MSM’s Fake War, Part 4: The Media’s Sins of Omission

by Mary W Maxwell, LLB

So far our series has contained: Part 1, a reminder that the media still has not caught up with Oswald being a patsy (but what’s 55 years among friends?), and a video of Udo Ulfkotte’s whistle-blowing about the CIA pressure on journos in Europe.

Part 2 was a list of the winners of last year’s Pullet Surprises and Golden Wankleys; and Part 3 was about the media’s being corralled, and “hunting in packs,” on the day of the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.

Today I aim to demonstrate to Marjorie Pritchard that media is the enemy of the people, by highlighting the Mainstream Media’s sins of omission. I’ll list the important – sometimes earthshattering — subjects on which the MSM remains mum to the nth degree.

What Is the MSM?

The word media is the plural of medium. The word “medium” means “in between.” You might visit a medium if you want to make contact with the dead. That lady – it’s usually a lady – stands in between you and the beloved deceased, as it were. She is an avenue of communication.

Today the MSM (mainstream media) – stands in between facts — actual events – and us. They report those events, or interpret them for us, or, as I will now show they omit them.

Owing to their apparent coordination with one another, different parts of the media can be seen as a united front. Thus I prefer to use the singular verb. I will say, for example, “The media informs you” instead of “The media inform you.”

In Australia before John Howard was prime minister, there was legislation in place to prevent any one media group controlling the information in a particular state. If you owned the major newspaper in Sydney, you could not also run a Sydney TV station type thing.  But those rules of cross-ownership have been gradually weakened by Parliament. Natch.

Sins of Omission by the MSM

Here then is my list of topics that are studiously avoided by the MSM. Begin with 1964.

Gulf of Tonkin

This is a famous false flag, and it’s noteworthy that it is admitted to be so. President Lyndon Johnson, wanting to increase the presence of US troops in Vietnam (by a huge number) lied to us that the Viet Cong had torpedoed an American ship in the Gulf of Tonkin. Congress duly authorized the troop increase with its “Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.”

It was later discovered that the story was false.  Congress repealed the Resolution. I was not aware of that repeal until doing research for my war-powers case, Maxwell v. Trump, in 2017. I’m not sure if the MSM reported that repeal, maybe they did, but they surely did not make a fuss about the original false flag.

Granted, the media did give gave much coverage to citizens protesting the Vietnam war. I now believe the protests were themselves driven by the Powers That Be who had determined that the war should end. College students in the late 1960s were talking about the rights of the Vietnamese people to do their own thing. They naturally worried about the high death toll of US soldiers. Joan Baez sang poignantly “Where have all the flowers gone?”.

Many academics and numerous politicians took a strong anti-war stand. But not about the false flag. (Huh? What false flag?)

Cold War  

Although the Soviet Union had been an ally of the US in World War II, the American government quickly set up a new war in the late 1940s — starring The Commies as the world’s great enemy. We were so sure the communist thing was bad (though it was actually similar to the well-accepted Christian idea of sharing wealth equally) that we actually intoned the rhyme “Better dead than Red.”

The Cold War made for all sorts of “explanations” of our (US) foreign policy. We simply had, for example, to get into the territories abandoned by Portugal’s empire in 1974 when the Salazar regime collapsed. Hence, we should provide arms to groups in Angola that would keep that country from going Pinko. (In other words, we should stir up civil war.)

It was never called to our attention by the media that the Cold War itself was fake.  The conservative scholar Anthony Sutton found to his surprise, when researching the USSR’s technology, that such companies as Ford Motor and General Electric were transferring technology to them like mad. The illusion of enmity was cultivated for domestic audiences, while the reality was one of collusion.

Watergate

The latest in the saga of Watergate is Fiona Barnett’s announcement that NYPD officer James Rothstein told her the real motive for the Nixon team’s break-in to the Democratic Campaign office in the Watergate Hotel in 1972.  It was to rescue a list of politicians who were being subjected to blackmail by involving them in pedophilia. Very funny.

But even before that, we in the dissident world became aware of aspects of the Watergate defeat of Nixon’s presidency — which the MSM has never so much as alluded to, namely it was all engineered for Nixon to resign and make way for Nelson Rockefeller to become president.

Nelson had, as far back as 1944, set his eyes on the White House, but Nelson being Nelson would never think of just running for office – he had to create a complicated deceit. First, he engineered the 25th Amendment to the Constitution; it allows a president to appoint a new VP if the VP dies or quits.

(When FDR died in 1944, Vice President Truman became prez, but no one rose up to fill the vacant office of VP as there was no constitutional provision for it. See?)

Probably it was Nelson who picked Agnew to be Nixon’s 1968 running mate, as Agnew would be easily kick-outable (No one could stand him. Remember the bumper sticker “Get Agnew First”?)  Indeed Agnew was then told to leave, in 1972, as is reported in Agnew’s book “Go Quietly, or Else…).

Gerald Ford was the appointed new VP. (Ford was a major, major pedo, per Cathy O’Brien’s book, TranceFormation of America.)

Then Nelson Rockefeller got Nixon to fear impeachment to the point of resigning, in 1973. This made Ford the new president — and who should Ford appoint as VP?  Why Nelson of course. (But it seems that Nelson chickened out of assassinating Ford to reach the coveted Oval Office.)

The 1975 Frank Church Hearings

I cannot accuse the MSM of failing to tell the nation that a Senator was holding hearings about the CIA’s overstepping its mandate. Some of it was even televised.  But I can say that not enough was reported to let people learn that the CIA was doing Mk-Ultra torture on many children of military. We had to wait for Brice Taylor’s 1998 book, Thanks for The Memories, to find out the brutality of it.

Even now you won’t find the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, or the Chicago Tribune letting loose with the fantastic information provided by survivors (available in my book Deliverance!).  Did the Adelaide Advertiser send a reporter to review my 2018 Fringe play about False Memories?  Nah.

1979 the Release of Bobby Garwood as POW in Vietnam

Yet there is the occasional MSM journalist who is so moved by Truth that he or she will flush her career away by telling what needs to be told.  Monica Jensen-Stevenson is one such person. She tried to tell the story of Bobby Garwood in the 60 Minutes program “Dead or Alive?”.

Bobby knew that more soldiers were still POWs in Vietnam. He had escaped in (by the help of a Finish diplomat!) but for 18 years, until Jensen-Stevenson wrote her book Spite House, he did not receive a welcome home by the public, as his amazing story could not be told.

In fact, Bobby Garwood got a court martial for “desertion” and the tabloids’ accused him of – what else? – child molestation. Finally, a Congressional committee agreed that there were, as he claimed, 20 more POWs in Vietnam.

Did the MSM make anything of this?  Did you read about it? I read about it when a 9-11 researcher and broadcaster, Hummux, told me to read Fran Shure’s analysis of it.  That was in 2018, another 21 years after Monica’s 1997 book, and almost 40 years since Garwood escaped.

Good God.

Iran Contra, Garry Webb, Porter Goss, 1980s

Supposedly, the CIA wanted to fight the socialist government of Daniel Otriz in Nicaragua in the 1980s and was stymied by Congress’s “No”. (The No was expressed in the Boland Amendment, forbidding arms to the “Contra’s”) The CIA then got the funding it needed by importing cocaine. (Why is the word “Iran” in “Iran-Contra”? Don’t ask, too complicated.)

Let’s concentrate on the drugs.  It became known, via dissidents such as pilot Richard Taus (who has now been in jail for 30 years for his efforts) that the US was a big importer of cocaine.  A journalist in San Jose, Garry Webb, then uncovered the fact that the drugs were delivered to gangs who would in turn pass them – for free? – to the ghetto.  (Have you heard of the School-to-Prison pipeline?).

Anyway, just as they kill journalists in Third World countries for daring to tell the truth, they killed Garry Webb.  He died of two bullet wounds to the head which, in an absurd move, was ruled “suicide.”  Earlier, Webb had got Congresswoman Maxine Waters to hold a hearing about the cocaine shipments, but this was wrecked by Rep Porter Goss, himself both a CIA member and a drug dealer.

Did you see all that on TV?  Oh, you didn’t?  Oh. Maybe it wasn’t interesting enough for TV.

Or maybe I wasn’t fooling around when I said the “medium” — the press — is “what stands between facts and us.”

1990s

Let’s skip the 1990s, for lack of space in this article, and move to the biggie, 9-11.

Nine Eleven: September 11, 2001

While the MSM gives silence to some issues, like Garwood the POW, or Porter Goss the double-suicider, it can’t be said to have been silent about 9/11. Undoubtedly media was tasked with traumatizing us to the max that day. The idea was to make Americans believe the nation was under threat from… um… a guy in a cave.  A caveman, so to speak.

And you know how rough it can be, to be under threat from a caveman.

My whinge has to do with MSM’s silence about the unanswered questions of 9-11. Personally, I didn’t even know there were questions until 2005.  I believed Bin Laden did it. My husband had died the previous year and I was in a state of near catatonia about that. I didn’t have the brains to notice the blatant hallmarks of a false-flag operation.

But word seeps out.

In this case it has to be said that the MSM does not stop at indoctrinating us about the caveman side of the story. It actively and vigorously fights off any person who dares to say “9-11 was an Inside Job.” I’ll bet some people have been killed for possessing conclusive information. I’ll bet some people have been threatened with death if they happen to be authoritative types who then might be believed by the people.

Come to think of it, it’s quite possible that President Trump is one such person. We do know for sure that he proclaimed, soon after 9-11, that the twin towers must have come down by explosions, not fire or attacks by planes. He said this was based on his familiarity with the building’s structure, and people realize from Trump Tower that he is a building-conscious kind of guy.

I’m wondering if this is part of the reason Marjorie Pritchard and Co are slamming the president – to make sure nobody trusts him. And to make sure he doesn’t get a swelled head (I mean more of a swelled head than he already has) such that he would blurt out the truth about 9-11.

The MSM is also working diligently at keeping a lid on “the families’ questions” about 9-11. Consider this – the goal of a fancy-dancy journalist is to do a terrific job of answering questions that have already been raised – as well as raising some new ones.  Here we have many questions:

1. Why was the WTC debris removed, against the law of evidence, before anyone could test it?

2. How did 19 hijackers get on 4 planes without benefit of boarding pass?

3. Why is there no sign of a crashed plane at either the Pentagon or Shanksville?

4. How did the Air Force break all its protocols about responding to an invasion?

5. How is Larry Silverstein not held responsible for “pulling” Building 7 when he already admitted, on video, that he did so?

You have to wonder, does Marjorie Pritchard know that there was a Building 7? It came down around 5.20pm, on camera, at the World Trade Center but has never been mentioned in any way, shape, or form by the Boston Globe.

The Cold-Blooded Murder of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 2013

And now to the Marathon bombing, a subject on which I have written the definitive book. Not to be confused with the movie Patriot’s Day which is the definitive barrel of lies.

Come right to the famous affidavit by Aunt Maret Tsarnaeva. She tells us that the US government, in the person of members of Jahar Tsanaev’s defense team, went to Jahar’s parents in Russia, 14 times no less, and told them outright that their son was innocent but nevertheless he “must not resist conviction.”

Don’t you love it? Red, white and blue, rocket’s red glare, apple pie, Bambi, and all that, but it’s still OK to say “Hey look, we got a problem. We botched the false flag at the boatside in Watertown, and now we need you to do your patriotic duty of telling your kid to shut up.”

(When Judge George O’Toole received the affidavit, he did not challenge it or do anything with it. If he thinks it is untrue he can have the aunt extradited from Canada for perjury, no?)

As for Tamerlan, the other son, who is now in the cemetery, the Globe wants you to believe he got there by his own devices, having thrown IEDs, pressure cookers, refrigerators, and whatever else was handy, at some poor hard-working cops, one of whom, Rick Donohue, nice Irish name, nearly bled to death.

OK. I’ll stop now, since as you can see, I am losing control. It drives me crazy that my friends and neighbors seem perfectly willing to believe a bunch of false stories.

Please get on the case. I mean the case of the outrageous “coordinated effort,” scheduled for tomorrow, August 16, 2018, which aims to prove that El Presidente was wrong in identifying the media as the enemy of the people.

The Globe announced a few hours ago that 200 editors have taken up the cry.

Go, Dee McLachlan! Go GumshoeNews! Fix this horrible situation!

— Mary W Maxwell, LLB, is the author of “Teen Etiquette with Feelings” written under the pen name Fortunata Fifi, available at Amazon. This book is laden with Shakespearean quotes such as “Is this a newspaper which I see before me?”