Filed under: al-qaeda, Al-Qaeda Tapes, alqaeda doctored tapes, Australia, Bin Laden Tapes, Britain, CIA, Europe, Fox News, IntelCenter, Iran, Media, Media Fear, Mossad, Murdoch, Propaganda, Psyops, rupert murdoch, United Kingdom, War On Terror, WMD
BUSTED : Murdoch Media Uses Online Game Art For War Propaganda, Claims It Came From Al Qaeda
Darryl Mason
YOUR NEW REALITY
May 30, 2008
UPDATE : The Australian newspaper has illustrated a thoroughly discredited story about Al Qaeda and WMDs with a piece of art from an online video game. The Australian newspaper claimed the above was “supplied”. But supplied by who? Al Qaeda? News agencies? Corporate American intelligence agencies? Or someone in The Australian’s own art department?
Previously : According to Rupert Murdoch’s The Australian, the above image turned up on an Al Qaeda website. Or on a website populated by people who claim to be Al Qaeda. Or it was ’supplied’ to The Australian newspaper by the corporate American intelligence agency that claims to monitor Al Qaeda websites, and then sells what they find for big dollars to the world’s media? It’s hard to keep track.
The Australian newspaper is supposed to Murdoch’s ’quality broadsheet’ down under, but clearly they are more than happy to pump Al Qaeda propaganda as much as the dozens of trash Murdoch tabloids in the US, the UK and Australia.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM..H0PwQMcgD90U56RG2
Officials: Iran & Al-Qaeda In Secret Talks
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/International/story?id=4954667&page=1
Al-Qaeda WMD Tape A Prank?
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/0..-about-al-qaeda-and-wmd/?hp
IntelCenter Dismisses Al-Qaeda Tape Report
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/new..zMBEkl_3hCk&refer=us
Filed under: 2-party system, 2008 Election, Bill Clinton, CNN, corporatism, democratic debate, Fox News, Hillary Clinton, left right paradigm, Murdoch, NAFTA, neocons, Neolibs, planted audience
Hillary’s Corporate Cronies
Ethan Allen
Rogue Government
November 16, 2007
Despite pledging to stop corporate lobbyists and playing herself off as the defender of the common man, Hillary’s contributors speak for themselves. Several internet sites can be found that disclose public donations, and Hillary’s is a laundry list of corporate bankers and media barons. Sure, Hillary’s got her fair share of rock stars and movie celebs supporting her, but she’s also got major money coming in from different business sectors. There’s nothing illegal about it, but it highlights just how fused our two-party system has become, and just which wheels are being greased behind the scenes. Hillary Clinton publicly espouses populist messages and promises to repeal corporate welfare and subsidies, yet is being bankrolled by the very corporations that she pledges to fight. As the old saying goes, ‘Money talks’…
Just a few of her corporate sponsors.
Jack Abernethy, CEO of FOX TV
Chris Albrecht, HBO chairman
Paul Allen, Microsoft co-founder
Lloyd Blankenfein, Goldman Sachs chairman
Warren Buffett, Berkshire-Hathaway, billionaire
Ron Burkle, Supermarket magnate
August Busch III, Anheuser-Busch chairman
John Catsimatidis, Supermarket mogul
Peter Chernin, News corps. COO
Donny Deutsch, Adverstising exec
Barry Diller, media mogul
Tom Freston, former Viacom president
Brad Grey, Paramount pictures chairman
Vernon Jordan, Washington power broker
Jeff Kindler, Pfizer CEO
Norman Lear, TV producer
John Mack, Morgan Stanley chairman
Rupert Murdoch, News corps. chairman
Ronald Perelman, billionaire investor
Sumner Redstone, Viacom chairman
Brian Roberts, Comcast chairman
Hilary Rosen, lobbyist, former RIAA CEO
Haim Saban, media mogul
Ivan Seidenberg, Verizon chairman
Terry Semel, former Yahoo CEO
Ben Silverman, NBC chairman
Sy Sternberg, NY Life insurance chairman
Howard Stringer, Sony CEO
Richard Thalheimer, Sharper image chairman
Sandy Weill, Citigroup chairman
Robert Wright, former NBC chairman
So we have Peter Chernin, Barry Diller, and Rupert Murdoch, all big wigs at the ‘right wing’ FOX news corps, all donating and publicly supporting Hillary Clinton. And of course it even came out in the mainstream news that back in May Rupert Murdoch held a fundraiser for Hillary’s campaign.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/09/politics/main1600694.shtml
Mrs. Clinton has brought in $304,000 in PAC money from the business sector, which makes up for a total of 56% of the total PAC money she has netted. She has also received over $500,000 from lobbyists, $935,000 from banks, $269,000 from pharmaceuticals, $4.7 million from securities, and $2.2 million from the TV and movie industry.
Millionaires and billionaires from all sectors: business and marketing, real estate, media and television, movie studios, pharmaceutical cos, energy, all donating to candidates… even the ones like Hillary Clinton who offer to stop corporate welfare and turn back the influence of lobbyists in Washington. The picture is clear. The power elite in Washington are simply a group of incestuous cronies and demagogues, and have only one interest in mind: self interest. The business and corporate sectors know that the economy is tanking, and are doing everything in their power to maintain success during the consolidation period. And there’s one candidate they know who will not expose their operations, and who will continue the status quo of the great raping of our land, and that candidate is Hillary Clinton.
More complete list of Hillary’s donations can be found here.
http://newsmeat.com/campaign_contributions_to_politicians/donor_list.php?candidate_id=P00003392
http://opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?ID=N00000019&Cycle=2008
Hillary Clinton Laughs About NAFTA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBypp2hqxaQ
CNN Caught Planting Questions and Reporting on Debate Events Before They Happen
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20912413@N05/2036715666/
Hillary Clinton Takes Cash From Recipients of Husband’s Controversial Pardons
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=3866786&page=1
Coal industry attempts to buy a victory by sponsoring tonight’s Dem presidential debate
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/11/15/clean-coal-sponsors-debate/
Clinton Had Multiple Planted Questions
http://noworldsystem.com/2007/11/14..multiple-planted-questions/
Filed under: 2-party system, 9/11 Truth, Fox News, Hillary Clinton, left right paradigm, Murdoch, neocons, New World Order, North American Union, Sean Hannity, Truth Action, We Are Change
Sean Hannity Confronted on Murdoch / Hillary Ties
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWbeSZuXJ_U
Hannity’s Program Director Tries Arresting Me Over A Question
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=790
Filed under: 2-party system, 2008 Election, 9/11 Truth, Alex Jones, bilderberg, diane feinstein, Fox News, George Bush, global elite, Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Murdoch, Nazi, neocons, Neolibs, New World Order, oakland, roger ailes, secret meetings, We Are Change
Hillary Confronted on Bilderberg in Oakland
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SVyn1FR-20
Related News:
More Signs The Bush People Are Preparing For President Hillary Clinton
http://www.nydailynews.com/ne….e_question_is_rudy_says.html
Bush Predicts Hillary For Left Hand Puppet
http://infowars.net/articles/september2007/240907Hillary.htm
Bush Declares: Hillary Will Win Nomination; White House Calls Obama “Lazy”
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1.htm
Examiner Exclusive: Bush quietly advising Hillary Clinton, top Democrats
http://www.examiner.com/a-9531…._Clinton__top_Democrats.html
Clinton Takes Over $20,000 In Fox News Donations
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6823654,00.html
Neocons Salivate Over Hillary
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=940
Hillary Clinton Shuns Fox Debates, But Pockets Murdochs’ Money
Hillary: ‘No Appetite’ for Bush Impeachment
Murdoch, Hillary Alliance May Change Political Rules
Rupert Murdoch Loves Hillary Clinton
Hillary Now Partnering With Many Republicans Who “Tried To Remove Her Husband From Office”…
Hillary Clinton defends link with Murdoch
Murdoch to host fundraiser for Hillary Clinton
Filed under: 2008 Election, CNBC, Fox News, Fred Thompson, GOP, Iran, michigan, Mitt Romney, MSNBC, Murdoch, neocons, poll, Propaganda, Psyops, Republican Debate, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani, Saber Rattling, voter fraud
Ron Paul Wins Debate In Another Landslide
Congressman comes out on top despite being given least time, least questions and despite CNBC pulling its poll half way through
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
October 11, 2007
Ron Paul won another debate by a landslide this week despite efforts on the part of the mainstream media to limit the Congressman’s exposure and to force Rudy Giuliani down the necks of viewers.
According to an MSNBC online poll participated by over 22,000 people, Texas Congressman Ron Paul won the Tuesday night GOP Michigan debate in a landslide.
As shown in the screenshot, when asked who they thought was standing out from the pack, Paul received 86% of the online vote.
Critics have again charged that the polls were deluged by Ron Paul internet spammers. Recently hacks such as Sean Hannity and others have suggested their own polls have been fixed simply because Ron Paul won them.
In a familiar move CNBC even removed its own poll on Tuesday night just hours after the debate had ended when they realized Ron Paul was winning by such a wide margin.
Many Neo-Con blog sites do not even include Ron Paul in their polls anymore because too many people are voting for him! This is not as a result of one person voting multiple times, as in all the online polls only one vote per IP address is allowed, but the operators of the site simply don’t like Ron Paul and have chosen to ignore reality and pretend that he doesn’t exist.
In another poll this week, so called “conservative” bloggers listed Paul as their most hated “person on the right”, even though he is the most conservative Congressman in office!
In addition to CNBC pulling their poll, and continued attacks on the Congressman, the anchors of the debate on Tuesday night only allowed Paul a total of 5:44 minutes to speak, just over 6.5% of the time allotted in total to all candidates. In addition Dr Paul was only asked 7 questions, where as Giuliani and Fred Thompson were both asked over double that amount.
In addition to CNBC pulling their poll, and continued attacks on the Congressman, the anchors of the debate on Tuesday night only allowed Paul a total of 5:44 minutes to speak, just over 6.5% of the time allotted in total to all candidates. In addition Dr Paul was only asked 7 questions, where as Giuliani and Fred Thompson were both asked over double that amount.
See opposite for the figures (courtesy Marc Parent)
Ron Paul wowed viewers once again both during the debate and afterwards as he slammed the candidates who willingly accepted the idea of striking Iran from the air without the authorization of Congress:
“Why don’t we just open up the Constitution and read it? You’re not allowed to go to war without a declaration of war. Now, as far as fleeting enemies goes, yes– if there’s an imminent attack on us. We’ve never had that happen to us in 220 years. The idea that Iran could pose an imminent attack on the United States is preposterous. There’s no way.”
“This is just war propaganda preparing this nation to go to war and spread this war not only into Iraq but into Iran unconstitutionally. It is a road to disaster for us as a nation. It is the road to our financial disaster if we don’t read the Constitution once in a while.”
Afterwards the Congressman hit out at the current Administration, describing them as “all big government people” and calling for massive cuts in spending.
CNBC On Why They Pulled Debate Poll
CNBC
October 12, 2007
Dear folks,
You guys are good. Real good. You are truly a force on World Wide Web and I tip my hat to you.
That’s based on my first hand experience of your work regarding our CNBC Republican candidate debate. After the debate, we put up a poll on our Web site asking who readers thought won the debate. You guys flooded it.
Now these Internet polls are admittedly unscientific and subject to hacking. In the end, they are really just a way to engage the reader and take a quick temperature reading of your audience. Nothing more and nothing less. The cyber equivalent of asking the room for a show of hands on a certain question.
So there was our after-debate poll. The numbers grew … 7,000-plus votes after a couple of hours … and Ron Paul was at 75%.
Now Paul is a fine gentleman with some substantial backing and, by the way, was a dynamic presence throughout the debate , but I haven’t seen him pull those kind of numbers in any “legit” poll. Our poll was either hacked or the target of a campaign. So we took the poll down.
The next day, our email basked was flooded with Ron Paul support messages. And the computer logs showed the poll had been hit with traffic from Ron Paul chat sites. I learned other Internet polls that night had been hit in similar fashion. Congratulations. You folks are obviously well-organized and feel strongly about your candidate and I can’t help but admire that.
But you also ruined the purpose of the poll. It was no longer an honest “show of hands” — it suddenly was a platform for beating the Ron Paul drum. That certainly wasn’t our intention and certainly doesn’t serve our readers … at least those who aren’t already in the Ron Paul camp.
Some of you Ron Paul fans take issue with my decision to take the poll down. Fine. When a well-organized and committed “few” can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of “the many,” I get a little worried. I’d take it down again.
Sincerely,
Allen Wastler
Managing Editor, CNBC.com
Ron Paul On Abrams Report
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P_vHlufc0Y
The International Murdoch Media Smearing Of Ron Paul Begins
http://yournewreality.blogspot.com….edia-smearing-of.html
Paul campaign fueled by Web cash and savvy
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/web…htm?POE=click-refer
MSNBC: ‘Look Who’s Crashing the Party!’; Ron Paul Ranks 5th
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16711064/
Ron Paul Energizes University of Michigan
http://mparent7777-2.blogspot.co…ergizes-university-of.html
Anti-War Group Releases Ad Hailing Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gh-PxT12rpE
Michigan Debate Online Polls
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21209617
http://news.aol.com/elections/stor….1009164009990001
Clinton Takes Over $20,000 In Fox News Donations
Edra Pickler
Associated Press
August 2, 2007
WASHINGTON (AP) – John Edwards criticized Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday for taking more than $20,000 in donations from News Corp. officials, arguing that the company’s Fox News Channel has a right-wing bias and Democrats should avoid the company.
Edwards led the Democratic candidates’ boycott of Fox’s plans to host a Democratic presidential debate. Now he is objecting to News Corp.’s purchase of Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co. and highlighting the relationships that Clinton and other rivals have with the company’s executives.
“The time has come for Democrats to stop pretending to be friends with the very people who demonize the Democratic Party,” Edwards said in a statement.
He challenged his rivals to refuse contributions from executives of News Corp., and return any they had already received. The Edwards campaign sent an e-mail to supporters with the subject line “Unfair and Unbalanced,” asking them to donate in support of his stand against the company.
Said Edwards spokesman Eric Schultz: “Thousands of good people work at Fox News and News Corp., but this is about the bias of top executives, those who make real editorial decisions like Rupert Murdoch, people who continually sanction unfounded attacks on Democrats. And that’s why Democrats like Senator Clinton should either reject their money or return it.”
The campaign timed the challenge to come two days before Edwards, Clinton and other candidates are scheduled to appear at a convention of liberal bloggers, who applauded Edwards’ revolt against the Fox-sponsored debate in March.
Most of Murdoch’s donations go to Republicans, but he gave $4,200 to Clinton’s Senate campaign in 2006 and held a fundraiser for her at News Corp.’s midtown headquarters. He also donated $2,300 to her presidential campaign, according to online campaign donation database Political MoneyLine. Murdoch’s son James, who is seen by many as a likely candidate to eventually succeed his 76-year-old father, gave $3,450.
A Political MoneyLine search of donors employed by News Corp. finds $20,900 in donations to Clinton’s presidential bid from nine company attorneys and executives, including Murdoch’s No. 2, Peter Chernin, who gave the maximum $4,600 allowed.
Chernin is a frequent donor to Democratic causes. He’s also contributed $2,100 each to Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Chris Dodd, Political MoneyLine shows.
The Clinton, Obama and Dodd campaigns declined to respond to Edwards.
Dodd issued a statement urging government antitrust lawyers to review the deal. He expressed concern that The Wall Street Journal would become biased because of News Corp.’s control.
Related News:
Neocons Salivate Over Hillary
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=940
Hillary Clinton Shuns Fox Debates, But Pockets Murdochs’ Money
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/07/16/hillary-clinton-shuns-fox_n_56495.html
Hillary: ‘No Appetite’ for Bush Impeachment
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/4/29/190317.shtml
Hillary Now Partnering With Many Republicans Who “Tried To Remove Her Husband From Office”…
Murdoch Had Hotline to PM During War Build Up
Murdoch set to buy Wall Street Journal
Obama and Hillary Get Cozy With ‘La Raza’
Edwards & Clinton Want to Exclude Rivals
Kucinich angrily reacts to Clinton-Edwards exchange on limiting debate participants
Fake Left-Right Paradigm: Hillary Parties at Fox News
Murdoch Admits He Tried to Shape Public Opinion on Iraq
Hillary Clinton defends link with Murdoch
Murdoch to host fundraiser for Hillary Clinton
Murdoch Had Hotline to PM During War Build Up
Independent
July 19, 2007
Tony Blair had three conversations with the media magnate Rupert Murdoch in the nine days before the start of the Iraq war, the Government has disclosed.
Details of the former prime minister’s contacts with Mr Murdoch have been released under the Freedom of Information Act. After trying to block disclosure for four years, the Government backed down in a surprise change of heart the day after Mr Blair resigned last month.
Requests for information under the Act were submitted by the Liberal Democrat peer Lord Avebury and The Independent journalist James Macintyre. An appeal was pending and evidence was about to be served in a case before an Information Tribunal.
Yesterday the Cabinet Office said there were six telephone discussions between Mr Blair and Mr Murdoch in 20 months, all at crucial moments of his premiership. The subject of their calls was not revealed.
In 2003, Mr Blair phoned the owner of The Times and The Sun on 11 and 13 March, and on 19 March, the day before Britain and the United States invaded Iraq. The war was strongly supported by Murdoch-owned newspapers around the world. The day after two of the calls, The Sun launched vitriolic attacks on the French President Jacques Chirac. The Government quoted him as saying he would “never” support military action against Saddam Hussein, a claim hotly disputed by France.
Mr Blair and Mr Murdoch spoke again on 29 January 2004, the day after publication of the Hutton report into the death of Dr David Kelly. Their next conversation was on 25 April 2004, just after Mr Blair bowed to pressure led by The Sun for him to promise a referendum on the proposed EU constitution. They also spoke on 3 October that year, after Mr Blair said he would not fight a fourth general election.
The Cabinet Office also said Mr Blair had three meetings with Richard Desmond, the proprietor of Express Newspapers, between January 2003 and February 2004. The Government had said releasing the information would be prejudicial to the effective conduct of public affairs, and disclosure of the timing of exchanges with “stakeholders” could reveal the content of the discussion.
Lord Avebury said: “This is a welcome victory for the cause of freedom of information. It shouldn’t have taken so much time and effort to extract information that was clearly of great public interest. Rupert Murdoch has exerted his influence behind the scenes on policies on which he is known to have strong views, including the regulation of broadcasting and the Iraq war.”
In Alastair Campbell’s diaries, published last week, the former spin doctor described a Downing Street dinner for Mr Murdoch and his sons, James and Lachlan, in 2002. “Murdoch pointed out that his were the only papers that gave us support when the going got tough. ‘I’ve noticed,’ said TB,” Mr Campbell wrote. Lance Price, Mr Campbell’s deputy, called Mr Murdoch “the 24th member of the [Blair] Cabinet”. He added: “His presence was always felt. No big decision could ever be made inside No10 without taking account of the likely reaction of three men, Gordon Brown, John Prescott and Rupert Murdoch. On all the really big decisions, anybody else could safely be ignored.”
Last year, Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, ruled that official contacts between Mr Blair and Mr Murdoch should be disclosed, but other contacts were not if no minute or note was taken.
The calls… and the editorial response
How ‘The Sun’ shone on Tony Blair after his phone chats with proprietor Rupert Murdoch
Phone call: 11 March 2003
The Sun says: 12 March 2003
“Like a cheap tart who puts price before principle, money before honour, Jacques Chirac struts the streets of shame. The French President’s vow to veto the second resolution [on Iraq] at the United Nations – whatever it says – puts him right in the gutter.”
Phone call: 13 March 2003
The Sun says: 14 March 2003
“Charlatan Jacques Chirac is basking in cheap applause for his ‘Save Saddam’ campaign – but his treachery will cost his people dear. This grandstanding egomaniac has inflicted irreparable damage on some of the most important yet fragile structures of international order.”
Phone call: 19 March 2003
The Sun says: 20 March 2003
“Time has run out for Saddam Hussein. His day of reckoning is at hand. The war on Iraq has begun… The courage and resilience of Tony Blair and George Bush will now be put to the ultimate test.”
Murdoch to set to buy Wall Street Journal
http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2007/jul/17wsj.htm
Murdoch Admits He Tried to Shape Public Opinion on Iraq
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF9HpuZm6-g
Hillary Clinton Shuns Fox Debates, But Pockets Murdochs’ Money
Thomas B. Edsall
The Huffington Post
July 17, 2007
Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards may not want to participate in debates sponsored by FOX News, but they like taking cash from officials of the company considered an arm of the conservative movement by many liberal Democrats.
In April, Edwards led the charge in refusing to participate in a Fox-sponsored debate. His deputy campaign manager, Jonathan Prince, told AP: “We believe there’s just no reason for Democrats to give Fox a platform to advance the right-wing agenda while pretending they’re objective.”
Within days, Clinton followed suit. Unlike Edwards, Clinton did not directly attack Fox in announcing her decision.
“We’re going to participate in the D.N.C. [Democratic National Committee]-sanctioned debates only. We’ve previously committed to participating in the South Carolina and Tavis Smiley debates,” Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said. The Fox debate was not DNC-approved.
Obama joined in with Clinton. Bill Burton, Obama’s spokesman, said a CNN-sponsored debate would be a more “appropriate venue.”
But in her most recent filing at the FEC, Hillary Clinton reported two large donations from the very top of the Fox corporate structure.
On June 5, Rupert Murdoch, chairman of the News Corporation, gave her presidential bid $2,300. A few weeks later, his son, James R. Murdoch, chief executive of British Sky Broadcasting in London, gave $3,400. Altogether, NewsCorp/Fox executives gave at least $40,000 to the Clinton campaign.
In July 2006, the elder Murdoch hosted a fundraiser for Clinton’s Senate re-election campaign, raising many eyebrows among Democrats. The Financial Times, which first disclosed the event, noted that Murdoch was a part of the “vast right wing conspiracy” named by Hillary Clinton as determined to destroy her husband’s presidency.
She explained her willingness then to accept Murdoch’s support to the FT: “He’s my constituent and I’m very gratified that he thinks I’m doing a good job.”
Asked about the Murdoch contributions to Clinton’s presidential bid, Howard Wolfson, director of communications, said he had no comment.
Obama has taken more $14,000 from NewsCorp/Fox executives, although none came from the Murdochs themselves. In the broad network of NewsCorp/Fox holdings, with many Hollywood and entertainment entities, there are a substantial number of Democrats on the payroll.
Obama’s contributions from NewsCorp/Fox executives included $2,300 each from Daniel Fawcett and Donna Isaacson; $1,000 each from Carla Hacken and Jospeh Hartwick; and a number of donations from other NewsCorp/Fox officials and employees. No comment from the campaign was immediately available.
Edwards received substantially less than Clinton or Obama. His contributions from NewsCorp/Fox executives Louis Supowitz, Jonathan Sarrow, Sean A. Riley, and Jonathan Sarrow total just under $1,000. There was no immediate comment from the Edwards campaign.
Related News:
Murdoch to host fundraiser for Hillary Clinton
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/61faabde-deb8-11da-acee-0000779e2340.html
Hillary Clinton defends link with Murdoch
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/577ecd2e-dfc2-11da-afe4-000….be49a01.html
Fake Left-Right Paradigm: Hillary Parties at Fox News
Hillary Now Partnering With Many Republicans Who “Tried To Remove Her Husband From Office”…