Excerpt:
.
It is fascinating to see how uniform the evening news is. No matter which channel you turn to, the same stories appear with the same general emphasis, even with regard to local stories. A common illusion today is that Fox News is significantly more conservative than the other big three networks. Not so. Fox is merely playing the role of the pro-government cheerleader, just like CNN did during the Gulf War, when it came out of obscurity to become an instant major player. That never happens without government ties. Meanwhile, the other three majors are doing their part. They criticize the current administration mildly, enough to satisfy the liberal opposition. In reality, however, they are part of the same machine designed to protect any insider administration, whether Democratic or Republican, from its strongest critics on the constitutional right. They make sure they keep the most damaging evidences of conspiracy out of the public eye.
.
Virtually every major metropolitan area in the US has a major liberal, establishment newspaper which promotes this hidden agenda. In turn, every state of the Union is more or less controlled by the concentration of voters in those liberal metro areas. Even though most states have a sizeable body of rural conservatives, their voice is rarely heard at the polls.
.
The one thing you can learn from the liberal and controlled media, including arch liberal newspapers like the Washington Post, NY Times, and LA Times, is the direction in which the conspiracy against liberty is going. I spend about a third of my time watching what the opposition does. When they start uniformly promoting certain issues in all the liberal journals (global warming, smart growth, gun control, etc.), it is obvious that there is some coordination going on. But remember, you can only learn to see through the selectively filtered news dispensed by the establishment media if you have other sources that feed you the missing pieces.
.
So where do you look for good alternative news sources? First off, don’t believe everything on the Internet. Just because an alternative news source appears anti-establishment does not mean it is honest or a true advocate for liberty. In fact, many of the most well known and well funded alternative news media outlets are leftist. Oddly enough, this does not mean that these sites are the most dangerous opponents to liberty. Even though I reject their big government socialism, many have recently become allies in the fight to ferret out useful information on the betrayal of US interests by the Bush administration (which the left believes has a "right wing" agenda).
.
The most dangerous sites are those supposedly on the "right" (posing as conservative), but which are actually shilling for the Bush administration. Some of them are sincere but blind, while others are manipulated by their hidden funding sources. Newsmax.com, for example, is funded in part by establishment insiders like Richard Mellon Scaife, and is predictably and unabashedly uncritical of nearly everything Bush does. Chris Ruddy, who runs Newsmax, should know better after publishing a book on the evidence surrounding the Vince Foster murder. But he is strangely silent about evils and deceptions of the Bush administration. WorldNetDaily.com is much better, but it still puts out occasion garbage. NewsWithViews.com is the site I think shows the best judgment about a broad range of issues.
.
The Washington Times, owned by the Mooneys, is pro-Bush to a fault, and never even allows a hint of conspiracy issues or evidence to surface in its articles. Its sister publication, Insight Magazine, seems to be a bit more independent and rigorous. Insight does some first class investigative reporting, but still holds back on criticizing Bush. I’ve always suspected that the Mooneys, with their seemingly bottomless pit of money, are fronting for a government organization, perhaps the CIA. The dark side of the US government is expert in funding both sides of the political spectrum, thus controlling both sides.
.
The establishment has also secretly funded or taken over most conservative talk radio stations. Rush Limbaugh was "turned" early on. He was rewarded with millions in salary increases. I knew when it happened. He suddenly switched from open discussion of conspiracy issues to deriding and denigrating anyone who called in expressing thoughts on conspiracy. Now, there are very few truly independent, conservative voices on talk radio left. Almost all radio stations in the country are owned by one of the four or five major broadcast companies like Clear Channel, Citadel, Cumulous, and Intercom. Slowly, the most hard-hitting and independent conservative talk show hosts are being pushed out or fired. Even Christian radio stations are letting go of hosts who dare challenge President Bush.
.
To me, the Bush betrayal of liberty and constitutional principles has become so open and blatant, that anyone claiming to be a champion of liberty can no longer stand with Bush, at least unconditionally. This is a key litmus test of whether or not you can trust sources who claim to be conservative. All of the major Christian leaders who support Bush unconditionally are either willfully blind or sold out to the lure of popular appeal. They know that to criticize Bush is to court financial disaster. Still, there are a few on the Christian right who have the courage to criticize the Bush administration. Gary Bauer for a time was caught up in the pro-Bush euphoria, but has now retreated. The most consistently insightful Christian critic of the Bush administration is Chuck Baldwin. He is worth listening to on www.chuckbaldwinlive.com.
.
On the left, the CIA directly cultivates journalists who can be relied on to publish key leaks and slanted information—a practice that is illegal but done anyway. Some journalists, I am told, are even on secret monthly retainers. One thing you can count on. There isn’t a single investigative journalist who regularly comes out with blockbuster revelations from inside government, who isn’t on the receiving end of regular, purposeful, government leaks. There are even a few on the right that receive leaks from sources in government claiming to be patriotic. However, these sources only leak information confirming and supporting the Bush justifications for war and intervention. It is strange that we rarely see any whistleblowers emerge from the CIA anymore. The dark side has apparently eliminated all opposition within that agency. The FBI still has a few that break ranks, but since the Justice Department refuses to give them a hearing, I think any others contemplating blowing the whistle will decide instead to remain silent or resign.
.
This much is for sure. No truly patriotic CIA agent or FBI agent is allowed to leak critical information about illegal government activities or conspiracy for long. They are hunted down and rousted out of the government, and are often prosecuted like criminals by federal agencies eager to discredit and silence them. Dozens of whistleblowing agents from all federal agencies are languishing in US federal prisons on trumped up charges.
.
In a similar vein, watch out for the many up-and-coming "private" intelligence sources, like Stratfor.com, Debka.com or Geostrategy-Direct. When organizations with a world-wide intelligence reach suddenly appear out of nowhere, with no substantial traceable sources of funding, you can be assured they are almost always tapping into government sources. Stratfor was started by a college professor, and almost at its inception had an instant worldwide presence of top notch economic and geo-political intelligence. The analyses on that site are suspiciously skewed along lines that would mask the real motives behind world events. Debka.com is run by an Israeli business journalist who openly admitted to me that his sources are all government insiders. The trouble with that kind of arrangement is that a one or two man shop, even if sincere, can’t possible check up on whether they are being fed disinformation or not. Sometimes they can tell, but usually they cannot.
.
Another example is the Northeast Intelligence Network (NEIN), which also claims to know too much for a group that is truly private—especially one that claims to be on the right side of the political spectrum (which is specifically excluded from true insider information). In making warnings about terrorism, this outfit claims to have analyzed thousands of telephone intercepts. No private source has access to this kind of information. Either they are making it up or they are tapping into government intelligence directly, which makes them no more private than government covert mercenary corporations like DynCorp, MPRI, and Vinelli. Yes, NEIN may have a few military types who feed them information. I too have a few who occasionally let me in on what they observe, none of which is specifically classified or illegal to disclose. However, no one in the military leaking the kind of info NEIN publishes can do so regularly without being caught—especially when NEIN has an internet presence that openly publishes these claims. In like manner, watch out for Al Martin and Sherman Skolnick. They both claim more than they can know without having government sources feeding them.
.
Insider connected corporations and wealthy individuals also control think tanks on both the right and the left. The Hoover Institution, American Enterprise Institute, and National Review, even though they have done good research in the past, have become shills for neo-conservative globalist intervention. The Heritage Foundation used to be really conservative and hard hitting until it started to receive funding from establishment sources. Now it is relatively benign. Rarely does it criticize the Bush administration. The only exception to the corruption by funding trend has been the libertarian Cato Institute. Despite receiving major funding from establishment sources, it still resists control, and has not strayed far from its libertarian roots - except that it will never accuse the government of conspiracy. That seems to be the universal requirement for keeping an organization free from establishment attacks. No one is allowed to play with the majors if they present evidence of conspiracy.
.
On the left, we still have with us organizations that grew out of Communist or Marxist influence within tax exempt foundations. Early on, the left targeted and gained control of the Carnegie, Brookings, and Ford Foundations. Even younger foundations like the Wallace, MacArthur, and Pew Charitable Trust are run with a liberal agenda. Some, like the Rand Corporation, Wackenhut Corrections and BCCI, are suspected of being outright government operations, dressed in civilian garb.
.
Then there are the traditional globalist organizations like the CFR, Trilateral Commission and Aspen Institute. Although each of these organizations takes great pains to include in their membership up and coming middle-of-the-roaders, along with a few unthinking conservatives, to mask their hidden agenda, it is my opinion that these organizations are where the really dangerous people, who actively work toward the subversion of American constitutional sovereignty, congregate. Keep an eye on the top leaders of these organizations. I have noted that since the Iraq war, the media has been calling upon spokesmen from the CFR much more frequently than in prior years. I suspect the media is trying to bring the CFR into the mainstream consciousness of Americans in a subtle, positive way.
.
http://www.joelskousen.com/hotissues_news.html