“What you have just heard; Only a handful of people on earth know, even in classified projects; Is highly compartmented. This is really way past TSSCI – Top Secret Special Compartmented Intelligence.” | Dr. Steven Greer
“What you have just heard; Only a handful of people on earth know, even in classified projects; Is highly compartmented. This is really way past TSSCI – Top Secret Special Compartmented Intelligence.” | Dr. Steven Greer
Note to would-be suiciders: Always shoot yourself on the head twice in order to have a successful suicide.
by: Mike Adams
Friday, November 29, 2019
Jaynes was a celebrated author whose books achieved USA Today bestseller status. Her novels showcased the criminality, child abuse and deep-rooted fraud of the vaccine industry.
Her most recent book, Malice, explores the medical ethics battle of a character named Dr. Daniel Winters, who tries to expose a dangerous vaccine that the medical establishment knows is harming and killing children. Her thriller Malice is also available as an audio book on Audible.com. See four of her book titles at this link on GoodReads.com.
Jaynes was reportedly found with two gunshots to the head, according to AmarketNews.com. (Not one gunshot, but two.) The death was reportedly ruled a “suicide,” which begs the question of how a person can shoot themselves in the head twice.
Many of her fans suspect Jaynes may have been murdered by the vaccine industry, which has a long history of advocating criminal fraud, bribery and kickbacks, outlandish medical experiments on human children, coordinated science fraud and other heinous crimes.
Scary! “USA Today bestselling author who wrote about corruption inside the vaccine industry found dead with two gunshots to the head, ruled su If you choose vaccines then you choose death. But if you choose to fight against vaccines then you Are a… https://www.caudle-rutledge.com/m/obituaries/Jennifer-Jaynes/Memories …
Jennifer Jaynes – View Obituary & Service Information
Share Memories and Support the Family.
Our prayers go out to the family members of Jennifer Jaynes, who was a courageous and brilliant researcher and writer. We are not yet aware of any organized effort to investigate her death or help raise funds for her family, but here are some publicly available addresses that may help you organize or share the word about such efforts:
Her book publicist appears to be Ashley Vanicek who works for Thomas & Mercer, an imprint owned by Amazon.com — a corporation that has recently joined with Big Pharma to start retailing dangerous prescription drugs that will be delivered by drones. Vanicek’s contact is publicly listed as firstname.lastname@example.org – which appears to be a generic email address.
Jaynes’ literary agent is publicly listed as Italia Gandolfo, who works for Gandolfo Helin & Fountain (GHliterary.com). The agency has a public page describing the works of Jennifer Jaynes at this link: https://ghliterary.com/clients/jennifer-jaynes/
We do not publish this information to inconvenience Jaynes’ publisher or agent, of course: We hope to help spur a deeper investigation into her death, given all the suspicious deaths of individuals who have courageously spoken out against the “vaccine deep state” which quite literally consists of murderers and execution squads that seek out and silence individuals who pose a threat to the controlled vaccine narrative.
Ironically, the very description of the criminal vaccine industry that Jaynes wrote about in her own books is reality, not fiction. And many Jaynes fans believe they came for her and killed her.
As a targeted whistleblower and investigative journalist myself, I have been forced to pursue thousands of hours of pistol, rifle and shotgun combat training over the last decade in order to ensure my own safety against the vaccine criminal cartels. I am armed at all times and cannot speak in public without hiring a minimum of four armed security personnel to watch my back.
It appears that Jennifer was about to launch a much larger media project, as she is the owner of Ink Bug Media which has a web domain that’s not yet populated with content: InkBugMedia.com
Jaynes’ fan base is, of course, horrified to discover that this talented, courageous woman has been killed. Jaynes had a very loyal following of readers and fans who spoke very highly of her work… and honored her commitment to exploring the truth about the criminal vaccine industry, even if it meant writing so-called “fiction novels” to get the word out.
As one Amazon.com reader wrote:
My oldest daughter and her younger brother both had reactions to vaccines. Reading about Suzie almost had me hyperventilating. The scenario was nearly identical to what happened with my oldest daughter. The seizures that began after receiving a “necessary” baby shot have never gone away… I don’t think what she wrote as fiction is very far from the truth in regards to pharmaceutical companies today. Just listen to a few drug commercials and really hear the long list of side effects.
The book received rave reviews from readers who found its story line to be compelling and rooted in truths about the criminal vaccine industry. Other readers wrote:
This book, Malice, was to date, even her best novel. I was drawn into this book from page one to the final page. A great psychological thriller that takes you on a journey that is is so heart pounding, you can’t wait to read what happens next. This story is written in a way that the storyline is believable and the material is well researched. There was a twist I didn’t see coming, and that was a game changer!! I could not put this book down! Superb novel!!
This was the best book I’ve read in a long time! As a physician, I could so relate to this doctor just starting out, whose ideals come in conflict with corporate medicine and pharmaceutical corruption. The author presents some shocking truths about the practice of modern medicine, which makes this a must-read for anyone working in the medical field, or for anyone who places their trust in those hands. I could not put this book down, and was rewarded with some unexpected plot turns as the story unfolded. Brava, Jennifer Jaynes! So well done!
Jennifer Jaynes captivates her audience with suspense. Every Jennifer Jaynes book including Malice I had read within a few days because I was so engaged in her writing. I appreciate the research that she puts in to her writing. Even though her writing is fictional she includes truths about what is encountered in our society. In Malice she informs her readers about the truth of the drug industry. Well done Jennifer!
We pray for Jennifer Jaynes and her surviving relatives, and we hope that her novels will reach an ever-expanding number of readers and fans who realize that the criminal cartel Jaynes is describing in her novels isn’t fiction at all. It’s the reality of the Big Pharma drug cartels and their vaccine deep state “black hat” operations that engage in murder-for-hire.
It isn’t fiction. It’s the vaccine industry’s business model.
Jaynes’ death comes on the heels of over 75 other holistic doctors, naturopaths and wellness educators who have died under extremely mysterious circumstances over the last three years or so. Erin Elizabeth of HealthNutNews.com has exhaustively documented many of these mysterious deaths in her website articles and public speeches.
To all holistic medicine practitioners: Arm yourself and learn to defend your life against the violence of the vaccine industry. If you aren’t legally carrying a pistol with you at all times, you are not prepared for the reality of the vaccine industry’s execution squads.
Remember: An industry that murders and maims children for profit thinks nothing of killing whistleblowers and writers who get in their way. The vaccine industry has zero value for human life. Many vaccine researchers knowingly and deliberately oversee the tainting of vaccines with cancer viruses in order to cause widespread cancer outbreaks. And yes, vaccines are manufactured using aborted human fetal tissue, as the CDC openly admits. The aborted human ingredients are called MRC-5 and WI-38 human diploid cells. The FDA admits to their use here. And the CDC openly lists such ingredients in this vaccine excipient document (PDF). Here’s a link from GSK that admits the use of aborted human fetal tissue ingredients in their MMR vaccine.
Stay informed. Read Vaccines.news for daily updates on the vaccine industry and its crimes against humanity.
Watch vaccine truth videos at Brighteon.com, now the online hub for uncensored videos about the dangers of vaccines.
And check out the bombshell new film Vaxxed 2 at Vaxxed2.com.
“Does Astronaut’s visor reflection show a stagehand on the Apollo fake Moon set?” is the question posed by Streetcap1, who shared his recent discovery on YouTube.
The photo in question is taken from the Apollo 17 mission, which took place in late 1972. Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt spent about 22 hours exploring the surface and were the last humans to walk on the moon.
The moon landings have been the source of skepticism for conspiracy theorists ever since astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin set foot on the moon in 1969.
According to Streetcap1, who took a picture of the NASA image using his “software,” the astronaut’s visor reflection appears to show a man “not wearing a spacesuit,” standing on the moon.
“It looks like a man back in the early 1970s, long hair, you know,” he said. “He is wearing some sort of, I don’t know, waistcoat type thing… one leg there, with one shoe, another leg and a shadow of that figure presumably.”
Streetcap1 says he wasn’t a moon landing disbeliever until he came across the suspicious image. “I sort of think we did make it to the Moon, but this is starting to make me think if we did because where is this guy’s spacesuit?”
Streetcap1’s video divided opinion, with some people surprised to have their suspicions raised.
“Pretty Earth-shaking for a believer in the landing,” a commentator said.
“I vote astronaut… the shadow on the ground looks more like an astronaut in a bulky suit,” said another.
However, other photographs taken from the Apollo 17 mission suggest the “stagehand” in the helmet reflection is likely the other astronaut.
One image shared on the NASA website shows Cernan on the moon, with another astronaut clearly seen in his helmet’s reflection.
As Cernan and Schmitt performed three moonwalks over three days, pilot Ronald E. Evans stayed orbiting the moon during this time, in the command service module of the spacecraft.
An image shared on NASA’s site shows Schmitt standing next to the large boulder featured in the suspicious image. It was taken by Cernan. If Schmitt turned toward Cernan, he would have been in an ideal position for Cernan’s reflection to be captured in Schmitt’s helmet.
The Apollo 17 mission aimed to capture precise images for mapping and examining the lunar surface. Multiple cameras were used on the surface of the moon, meaning there were many different cameras that could have captured the astronaut with the helmet reflection.
The astronauts had three battery-powered 70-millimeter Hasselblad cameras which were attached to their chests, the Lunar Planetary Institute reports. They also carried a 16-millimeter Maurer Data Acquisition Camera that could be handheld or mounted to the lunar module and lunar roving vehicle.
A lunar surface TV camera was also used and operated from three positions, either mounted on a tripod, or on the modularized equipment storage assembly (MESA). “The camera could be aimed and controlled by the astronauts or remotely controlled by personnel in the mission control center,” LPI said.
NASA doesn’t comment on specific moon hoax theories, but it has said in the past that it did go to the moon.
If you’re skeptical of western power structures and you’ve ever engaged in online political debate for any length of time, the following has definitely happened to you.
You find yourself going back and forth with one of those high-confidence, low-information establishment types who’s promulgating a dubious mainstream narrative, whether that be about politics, war, Julian Assange, or whatever. At some point they make an assertion which you know to be false–publicly available information invalidates the claim they’re making.
“I’ve got them now!” you think to yourself, if you’re new to this sort of thing. Then you share a link to an article or video which makes a well-sourced, independently verifiable case for the point you are trying to make.
Then, the inevitable happens.
“LMAO! That outlet!” they scoff in response. “That outlet is propaganda/fake news/conspiracy theory trash!”
Or something to that effect. You’ll encounter this tactic over and over and over again if you continually engage in online political discourse with people who don’t agree with you. It doesn’t matter if you’re literally just linking to an interview featuring some public figure saying a thing you’d claimed they said. It doesn’t matter if you’re linking to a WikiLeaks publication of a verified authentic document. Unless you’re linking to CNN/Fox News (whichever fits the preferred ideology of the establishment loyalist you’re debating), they’ll bleat “fake news!” or “propaganda!” or “Russia!” as though that in and of itself magically invalidates the point you’re trying to make.
And of course it doesn’t. What they are doing is called attacking the source, also known as an ad hominem, and it’s a very basic logical fallacy.
Most people are familiar with the term “ad hominem”, but they usually think about it in terms of merely hurling verbal insults at people. What it actually means is attacking the source of the argument rather than attacking the argument itself in a way that avoids dealing with the question of whether or not the argument itself is true. It’s a logical fallacy because it’s used to deliberately obfuscate the goal of a logical conclusion to the debate.
“An ad hominem is more than just an insult,” explains David Ferrer for The Quad. “It’s an insult used as if it were an argument or evidence in support of a conclusion. Verbally attacking people proves nothing about the truth or falsity of their claims.”
This can take the form of saying “Claim X is false because the person making it is an idiot.” But it can also take the form of “Claim X is false because the person making it is a propagandist,” or “Claim X is false because the person making it is a conspiracy theorist.”
I don’t think @bellingcat knows what’s about to hit them now that @caitoz is on their case. Settle in for a few fun months as their entire bullshit narrative on #Syria chemical weapons comes tumbling down. Here’s her opening jab: https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/narrative-managers-faceplant-in-hilarious-opcw-scandal-spin-job-6710730cda01 …
Narrative Managers Faceplant In Hilarious OPCW Scandal Spin Job
Imperialist propaganda firm Bellingcat has published a response to the ever-expanding OPCW scandal, and it’s got to be seen to be believed.
Someone being an idiot, a propagandist or a conspiracy theorist is irrelevant to the question of whether or not what they’re saying is true. In my last article debunking a spin job on the OPCW scandal by the narrative management firm Bellingcat, I pointed out that Bellingcat is funded by imperialist regime change operations like the National Endowment for Democracy, which was worth highlighting because it shows the readers where that organization is coming from. But if I’d left my argument there it would still be an ad hominem attack, because it wouldn’t address whether or not what Bellingcat wrote about the OPCW scandal is true. It would be a logical fallacy; proving that they are propagandists doesn’t prove that what they are saying in this particular instance is false.
What I had to do in order to actually refute Bellingcat’s spin job was show that they were making a bad argument using bad logic, which I did by highlighting the way they used pedantic wordplay to make it seem as though the explosive leaks which have been emerging from the OPCW’s investigation of an alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma, Syria were insignificant. I had to show how Bellingcat actually never came anywhere close to addressing the actual concerns about a leaked internal OPCW email, such as extremely low chlorinated organic chemical levels on the scene and patients’ symptoms not matching up with chlorine gas poisoning, as well as the fact that the OPCW investigators plainly don’t feel as though their concerns were met since they’re blowing the whistle on the organisation now.
And, for the record, Bellingcat’s lead trainer/researcher guy responded to my arguments by saying I’m a conspiracy theorist. I personally count that as a win.
The correct response to someone who attacks the outlet or individual you’re citing instead of attacking the actual argument being made is, “You’re attacking the source instead of the argument. That’s a logical fallacy, and it’s only ever employed by people who can’t attack the argument.”
The demand that you only ever use mainstream establishment media when arguing against establishment narratives is itself an inherently contradictory position, because establishment media by their very nature do not report facts against the establishment. It’s saying “You’re only allowed to criticise establishment power using outlets which never criticize establishment power.”
2/2 No principle is worth nuclear war. This honest reporter, @caitoz, beholden to no ideology or special interest, calls it as it is, not as the #MSM wants to see — https://consortiumnews.com/2019/11/19/25-times-trump-has-been-dangerously-hawkish-on-russia/ …
25 Times Trump Has Been Dangerously Hawkish On Russia
Caitlin Johnstone discredits a CNN listicle on Trump’s “softness” towards Moscow. In fact, she writes, the U.S. president has actually been consistently reckless towards Moscow, with zero resistance…
Good luck finding a compilation of Trump’s dangerous escalations against Moscow like the one I wrote the other day anywhere in the mainstream media, for example. Neither mainstream liberals nor mainstream conservatives are interested in promoting that narrative, so it simply doesn’t exist in the mainstream information bubble. Every item I listed in that article is independently verifiable and sourced from separate mainstream media reports, yet if you share that article in a debate with an establishment loyalist and they know who I am, nine times out of ten they’ll say something like “LOL Caitlin Johnstone?? She’s nuts!” With “nuts” of course meaning “Says things my TV doesn’t say”.
It’s possible to just click on all the hyperlinks in my article and share them separately to make your point, but you can also simply point out that they are committing a logical fallacy, and that they are doing so because they can’t actually attack the argument.
This will make them very upset, because for the last few years establishment loyalists have been told that it is perfectly normal and acceptable to attack the source instead of the argument. The mass hysteria about “fake news” and “Russian propaganda” has left consumers of mainstream media with the unquestioned assumption that if they ever so much as glance at an RT article their faces will begin to melt like that scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark. They’ve been trained to believe that it’s perfectly logical and acceptable to simply shriek “propaganda!” at a rational argument or well-sourced article which invalidates their position, or even to proactively go around calling people Russian agents who dissent from mainstream western power-serving narratives.
But it isn’t logical, and it isn’t acceptable. The best way to oppose their favorite logically fallacious tactic is to call it like it is, and let them deal with the cognitive dissonance that that brings up for them.
Me: This link proves my claim.
Empire loyalist: Eww, THAT outlet? They publish criticisms of western imperialism!
Me: Yeah. That’s why I’m linking to them.
Empire loyalist: No. You can only criticize western imperialism linking to outlets that never criticize western imperialism.
Of course some nuance is needed here. Remember that alternative media is just like anything else: there’s good and bad, even within the same outlet, so make sure what you’re sharing is solid and not just some schmuck making a baseless claim. You can’t just post a link to some Youtuber making an unsubstantiated assertion and then accuse the person you’re debating of attacking the source when they dismiss it. That which has been presented without evidence may be dismissed without evidence, and if the link you’re citing consists of nothing other than unproven assertions by someone they’ve got no reason to take at their word, they can rightly dismiss it.
If however the claims in the link you’re citing are logically coherent arguments or well-documented facts presented in a way that people can independently fact-check, it doesn’t matter if you’re citing CNN or Sputnik. The only advantage to using CNN when possible would be that it allows you to skip the part where they perform the online equivalent of putting their fingers in their ears and humming.
Don’t allow those who are still sleeping bully those who are not into silence. Insist on facts, evidence, and intellectually honest arguments, and if they refuse to provide them call it what it is: an admission that they have lost the debate.
Thanks for reading! 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. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast on either Youtube, soundcloud, Apple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemit, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing 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. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.
“I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself… That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. … The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States.”
-Osama bin Laden statement, published by BBC
In essence, this article is about a map, a video, a timeline, and a chart. Please, take a few minutes to carefully examine each.
I have asked dozens, if not hundreds, of Americans to please tell me why, exactly, America is at war with Afghanistan, the longest war in American history. Some say, “Because they attacked us.” Most have no answer, whatsoever, but instead ask me, “Why?” I respond by asking them what large oil-producing nation borders Afghanistan in the west. Some guess, “Iraq.” Nobody knows. I then ask what large oil-consuming nation borders Afghanistan on the East. Nobody knows. I tell them the answers are Iran (Israel’s and Saudi Arabia’s arch enemy) and China.
0 miles: Distance from Afghanistan to Iran
0 miles: Distance from Afghanistan to China
7,477 miles: Distance from Afghanistan to Washington, D.C.
Said a different way, the USA invaded and occupies a nation on the other side of the planet that fucking borders Iran and China, then complains about Persian and Chinese aggressive behavior in the Persian Gulf and South China Sea.
It is highly unlikely that you have seen the interviews in this 4 minute and 13-second video, a compilation of FDNY firefighters talking about the explosions inside the WTC on 9-11-2001. Watch it now, before it is memory holed by The Ministry of Truth.
President Donald J. Trump has expressed his desire to withdraw U.S. forces from Afghanistan.
Watch what they do, not what they say.
On September 7, 2019, President Trump revealed in a series of tweets that he had invited “major Taliban leaders” and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to meet with him separately at Camp David on the following day. He wrote that, because a Taliban attack killed several people, including a U.S. soldier, in Kabul on September 5, he had “immediately cancelled the meeting and called off peace negotiations.”
U.S. air operations have escalated considerably under the Trump Administration, as measured by the number of munitions released (see Figure 2). These operations have contributed to a sharp rise in civilian casualties; the U.N. reported that the third quarter of 2019 saw the highest quarterly civilian casualty toll since tracking began in 2009, with over 4,300 civilians killed or injured from July 1 to September 30.
US Army’s new card decks feature Russian, Chinese & Iranian weapons ‘to learn more about adversaries’
Peace, liberty, love, and truth,
Suppose people are talking about Medicare for All which some call Single Payer and you want a short but powerful counter-argument. Try this:
If you take five annual flu shots, your chances of getting Early Onset Alzheimer’s just went up 1,000 %.
Let the Democrat candidates prove to us that Medicare for all or Single Payer or NHS will improve our health. Let them first pass a law letting students in grade schools and employees at hospitals opt out of required annual flu shots.
MSG in ten different foods a day tricks us into believing we did not get enough to eat. Why not pass a law requiring MSG food labeling? Reducing weight will lower the cost of healthcare no matter what system of payment we use. And how about passing a law to take Bisphenol out of the lining in canned food? It is known to cause cancer? Passing a law to save millions of Americans from getting cancer will reduce healthcare costs.
But politicians could care less about your health.
Recently a 13 year-old New York actress died from what I believe to be vaccine induced asthma. RIP Laurel Griggs.
Or suppose people have been talking about runaway government spending threatening to bankrupt us all destroying the value of our wages and pensions. Point out that we are currently spending $12 billion a week in interest on government debt. But, if we still had President Lincoln’s Greenbacks, we would not have a $23 trillion national debt. Why won’t any candidate for any public office mention the $12 billion a week we throw out the window just to subsidize Billionaire Bankers?
When the Rothschilds, Rockefefllers, Warburgs and J P Morgan friends got together to create the Federal Reserve, Bankers gave themselves the right to charge us interest on money they create out of nothing. This transfers wealth from those of us who work and gives it to parasites who create money by expanding checking accounts every time we take out a loan.
Since November of 2009, we added $11 trillion to the national debt. That is a growth of 91.6%. If our national debt grew at that rate for the next 10 years, our debt would be $44.6 trillion. A $4 trillion interest rate bill would require that we cancel Food Stamps, national parks, healthcare, Social Security, federal pensions, education, eliminate national defense and release all federal prisoners. Put simply: we will soon hit a brick wall at 120 mph.
Why not change our banking system now before the coming crash?
Suppose people are taking sides on the issue of Fake News.
Tell them that Dr Mark Skidmore found $21 trillion had gone missing from HUD and DOD accounts from 1998 to 2015. He has screen captures from US government websites to prove this. He told this funny story of the US Army, which had a $122 billion annual budget. The Army had so much Missing Money that the Treasury Dept sent the Generals a check for $800 billion. Would you believe that the $800 billion went missing too?
Now let’s discuss Fake News. Choose. Will you believe the Corporate Media who covered up the theft of tens of trillions of dollars , covered up the Epstein pedophile case and lied to you about every major event since 911 or the people unafraid to speak the truth?
Or suppose people have been talking about foreign wars.
911 is used to justify $6 trillion in war spending and the deaths of thousands of young Americans in foreign lands. You could ask them how World Trade Center Tower 7, a 47 story building, fell down in 6.5 seconds. It was never hit by a plane. There were no active fires. So the question is: was it taken down by explosives planted inside the Tower?
You might want to glance at the second article below if you want to look again at 911.
Video: GMO Ticking Time Bomb, The Bankers Want You Sterilized And Then Dead
911: Short And Powerful Questions
Quotes About Jews You Will Never Hear In Schools
Israel Shahak: The Laws Against Non-Jews In 2 Minutes
Conspiracy theories are divisive, dangerous, even evil, according to the mainstream media. They cause “violence, including terrorism,” former Obama administration official Cass Sunstein notoriously declared, and the FBI’s Phoenix field office recently reiterated. They’re a way for ignorant people to make sense of the world, academics cry, or a holdover from the caveman era, when primitive man had to suspect enemies around every corner. More recently, they’ve been described as a way for white people to deal with demographic changes.
But conspiracies are everywhere in American politics today in a way that is nearly impossible to ignore. Convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s sweetheart deal, given an open-door 13-month sentence despite evidence of abusing and trafficking scores of girls (“he belongs to intelligence,” the prosecutor later claimed he was told), the machinations of the so-called Deep State (“thank God for the Deep State!” ex CIA director John McLaughlin chuckled, live on CSPAN), and the CIA’s fomenting of coups around the world are just the tip of a massive iceberg we are told does not exist except in the minds of crazy or backward people – one on which the ship of state has wrecked itself again and again.
Unable to drive people away from researching secret plots by calling them racist cavemen, academia has revived the word “conspiracism,” a term first coined in the 1980s to describe the pervasiveness of conspiracy theories in politics as a sort of mass psychosis. The not-so-subtle inclusion of the word “racism” might not be intentional, but it certainly doesn’t hurt when you want to slime anyone poking around behind the façade of power – or deny there is such a façade at all.
‘Conspiracy theory’ has become the go-to shorthand in the mainstream media for inconvenient outbreaks of political dissent. CNN’s Jim Acosta applied it to the idea professed by President Donald Trump and many independent journalists that Ukraine meddled in the 2016 election on behalf of the DNC. CNN’s Chris Cillizza applied it to Trump’s claim that Google was suppressing conservative news outlets in its search results, a claim echoed by many right-leaning social media users.
But the mainstream media also reported on Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election, and multiple Google whistleblowers have come forward to confirm the search giant does, in fact, suppress right-leaning sources in its news searches.
Meanwhile, truly unhinged conspiracy theories blaming Russia for any vote that doesn’t go the way the US government likes – whether it’s Brexit in the UK or the election of right-wing candidates in Italy – as well as political dissent both abroad and at home – are passed off as real news. Indeed, the mainstream media has spent so much time peddling fantasies like the “Russian collusion” delusion – which dominated headlines for three years in the absence of concrete evidence before dying ignominiously – that trust in ‘journalism’ is at record lows. The abundance of real conspiracies behind many of the turning points of recent history – Watergate, the Iraqi “weapons of mass destruction” hoax, and the CIA arming and training terrorist “mujahideen” in Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Union being just a few examples – is rarely mentioned amidst the endless mockery of those tinfoil-hat loonies who believe the rich and powerful are working together behind the scenes.
Even some mainstream journalists see through the tripe they’re asked to report, as Project Veritas’ recent leak of an ABC reporter calling out a conspiracy to suppress her story on suspiciously-deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein proved. A media apparatus that can’t even fool the people on its payroll is in a sad state indeed.
Powerful people and intelligence agencies who don’t want the hoi polloi probing their misdeeds are aware they have a crisis of credibility on their hands. Even the FBI, in a memo warning agents that conspiracy theorists (like literally everyone else) are dangerous loonies, had to admit that the “uncovering of real conspiracies or cover-ups involving illegal, harmful, or unconstitutional activities by government officials or leading political figures” might be behind the outbreak of conspiracy theorizing that had seized the nation. In other words, conspiracy theories are everywhere because conspiracies are everywhere.
The tradition of labeling ideas conspiracy theories to discredit them is itself a conspiracy – a documented one. The term was weaponized in 1967 in a CIA memo about how to quash criticism of the Warren Report, the product of the government investigation into President John F. Kennedy’s murder. The memo laments that some 46 percent of Americans did not believe the assassin acted alone, and details how the agency might “counter and discredit the claims of the conspiracy theorists” suggesting others were involved. It recommends “employ[ing] propaganda assets to refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.” The agency had infiltrated mainstream media through its Operation Mockingbird, paying or even planting journalists to push favorable viewpoints, and a flood of articles denouncing ‘conspiracy theorists’ followed, pushing the term into the popular lexicon.
Over half a century later, the CIA’s plan hasn’t worked very well – a 2017 poll found that the percentage of Americans who believe JFK’s death was the result of a conspiracy had swelled to 61 percent. But rather than come up with a new strategy, the media’s narrative managers have simply doubled down on the failed one, expanding the range of opinions smeared as “conspiracy theories” and heaping scorn upon their adherents.
Feature articles still try to shame people , diagnosing anyone suspicious of threadbare media narratives with the societal psychosis of ‘conspiracism.’ It may work to keep inconvenient truths out of the mainstream media, but in the absence of a compelling alternative narrative – one that can’t be disproven by the evidence of one’s own senses (or a few minutes’ research on the internet) – conspiracy-shaming is a weak weapon. People are much less likely to look for conspiratorial explanations if the “facts” presented by the media make sense. But if mainstream narratives continue to decline in believability, pretty soon people will be dismissing establishment journalists as “coincidence theorists.”
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.