-Caveat Lector-
<< rom:
> AntiShyster
> Vol. 8 No.2
> POB 540786
> Dallas, Texas 75354-0786
> 800-477-5508/subscriptions
> $30/six issues
> 972-418-8993/office
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----
Money-Media Complex
> by Alfred Adask
>
> We're constantly reminded that this is the "Information Age". Nations and
> corporations compete in life-or-death struggles to gather, possess,
> record, use, conceal, spin and sell information, because (as you know)
> information is power!
>
> Maybe so, but I have my doubts. I agree that knowledge of truth is power,
> but the waterfall of information that soaks me each day is not comprised
> exclusively of truth. We watch the Evening News and wonder if
> "Information Age" leaves us better informed or better deceived.
>
> I listen to the TV News every night and find the various opinions and
> information fascinating, but within hours I can't remember what those
> opinions
> were. Can you remember last night's news? I can't. So is this the Age of
> information? Of Gossip? Or a second Age of Babel?
>
> Today, thanks primarily to the telephone, radio, TV, Internet and other
> forms of electronic communication, each of us has access to quantities of
> information that were inconceivable just ten or twenty years ago. Today,
> the average janitor has access to more information than the average
> university professor in 1950. So is this the Information Age? No. It's
> the Opinion Age.
>
> What seems to have increased in the Information Age is not truth, but
> opinion.
> There's an old joke that opinions are like an unsavory human orifice:
> everybody's got one. Little did they know today, everybody's got scores
> of opinions we've got as many opinions as hairs on our heads. Joe Brown
> thinks this, Jane Smith thinks that, and Alfred Adask thinks something
> else. Not everyone's become a commentator, columnist, or publisher, but
> within another four or five years, we just might.
>
> Today's political struggle is not to find information it's as
> ubiquitous as
> coat hangers but to control and restrict the distribution
> (communication)
> of
> information. Did Bill Clinton really "inhale" when he tried marijuana
> (once) decades ago? Does he cheat on his wife with White House in-terns
> young enough to be his daughter? Of course. The information is not only
> available, it's widely published And communi-cated.
>
> But while we titter over Bill's peccadillos, how many Americans know
> that, as Governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton was allegedly involved in
> massive chug smuggling through the Mena, Arkansas airport and, perhaps
> several homicides? Frankly, I don't care if Bill inhaled in college or
> Monica inhaled in the White House. 'What I want to know is whether Bill's
> primary party affiliation is with the Democrats or organized crime,
> whether he helped kill Vince
> Foster,
> and if he's committed treason with Red China for political campaign
> contributions.
>
> The mainstream media's answers to my questions aren't denial it's
> silence. They don't deny the most serious allegations concerning Bill
> Clinton, they ignore 'em. In the "Information Age:' the mainstream media
> doesn't deny
> facts,
> they deny questions. They don't deny truth, they drown it in a torrent of
> "nightly news" that leads Americans to ' forget that the quantity of our
> information is no substitute for its quality (truth).
>
> In denying my questions, the media denies, me, isolates me. I rage in the
> night but (judging by the mainstream media) I make no sound. Since I
> depend
> on
> the mainstream news for my sense of "community," my mute isolation makes
> me doubt my perceptions and question my sanity. Seemingly unable to
> succeed in "Publishing" (raising public awareness) that the President may
> be a psychotic irresistibly drawn to organized crime, lust, murder and
> treason I finally concede, maybe I'm the one who's nuts.
>
> Guess which headline the main- stream media is more likely to
> run:
> "Clinton's
> a Psycho!" or "Adask's a Nut!"? But who cares if I'm nuts? What
> difference does it make if some eccentric roofer publishes opinions that
> might reach 40,000 or 50,000 people?, In a population of 265 million, my
> audience seems insignificant.
>
> Yet, if the President of the United States is psychotic, it seems to me
> that all Americans share an interest in not only keeping him away from
> knives and pointy scissors, but also from the buttons that launch nuclear
> missiles, international trade negotiations and domestic health care
> plans. Perhaps President Clinton's just another over ambitious
> politician, with too little ethics and too much ego. However, Bill's
> persistent pattern of behavior over several decades suggests his tendency
> to "do wrong" may be complusive And that's why a responsible mainstream
> media should conduct a thorough, public investigation of Clinton's
> behavior. A lot of lives could depend on whether Bill's motivated by a
> big ego or a big psychosis.
>
> Does the mainstream media conduct that investigation? No. Why not?
> Because
> the
> underlying questions and allegations are too absurd to consider? Or
> because a thorough investigation of Clinton would precipitate
> investigations of the people around him in Washington (and not only among
> Democrats or Republicans, but also members of organized crime, Red
> Chinese spies, and wealthy political campaign contributors)? In the final
> analysis, is Clinton misunderstood, correctly understood but an
> aberration, or the tip of an iceberg?
>
> I'd bet Clinton's the tip of an iceberg of politicians, bureaucrats,
> special interests and bankers who are at least unethical, probably
> criminal possibly psychotic., and remotely, satanic. To deeply expose
> Clinton could expose an entire system that's built on little more than
> smoke, mirrors and barely disguised corruption.
>
> We can debate whether government in general and Clinton in particular are
> corrupt, But one thing is sure: If either entity were "massively"
> corrupt, that. corruption could not survive (let alone prosper) unless
> the mainstream media were controlled to restrict the publication of the
> damning evidence.
>
> Conversely, if there were evidence that the mainstream media routinely
> refuses
> to report news that government finds damning, we'd have to conclude that
> not only is the media controlled, but -government must be corrupt. After
> a II., why would an honest government that cherished the First Amendment
> allow the media to be controlled?
>
> Government corruption (if any) goes hand in hand with media control (if
> any). They are two, sides of the same coin. One could not exist without
> the other. To find either proves. the other's existence, .
>
> I have no doubt that the mainstream media is at least influenced
> and
> possibly
> controlled to deprive us of truth concerning our apparent leaders. Why?
> Because this System is built. on belief (public misinformation and
> "political correctness") rather than objective truth and substance.
> Because this System can't stand without "public con-fidence". Insofar as
> our System depends on
> our
> confidence/ belief, this system is "what like a secular religion.
>
> But what, exactly, might we be worshipping?
>
> I'm not quite sure. But I can tell you this: Over the years,
> I've
> seen one
> sure way to get yourself jailed mess with the money system. You can
> conspire
> to kill the Presi-dent or blow up. New York's World Trade Center and
> maybe
> the
> government will come for you and maybe not (they may even send some
> people to help you). In the end, Presidents (and skyscrapers) are, as
> disposable as light bulbs; if Clinton flickers, they'll pop him out and
> screw Al Gore in,
> If
> Gore burns out, no big deal, they'll just screw another dim bulb into the
> Oval
> Orifice. So any threat to harm a President is likely to be regarded by
> folks at the top as almost comical ("Ohh, nooo! Not the President!").
>
> But if you create your own "comptroller warrants:' open your own bank, or
> issue some sort of money that offers a real alternative to Federal
> Reserve Notes the only question is how many years you're gonna get in
> the slammer., Mess with the money system, and you will be arrested,
> indicted, convicted,
> and
> sentenced.
>
> Oh, you'll get a trial, of course. The judge will appear attentive as
> your lawyer presents your defense. gut the appearance of "due process"
> will be window dressing to conceal an absolute certainty recognized long
> before they kicked in your door you're going bye-bye.
>
> I've seen this process take place several times, and judging by the
> system's virulent attack against anyone who offers an alternative to the
> existing
> money
> system, there's no doubt that money is our System's "third rail" touch
> it And die. Judging by government's determination to protect the money
> system at all costs, I am convinced that money is our System's "heart of
> darkness."
>
> Those who doubt my opinion might want to search all available sources in
> this "Information Age" for concise, comprehensible information on money
> in general and our money system in particular. It's almost impossible to
> find.
>
> In fact, Baron Rothschild declared, "Not one man in 1,000 understands
> money." Even though money is as essential as oxygen to our economic
> survival, I'd bet that today, the number of people who fully understand
> the concept of money is even lower. Today, the average American
> understands more about DNA, genetics, and cloning sheep embryo's than he
> does about the "money" in his pocket.
> Here,
> in the Information Age, I'd bet the number of Americans who truly
> understand money and therefore economics, politics, and social
> structure could be less than 5,000.
>
> Can that degree of public ignorance concerning a topic as fundamental to
> our survival as money be accidental? Not a chance. Therefore, this issue
> of the AntiShyster will begin to explore money/ media complex. '
> >>
>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
