breitbart. lied.

But this is what journalism is today. There is no one with enough of a moral compass to just come out and say that in the media. This is why, by the way, Robert Gibbs and the Obama Administration won't say it either. I'll get to that toward the end of this post, but first let's have a look at Anderson Cooper's Invented America.

COOPER: But we begin with a political storm that nearly destroyed Shirley Sherrod. President Obama spoke with her on the phone today. And we will speak to her in a moment about that conversation.

But first the blogger who slammed Shirley Sherrod, we're "Keeping Them Honest." He is the only actor in this dismal drama that has not apologized to Ms. Sherrod. And, in fact, he says he is the victim and that the Obama administration and mainstream media are out to destroy him.

He told Politico today -- quote -- "I am public enemy number one or two to the Democratic Party, the progressive movement and the Obama administration based upon the successes my journalism has had."

Now, calling what Mr. Breitbart does journalism is hard for those of us who actually check and try to be fair. I'm certainly not perfect, and have made mistakes, and have apologized for them. But journalism shouldn't be about left and right. It should be about the truth.

Up to this point, I'm right there with him. Yes, journalism shouldn't be about left and right. It should be about truth. And facts. And full telling of the truth and facts. If Anderson Cooper had stopped here, I'd be applauding. Andrew Breitbart wouldn't know the truth if it reared up and breathed hot fire in his face.

But this is not what journalists do. We don't live in an age where they actually call it what it is and move on to the next story. No, instead they have to create that false "balance", or equivalence that just doesn't exist.

The single reason that Robert Gibbs and other Obama administration officials, including the President himself, will not call out Fox News and Breitbart is because of stupid assertions like the ones Cooper is about to make. If Gibbs had pointed out that the entire story was the product of a lie manufactured by Andrew Breitbart for attention and giggles, the narrative would have shifted to "Mean President Obama Whines and Picks on Andrew Breitbart".

The administration would have been painted as "petty", "blaming", "ducking the issue". It would have just obfuscated the truth of the matter, which is simple, and which I will repeat a few more times: Andrew Breitbart lied.

What Mr. Breitbart does and what others on the left and the right do may very well be what journalism has become, but it isn't certainly not what it should be. Mr. Breitbart also Politico -- quote -- "The desire here is to make it about me and not the Democratic establishment and the NAACP vs. the Tea Party."

That's been Mr. Breitbart's excuse since it was revealed that his video was not what he said it was. He claims this was never about Shirley Sherrod. In fact, he said to Sean Hannity -- quote -- "I could care less about Shirley Sherrod, to be honest with you."

That is the one thing he has said that is indisputable. He does not care about Shirley Sherrod, doesn't care about making false allegations against her or ruining her career. Andrew Breitbart has his ideology. He believes he is right. And in his mind that justifies any action he takes.

I'm still good with it through this point, even. Cooper has clearly named the villain in the plot and called it non-journalism, which it is. He could have even said Andrew Breitbart just lied, but we all know that would be too good to be true. His next segment is where he falls off the edge of the planet into Outer Journo space:

And that's how ideologues think on the left and on the right. Post a video clip that's misleading? No problem if it helps you make your argument, if it helps boost visitors to your Web site. Make false claims about a person? Why not, if it gets you more Web traffic?

That is where we are today. Andrew Breitbart is conservative. But, as I said, there are liberals online and on TV who do the exact same things. They cherry-pick the facts that prove their arguments, not the facts that reveal the truth.

Oh, really? If you know of any liberal blogger who has intentionally edited a video clip to mislead and cause entire organizations serving poor folks to crumble, post a comment with a link, please. Anderson Cooper's equivalence sounds oh, so lofty until you sit down and ask yourself where exactly are these misleading video clips posted from the left that destroy people?

Where are they? Where is the left saying that an entire organization on the right loaded up voter registrations with bogus Republicans? I've only seen proven allegations with a criminal record to back them up.

Where ARE those lefty videos? Please, show them to me.

Of course, you can't. Because there are none. Huffington Post, which is probably the closest thing to Breitbart's sites, has nothing like that video. This site doesn't. Daily Kos? FireDogLake? I don't see any there. So please, tell me where are these videos?

Of course, Anderson doesn't stop with that. He invokes one of the 'reasonable right' (and I use the term guardedly) to back his assertions.

David Frum, a conservative, said on this program last night the problem is not liberalism or conservatism. It's factionalism, seeing the world through your own limited political lens and never admitting when you have made a mistake, never admitting the other side may be right some of the time, never doing anything that damages your faction.

Funny, I've been known to hammer on those to the left of me about hammering on our own, because they are all too willing sometimes to flog OUR side at the expense of the bigger picture, in my opinion. Whether I hammer or not, there's always someone in the liberal blogosphere willing to take OUR side to task without regard to what the rotten Right might be up to. So again, I'd really like to see the evidence of that. Show us. Quit saying it and show me the goods.

It's a game for people like Mr. Breitbart and others. They don't go out into the field and meet the people they're supposedly reporting on. They don't go out and challenge their assumptions. They stay behind a desk and see the world as black or white, left or right. And it's a lot more complex than that.

Actually, Anderson, here's a news flash for you. I've met Andrew Breitbart and he doesn't sit behind a desk all day. He sits in a bottle a lot, though. Why not call him what he is? A bully, an idealogue, a liar and a likely lush.

This isn't a question of "both sides do it." What Breitbart did, by his own admission, was use a government employee as a weapon to stir racial tension. The fact that it worked at first is another issue entirely. He lied to get a reaction. Andrew Breitbart lied. Repeat after me: Andrew Breitbart lied.

Where I come from, that's dishonest antagonism. Not journalism.

First Amendment suspended in the Gulf of Mexico

http://www.naturalnews.com/029130_Gulf_of_Mexico_censorship.html
First Amendment suspended in the Gulf of Mexico as spill cover-up goes Orwellian
Saturday, July 03, 2010
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) As CNN is now reporting, the U.S. government has issued a new rule that would make it a felony crime for any journalist, reporter, blogger or photographer to approach any oil cleanup operation, equipment or vessel in the Gulf of Mexico. Anyone caught is subject to arrest, a $40,000 fine and prosecution for a federal felony crime.

CNN reporter Anderson Cooper says, "A new law passed today, and back by the force of law and the threat of fines and felony charges, ... will prevent reporters and photographers from getting anywhere close to booms and oil-soaked wildlife just about any place we need to be. By now you're probably familiar with cleanup crews stiff-arming the media, private security blocking cameras, ordinary workers clamming up, some not even saying who they're working for because they're afraid of losing their jobs."

Watch the video clip yourself at NaturalNews.TV: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=203

The rule, of course, is designed to restrict the media's access to cleanup operations in order to keep images of oil-covered seabirds off the nation's televisions. With this, the Gulf Coast cleanup operation has now entered a weird Orwellian reality where the news is shaped, censored and controlled by the government in order to prevent the public from learning the truth about what's really happening in the Gulf.

The war is on to control your mind

If all this sounds familiar, it's because the U.S. government uses this same tactic during every war. The first casualty of war, as they say, is the truth. There are lots of war images the government doesn't want you to see (like military helicopter pilots shooting up Reuters photographers while screaming "Yee-Haw!" over the comm radios), and there are other images they do want you to see ("surgical strike" explosions from "smart" bombs, which makes it seem like the military is doing something useful). So war reporting is carefully monopolized by the government to deliver precisely the images they want you to see while censoring everything else.

Now the same Big Brother approach is being used in the Gulf of Mexico: Criminalize journalists, censor the story and try to keep the American people ignorant of what's really happening. It's just the latest tactic from a government that no longer even recognizes the U.S. Constitution or its Bill of Rights. Because the very first right is Freedom of Speech, which absolutely includes the right to walk onto a public beach and take photographs of something happening out in the open, on public waters. It is one of the most basic rights of our citizens and our press.

But now the Obama administration has stripped away those rights, transforming journalists into criminals. Now, we might expect something like this from Chavez, or Castro or even the communist leaders of China, but here in the United States, we've all been promised we lived in "the land of the free." Obama apparently does not subscribe to that philosophy anymore (if he ever did).

So how does criminalizing journalists equate to "land of the free?" It doesn't, obviously. Forget freedom. (Your government already has.) This is about controlling your mind to make sure you don't visually see the truth of what the oil industry has done to your oceans, your shorelines and your beaches. This is all about keeping you ignorant with a total media blackout of the real story of what's happening in the Gulf.

The real story, you see, is just too ugly. And the government has fracked up the cleanup effort to such a ridiculous extent that instead of the "transparency" they once promised, they're now resorting to the threat of arrest for all journalists who try to get close enough to cover the story.

Yes, this is happening right now in America. This isn't a hoax. I know, it sounds more like something you might hear about in Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela or some other nation run by dictators. But now it's happening right here in the USA.

As Anderson Cooper reported on CNN:

"Now the government is getting in on the act. Despite what Admiral Thad Allen promised about transparency just nearly a month ago.

Thad Allen: "The media will have uninhibited access anywhere we're doing operations..."

Anderson Cooper: The Coast Guard today announced new rules keeping photographers, reporters and anyone else from coming with 65 feet of any response vessel or booms out on the water or on beaches. What this means is that oil-soaked birds on an island surrounded by a boom, you can't get close enough to take that picture. Shot of oil on beaches with booms? Stay 65 feet away. Pictures of oil-soaked booms uselessly laying in the water because they haven't been collected like they should? You can't get close enough to see that. Believe me, that is out there. But you only know that if you get close to it, and now you can't without permission. Violators could face a fine of $40,000 and Class D felony charges."

See the video yourself at: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=203

Welcome to the (censored) club

All I can say to CNN is: Welcome to the club! This kind of censorship, intimidation and tyranny has been going on for decades in the field of health, where the Orwellian FDA has treated the entire U.S. public to a nationwide blackout on truthful health information about healing foods and nutritional supplements. CNN has never covered that story, by the way. Most of the mainstream media has, in fact, gone right along with censorship of truthful health information by the FDA and FTC.

Now they're suddenly crying wolf. But where was the media when the FDA was raiding nutritional supplement companies and arresting people who dared to sell healing foods with honest descriptions about how they might help protect your health? The media went right along with the cover-up and never bothered to even tell its viewers a cover-up was taking place.

You see, even CNN is willing to tolerate some Orwellian censorship, as long as its advertisers are okay with it. The only reason they're talking about censorship in the Gulf of Mexico right now is because oil companies don't influence enough of their advertising budget to yank the story.

Censorship is not okay in a free society

I like the fact that CNN is finding the courage to speak up now about this censorship in the Gulf, but I wish they wouldn't stay silent on the other media blackouts in which they have long participated. Media censorship is bad for any nation, and it should be challenged regardless of the topic at hand. When the media is not allowed to report the truth on a subject -- any subject! -- the nation suffers some loss as a result.

Without the light of media scrutiny, corporations and government will get away with unimaginable crimes against both humanity and nature. That's what's happening right now in the Gulf of Mexico: A crime against nature.

Obama doesn't want you to see that crime. He's covering it up to the benefit of BP. He's keeping you in the dark by threatening reporters and photographers with arrest. How's that for "total transparency?"

The only thing transparent here is that President Barack Obama has violated his own oath of office by refusing to defend the Constitution. By any honest measure, in fact, these actions, which are endorsed by the White House, stand in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution. And that means this new censorship rule in the Gulf, which suspends the First Amendment, is unconstitutional. It also means those who decided on this rule are enemies of freedom.

They are the ones who should be arrested and hauled off to federal prison, not the CNN reporters who are trying to cover this story.

The seeds of tyranny

The loss of life in the Gulf of Mexico isn't the only catastrophe taking place here, you see: Now we're losing our freedoms while our government tries to intentionally blind us all from the truth of what's happening on our own public beaches.

When those who seek truth are branded criminals by the government, it is only a matter of time before that government expands its criminalization labeling to include anyone who disagrees with it. These are the seeds of tyranny, and Obama is planting them at your doorstep right now.

What BP did to the Gulf Coast, Obama is now doing to your freedom.

'Hope for Haiti' raises $58 million and counting

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/TV/01/23/haiti.telethon

'Hope for Haiti' raises $58 million and counting
January 23, 2010
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Amount is record for donations to disaster relief telethon
Album of performances topped charts in 18 countries
Public may continue to donate for six months
Celebrities answered phones, performed music

Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- Friday night's star-studded "Hope for Haiti" telethon has raised a record-breaking $58 million, with more donations continuing to pour in from around the world, the benefit's organizers announced Saturday.

The preliminary figure is a record for donations made by the public through a disaster relief telethon, according to a news release from telethon organizers.

Additionally, the "Hope for Haiti Now" album, a compilation of the night's musical performances made available on Apple's iTunes, was the No. 1 album in 18 countries Saturday. Sales figures for iTunes are still being calculated, and the preliminary figure of $58 million does not include donations from corporations or large private donors.

People will be able to make donations to "Hope for Haiti" via phone, Web, text messaging and regular mail for the next six months, according to the news release.

A moving performance by Alicia Keys opened Friday night's telethon, and actor George Clooney, serving as the Los Angeles host for the event, made the first appeal for donations to raise money for relief efforts after last week's devastating earthquake.

"The Haitian people need our help," Clooney said. "They need to know they are not alone. They need to know that we still care."

The show was one of the most widely distributed prime-time televised benefits in history, appearing simultaneously on more than 25 networks -- including CNN, where Anderson Cooper reported live from Haiti during the event.

More than 100 actors, musicians and other celebrities answered phones in New York and Los Angeles after professional operators first talked to donors.

"Thank you so much for your donation," actress Reese Witherspoon told one caller. "You can't imagine how much love and great, wonderful energy is here today. People are doing everything they can to make a difference in these people's lives."

Several other calls were aired live, including with Julia Roberts, Steven Spielberg, Taylor Swift and Stevie Wonder.

Swift and Wonder were among the evening's musical performers. Others included Bruce Springsteen, Bono, Jay-Z, Rihanna, Shakira, Beyonce, Mary J. Blige, Coldplay, Christina Aguilera, John Legend, Justin Timberlake, Kid Rock, Sheryl Crow, Keith Urban, Jennifer Hudson, Madonna, Dave Matthews and Neil Young.

Other celebrities appearing on the telethon included Jon Stewart, Brad Pitt, Tom Hanks, Morgan Freeman, Ben Stiller, Clint Eastwood and Denzel Washington.

Proceeds from the telethon will benefit Oxfam America, Partners in Health, the Red Cross, UNICEF, the U.N. World Food Programme, Yele Haiti Foundation and the Clinton Bush Haiti Foundation.

CNN's Alan Duke contributed to this report.

DHS Document Created During Bush Administration

http://www.prisonplanet.com/dhs-%e2%80%9crightwing-extremism%e2%80%9d-document-created-during-bush-administration.html

DHS “Rightwing Extremism” Document Created During Bush Administration
Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
Friday, April 17, 2009

After the Department of Homeland Security’s report on “rightwing extremism” was leaked and posted on Infowars and other alternative news sites, so-called conservatives wasted little time blaming the Obama administration for the report.

However, recent evidence reveals the report has nothing to with the supposed “Marxist” (as Michael Savage and others would have it) persuasion of the Obama administration. It is a product created by a government not interested in the artificial divides of the right-left paradigm and concentrates on one primary objective – to demonize and criminalize all effective opposition.

The “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” document was produced during the Bush administration, as a quick check of the PDF document’s properties reveals. It was created on January 23, 2007.

In other words, the document is not a reflection of the supposed sinister political coloration of the Obama administration, said by many “conservatives” to be socialist or Marxist. It is a document produced specifically as part of a larger effort to demonize and eliminate all opposition regardless of political persuasion.

An earlier report produced by the Strategic Analysis Group, Homeland Environment and Threat Analysis Division of the DHS concentrated on “leftwing extremism” ( Leftwing Extremists Likely to Increase Use of Cyber Attacks over the Coming Decade), again demonstrating the government does not hold an ideological bias when it comes demonizing groups and individuals opposed to the government.

The latest DHS report is designed to portray anti-government groups as dangerous and potentially violent terrorists and thus scare off and balkanize supporters. It also provides the corporate media with an excuse to polarize important issues and dismiss supporters as either misled or as deluded and violent conspiracy theorists.

In particular, some observers claim the report was released and hyped by the corporate media in order to deligitimize Tea Party demonstrations against government spending and taxes held around the country. For instance, the Huffington Post reports: “If you think the conservative ‘Tea Party’ movement is daunting, take a look at a new report issued by the Department of Homeland Security that says right-wing extremism is on the rise throughout the country.”

As another example of this dismissal of the Tea Party movement by the corporate media, consider the rather disgusting and juvenile effort by CNN’s Anderson Cooper (the Yalie of Vanderbilt lineage who interned for the CIA and may thus be considered a Mockingbird asset). Appearing with David Gergen, a member of the Trilateral Commission and Bilderberg Group (who has romped at Bohemian Grove), Cooper said it is difficult for Republicans to find their voice when they are “teabagging.” The Urban Dictionary defines a “teabagger” as “a person who is unaware that they have said or done something foolish, childlike, noobish, lame, or inconvenient.” It is also used to define a pornographic act.

Around the same time the Bush administration’s DHS produced the “rightwing extremism” document, the FBI received a request to work on a similar report. “Fox News’s Catherine Herridge revealed that the report, along with an earlier report on radicalized left-wing groups, was actually ‘requested by the Bush administration’ but not completed until recently,” Think Progress reported on April 15.

The report, entitled “White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel since 9/11,” begins with an “intelligence assessment” claiming “white supremacist extremist groups have attempted to increase their recruitment of current and former US military personnel.” According to the FBI, these “[p]ost-9/11 activities by current or former military personnel involved in the extremist movement span the range of activities engaged in by their extremist compatriots who lack military experience, and include weapons violations, physical violence, paramilitary training, intelligence collection, drug violations, fraud, threats, and arson,” that is to say all manner of evil and criminal activity.

It is no mistake this “disgruntled military veteran” appears in the DHS document. It is also no mistake the report claims “white supremacist and violent antigrovernment groups” present an ominous threat to Obama, primarily due to his race. The lines separating racist nationalism (a marginal threat at best) and opposition to the government are blurred in the document.

The Council on Foreign Relations reiterated the parameters of the DHS and FBI documents on April 21, 2008. A CFR “bakckgrounder” entitled “Militant Extremists in the United States” touches on both “rightwing” and “leftwing” extremism covered in the DHS and FBI reports. The CFR report states:

The September 11, 2001, attacks in New York and Washington were the most destructive ever on U.S. soil. But law-enforcement officials have also long struggled with a range of U.S.-based terrorist groups. Domestic extremists include hate groups motivated by ultra-conservative ideals that are often anti-Semitic and racially motivated; ecoterrorists who use violence to campaign for greater environmental responsibility; and socialist groups who oppose the World Trade Organization. While homegrown Muslim extremists have proven more lethal in Europe than in the United States, U.S. authorities continue to worry about the prospect of attacks by militant Muslims who are American citizens.

The SPLC and the ADL work closely with the DHS, FBI, and apparently the CFR. The CFR cites materials provided by the Southern Poverty Law Center in its report.

Prior to the CFR “backgrounder,” the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project issued a report claiming in “the 10 years since the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing killed 168 people, roughly 60 right-wing terrorist plots have been uncovered in the United States,” according to U.S.News & World Report. “The plots demonstrate that the Department of Homeland Security still needs to closely monitor right-wing groups, says Heidi Beirich, with the Intelligence Project.”

On March 26, after Alex Jones exposed the MIAC document, the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) issued a national advisory to all local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies and officers, along with all DHS Fusion Centers, warning against “any reliance upon faulty and politicized research issued by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Anti Defamation League (ADL).”

ALIPAC would like to advise all media sources, law enforcement officers and agencies, that the ADL and SPLC are political organizations, with stated political goals and agendas which are contrary to the candidates, political parties, and millions of Americans besmirched by the MIAC documents.

While both the ADL and SPLC actively market themselves and seek roles as advisers to law enforcement and the media, both groups regularly engage in political tactics like those observed in the now withdrawn Missouri Documents. Materials from one or both organizations contributed to this scandal.

The ADL and SPLC are notorious for targeting “rightwing” groups and individuals while the FBI has a long track record of going after “leftwing” groups, as evinced by COINTELPRO (the CIA also participated in this effort under its Operation CHAOS). The FBI also sponsored so-called “right-wing vigilantes,” who were given “funds and information, so long as they confined their attacks to COINTELPRO targets,” consisting mostly of anti-war and Black, American Indian, and Chicano “liberation” groups. (see Brian Glick, COINTELPRO Revisited: Spying & Disruption)

The FBI considered the putative “Militia movement” so threatening (primarily due to its constitutional underpinnings) it orchestrated the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995 in order to demonize and criminalize the movement (and scare off support).

A declaration from alleged Timothy McVeigh co-conspirator Terry Nichols, filed in U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City in 2007, reveals McVeigh was taking orders from Larry Potts, a top FBI official. “Potts was no stranger to anti-government confrontations, having been the lead FBI agent at Ruby Ridge in 1992, which led to the shooting death of Vicki Weaver, the wife of separatist Randy Weaver. Potts also was reportedly involved in the 51-day siege of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas in 1993, which resulted in a fire that killed 81 Branch Davidian followers,” the Desert Morning News reported on February 22, 2007.

The DHS, FBI, and we can assume military intelligence and the CIA (along with other intelligence agencies), are intimately involved in a highly orchestrated effort to demonize and criminalize activists opposed to the government, in particular the patriot movement.

In the corporate media realm – a corporate media long in the orbit of intelligence agencies – this process is limited to propaganda designed to make constitutionalists and patriots look either absurd or dangerous. The fact the latest document was leaked a few days before the Tea Party demonstrations held around the country is probably not coincidental.

Demonizing and criminalizing the patriot movement – characterizing them as “rightwing extremists” and white supremacists with the help of SPLC and ADL propaganda – is a last ditch effort on the part of the globalists and international bankers in control of the government. Our rulers realize the threat posed by a large grassroots movement – especially one including veterans – demanding less government intrusion in our lives and a return to a constitutionally limited Republic.

Substance overcomes novelty

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-internet_tuejul24,1,1778014.column

chicagotribune.com
CAMPAIGN 2008: ANALYSIS
Substance overcomes novelty
Steve Johnson

Tribune Internet critic

July 24, 2007

It was a bad night for news anchors and Washington bureau chiefs, the traditional interrogators of would-be holders of American high office.

The format of Monday's Democratic presidential debate, with questions asked via online video, had all the potential to be an empty-headed stunt, politics scrambling for a perch on the YouTube bandwagon.

But instead of being this campaign season's version of a candidate playing saxophone on a talk show, the few dozen amateur questions that co-sponsor CNN selected from among almost 3,000 posted to YouTube led to a relatively lively and informative two hours. The inaugural effort to harness the wide net of the Web to craft questions for would-be presidents offered further demonstration of the Internet's rapid ascension to a place of prominence in American politics.

Yes, there was a question posed by a snowman (about global warming), one asked by Internet comedians posing as rednecks (about whether all the attention paid to Al Gore hurts the announced candidates' feelings) and one posited in the form of a heavy-metal song (about No Child Left Behind, which, come to think of it, could be the name of a heavy-metal band).

But while this new format was at times unconventional, it made for vigorous conversation, which is probably a better hope than genuine debate among a field of eight, more than 15 months prior to Election Day. It never got silly, and it was occasionally surprising in ways some of the previous debates have not been.

A questioner from Michigan, shot in shadow, asked whether the candidates intended to take away his baby, and when he pulled the "baby" into frame, it appeared to be an assault rifle.

"If that's his baby, he needs help," said Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden.

Part of the power of the event, held at The Citadel in South Carolina and telecast on CNN, was, of course, the novelty of it. It's an open question whether the next CNN-YouTube debate, among Republicans on Sept. 17, or any similar one that gets scheduled after that, will pack the same punch. You've seen one folk singer in his back yard complaining in verse about high taxes, you've seen 'em all.

Part of the success was due to the moderator, CNN anchor Anderson Cooper. Despite former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel's grumblings to the contrary, Cooper was nimble as a traffic cop.

But the larger portion of the debate's success was due to it allowing ordinary Americans to reclaim their own anecdotes, taking them out of the massaging and sometimes transfiguring hands of the candidates. Questioners framed their stories in the way most meaningful to them, whether it was the bald woman hoping to be a breast-cancer survivor or the mother of a son deployed in Iraq wondering what the future holds.

In this regard, CNN deserves credit, too, for choosing questions more in the spirit of YouTube than of conventional campaign coverage. Many bloggers and other observers feared a "wonking down" of the proceedings when they learned that the debate questions would be picked not by the YouTube user community, but by CNN itself.

But while CNN's question choices weren't always the very sharpest -- there were dozens of better-worded questions from atheists than the one the news channel picked -- they didn't allow YouTube users to game the system, either. The network rightly ignored all the questions posed by children acting as adult mouthpieces, and it didn't seem, at first glance, to have selected any that were made by special-interest groups.

To be sure, CNN made mistakes. It plastered its logo so heavily on the debate stage and screen that you might have thought you were in a branding meeting.

Most egregiously, it hid too many of the videos from viewers. CNN never put the YouTube questions full-screen, instead showing only the in-auditorium screen that was playing the videos. The effect was to render much worse the amateur video quality that the network presumably feared. Viewers couldn't see what many of the questioners looked like and, in many cases, had to struggle to make out the text that so many of the videos employed.

Millions of Americans daily go to YouTube not for the cinematography but for the content. These questions had strong content, but CNN, imposing old-media standards, stole some of its power.

But, really, who needs CNN? People wanting to see the questions in full screen, paired up with the candidates' answers, will, of course, be able to go to YouTube for that.

sajohnson@tribune.com