EZEKIEL

and YHWH’s

Judgment

for the

Good News

PEOPLE

VOLUME XX

Christian IQ Levels

EZEKIEL and YHWH’s

Judgment for the

Good News People

Volume XX--Christian IQ Levels

by

an unworthy servant

And you shall know the truth,

and the truth will make you free.

(John 8:32)

Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho. The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States. Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.age-end.com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA.

Contents

Volume XX--Christian IQ Levels

CHAPTER PAGE

- Cover Page 1

- Title Page 2

- Contents 3

- Publisher’s Preface 5

Part JJJ--Christian Media

298 Media Hypocrites I 6

299 Media Hypocrites II 18

300 Media Hypocrites III 34

301 The Spin I 50

302 The Spin II 66

Part KKK--Realities of Christian Humanism

303 Christian Humanism in Action 81

304 Gun Controls 85

305 Crime and Punishment 99

306 The Welfare State 108

307 Financing Christian Humanism I 117

308 Financing Christian Humanism II 125

309 Indians, Greed and Taxes 132

310 Christian Humanism’s Tactics 136

Part LLL--Humanistic Control

311 Christian Humanism and Control 146

312 More Humanism and Control 154

SHEERIT YISRAEL

PO Box 473

Calder, Idaho 83808, USA

Publisher’s Preface

Greetings! The following presentation is volume twenty of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.age-end.com web site.

This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world. In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one.

Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material. It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message!

The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1. It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins: left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers).

For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope.

With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers. May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him. Shalom (peace) to you and yours!

an unworthy servant, Hanukkah 2003 CE

Chapter 298--Media Hypocrites I

Thomas Jefferson

The great populist American President, Thomas Jefferson, said in 1807 that “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper” (Apr 8, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 20).

The difference between 1807 and today in 2003 is that back then there was some honor and integrity in the United States. Today, these concepts are largely void and blank issues.

The Media’s Impact

Since the political liberals have been in charge in America (under Amalekite leadership, as discussed earlier), and attitudes have changed, they have gained a tremendous forum in the American media and entertainment industries (with the approval of the fat cat, super rich bankers and Illuminati who own and control those entities--this reality will be broached in later chapters of this work).

It almost goes without saying that most Hollywood celebrities and television news reporters are very liberal, in addition to being classic humanists (as will be detailed in the following chapters). It probably would be incorrect to charge many of them with being fundamental or conservative Christians. But many of them are identified as either liberal or permissive Christians or Jews or at least New Age ideologists.

These left wing liberals do everything that they humanly can do in their power to promote liberalism, Socialism and humanism under Amalekite bankers/masters (as will be addressed later).

Yellow Journalism

News reporters and television anchors will almost always practice “yellow” journalism. They are classic hypocrites.

Therefore, stories which are adverse or hostile to their ideology are just not reported. And if they must appear in a newspaper, then they are typically hid in small print on one of the back pages.

Too, many of the leading journalists and reporters will slant stories and reports in such a fashion that they completely distort the truth about what really happened. It’s not hard at all for a reporter or editor to play up and say favorable things in stories with their liberal objectives; while hiding, playing down or criticizing a contrary position.

The press and media do this regularly and no one says much about it at all. Well, of course, if a person does object, where would he/she publicly complain? In the media?

Not only would the media allow much, if any, of complaints to surface; but if they do come out, then the media responds by editorially criticizing and condemning the complainant and by casting ridicule and contempt on the person who would dare speak out. The liberal MO is to always attack personalities and avoid facts.

An article on “How the Government Works... (you over) The Fourth Branch” in the Dec 1997 “Idaho Observer” (p. 2) focused on the media and called it the “Fourth Branch.” The story went on to say that without the media aiding cover-ups, distorting facts, missing punchlines and generally lying to the public, politicians would be serving us, instead of selling us out.

An Illustration

Two good examples of media prejudice and bias exist in the vein of the right-wing and guns (two subjects which the controlled media hates with a passion). There is no way that a right-winger or pro second amendment person is going to get a fair shake in the media. The controlled media with use spin, yellow journalism, lies, distortions and news manipulation to no end to try to destroy right-wingers.

One of the classic cases of media bias and dishonesty surfaced in late July 1999 when a man named Mark Barton, a day stock trader, killed eleven people in Atlanta, Georgia and then committed suicide.

First, Barton took a hammer and beat his wife and small son and daughter to death. Next, he went to two stock brokerage offices and shot and killed eight more people at random with a gun before killing himself (Aug 9, 1999, “US News & World Report,” p. 22).

Certainly, of the two murder incidents, the most horrible, sickening and tragic one was the use of the hammer to bludgeon the heads of his wife and children. This was terrible beyond description. It’s not to say that the other murders were not bad. They were. But their significance didn’t reach the level of using the hammer to kill his wife and children.

That the man was very obviously totally crazy goes without saying. He had major problems. But there is another tragedy to this pathetic and tragic story. It surfaced in the way the media handled the case.

Other than slightly mentioning the murders of the wife and children, nothing much was said about the cruelty and horror that they faced in their murders. Instead, the media focus was entirely upon the guns and the shootings in downtown Atlanta. The media cried, moaned and groaned for days and days about the evil guns.

The NRA

In an article on “NRA Exec VP Exposes Media Manipulation,” in the Nov 15, 1999, “Spotlight” (p. B-3), National Rifle Association Vice President Wayne LaPierre said that the media just swept the lives of the kids and mother aside so that the media focus could be directed to the guns and what hurt they caused.

The AP news headline in America said “Atlanta Shooting Spree Forced Gun Debate to Extremes--Use of Legal Weapons Raises Questions of Ban on Handguns.” Josh Sugarman of the Violence Policy Center stated that “Unless we start talking about banning handguns in this country, this is America’s future.” LaPierre noted that no one called for hammer control.

Actually, the way the media handled these murders in Atlanta is common. The fact that guns were involved was national news of the most importance. Reporters in the major papers and television networks could and did talk about the guns on and on. Evidence that the man was totally insane and the horrors of the murders of the woman and children were totally lost in America.

Incidentally, a story by Lily Nguyen on “Study finds 10-to-1 imbalance in news reports on guns,” in the Jan 10-16, 2000, “Washington Times” (p. 14), quoted L. Brent Bozell, III, chairman of the Media Research Center, who noted a recent study which showed that the media is a partisan player on the subject of guns.

A two year study of 635 stories on gun policy (from ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN) indicated that 357 gun stories were anti-guns, 36 were pro-guns and 260 were neutral. This is an amazing ten to one ratio favoring gun control laws. The morning talk programs from the networks were even more one-sided in their attacks upon guns.

The Nut Buford Furrow, Revisited

Another good illustration of media prejudice surfaced just after a nut named Buford Furrow shot up a Jewish Community Center in Los Angeles, as briefly cited earlier (he killed no one at the center; but later, he shot and killed a US postman, making him a federal criminal). Though this Furrow shooting event has been or will be assessed in further detail elsewhere herein, some facets about it need to be covered now.

Immediately, “Newsweek” (of Aug 23, 1999) published almost an entire issue on the evils of guns. The front cover page had a picture of a gun and the words “America Under the Gun.”

From there on, “Newsweek had a whole series of articles (almost covering the entire magazine) on how bad guns were and why more gun laws are needed. There was almost nothing said about personal responsibility (as discussed herein, in a prior chapter).

About the only pro-gun comments that this issue of “Newsweek” allowed into the discussion was a short interview with the just quoted Wayne LaPierre, executive vice-president of the National Rifle Association. While “Newsweek” printed this interview, one can be absolutely sure that she edited it and edited out anything that would go against her pitch of hate upon guns.

Besides the focus upon guns, mentioned above on Buford Furrow, this same issue of “Newsweek” also had an attack article upon the racialist right wing, as evidenced by the Aryan Nations/Church of Jesus Christ Christian in North Idaho. This article will be discussed in later comments herein in the context of the shooter Buford Furrow.

Also, why is it or how is that a man who identifies with the Christian Identity movement, like the just mentioned nut, Buford Furrow, has his religion splattered all over the national media network when he shoots up some kids (killing none of them), in contrast to literally hundreds of thousands of other murders which never even receive a comment from the media and certainly nothing about the religions or religious beliefs of the murderers?

Two More Non-Gun Cases

Wayne LaPierre’s article in the November 15, 1999, “Spotlight,” discussed above, also mentioned some school shootings (which will be commented upon in subsequent chapters herein). When a student illegally takes a gun onto school property (and it is illegal to have a gun within several hundred yards of a school) and kills one or more students, this becomes major news in the US, as LaPierre noted.

But what about the situation where a man named Steven Allen Abraham drove his automobile onto a school yard on May 4, 1999, at Costa Mesa, California to kill a three year old girl and a four year old girl, plus maiming four other kids, as LaPierre pointed out. Abraham said that he was going to execute these children “because they were innocent.” In other words, it was murder and not an accident.

Yet, this was “no news” in the national media. Why was it unimportant as a news item? If the man would have used a gun to shoot some children in a school yard, it would have been headline news. The nightly TV programs and politicians would have belabored it almost without end.

As late as November 28, 1999, a crazy man with a sword went into a Catholic Church in London, England during worship services. He seriously injured six people with the sword before finally being subdued. Since this nut used a sword, the event was almost a no news item in the US national media. If a man had went into a church with a gun and shot the place up, it would have been major news for days and days.

More From Britain

Incidentally, the British have a significant limitation on guns in their island kingdom. Since guns are generally not allowed, one can perhaps see why the above nut used a sword. But restrictive gun laws were of no relevance.

“Spotlight” of Mar 13, 2000, had a news report from Britain which said that both guns and crime are up there. Drive by shootings and gangland executions are both rising, despite the gun control laws.

Per the story, some three million guns have been illegally smuggled into Britain in the last few years (allegedly from Eastern Europe). Many of these weapons are now in the hands of young thugs--15 to 25 years old (surely, many racial minorities in Britain now have guns). Obviously, gun control laws do not and cannot stop the use of guns in violence.

The Feb 2002 “American Sentinel” (p. 4) had a follow-up report from Britain (via the BBC). BBC said that between April and November of 2001, the number of murders involving firearms was up some 90% over a year ago in the London police area. The BBC said that “Although all privately-owned handguns in Britain are now officially illegal, the tightened rules seem to have had little impact on the criminal underworld.”

A news report from Australia noted the situation there in early 2002, following a year of the government’s gun buy-back program. Since the Australian Big Brother has been collecting guns from the common people (who no longer have the means of protecting themselves), crime has been going up--homicides are up 3.2%, assaults are up 8.6%, and robberies are up 44% (Apr 22, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 2).

Of course, this is precisely what will happen; and indeed, was expected to happen. Outlaw the guns and it will be only law-abiding citizens who conform to the law. The criminals and law violators will never turn their guns in or stop buying guns (which, like dope and drugs, will always be available for the right price).

The Latest British Reaction

News reports in early January 2003 took note of the explosion in crime in Britain involving guns and the fact that numbers of criminals have access to guns while the British police and law-abiding population do not have guns.

The anti-gun laws in Britain make it illegal for law-abiding people to have guns. Thus, the only people with guns are crooks, gang members and other criminals who obtain them illegally.

Because of the increase in gun crime, British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s government proposed on January 6, 2003, to tighten “Britain’s already tough firearms laws” (Jan 7, 2003, Spokane “Spokesman-Review,” p. 2). The ruling leftist Labor party wants to make tougher prison sentences for the illegal possession of firearms.

Currently, there is no minimum sentence (apparently meaning that judges can be lenient in sentencing persons caught with a gun). Blair’s people want a minimum prison sentence of five years for anyone caught with an illegal gun.

Of course, none of this will prove anything because it does not address the basic problem. These British fools can pass all the gun laws that they want to, and it will not change the reality that criminals, crooks and gang members can always obtain guns. It will always be only law-abiding people who obey these stupid gun laws. Law violators will continue to ignore them.

The People Problem

Yes, the problem is not one of guns or gun control laws; but rather, the problem lies with people.

In the case of the United States, it is manifest that the presidential leadership of the nation has been morally corrupt for many years now. No wonder people commit crimes. No wonder small 12 year girls are now giving boys oral sex. They only follow the role model of the former US president.

A discussion on the Art Bell Coast to Coast AM radio talk show program on Jan 19, 2000, noted that far more people die each year in the US from medical malpractice than from guns (250,000 deaths annually from doctors and bad drugs, as discussed earlier). Yet, no one talks about the evils of doctors and the establishment approved drugs and surgery methods.

A news report over National Public Radio on May 16, 2002, noted that there is some concern over the deaths of children from hypothermia because parents leave children in locked cars while they go shopping, attending to business, or pursuing some personal matter. Since 1996, some 150 children have died as a result of this gross stupidity. In 2001, some 30 died in the US alone.

If the loving and concerned liberals and humanists are so profoundly worried over the deaths of people and particularly small children (who are burned alive in a parked, locked car), why don’t they focus some national attention on the incompetence of doctors and pharmacists as well as on the irresponsible actions of parents who leave small children in locked cars on hot days.

Yet, the controlled media and the loving liberal and humanist humanitarians don’t seem to be much concerned with the murders of people by doctors, pharmacists or pharmaceutical companies. For sure, the irresponsible action of parents in murdering their small kids in locked cars on hot days receives virtually no appreciable interest from anyone in authority in America.

Sometimes, it seems that the controlled media and its loving liberal and humanist colleagues have only a focus on guns for their acts of love and concern for the American people. Truly, they are obsessed with guns and the alleged evils of the second amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Dangers of Airplanes

How about airplane crashes which periodically occur and kill hundreds of people in one sweep. Take the case of TWA flight 800 from New York to Paris on July 17, 1996. As will be covered in a later chapter, the evidence is that 800 was shot down by a US Navy missile. Yet, the national media has said nothing about the death of the 230 passengers, along this line.

On Oct 31, 1999, an Egypt Airline flight 990 from New York to Cairo turned into a disaster when something happened with the plane to cause it to crash into the Atlantic Ocean with some 217 people on board.

In late 1999, investigators could not say for sure what occurred. But this event had much in common with an affiliate of Singapore Airlines, Silk Air Flight M185 on Dec 19,1997, where a suicide pilot crashed his plane in Indonesia to kill 104 people.

An Egypt Air relief pilot on flight 990 (named Gamel al-Batouti, who had taken the place of the regular co-pilot) was suspected of sabotaging the plane in a suicide action, while the pilot was momentarily absent from the controls. Batouti was allegedly a religious Muslim, who was at the controls as the trouble developed.

Batouti was heard on the voice recorder as saying a Moslem prayer some 14 times--starting just before and continuing on while the plane was diving into the ocean (Nov 29, 1999, “Newsweek,” p. 33). The words of the prayer is that the speaker is putting his trust in Allah. However, some Muslims claim that the prayer is a routine one which religious Muslims speak before driving a car or cooking a meal.

Although the Muslim faith is usually against suicide, there are occasions when it is proper for those in a holy war in the service of Allah (a jihad?). Reportedly, some Muslim sects actually teach that if members die in the army of Allah, they are immediately conveyed to the Islamic heaven where they can be surrounded by beautiful women, eat pork and drink wine (some things forbidden on earth).

The present Egyptian government has been at serious odds with Muslim fundamentalists for some time. Many of the Muslims have been mad at Egyptian President Mubarak for negotiating peace with Israel and for the close ties Egypt has had with the United States. Some 33 Egyptian Air Force officers, trained in the US, were on flight 990. So there would have been a reason for the plane to come down.

Since Batouti’s religion was patently relevant and could have been implicated as a cause in his action, it had to be mentioned. Otherwise, the controlled media would have said nothing about it.

But the controlled media is never silent about incidents involving people in the right wing, Christian Identity Church. Anytime one of these racialists do something wrong, his religion becomes a major news item.

Possibilities

While suicide by Batouti was the plausible explanation, Muslims discounted the idea. It appears that there is a significant belief among Muslims that the Zionists were involved in sabotaging the plane to bring it down (Oct-Dec 1999 “Hebrew Roots,” p. 31). Per this view, the 33 Egyptian Air Force officers were mostly pilots. They were the target since they could be a military threat to the state of Israel.

There is still one more option. There was also the possibility of a plane malfunction and possible incompetence on the part of the crew. In 1996, a similar plane, flown by Martinair, an affiliate of KLA, experienced a series of malfunctions due to a strange computer failure (from a loose battery connection) while over the Atlantic (Nov 15, 1999, “Newsweek,” p. 70).

The Dutch crew was competent and was able to bring the plane into Boston for an emergency landing. As “Newsweek” suggested, this Martinair flight could also have some similarities with Egypt Air 990.

Certainly, the cockpit voice recorder from 990 indicated that there was a problem and at least the Captain was attempting to resolve it when the plane plunged into the ocean. Whether Batouti was helping or hindering the Captain’s effort to pull the plane out of the dive was unclear. Some said that he was helping, while others said that he was pulling against the Captain.

Another Twist

On the airplane problem, something totally ignored by the national media surfaced in a report from Chris Ruddy in the Nov 1999 “Internet Vortex” (p. 12). Ruddy was flying out of JFK airport on a United flight at around 9:15 AM on Oct 31, 1999. He put his headset on and tuned into transmissions between his plane and air traffic control in the US.

Ruddy said that air traffic control people were advising airplanes to change their flight paths and were giving new coordinates and altitudes over the Atlantic. The reason reported for this alteration was that “there are rockets being fired in the area.” The Egypt Air flight had went down--just some seven hours before Ruddy’s United flight.

Now, to something ignored by the national media--there was a strange correlation between what happened with 990 and what had happened earlier with TWA flight 800 (which was possibly shot down by a missile attack, as will be addressed in later chapters). This correlation will be assessed in a later chapter.

While all of these events were significant enough to receive a little national news coverage, they all were largely forgotten within a few days. None of the controlled media came out with front page stories about the dangers of airplanes. There was never any appreciable talk of new laws or of grounding airplanes.

No one in public condemned the apparent missile attack on 800. No one much complained over the suicide of the pilot in M185. Very few persons were concerned over the possible suicide of the relief pilot or the incompetence of the crew or the rocket attack on 990.

Yet, if someone had used a gun and shot and killed 104, 217 or 230 people in one incident, there would be no end to the news reports. Clinton would have called Congress into special session and all of the national media would have had front page coverage of the evils of guns--until new laws were passed to further erode the benefits of the second amendment to the US Constitution.

The Muslims’ use of knives and box openers to hijack four airliners to crash into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sep 11, 2001, offers a classic case of hypocrisy (as will be discussed in some detail in later chapters).

Can anyone begin to grasp what would have happened if the Muslims would have used guns instead of knives, box openers and airplanes? The media would have flipped and Slick Clinton would have come out of retirement to lead the protest against guns.

Why Guns?

Inevitably, the question must be asked on why there is then this fanatical focus by the controlled media and the leftists upon guns? After all, there are a multitude of things in the modern, Western, Christian society which are far more troubling than guns (like airplanes, locked cars with children inside, doctors, pharmacists and pharmaceutical companies).

This reality has been demonstrated in numerous reports over the years. Perhaps the best illustration surfaced in a news report on “Guns: Another side of the story” in the Mar 22, 2002. “The Week” (p. 10). The essence of this account was that if a person subtracts out all of the US homicides attributed to firearms, the resulting US murder figure is still higher than that in some other countries (like Japan, Britain and Sweden).

This same story had some remarks on research done by scholars like John R. Lott of Yale University. Lott made a study which showed that when US states allow citizens to carry concealed weapons, violent crime and murder rates fall. Over the past several years, homes that are allowed to have guns are far less susceptible of burglaries and crime.

Incidentally, the Lott study received almost no media coverage. As “The Week” noted, the press is just not interested in stories like this! For sure, there is a US people problem which the controlled media simply refuses to acknowledge.

This and succeeding chapters will address the hypocrisy over guns and will ultimately demonstrate that the problem isn’t over guns; but instead, there is a desire from these loving leftists to bring on a world government. And guns in the hands of the people are a threat to the establishment of world government. Therefore, guns must be outlawed.

Jasper, Texas

Actually, of all topics which are subjected to media bias, distortion and twisting, the issue of race probably receives the more hypocritical and unfair reporting from the controlled media--more so than guns, which is also grossly and unfairly reported upon.

In June 1998, news reports said that three White men (reportedly, with some participation of a Black colleague [per Charles A. Weisman, Box 240844, Apple Valley, MN 55124], which the controlled media routinely ignored) in Jasper, Texas were guilty of a hate crime because they had murdered another Black man by dragging his body behind their pickup truck.

And on the surface, this was a horrible crime, regardless of the races of the people involved. But murder is fairly common in America (and even by federal agents, as when they slaughtered some 86 Branch Davidian men, women and children [24 children in total] in Waco, Texas and a small boy and a innocent woman, holding her baby at Ruby Ridge in North Idaho, as will be assessed in subsequent chapters).

Hundreds of thousands of people have been murdered in America over the years and there is no particular outcry among the US media and population.

“Bible Light On The News” (v. 5, No. 7, p. 3) gives these US murder statistics. Currently, some 20,000 to 25,000 people are murdered each year in the US. This translates to 200,000 to 250,000 in the last ten years.

Murder is as American as motherhood and apple pie. Every day and night, numbers of people die in the nation’s Black capital--Washington, DC. Yet, no one seems to get excited over the huge numbers of daily murders.

In particular, Mob killings can involve torture and some of them are very nasty (far worse than the Texas killing of the Negro). Some of the people with connections to Slick Clinton have faced gruesome murders and the media has expressed little concern over these deaths.

So, why the big fuss for days and days over the Texas murder. Well, it allegedly involved a Black victim of White killers (although a Black man also was involved in the killing). Actually, this is quite unusual because normally most criminal violence involves Black criminals killing and assaulting White victims in the integrated culture and each other among the Blacks themselves.

Biased Reporting

Actually, there was still one other factor of truth that almost no one even considered or talked about in terms of the Jasper, Texas event.

The truth is that the American public was told certain things about this reported crime from a controlled media which is notorious for slanting, tilting and twisting news reports to further a particular agenda, and especially, the present agenda on race and racial integration.

How bad was this reported crime from Jasper, Texas? Who knows? It could have been as bad as NBC, CBS, CNN and ABC reported. But the controlled media has a common objective of presenting certain stories, using at least yellow journalism and other employments of twisting and distorting information to accomplish its goals.

True, the media presented the case as a horrible crime. And it may have been. It’s just that the controlled media is so biased and so wretched in terms of lying and deceiving the public that it’s hard for most informed observers to be precisely sure of exactly what did happen in Texas (like with the failure to discuss the involved Black man in the killing).

However, as bad as it may have been, the media will make it appear far worse for the involved Whites--to fit its evil agenda of making White people look bad and wicked, while building up the Coloreds to make them look like American heroes, motherhood and apple pie.

Media Hypocrites

There was another feature of this Jasper, Texas incident which received no news coverage or reporting at all. As brought out in the July 1998 “America’s Promise Newsletter” (p. 1), this incident caused a number of militant Black groups (Black Muslims, Black Panthers, etc) to come to Jasper for a march.

The Negroes participating in this march were, by and large, armed with guns and publicly brandished them without fear of restraint or opposition from authorities. The liberal, biased newscasts and reporters said absolutely nothing about this army of armed and antagonistic Blacks.

The question comes up--what would have happened if a Black had murdered a White person (which happens in about 89% of interracial murders) and if the local White population staged a march with the men carrying arms? The media would have went wild in hate and condemnation.

All the major news networks would have had cameramen and reporters on the spot, making news casts about how horrible and evil the Whites were. Slick Clinton would have ordered in an army of FBI agents and other federal provocateurs to arrest and intimidate the Whites.

Many Whites would have been jailed and the whole population would have been hyped up with intense bitterness and hatred toward the Whites for daring to come out in public with guns showing. Assuredly, the liberals would have cried on and on for new gun laws and a crackdown on White, right wing “extremists,” as they would have been branded.

A Pleasanton, Texas Case

Concurrently with the Jasper, Texas case and its front page news coverage for days and days, another murder took place in Pleasanton, Texas which received absolutely no attention from the national media.

In this one, a gunman shot and murdered three, White, Texas state policemen to death, after luring them to a trailer park with a 911 telephone call. He then shot and killed himself. Though totally ignored by the controlled media, the “Spotlight” paper, of Nov 15, 1999 (p. 2), had a report on it.

“Spotlight” perceptively noted that prominent media people--like Peter Jennings, Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw--all totally ignored this Pleasanton, Texas shooting of three White policemen. Never once did these shootings receive any national publicity, despite the fact that the controlled media has been insane on reporting deaths by guns. And normally, the killing of a policeman is major news in the US.

Surely, of all the things which would be front page news and obsessions on the nightly boob tube, a shooting of three policemen would be it and especially since there has been an enormous outcry for gun laws and gun controls. As “Spotlight” asked, how is it or why it is that this Pleasanton, Texas case received no media scrutiny.

The Answer

Well, “Spotlight” answered its own question by merely printing a picture of the killer. He was a very black, Black man named Jeremiah Engleton.

Obviously, if Jeremiah would have been White, Jennings, Brokaw and Rather, plus “Newsweek” and “Time” magazines and so forth would have had major stories about the incident. The public would have been bombarded for weeks and weeks about it.

And if by chance, the killer was a White man who shot and killed three Black policemen, the US President and Congress would have had a major outcry. Slick Clinton would have dispatched an army of federal agents, prosecutors, investigators, etc to fully investigate the incident and ascertain the complete family history and background of the killer.

Furthermore, if the detailed and extensive investigation into the life and background of the killer revealed that he had ever had any contact with the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryans Nations or one of the Christian Identity groups, this contact would receive still more media hype. There would be new cries to crack down on the accused religion or faith of the man on the premise that it is an out of control cult.

This case would have been the crime of the decade and maybe century. If anything could bring on a new gun control law, such an incident would have done so. People in the controlled national media and in Washington would have whined, moaned and cried continuously until Congress finally acted.

Chapter 299--Media Hypocrites II

The Flint, Michigan School Shooting

One of the most extraordinary illustrations of media bias surfaced on Feb 29, 2000, when a small six year boy named Owens took a stolen, 32 caliber hand gun from his home and took it to school and shot and killed a small six year girl named Kayla Rolland. This story did receive a little publicity (perhaps because it was so incredible). But the story behind the story never came out.

Quite naturally, President Slick Clinton grabbed the available media sources to start his usual war on guns. He called for a summit meeting with Congressional leaders to discuss more gun control laws. He wanted trigger locks on guns, among other things.

“Newsweek” magazine of Mar 13, 2000 (p. 25-27), had a story on this incident (“Did Kayla Have to Die?”), which was a little revealing by reading between the lines. Quite naturally, neither “Newsweek,” Clinton or any other public figure or source really discussed the problem.

As is always true, these sources all began their routine war on guns. Of course, this was the gist of the “Newsweek” account of what happened in three articles. Besides the just mentioned murder story, “Newsweek” also offered up stories on “There is More We Can Do” and “Inside the Real Gun Battle” (which focused upon the evils of guns and how Clinton wanted more gun laws).

Please understand that these news reports from the national controlled media are written with a media bias and slant.

In other words, the controlled media didn’t just report the news, but the controlled media worked in a twist and slant and some yellow journalism to interpret the news. The controlled media (which is controlled by a handful of people) has an agenda (of their primary owners/controllers).

Details on the Boy

In the report on the shooting, “Newsweek” pointed out that the shooter’s father was in jail for burglary and drug use, and that his mother was sort of being with the boy to living in another nearby house. “Spotlight” had some remarks on the shooting in its Mar 13, 2000, issue (p. 2). “Spotlight” noted that the boy’s grandfather was also in jail.

The boy ostensibly lived with his uncle and another man named James (both of whom were allegedly crack-cocaine dealers). The house was a dirty, run down, crack-cocaine store (surely, with many cockroaches and all the rest of depravity imaginable).

Neighbors said that the parents were always cussing, fighting and drinking in the yard. There was reportedly such a steady stream of drug dealers in, out and near the place that police had to sometimes be called in to open a path for children to get to and from school. Truly, the boy lived in a dysfunctional family and home.

But the real story of what happened was accidentally allowed to surface when “Newsweek” made the mistake of including with its presentation several photographs of little Kayla, the shooter’s mother and father and the James man, who lived with the boy in the crack house and supplied the gun.

The murdered Kayla was a beautiful and innocent, little, White girl and the Owens boy, his father, his mother, his uncle and the man living with him (who had possession of the stolen gun) at the crack house were all Black Africans. This is pure and simply a story of racial integration and how the modern, corrupt, misinformed society has dealt with the race issue.

The story would end there and we still would not fully know what happened or really what the issue was. But “Newsweek” mistakenly quoted the boy’s father, Dedric Darnell Owens, who was in jail.

Per Dedric, the boy was always fighting (and apparently attacking) other (White?) children at school (like the one he jabbed with a pencil at school). Owens asked his son why he fought other kids? The boy replied-- “Because I hate them.”

The Hate Crime Scenario

Yet, no one would have the foggiest notion of what all was involved in this story from the media accounts--were it not for the fact that “Newsweek” mistakenly included the just noted pictures of the boy’s father, mother and friend at the crack house.

Without these photos, plus the wisdom of the boy’s father in telling about the boy’s hate, it would be impossible to ever put together the story that the controlled media never told.

Manifestly, what we have is a classic hate crime (according to the definition of the loving and compassionate liberals, humanists and Socialists--like with former President Slick).

First, there was the gender issue. The murderer was a male and the victim was a female. Surely, this point is significant in a hate and thought crime. Next, there was the racial issue--a Black murderer and a White victim.

Finally, the boy admitted his hate of people he fought with or opposed in school. It would be interesting to know if all of these persons the boy hated were White or were there other racial strains involved. If they were all White, then this really cinches the hate crime scenario.

But we’ll never know the background here because the controlled media will hide and cover-up all references to hate and race in this boy’s life.

More

In any case, no one said anything about the racial factor or the hate factor in the controlled media’s stories about this incident. The whole focus was upon the evils of guns and how something must be done in new laws to prevent another shooting like this one (never mind that no new gun laws could have stopped this shooting).

With this backdrop, let us imagine what Slick Clinton and the controlled national media (the hypocrites) would have done if the shooter was White and the victim was Black (coupled with the remark about the hate in the shooter’s mind and heart). Instead of just focusing upon guns, we would have had the classic hate crime of all. Slick would have been out demanding new hate crime laws (plus new gun control laws).

Though “Newsweek” made the mistake of including the photos and quoting the shooter’s father on the boy’s hate, the magazine tried to make it all up for the Africans by ameliorating the incident and supporting the innocent little boy (who will walk free and never face any of the punishment which he should face for this murder).

Upon police questioning of the boy, after the shooting, he explained that he and little Kayla had exchanged words the day before and that she slapped him (was he trying to get her in the sack for sex, as little Africans start copulating quite early?).

So, with this excuse, maybe the media can also put some of the blame on the little girl. After all, she had no right to slap him (if she, in fact, did slap him or was this a justifying lie?).

“Newsweek” then went on to support the boy by quoting the prosecutor who said that he didn’t think the shooter ever understood that pulling the trigger kills. The boy allegedly took it all in as something happening routinely on television. So maybe, some of the blame can be put on TV as well. Regardless, the bottom line is that the boy is not to be blamed for anything.

Another Paradox

Now, for a real paradox in media reporting, consider some statistics on crime. The “America’s Promise Newsletter” for July 1998 (p. 2) offered some recent data from a Black leader named Walter Williams. Williams reported that 93% of murdered Blacks were killed by other Blacks and that 89% of interracial murders involved Black perpetrators on Whites.

The Jul-Aug 1999 “America’s Promise Newsletter” (p. 5) was more explicit on this paradox and gave the actual numbers for 1991. For all violent, interracial crimes, White perpetrators on Blacks numbered 55,301 while Black attacks on Whites totaled 572,458 incidents.

These statistics will be examined in some detail shortly below. But there is a need to recognize this reality in connection with the Jasper, Texas killing, as was outlined in the preceding chapter.

Why is it that the media generally ignores and by-passes any discussion on the real world of truth? Yet, if a White person should commit a crime against a Black, it becomes a major news event--as the one from Texas. Obviously, the nation’s leaders and powers have an agenda with a sinister purpose in twisting, distorting and lying about reality.

More on Black Crime

The “Spotlight” weekly paper of Jul 19, 1999 (p. 6), had a story by Sam Francis on “Media Blacks Out Racial Story” which really came home with the reality of the modern, controlled media and its enormous hypocrisy.

Like the just cited Walter Williams, Francis reported that 90% (Williams gave it as 89%) of the 1.7 million annual, violent, interracial crimes committed in America involve Black criminals, committing crimes on Whites. This means that only some 10 or 11% of the violent, interracial crimes occur with Whites on Blacks.

And this conclusion is in the context that the African American population is only about 12-13% of the total US population. In other words, one in nine Americans is Black and they commit nine times more violent crimes on Whites than the majority Whites commit on Blacks.

This means that the probability of a Black committing a crime of violence against a White is 50 times greater than a White on a Black. Francis notes that for multiple-offender, interracial crimes with Blacks, the probability is something like 100 to 250 times greater that gang victims will be White.

The essence of Francis’ report was that the New Century Foundation worked up these statistics in a study which was released to the public, in connection with a press conference in 1999. Copies of the study were furnished to the major media sources--like Time magazine, National Public Radio, CBS News, the Associated Press, Knight-Ridder newspapers, the Washington Post and so forth.

The interesting thing about this event is that not a one of the media sources chose to print one word about the study or the press conference of New Century. It was a total, 100%, news black out. And this is extraordinary if anyone wants to believe that the American media is independent and tells the truth. In truth, the media is a controlled media which lies and regularly distorts the truth.

Going on, Francis quoted Morgan Reynolds, head of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis, who said that this is an issue which is ignored and will not be commented upon by White scholars in America. Such scholars report that they will only get into trouble if they mention these statistics.

The article noted that Americans supposedly live in a free country where all points of view can be heard; but actually, all points of view can be heard only if they don’t contradict the enforced orthodoxy.

Contrary views (which are politically incorrect) cannot be heard at all in America. They will be blacked out and stomped into the ground. Clearly, the controlled, national media is not about to allow the truth to be told about race and crime.

Another Statistic

The previously cited “America’s Promise Newsletter,” for July-August 1999 (p. 5), had one more fascinating statistic to share on the question of crime and guns. This source noted that in 1994, a firearm was present in only 12 percent of the violent crimes committed in the United States.

The writer of this America’s Promise article, Richard Kelly Hoskins, concluded that crime is a PEOPLE problem and NOT a hardware problem. Hoskins went on with his “people” assessment by reflecting upon some of the statistics cited above on the demographic aspect of violent crime.

He placed the people problem in the context that more than one-third of it is found in 13% of the population (yes, the problem is not with guns, but it is a people problem and particularly with the 13% of the population--the Blacks--who commit most of the crimes). Of course, without the Blacks and now the growing Colored Hispanic population, there would be no crime problem.

US Department of Justice Data

The previously quoted “Spotlight” paper of Aug 23, 1999 (p. 1), had a report by James P. Tucker Jr on “Federal Stats prove Who the Haters Are” that assessed the 1997 crime statistics from the US Department of Justice, the latest year of federal data (which gave the details, as reported above by Sam Francis).

The story focused upon some 1,883,000 cases of aggravated assault, attacks that would cause serious injury or death. Some 60% of all robberies were done by Blacks, while 57% of persons arrested for robbery were Blacks. The same proportions were reported in other classifications of aggravated assault.

In 1994, every 100,000 American Blacks committed 3,494 crimes against Whites. Of every 100,000 Whites, only 63 committed crimes against Blacks. Thus, the average Black is 55 times more likely to commit an aggravated assault upon a White than the average White upon a Black (as noted earlier, Sam Francis put the figure at 50 times greater for all violent crimes).

For gang violence, the typical Negro gang is 102 times more likely to attack a White person than the reverse. For robbery, the ratio is 277 times greater by Blacks on Whites than Whites on Blacks.

Black Crime on Whites and Not the Reverse

So while the media was all hyped up about the White men killing the Black man in Jasper, Texas, as cited in the previous chapter, substantially more Blacks were murdering and assaulting Whites; which, of course, will never be reported in the controlled media because Black crime on Whites does not serve the media’s agenda.

Otherwise, it is well to also note that all of this Black crime on Whites does not constitute hate crimes. This writer is unaware of any situation where a Black crime on a White person constituted a hate crime. It is only the few and rare White crimes against Blacks that are hate crimes, deserving of national reporting and attention.

The same reasoning applies to the evil Amalekite Jews who attack, persecute or oppress other Americans. Whatever an evil Amalekite does can never be classified as a hate crime.

For example, in mid December 2001, Jewish Defense League Chairman Irv Rubin and member Earl Krugel were arrested in California on charges that they planned to bomb a Muslim mosque and the offices of Arab American Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) on the basis that they were Arab Muslims.

Never once was there any suggestion that these conspiratorial plans involved hate. This writer does not have the follow-up on this case, but we can be sure that Earl will ultimately skate free or never face any troubling sentence (Irv would have beat the rap too, but he committed suicide while in jail). Can the reader envision what would happen to two White men who planned on bombing a synagogue or a Black Church?

In other words, the whole American society and culture are nothing but a bunch of deceitful, evil hypocrites on this subject. And this reality can be proven quickly by anyone who is able to look into the subject by going beyond the lies and distortions put out by the national, controlled media.

The disparity is so bad and obviously gross that leading American liberals have started an effort to strike the word race in all compilation of statistics on crime. In other words, the ruling pundits don’t want anything said about the Black crime on Whites.

If there is to be a focus, it will be media attention on the few cases where Whites attack Blacks. This type of an event will continue to receive front page media coverage, as in the Texas case.

Racial Profiling

Incidentally, the topic of racial profiling has been under discussion in the early 21st century.

The liberals and leftists ruling the US claim that the statistics which prove how bad Blacks are in committing most crimes constitute a form of racial profiling and must, accordingly, be stopped as it is allegedly discriminatory and evil to take note of how bad Negro crime is.

It is all right to report on White crime. It’s just Black crime statistics that must be hidden from the public’s eyes. Thus, whenever an occasional White person commits a crime, that fact can be blabbed from the tallest mountain. Whenever a Black commits a crime (which is the primary and usual source of crime), that fact must be hidden from the public’s view.

For years now, most policemen have correctly understood that Blacks commit most of the crime. Therefore, policemen on patrol have had a habit of carefully monitoring some crime prone Blacks (like young, Negro males).

This police action has also come under the condemnation by the ruling liberals who hate the idea that a wise policeman might scrutinize and watch young, Black, male thugs.

To demonstrate how far the leftist controlled establishment and media has went and is moving, the Apr 8, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 2) had a news report which noted that the US Justice Department ordered a study on so-called racial profiling by law enforcement officers in New Jersey and presumably across America.

This Justice Department study found that the reason that Black automobile drivers get stopped more often by police is because the Blacks more often are speeding. Since this revelation was not exactly what the racial amalgamation people were looking for, they took action to suppress the report and not release it to the public.

Naturally, the controlled media said nothing about the report and its suppression. Thus, the hypocrite controlled media became co-conspirators in the hiding of this study and its findings. Obviously, if “American Free Press” found about it, the controlled media people could also have found out about it and published the results (but they wouldn’t do so since the results were contrary to their agenda on race-mixing).

Incidentally, the controlled media has been so insane over this allegation of racial profiling that the issue has reached the ridiculous level.

The May 24, 2002, “The Week” (p. 5) had a news report that the Governor of Maryland, Parris Glendening, has imposed a moratorium on executions until a study is completed on whether the system is racially biased or not. As pointed out in a preceding chapter, the nine people on Maryland’s death row are Blacks and eight were convicted for killing Whites.

The reality of racial profiling will be addressed in more detail in later chapters. Suffice to say, the topic is one that the ruling liberals and the controlled media want to cry and whine about continuously.

More on the Warped, Liberal Mind

One more example of this Christian America hypocrisy surfaced in a news report on December 17, 1999, on disciplinary problems in US schools--apparently, as prompted by the Black, so-called “reverend,” Jesse Jackson’s recent appearance in Decatur, Illinois, trying to get the school officials to reverse themselves and reinstate some Black students who had been expelled for fighting.

The story said that there is a belief in Washington that American schools are far more likely to take disciplinary action against Black students than they are against White students. Accordingly, the US Department of Justice dispatched a host of FBI agents, federal provocateurs and so forth all over the nation to make investigations to try to prove this liberal ploy.

As noted in a previous chapter, the report noted the situation in Phoenix, Arizona where Blacks constitute 4% of the school population. Yet, they receive 21% of the school disciplinary actions. On the surface, one could easily accept the fact that Black students cause more disciplinary problems than White students; but no, not so, among the US liberal humanists.

In the Christian humanist mind (as prodded, directed and focused by evil Amalekite bankers/masters who hate the stupid, White goyim), the statistics suggest racial discrimination since Black students are disciplined more than Whites. No humanist can ever understand that maybe the Blacks commit more school crimes; thus, necessitating more disciplinary actions.

More Cases Never Mentioned in the Controlled Media

Contrariwise, there are other pathetic cases of media prejudice which are totally incomprehensible. For instance, the Jul-Aug 1999 “America’s Promise Newsletter” (p. 5) mentioned a recent incident in Alexandria, Louisiana where an 82 year old woman was stabbed to death by a band of roving Negroes who selected her “because she was White.”

This story received little or no media focus. There never were any outcries about racism or hate crimes when this old woman was murdered. Slick Clinton did not mobilize an army of FBI agents to go to Louisiana and investigate Black racism. The media and the public ignored it since it involved Black crime on Whites (which is a non-story).

Another sample surfaced on Oct 16, 1999, in the Charleston, SC area when a gang of twelve or more Black youths (ages 14 to 21) attacked two White men riding bicycles on a residential street--following a nearby, highschool, football game.

The Black animals stomped, kicked and beat the two men mercilessly--even using metal pipes on one man while he was down on the ground (Nov 1-7, 1999, “Washington Times,” p. 18). This man, while down, was beaten into an unconscious coma.

The attackers were just beginning to concentrate on the second man when a woman nearby opened her door and yelled at the attackers that she was calling the police. When arrested, one of the Negroes used the race card to claim that the attack was prompted by one of the White men who allegedly used “racial slurs” (per the words of the Black animal)

Police said the Blacks apparently attacked to steal the bicycles, although race or something else could have been the motive for the attack. Fights and trouble had erupted after the football game which may have hyped up the Africans. The importance of this story is that it, like thousands of others, was totally ignored and lost in the controlled national media. Black crime on Whites is just not reported.

More Neglected Stories

A report in the Nov 1999 “Internet Vortex” (p. 30) noted that a gang of five Asians brutally raped a White teenage girl, as a part of their gang initiation. They admitted to police that they chose her because she was White.

Yet, this incident was not a hate crime. Of course, it was a no-news case in the national media. But imagine what would have happened in the media if five White boys had raped an Asian girl?

This same “Internet Vortex” (p. 30) had one more illustration of the gross, prevailing. media hypocrisy in America. This case concerned a Colored Filipino immigrant who took a handgun and went upstairs in his apartment building and shot and killed two innocent neighbors. This incident received no mention in the media. If the killer was a White man, it would have been major news all over the newspapers and boob tubes.

In December 1999, a gang of roving Negro animals in Pittsburgh attacked a pair of White kids. The Blacks beat both of them to death in an obvious frenzy of hate (as discussed on the “Michael Reagan Radio Talk Show” on Dec 22, 1999). Like so many other cases, this one was utterly blanked out by the controlled media. What would have happened if a White gang killed two Black children?

Another story occurred in Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania (a suburb near Pittsburgh), on March 1, 2000, when a Black man named Ronald Taylor took a gun and killed two White persons and seriously injured three other Whites at two fast food restaurants. As he gunned down the Whites, Taylor said that “You’re all White trash, racist pigs” (Mar-Apr 2000 “America’s Promise” newsletter, p. 2).

Taylor tried to hide from police in the home of a Black woman. He told her that he was not going to kill any Blacks and that he was out to kill Whites only. Manifestly, Taylor’s targets were selected precisely because they were White. Of course, this case could not involve a hate crime since the perpetrator was a Negro. And importantly, there was no media or political outcry over hate in this incident.

On March 16, 2000, two White Sheriff’s deputies tried to serve a warrant on H. Rap Brown, the former Black Panther leader. Brown shot and seriously wounded the two deputies--one died. Despite all of the hate associated with the Black Panthers and H. Rap, this crime was not a hate crime and it was never characterized that way.

The April 15, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 2) offered a news item of nine Blacks beating White University of Virginia students in Charlottesville precisely because they were White. The Commonwealth’s attorney said that he lacked evidence of hate in the crimes. Of course, stories liked this one never saw the light of day in the national controlled media.

As always, hate crimes only involve White males, who act against women, queers, Blacks, Hispanics and Asians. And as always true, Black crime on Whites is quickly forgotten in the US media.

Since Black crime on White people is not on the agenda of the controlled national media, incidents, like the above samples, are either not reported or only briefly mentioned and quickly forgotten in the controlled media.

The Jake Robel Case

The Mar-Apr 2000 “America’s Promise” newsletter (p. 1) told the story of six-year old Jake Robel of Blue Springs, Missouri. Recently, he and his mother Christi were in Independence, Missouri shopping. Christi went into a sandwich store momentarily and left Jake in the family car, still strapped down with the Missouri required seat belts.

While Christi was in the store, a car jacker jumped into the car, started the engine and prepared to leave. Seeing little Jake, he opened the door and shoved the boy outside the car, while the boy was still entrapped in the seat belt. The mother saw what was happening and rushed to the car to try to free the boy from the tangled seat belt.

The car jacker poured the gas to the car and it took off and soon reached a speed of 80 miles an hour. Little Jake was outside the car and still hooked up to the seat belt as Christi tried to free him. The boy was killed as he was dragged on the pavement for five miles.

In many ways, this Missouri case had much in common with the previously discussed Jasper, Texas case. Perhaps the major difference between the two incidents is that little Jake was White and the car jacker was Black--whereas in Texas, the races were mostly reversed. Yet, neither the controlled media or Slick Clinton had anything to say about the murder of little Jake.

Slick never called out the FBI. He did not appear on TV. He did not muster any tears (as he can and does do on occasion). And of course, the controlled media was totally uninterested in the Missouri case. After all, they have been quite busy reporting upon, shedding tears and complaining about the Jasper, Texas case. Above all else, this Missouri crime was not a hate crime--like the one in Texas.

The ruling powers could only address one major case like this at a time--unless perchance, little Jake would have been Black and he was dragged to death by a White car jacker (which would have been a real fluke because virtually all car jackings are done by Blacks). With the races reversed, everybody would have easily found time to focus upon the Missouri murder.

A Recent Virginia Case

On July 10, 2000, a Black man in Northern Virginia said that he hated White people and that he was going to kill White children. He began attacking White children and did slit the throat and murder a small, eight-year, White boy (discussed on the Michael Reagan show by David Horowitz on July 11, 2000).

There was a complete news blackout of this event--beyond some local coverage in Northern Virginia and the “Washington Times” which had a story about it. If the races of the participants had been reversed, the controlled, national media and the nation’s politicians would have went wild with publicity and condemnation. Because the murderer was Black and the victim was a White child, it was no news.

And since the murderer was Black, it certainly was no hate crime. But again, if the races would have been reversed, Slick Clinton would have called out an army of federal agents and authorities to make a crack down on the racist, White supremacist who was involved in this hate crime. Truly, outright and blatant hypocrisy and wretchedness completely dominate the modern Christian civilization.

Yes, the one word which applies to everyone involved in these cases (including Slick Clinton, American politicians, the pathetic Christian Churches, the controlled, national media and the Southern Poverty Law Center) is “hypocrites.” Truly, Christian America is a sick, warped, hypocrite nation. For sure, judgment will come soon. The ELOHIM is not as stupid and unjust as is Christian America on things like this.

One More Ignored Illustration of Media Bias

A news comment on March 23, 2000, dealing with the failure of the US Immigration & Naturalization Service (INS) to deport both legal and illegal aliens who come to the US and commit crimes, has meant that these aliens have committed 98 murders and a whole host of lesser crimes of violence in the past few years. The aliens involved were mainly Colored Hispanics from Mexico, Cuba and so forth.

In the late 1990s, one illegal Mexican alien turned out to be a serial killer who murdered any number of US citizens across the country before being caught. This killer was known and wanted by the Houston Police Department, the Texas Rangers and the US FBI, even while he was in custody of the US Immigration people.

Rather than turn him over to the various authorities wanting him, the INS deported him back to Mexico. Soon, he returned to the US and resumed his murder campaign.

Another case involved an illegal Jamaican named Lee Malvo, who turned out to be a serial killer in Oct 2002 (he will be discussed in later chapters herein). One must wonder why the US media doesn’t concentrate upon crimes like these from Colored, illegal aliens. But the media is very silent on these actions because its focus is upon guns and the few crimes done by Whites.

American Justice

Not only do Blacks do a disproportionate share of interracial crimes, but they are less likely to be punished by the American judicial system. In other words, it is far more likely that Whites will face punishment for crime in America than it is for Negroes.

The previously mentioned Jul-Aug 1999 “America’s Promise” letter (p. 5) noted that the US conviction rates for twelve of fourteen felony categories show that Whites are more likely to be tried and convicted than Blacks are for similar crimes. This is interesting because the public is lied to and told the reverse.

In the case of the statistics from Phoenix, Arizona on school disciplinary problems, cited earlier, it is probable that not only do the Black students commit more infractions, but that they are far less likely to be punished than White students. So while the 4% of Blacks receive 21% of disciplinary actions, perhaps they do far more than 21% of the wrongs (how much more? Who knows, maybe 25%, 50% or 75% of the infractions).

Obviously, the “controlled” media is very evil and hypocritical. No wonder the stage is being set for YHWH to destroy this depravity in the contemporary, wicked, pathetic, sun worship system in the next few years.

Christian Church Burnings

In 1996, there was a surge in Christian Church burnings in America. Most were White churches, but there were some Black churches as well.

Quite naturally, the controlled media had absolutely nothing to say about the White churches (many media liberals would have only said good riddance). But there was a wild, passionate focus on the Black churches.

The controlled media and the liberal, ruling politicians commenced a barrage of public complaints about White racism, and the alleged White supremacists who were burning and destroying all of the wonderful Black churches. Former president Bill Clinton quite naturally took advantage of the situation in order for him to exploit it for political purposes.

Clinton appeared on television and told about his grief as a child when Black churches were burned in Arkansas. The media gave this story full coverage for days and days. The only problem with it was that no Black churches burned in Arkansas when Slick was a child (Jan 17, 2000, “Spotlight,” p. 5). It was a Clinton lie for political deception purposes. Of course, the truth was never publicized (as with other Clinton lies).

Also, Slick rushed in teams of FBI agents and federal investigators whenever a Black church burned. But instead of finding White racists setting the fires at the Black churches, usually something else was found. Typically, the Blacks set the fires at the Black churches--sometimes to extort and con money out of the gullible Whites, who just loved to send money to Africans every time a Negro church burned down.

This course was assessed in previous remarks on “the reverend” Henry J. Lyons, an African thief and swindler in charge of a group of Black churches. He found that every time a Black church burned down, (White?) people loved to send him money to rebuild the church. It is still unknown how many churches Lyons and his team burned down, but surely many.

In Nov 1996, a fire destroyed a Black Pentecostal Church in Wichita Falls, TX. Upon investigation, it was discovered that the minister and some of his assistants started the fire in order to collect on a $270,000 insurance policy (as is a common practice among not only Blacks but Amalekite businesses which conveniently have fires to get rid of old inventories and buildings that cannot be readily sold).

Slick to the Rescue

In any case, former president Slick Clinton came to the rescue in 1996 by dispatching an army of federal agents to investigate these fires, especially at the Black churches. And many of these investigators did their job well and found the culprits--which often turned out to be Black people who set the fires at the Black churches and White people who set the fires at the White churches.

In other words, race was but one of the problems (along with religious hate, Satanic rituals, revenge and greed) allowed in a “US News & World Report” story on Nov 22, 1999 (p. 26), by Angie Cannon and Chitra Ragavan on “Another look at the church fire epidemic.”

This report said that the feds investigated 874 arsons and had arrested 372 people in connection with 300 of the fires (with evidently no racial issues in most or all of the arrests).

While race could have been involved in some of the cases, it was very doubtful, if at all, since this writer remembers no media mention of any specific race crimes so far. Assuredly, the media would have produced front page coverage for any such involved incidents.

However, the interesting aspect of the fires was the arrest of a 37 year old man named Jay Scott Ballinger and his girl friend Angela Wood (known as Snow, Destiny, Tabitha and Tiffany), both of Indiana. This pair was heavily involved in Satanism and had pledged their bodies and souls to “Lucifer.”

As the article goes, Ballinger was caught at one fire in Ohio and has confessed to burning as many as 50 churches. Snow got in on the act as well and said she conspired with Scott to burn churches in 20 states. Federal prosecutors claim Ballinger is the most prolific arsonist that they have found in their investigations.

Anyway, the gist of this story seems to be that Ballinger particularly and Destiny to a lesser extent did not discriminate. They apparently burned churches at random--both Black, White and whatever. Evidently, their focus was on the Satanic ritual aspects of the fires.

The Public Was Lied To

The amazing thing about this whole episode is that the gullible public was told daily that there was a racist, White supremacist plot and conspiracy against Black churches back in 1996. There were constant front page stories and media hype about the evil Whites and the poor Black churches. Now, it’s been proven for what it was--a media hoax to fool the stupid, White, Christian goyim.

A related matter was discussed in an article by James P. Tucker on “Real Truth Censored About ‘Hate’ Crimes” in the Jan 17, 2000, “Spotlight” (p. 5). Tucker mentioned the media hypocrisy about the Black church burnings and also an interesting case involving a Negro named “Darryl Gray” of Albany, NY. Gray secretly wrote some hate messages on the doors of two Black lawmakers.

The messages were supposedly written by the Ku Klux Klan. They said something about killing all the “Niggers” because they don’t belong here and signed by the KKK. Of course, a story like this would be front page news in the controlled media. But tragically, the police arrested the Black Gray who engineered the hoax. Naturally, Gray’s involvement was no news.

The Ultimate Media Hypocrisy

Previous chapters have already addressed the problem over alleged anti-Semitism. Anytime anything happens in the way of criticism or complaint over Jews or in possible damage or hurt upon a synagogue, the controlled media goes into a trance to start mumbling about anti-Semitism, White supremacists, racists, etc.

Just like there is a complete media obsession over anything that might happen to a Black Church, there is the same media obsession and fanaticism over anything happening to a synagogue. But like the fires at the Black Churches, the usual attacks on the synagogues ultimately turn out to be inflicted by one of the Amalekite members in an effort to revive the talk of the holocaust, anti-Semitism and so forth.

The controlled US national media just loves stories about the burning of Black Churches or Jewish Synagogues. But if the story leads to a revelation that it was a Black person or Amalekite criminal who set the fire (which is what usually happens), then the front page story vanishes immediately from the attention of the controlled media.

There is no story when a Negro sets fire to a Black Church. The story only exists if a White person sets fire to a Black Church. Not only is it front page news, but it involves a hate crime” which necessitates the full resources of government to catch the criminal and prosecute him fully according to the law. Of course, this gives the controlled media a chance to whine about racists, White supremacists, etc.

Charles Coughlin

Back in the 1930s, there was a well known Catholic priest named Charles Coughlin who really invoked the displeasure of the Amalekite bankers/masters who were then successfully taking over the United States and particularly the US media. Poor Charles quickly gained a reputation as an anti-Semite. The Amalekites did their best to teach all good Americans to hate Coughlin.

With the coming of WWII, Coughlin and people like him had to keep their mouths shut or be tried for treason and aiding the enemy. So, with the war, Coughlin passed into the limelight and eventually died.

Anyway, Coughlin’s Catholic Church was in Royal Oak, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit. Apparently, some of his followers transformed the church and/or Coughlin’s pulpit into a historic site called “Shrine of the Little Flower.” Evidently, Christian services are held there until this day in 2003.

On April 2, 2002, an apparent Amalekite worker of evil named Jared Bryan Goldenberg brought some gasoline with him and came to this church to burn it down. Some of the parishioners were involved in Christian prayer services and didn’t immediately spot Goldenberg’s activities.

Goldenberg Was Caught

So Jared made it to the basement where he started a fire in a wastebasket and painted the Star of David on some of the rest room walls. Some of the parishioners discovered Goldenberg and what he was doing. They held him until police arrived to take him into custody (Apr 15, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 18).

With his arrest, the police claimed that there was no motive for the work of Goldenberg to try to burn the church down. Of course, the controlled media never even bothered to report the story. It simply was no news in the nationally controlled US media.

On the other hand, if the church would have been a Black Church or if it was a Jewish Synagogue, and involving a White majority male, the incident would have been a hate crime. It would have been given front page coverage in many newspapers, and Dan Rather (on CBS) and his colleagues at ABC, CNN and NBC would have all blasted the so-called hate crime to the highest possible heavens.

The gross hypocrisy of the controlled US media is incomprehensible to the sane mind of a person not yet mesmerized and zombiized.

Of course, most Americans are mesmerized and zombiized by the controlled media and the warped educational institutions. Naturally, those people will never understand the problem.

Chapter 300--Media Hypocrites III

The Bias Over Queers

Along with the media’s bias in reporting on guns and the right wing, the press exhibits similar manifestations on any news relating to homosexuals. Thus, the media goes crazy any time a homosexual is attacked, assaulted or murdered. For instance, the case of the murder of a faggot college student (named Matthew Shepard) in Wyoming received inordinate press coverage in 1998 and 1999.

But conversely, when homosexuals and pedophiles sodomize, torture and kill innocent children and others, the news is “no news.” An illustration of this surfaced in the Oct 25-31, 1999, story by Joyce Howard Price on “Media tune out story of torture death of Arkansas boy” in the “Washington Times” (p. 23).

Per Price, two faggots in Arkansas raped and tortured a thirteen year old boy to death on September 26, 1999, in Prairie Grove, Arkansas. The boy was repeatedly raped six times by the queers and finally suffocated to death with his own underwear. The story received coverage essentially in Arkansas and in a few, local stories in nearby Oklahoma and Tennessee. Never once did the national media pick upon it.

Tim Graham, director of the Media Research Center, said that he is not surprised because “Nobody wants to say anything negative about homosexuals. Nobody wants to be seen on the wrong side of that issue.” Graham added that political correctness was at work. Conversely, David Smith, spokesman of the homosexual Human Rights Campaign, said that this rape and murder had nothing to do with “gay people.”

Of course, the national media took the Smith view that the rape, torture and murder of a boy by two queers had nothing to do with faggot people. But this was not the line when some heterosexuals murdered the just mentioned faggot in Wyoming several months earlier. In that case, the news was major and all over the national media. Even the trial of the killer received extensive press coverage.

GLAAD

Incidentally, this mention of the murder of the faggot Matthew Shepard brings up an interesting story by Julia Duin on “Pro-homosexual group influences media portrayals” in the Nov 22-28, 1999, “Washington Times” (p. 1, 23). According to Duin, the National Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has a community relations department headed by Cathy Renna.

When the news broke on the murder of the queer Shepard, Renna immediately flew West to handle media interviews for everyone from local residents to the University of Wyoming. Per Duin, Renna was tasked to give the GLAAD spin to the media on the incident that there was a climate of “hate” caused by conservative groups behind the murder.

Over the years, GLAAD has had amazing success at influencing the controlled media, perhaps because the media wishes to believe the best about the queers (per Peter LaBarbara, founder of the Americans for Truth about Homosexuality). Other conservative groups opposed to homosexuality agree that GLAAD has inordinate power over the US media.

GLAAD stands ready to provide resources and material to the media in all possible situations. Media groups which do not provide the proper GLAAD spin are listed on GLAAD’s on-line “GLAADalert” which is sent to 150,000 people every two weeks. Apparently, there is some fear in the media that they must toe the line with favorable news coverage about queers or be intimidated by GLAAD.

In May 1999, a coalition of conservative groups attempted to air ads touting a “ex-homosexual” group on Washington, DC TV stations. GLAAD and other pro-homosexual groups persuaded several stations to not run the ads.

The January 2000 “National Liberty Journal” (p. 1, 6) had a story by J. M. Smith on “Is One Murder More Significant Than Another?” which assessed the pro homosexual position on how the Media handled the Shepard murder. Smith also quoted the just cited Cathy Renna of GLAAD, who spoke recently to some GLAAD supporters.

She told them that “One of the most important things you can do is have those tough conversations with journalists about when it is completely inappropriate to run to some radical group like the Family Research Council because of misguided notions of ‘balance.’ We have to offer them some more moderate voices or convince them that there is no other side to these issues... We are now in the position of being able to say we have the facts, and we don’t have to go one-on-one with these people.”

What Renna is saying is that when it comes time for the media to get a contrary view from someone about the queer issue, the media must be steered away from very anti-homosexual groups to more moderate opposing groups or convince journalists that there is no contrary position. Thus, GLAAD “helps” and “guides” journalists in making selections of people to interview about the homosexual subject.

Manifestly, this queer woman is describing how she manipulates and spins the media to write stories which are always pro queer and never really in opposition to faggots. A description and samples of the art of media spinning, as just discussed, will be assessed shortly in the succeeding chapters.

More Illustrations of Media Distortion

Another illustration of complimentary news coverage on depravity surfaces in the fact that many modern US newspapers are now carrying favorable stories about the so-called engagements and weddings of homosexual couples. In late August 2002, the “New York Times” announced that it would carry “same-sex commitment ceremonies on its Weddings pages” (Sep 6, 2002, “The Week,” p. 4).

Otherwise, more modern times have also seen the media turn to the presentation of pre-martial sex, interracial sex, Witchcraft, New Ageism, Spiritualism, etc, and all in favorable terms.

For instance, in one very sick case of media coverage, Newsweek,” in its Nov 1, 1999, issue (p. 16), had a story by Erica Kennedy on “Who’s the Daddy? Grandma Didn’t Ask.” The focus of this report was upon both sexual promiscuity and miscegenation among two interracial couples. Naturally, the report was presented in a favorable light in both cases. The concern was over how Grandma would react.

The gist of the story was that Grandma would be pleased and would say that the baby could be black, green or purple. But it would be a baby and a human being. In other words, the story said that Grandma would approve of the biracial baby (contrary to what most real grandmas would say).

Of course, this whole sun worship motion of lying, twisting, deceiving, misleading and so forth is designed to teach a certain message to the public generally and to little, impressionable children in particular.

One should not be naive and stupid enough to suppose that a person (particularly children) can watch this junk on television, at the movies or read it in the news media and not be educated, persuaded and motivated in a certain direction. That’s part of the cause of the deterioration among young people. They have been raised and educated since WWII, completely different than the pre-WWII generation.

The Military

The controlled media does offer a number of stories about the US military from time to time. But the focus and direction of this media effort does not examine what most patriotic Americans are interested in. Instead, there is a strange and unique approach to take people’s mind’s off of some military issues and concentrate them on other subjects.

The Dec 11, 2000, “Spotlight” (p. 2) had a news report which quoted a survey made by “Brill’s Content” on media stories on the US military. The survey period was over US media reports from 1995 to 1999. The findings--1550 (76%) of the stories were on women in the military, 432 (21%) were on homosexuals in the military and only 64 (3%) dealt with military readiness.

The report went on to note that “Few journalists who cover wars and military affairs have experienced the solider culture, with its bizarre mixture of cynicism, boredom and deep loyalty.” Obviously, with the concern over women and homosexuals in the military, military readiness has suffered. No wonder, no one goes out to fight in America’s last military confrontation (Ezek 7:14).

The Jessica Lynch Story

While the media people themselves often make-up and generate fraudulent or ridiculous stores about the US military, it is also a fact that US authorities also join in to promote various lies and deception to the gullible public (like Schicklgruber said--tell a lie, over and over, and it will be believed).

A perfect illustration of this phenomenon surfaced in US reports (spread by the US media) about 19-year-old PFC Jessica Lynch and the alleged “daring rescue” by US special forces in the Iraq war in April 2003. Per the report, Jessica was captured and taken to an Iraqi hospital (behind enemy lines) with gunshot and stab wounds. While at the hospital, she was further mistreated and abused.

Based on a tip, US special forces allegedly stormed the hospital under heavy enemy fire to rescue the girl. Now, BBC has come out with a detailed documentary report on this heavily publicized US story.

The truth seems to be that much of it was nothing but blatant lies and deception in a Hollywood-style stunt designed to buck up sagging American support for the war at a time when the US military was having problems in the Bush war against Iraq (May 17, 2003, Spokane “Spokesman-Review,” p. A2).

Based on interviews with numerous Iraqis at the hospital, there was no gunfire even involved, nor were there even any Iraqi soldiers at the hospital (in fact, US authorities were told in advance that there were no Iraqi soldiers at the hospital). Hence, the US special forces went in unopposed and took Jessica out in a helicopter.

Per her doctor, she did not have any shooting or stabbing wounds (she did have a broken arm, a broken thigh and a dislocated ankle--evidently, injuries that resulted from the accidental crash of the truck which she was riding in at the time of her capture), but she did receive a blood transfusion for some reason (from blood provided by a hospital staff person).

She was placed in the only specialist bed in the hospital, under the care of one of the two nurses on the floor. In general, her care was described as being good (in view of the war going on in Iraq). Her nurse said that she was a mother to the girl who was treated like a daughter.

In the US tales about this incident, some video was provided of allegedly the US military storming the hospital with guns blazing and explosives going off. As it turns out, this was an edited or altered presentation since no gunfire or explosives were even involved. Apparently, US people faked the gunfire and explosives to add to the message being disseminated on the video.

BBC asked the Pentagon for copies of the “unedited tape,” but were denied access to the original. Then BBC contacted the Bush White House for comment. But White House spokesman Ari Fleischer refused to comment on the reports of US lies and deception.

Some History

For most of the 1,260 years that the Roman Catholic Church ruled supreme in Europe (from the time of Constantine on), she ruled in the vein of her being the state approved religion for the entire Holy Roman Empire.

Things continued that way until the Protestant Reformation kicked off in the 16th century when things began coming apart for mother Rome. Only then was Rome forced to give up her supremacy over portions of particularly Northwest Europe.

Concurrently with and following the Protestant Reformation, there was a motion over some parts of Europe to establish state approved churches/Christian religions (like the Church of England in England, the Lutheran Church in Germany, the Reformed Church in Switzerland and so forth).

One must understand that all of these nations in Europe were Christian nations. There was no interest in abandoning Christendom. Christianity was the established religion. But based upon the historical profile of the marriage of the Roman Catholic Church and the state, there was some hope and anticipation that various national governments would become married to their locally popular Christian denominations.

The thirteen British colonies in early America in the late 18th century were similar to parts of Europe. The colonies were all basic Christians and many Americans would have liked to have had a Christian state linked to one of the denominations--like the Episcopalian Church which was a fallout from the Church of England and which already had some government approval and status in parts of the colonies.

However, there was a strong feeling by many of the early colonists that they didn’t want a church-state relationship at all. They were all largely Christians and they all wanted the US to be a Christian nation. But they did not want the nation to favor one Christian denomination over the others. In other words, they wanted the different Christian Churches to be on an equal footing without governmental favoritism.

Media Hypocrites and Politicians

Accordingly, the first amendment to the Constitution was prepared to say “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”

From this law, the courts, the controlled media and prostitute politicians have developed a theory that there is a constitutionally approved “separation of church and state” in the vein that there can be no presence of anything resembling religion or religious practice in any form of the government or government peoples of the US (to include state and local).

Of course, on examining this amendment, the focus is plainly upon the US Congress (which will be addressed in a later chapter). Next, there was no intent to stop people in government from practicing their personal religions (after all, the Congress and different bodies of government had historically offered non-denominational prayers on various occasions--that have largely continued over many years).

In any case, a new liberalism and Socialism took over the US from the Earl Warren court in the 1950s and on forward until today (in 2003). All of a sudden, the leftists started using the first amendment to try to completely take religion out of all aspects of government on the premise of separation of church and state. And it has largely worked through the efforts of the controlled media.

The Modern Hypocrisy

But the purpose in mentioning this background here at this point is not to castigate the media bosses when they apply their standards of thinking to everyone and everything in the same twisted way. The problem with the biased, prejudiced, and controlled media people (under Amalekite leadership and authority) is that they are extremely warped and hypocritical because of their practice of yellow journalism.

Thus, a so-called religious Jew, named Joseph Lieberman (a closet faggot, as noted earlier), came along and ran for Vice President on the leftist, Democrat ticket with the ultra liberal Al Gore. Naturally, the liberal, leftist media started off on the political side of the leftist Democrats. Thereupon, the controlled media walked the extra mile to twist and slant its efforts at promoting Gore and Lieberman over everyone else.

The Republicans simply control too few newspapers or media agencies to have much of an impact over anything. Naturally, poor Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan didn’t have a chance to even be heard, much less have an impact on anything. So the Amalekite controlled media attacked Bush, Buchanan and Nader, if they carelessly allowed religion to even be discussed in any forum.

Consequently, when Bush went to Bob Jones University and spoke, he was immediately castigated by the controlled media. If he or the other non Democrat candidates would have spoken the words “God” or “Jesus” or exhibited any form of morality from a religious perspective, they would have been crucified by the Amalekite controlled media.

Yet, the leftist Amalekite Lieberman (who pretends to be a religious Jew) came on the stage and talked regularly and often about “God” and morality. Thereupon, the media never mentioned a word of criticism or compliant over Lieberman and his supposed religious integrity and standards. Instead, the controlled media loved him and presented his words favorably to the gullible voting public.

Abe “Foxman” (is he a cunning fox?), the apparent Amalekite head of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, did criticize Lieberman’s religious pitch one day. But his comments didn’t impact on anything. They were largely ignored by the gullible goyim Christians, and they certainly were not going to make any Jews or Amalekites change their positions from supporting the leftist Gore-Lieberman team.

A previous chapter quoted Jewish Rav Yehuda Levin’s insight on Lieberman when he said that “it’s very ironic that the liberal media is spinning Joe Lieberman as ‘Mr. Morality’ because he has made a few nice sound bites. But the question is, where’s the kosher beef when it comes to morality?” (Sep 2000, “Internet Vortex,” p. 2). Rav Levin has hit upon reality in his comment.

Negative Ads

In another act of gross media hypocrisy, the controlled media has stood by while the Democrats used gross negative ads attacking their opponents. Actually, this is a normal leftist practice (as discussed elsewhere herein).

The leftists like to avoid discussions on facts, data and truth and concentrate instead upon a personal attack on their opponents. They have followed this MO for ages. Attack personalities and not facts (because of the power of demons to lead this focus). Of course, the controlled media accommodated this effort and focus.

Anyway, in the 2000 presidential campaign, Gore and the leftists followed their usual practices of negative advertising and attacks upon their opponents (principally Bush and the Republicans, but Buchanan somewhat). By the time of Labor Day, Bush was alleged to be behind, so he began launching some negative ads which showed how hypocritical and deceitful the leftist Gore was.

What did the controlled media people do? Why, they attacked Bush for daring to produce advertising which was critical and negative about Gore. And as always, they completely ignored Gore and the Democrat’s negative ads which had been underway from the early summer. The media is so absolutely hypocritical and dishonest. It is sickening to even think about its deception and evil.

This writer is no fan of the sorry Republicans and certainly is not interested in promoting their ideology. But the leftist Democrats are even worse and clearly do not deserve such grossly favorable treatment from the leftist, Amalekite, controlled media (which went out of its way to support the Gore-Lieberman team to the point of being ridiculous, just as it hypocritically supported the vile and corrupt Clinton).

Making or Breaking People

In terms of modern American politicians, there is no doubt about it whatsoever. The media can make or break a politician. As will be discussed in detail in later chapters, Bob Packwood, US Senator of Oregon, was destroyed by the media while Bill “Slick” Clinton was saved by the same media for far more serious sexual improprieties.

Almost every American president in modern times (certainly starting with FDR and on since then) have been liars and frauds. And yet, the only one which the media decided on destroying was Tricky Dick Nixon. Other than Tricky Dick, the rest have been protected (although the media probably would have liked to do Ronald Reagan in--if given a chance).

Jerry Lee and the Media

A former chapter mentioned the story of a boy named Jerry Lee Lewis and his cousin Jimmy. Like the media loved rock n’ roll performers generally (especially Elvis Presley), Jerry Lee Lewis was basking in glory until things came apart for him in early 1958. And the why for the decline and wipe-out of Jerry Lee has to be laid to the role and power of the media.

Lewis had a woman problem and at least three marriages. He married a woman and then a second woman while married to the first one (thus, he became a bigamist). Eventually, he divorced wife one and then married a wife number three. He maintained that since marriage two was bigamy, he did not need a divorce from #2.

As it turned out, wife three happened to be his thirteen year old cousin (named Myra Gale Brown). Now, all of this probably would never have amounted to much (since the controlled media usually overlooks sexual depravity and shortcomings), except for one small thing.

Jerry Lee’s producers scheduled him for an appearance in England where he was a big star (they thought that a successful show in Britain would kick him into number one and the new King of Rock n’ Roll). However, a problem came up in that Jerry Lee wanted to take his thirteen year old bride along. He insisted. So she went with him.

On landing in London and exiting the airplane, a host of British photographers and reporters were at the airport to greet Jerry Lee. Call it a bad break or whatever, but one of the reporters asked Myra who she was. Myra said that she was Mrs Jerry Lee Lewis. The reporter could see at once that she was a young girl and asked about her age. Jerry said that she was 15.

With a little digging, the British media finally unearthed the truth that the girl was thirteen and was a wife number three (without a Jerry Lee divorce from wife number two--which made Jerry a bigamist). Of course, the British press went to work on Jerry Lee and nailed him to the wall. He was called a bigamist, a cradle robber, a baby snatcher, etc.

On the night of his first performance, the crowd jeered him and actually booed him at times. His show was a flop. The British promoter canceled his appearance and the UK government actually ordered him deported.

By the time that he was back in the states, the news of his English appearance and his marital troubles had reached the American media. As noted in other comments herein, the US media generally has little problems with morality or sexual integrity--that is with most people, unless the media takes a dislike to someone (as with Bob Packwood).

Either because the British press had already made such an issue with Jerry Lee or something else, the US press picked up the same pitch. Whereas Jerry Lee had been a big star, he, all at once, was nothing. His telephone quit ringing.

He continued to play at dives and cheap joints and tried to make a comeback. But success never returned and despite his efforts (and arguably, his skills on the piano). He did eventually divorce number two and remarried, a second time, Myra. In early 1959, he and Myra had a son whom they named Steve Allen Lewis.

The point in mentioning the rock n’ roll star Jerry Lee Lewis is that while the US media can overlook gross sexual sins, sodomy and on and on, it can also become riled up and go to work on some other person for a lot less. Once the media starts in on someone, it will completely destroy any credibility which the person may have in the eyes of the American public. Literally, the controlled media can make or break people.

Bernard Goldberg

The Dec 31, 2001, “American Free Press” (p. 2) reported the release of a new work by Bernard Goldberg on “Bias” which is an expose of the hypocrisy, elitism and tendentiousness that define the major US television networks, the “Washington Post,” the “New York Times” and other US media institutions.

Goldberg is a 28-year veteran of CBS News and he certainly knows what he is talking about. Apparently, his work was reviewed by Russ Smith in a recent “Wall Street Journal.”

This same “American Free Press” report also noted that “Wall Street Journal” people attend the secret Bilderberg meetings (to be further addressed in some detail below and in a later chapter herein), and thus, keep the prevailing media promise to reveal “nothing” (which is a lot like letting a billy goat take care of a cabbage patch).

In a follow-up report, the Jan 11, 2002, “The Week” (p. 4) noted Goldberg’s book and two more recent efforts which likewise offered more comments along the same line on media bias. Besides Goldberg, David Murray, Joel Schwartz and S. Robert Lichter have written a book on “It Ain’t Necessarily So” and William McGowan has come out with his views in a new work called “Coloring the News.”

McGowan looked at the wave of recent Black Church burnings and noted that this type of news receives front page coverage, even though there was no evidence of a conspiracy. Conversely, there is a respectful silence over the misdeeds of corrupt Black politicians. Clearly, the goal is to be politically correct in news reporting.

Goldberg’s work noted the clear bias in favor of legal abortions, gay rights and other liberal shibboleths. Opponents of this agenda are invariably dubbed “extremists.” Republican propositions are called “schemes” and Democrat ideas are labeled “plans.”

In a comment on this trio of 2001 books on media bias, William Rusher in “The Washington Times” said that the focus on media bias was about as bold as insisting that “the sun rises in the East.”

Dennis Byrne of the “Chicago Tribune” argued that the bias isn’t a product of a coordinated plot. Per Byrne, most journalists “are simply so left-wing that they don’t even realize how their biases turn up.”

Brent Bozell

Brent Bozell was on NPR on Feb 1, 2001, with a word on how the major TV networks (ABC, NBC, CBS etc) handled the changes in presidential administrations in 1981, 1993 and 2001. Jimmy Carter had some executive orders in place to permit abortions liberally wherever possible. When Reagan came on board, he canceled them. When Clinton became president, he reinstated them. G. W. Bush also canceled them.

The TV networks generally described the acts of Reagan and George W. Bush as being controversial and attacks upon women’s rights while the networks said nothing critical about Clinton’s actions and characterized them only in the vein that Clinton took action to keep his campaign promises. Of course, this was absolutely hypocritical. But it happens all the time in thousands of cases of news reporting.

The media can and does easily manipulate news to induce the public to become filled with bad feelings, hate and animosity toward certain selected targets/people. By the way, such an effort can be called freedom of the press and democracy. Of course, democracy is just that--mob rule (to be discussed later)!

More on the Media

Another Goldberg reporter, Jonah Goldberg, in the “National Review Online,” noted that the media looks to government, the single biggest news source, as the fixer (of the problems in society). Thus, whatever government does, it represents “progress and when something is undone (by conservatives or libertarians), it represents a giant step backward.

In terms of the Sep 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Robert W. McChesney and John Nichols wrote in “The Nation” that the war on terror transformed “our dim bulb” of a president into a hero with 90 percent approval ratings. That’s because “most Americans get their information from media that have pledged to give the American people only the president’s side of the story” (the above cited Jessica Lynch story is a sample of this).

Also, in “The Nation,” Mark Crispin Miller wrote that “Reporters are afraid to risk annoying their best sources.” Higher up media authorities are not interested in any “anti-establishment” views. They all favor the state.

Fraudulent Stories

While absolute bias prevails in almost all aspects of media operations, there is another particularly bad feature of media dishonesty in their operations. This issue concerns absolute fraudulent stories that journalists and editors sometimes plant to deceive and mislead the gullible public.

In a sense, this is what the controlled media does every time it conducts a so-called opinion poll of the population. Inevitably, these polls are slanted a particular way to evoke a certain finding (that is the media prepares their questions and the possible responses in a way to achieve a predetermined objective). This course of media dishonesty will be broached in the following chapters on the spin.

Perhaps the best known fraudulent story surfaced when “Washington Post” reporter Janet Cooke invented a tail about an eight year-old heroin addict which was the basis for a Pulitzer Prize winning 1980 story (Sep/Oct 2000 “Believer’s Advocate,” p. 20). This Janet completely manufactured her story and she won a Pulitzer prize for it.

Another case arose in early 2002 when a free lance writer for the “New York Times” wrote an emotional story about a young African boy’s life in slavery on a cocoa plantation in the Ivory Coast. The only trouble with this story was that it was all bunk. The writer made it up. The “New York Times” found out about it and did fire the writer (Mar 11, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 2).

The May 23, 2003, “The Week” (p. 19) had another report from the “New York Times.” This one came to light in a 7,000-word, front-page story that the Times had on the work of Black reporter Jayson Blair at the Times for the five previous years. Per the story, the Negro Blair wrote hundreds of stories by stealing the work of other publishers, inventing facts, and filing reports with datelines from cities that he had visited.

Though his early work was characterized by dozens of discovered errors and printed corrections, the Times kept him on the staff and continued to print his stories (evidently because he was a Negro and the Times had to promote its affirmative action program). After five years, the Times finally discovered/concluded that Blair’s work essentially involved lies, fraud and errors.

Incidentally, this story on Blair provoked a cartoon in the May 27, 2003, “Idaho Spokesman-Review” (A13) which showed Bill Clinton seated at a desk and talking to Jayson Blair. Clinton said: “Jayson, this is Bill Clinton. I was wondering before you write your book, could you sit down and knock out my autobiography. For sure, in 2003, Hillary Clinton produced her autobiography with the help of someone like Blair.

Tragically, these stories of fraud do arise from time to time. The just cited March 11, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 2) also mentioned similar cases involving journalist Michael Finkel and “Boston Globe” writers Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith. Inevitably, these frauds cook up some fascinating piece of fiction and then sell it to the gullible public. Rarely, do these crooks get caught.

So, in other words, if a reporter does not have the basis of a desired story, he or she can invent one fraudulently. The gullible public will never know the difference (although some of these media fraud are later discovered).

More Journalistic Deceptions

The May 13, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report” (p. 4) had a short news item which described a recent revelation about one of the Fox News talking heads. This person claimed that he was a highly decorated Army lieutenant colonel. Apparently, someone checked out his claims and found that he was a nobody private.

When this thing broke, it caused quite a hustle in the various networks to make some effort to check up on claims of their personnel--both employees and guests. The networks are now demanding resumes from people and are checking them out to be sure that personnel claims are substantiated.

The point of this story is that journalists and analysts not only make up false stories, but they are also known to make up false stores about their own backgrounds and qualifications.

Amalekite Efforts in Southern Oregon

As a follow-up on this line, the Mar-Apr 2000 “Jubilee” (p. 3) had a report from Carl F. Worden on a hate group posing as an anti-hate organization. This group was the Northwest Coalition For Human Dignity which is either directly run by or at least inspired by evil Amalekite bankers/masters (like those in the Anti-Defamation League [ADL]).

This entity in Feb 2000 released a report claiming that there were three new “White Supremacist/Hate Groups” in the Medford-Grants Pass, Oregon area. Allegedly, the three were a Oregon Militia unit in Medford, a Ku Klux Klan outfit in Grants Pass and something called the Medford Citizens Bar Association. The Coalition sent their report to the media for publication (to include the local Medford newspaper).

Worden is in the Militia unit and lives in the area. He says that all three claims are false. They are lies being circulated for some agenda. The Militia unit specifically is hostile to any position of so-called racism or anti-Semitism. The bar group was disbanded over ten years ago and there is no Ku Klux Klan entity in the Grants Pass area.

Worden’s lawyer has written the Coalition and the Medford paper for retractions. The point of these remarks is that the Amalekite controlled media will invent false, fraudulent stories, if necessary, to put their agenda of race mixing and hate over to the gullible goyim Israelites.

Media Control of the Internet

Although there are some Internet Service Providers (ISP) which take action to screen out certain types of information and messages, the Internet has historically been fairly free in terms of what can be said or communicated through the ISPs (at least, in early 2003, though this reality is changing).

Later chapters will discuss the enormous use of the Internet to promote illicit sex, pornography, homosexuality, perversion etc. Sex is now the number one commodity peddled on the Internet.

As will be broached in later commentary, some ISPs provide services to screen-out this bad information. And truly, if homosexual faggots and sodomites are screened out, it is a good thing. They should be excluded from entrapping innocent people into their web of perversion and depravity. In fact, most of them should be arrested and prosecuted by the state for their evil acts.

However, these screen-outs also usually include groups (like those cited above in Southern Oregon) made unpopular by the controlled media and evil Amalekite bankers/masters who call virtually all the shots of importance in the controlled and mesmerized US.

This screen-out of alleged hate groups (which the Amalekites define as White supremacists and racists), who dare to talk about race, racial segregation and/or do not conform to the politically approved position on race (as determined by the Amalekite bankers/masters, who are promoting Balaam’s scheme to destroy Yisrael), is certainly unfair and probably illegal (in terms of so-called freedom of speech).

The Amalekite controlled media and the Amalekite led hate groups (like the ADL, Jewish Defense League and Southern Poverty Law Center) run a continuous battle of hate against all groups and peoples in America, who do not accept their goals of destroying the Christian Israelite goyim (the WASPs--White Anglo-Saxon Protestants).

By the way, these Amalekite led hate organizations used to label their enemies as “anti-Semites.” This phrase became worn-out and over-done, so they switched to White supremacists and racists. Now, they have come up with still another new media attack label. They speak about “obscene” and “obscenity” in talking about their enemies (Jun 12, 2000, “Spotlight,” p. 21).

The Amalekites’ use of catch words/phrases--like obscene, obscenity, White supremacists, racists, etc to define their enemies--has become common place in America. Already, the Amalekites are using these definitions in their controlled media and to also control the developing Internet (as will be assessed in some detail in subsequent chapters herein).

The Amalekite bankers/masters and their controlled government agents are busy monitoring and spying upon the Internet presently with a goal of eventually regulating all use of it, and particularly its use by the right wing--like those persons in support of the Christian Identity motion, the Ku Klux Klan, etc.

The Amalekites are doing this by calling such beliefs obscene, evil and contrary to public policy (to be described in later remarks herein).

Louis Beam

In remarks from the Stormfront Web site on the Internet, right-winger Louis Beam predicted another possibility to oppress the right wing--in that the Federal government, the CIA and the ADL would join together to use computer nerds to commit acts of random electronic violence on the net so that they “will appear to have been perpetrated by white racists, neo-nazis, patriots, extremist anti-government radicals, hackers, or other identifiable dissidents of the right and left..”

Beam surely has it right. Already, hackers have been busy creating viruses to do damage on the net. All America needs is just one hacker who can be linked to the racialist right wing and it will give Big Brother an excuse to crack down upon all of them and especially those who do use the net.

Hypocrisy!

Of course, it is true that no one would dare think to censure or condemn any of the Amalekite hate groups which promote Balaam’s theories on destroying the stupid, White goyim in the House of Yisrael lands here in the age end.

No one gets up tight because there is a group called the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)--which was founded, financed and supported by the Amalekite bankers/masters (this was one of the classic acts of fulfilling Balaam’s advice on destroying the gullible, foolish, White Israelites).

It is perfectly all American (as motherhood and apple pie), for Blacks, Amalekites and other privileged minorities to have special rights and be allowed to transmit messages freely over the Internet. No one would dare accuse any of these groups of anything evil. It is inconceivable that the NAACP membership could ever be called racists in the controlled media (although they clearly are Black racists).

Conversely, if there are any pro White groups, like the National Association for the Advancement of White People, they are (per the controlled media) the epitome of evil. They are White supremacists and racists who must be destroyed. White people simply cannot have organizations which can ever compare with what Blacks and Jews are allowed to have.

The Essence

The bottom line here is that the Christian Yisrael nations (the US, Canada, Britain and White British Commonwealth) are gross hypocrite nations. They are so incredibly hypocritical that it is impossible to say anything good about any of them at all. Surely, judgment is knocking at the door.

Incidentally, the above mention of the monitoring and spying of the Internet and plans or efforts to control it (along with the present media control) by the Amalekite led hate groups is not unique.

Actually, both federal authorities and various Amalekite hate groups have complete spy programs (sometimes joint programs) in place to monitor and spy upon all conversations going on in America and even around the world, as much as possible. These dictatorial efforts will be assessed in some detail in later chapters.

Of course, one can easily make the case that the control over the media has been established and is maintained because of the reality that the corporate, national media is owned by a select hand-full of people, as established and defined elsewhere herein.

Actually, as will be conclusively proven in later chapters, the US media right now is largely owned or at least managed/controlled by a group of powerful Amalekite bankers/masters. It should not take too many brains to figure out that the owners of the media are the real people who call the shots on the reporting of news and how the news is to be slanted.

The Advertising Role

But there is another issue on this question. And this one concerns advertising. The Jan 28, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 6-7) had a story by James P. Tucker Jr on “Powerful Global Interests Enforce Tight Limits on News Reporting.” Tucker got to the heart of the matter by directing his commentary upon the issue of advertising.

After all, almost all media companies and businesses stay in business precisely because of advertising revenues. Powerful advertisers often set the agenda for newspapers and destroy those which do not conform to the politically correct approved positions.

Tucker cited the case of the former “Washington Times-Herald,” a nationalist oriented paper that condemned America’s international adventuring. Since the Times-Herald was not on the team of the globalists (and particularly, the Amalekite bankers/masters who control much of the large corporate world), the advertisers withdrew their advertising and the paper went under (to be gobbled up by the “Washington Post”).

Much of the huge advertising bucks are controlled by a group of powerful advertising agencies operating in New York. Many of them are directly in the hands of Amalekite bankers/masters, which insures that the Amalekite globalist position is continuously pitched.

The Bilderberg Situation, Revisited

Accompanying his article on the role of advertising (as discussed above), Tucker also presented some words about the situation with the powerful, secret rulers, called the Bilderbergs or Bilderbergers (to be further assessed in some detail in a later chapter herein).

Some of the most powerful and influential people in the world hold annual secret meetings at different locations. This group is called the Bilderbergs. The most powerful people on Wall Street, in government, in the media and in the corporate world attend. Yet, there is a total, routine, complete blackout of news in the American press on these plutocrats and their secret meetings.

It is clear that the plutocrats who own the media giants and who themselves attend these secret sessions practice a complete news blackout (as illustrated above with the “Wall Street Journal” example, as cited in the Dec 31, 2001, “American Free Press). But the media blackout goes beyond these few fat cats to almost the entire media world of the United States. Effectively, the blackout extends across the board. Why?

Although not mentioned directly by Tucker, it is plain that the power of the advertising bucks and the big advertisers act to also cause this blackout across the board in America. Newspaper editors, even in small towns, either don’t know about the secret meetings of the plutocrats and/or they are simply afraid to touch the subject.

Chapter 301--The Spin I

Spinning an Issue

The “National Jewish Democratic Council” (503 Capital Court, NE, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20002), in its document, on “How to Win: A Practical Guide for Defeating The Radical Christian Right in your Community,” has come up with an interesting definition on “the spin” in an article on “The Science of Spin.”

According to this group-- “Spinning is the art of framing an issue. It’s your message, your interpretation. It is how you define yourself and your opposition.”

Of course, spinning is one of the common practices that the media people use regularly whenever they “report” news and anything else which they want the ignorant public to hear and to hear in a certain way.

Or put another way, “The Week” of July 20, 2001 (p. 4), noted that the spinmeister can, with a straight face, say that “up is down.” In effect, it is a complete twist of the truth!

David Horowitz

David Horowitz is a former leftist radical from the 1960s, who has mellowed somewhat over the years and reassessed his position. Today, he is a leader in the conservative right wing movement in the US.

Horowitz is president of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture. In an early 2000 fund raising letter, Horowitz offered some of his thinking on how ideas and information are spun to achieve particular purposes.

For example, he wrote: “The masters of the radical Left fully understand the power of words and labels. They’re experts at twisting ideas and vilifying those who oppose them. Up becomes down, right becomes wrong, and common sense takes its leave.” Horowitz is on target in terms of how the leftists manipulate and spin truth to serve their own deceptive agenda. And that’s the real world in 2003.

Huey Long on Spinning

An article on “Huey Long and Media Manipulations,” by Christopher Ruddy in the June 2000 “Internet Vortex” (p. 20), quoted the famous American populist Huey Long of Louisiana when he was asked a question back in the depression days of the 1930s. Long was asked if the US might succumb to fascism. Huey replied-- “Yes, but in America we’ll call it anti-fascism.”

As Ruddy concluded, Long was on the mark about modern Americans. If you label something with a good name, and particularly if it is in fact bad, many persons will gullibly accept the idea as good. Assuredly, modern Americans are extremely gullible and even when the controlled media powers manipulate truth to turn bad into good. Manifestly, this is part of spinning.

Propaganda in the Middle East

The June 2001” Bible Light International JPM News & Prayer Requests” (p. 2) had a short report on “The Propaganda Battles” in the Middle East. Supposedly, this article reflected upon how the Palestinians were spinning news out of the Middle East to reflect their position and to castigate the Israeli state in the spin. Per the story, the Arabs follow eight rules in their media spinning operations viz:

1. Sensationalize the intensity and scope of Israeli military actions (use words like aggressive, devastating or intensive). 2. Whitewash Palestinian acts of violence. 3. Blame violence on the Jewish settlements. 4. Depreciate Israeli leaders (by referring to Sharon as hard-line, war criminal, the bulldozer, etc).

5. Blame Israel for all Palestinian casualties. 6. Active and passive verb usages (juxtapose two deaths, a Palestinian caused by Israel and an Israeli caused by the Palestinians--in spinning, publicize and blame the Israelis for the death they caused and ignore the one caused by the Palestinians).

7. Offset a reportable current Israeli death by bringing up previous Palestinian deaths. 8. Invoke Arabic terminology for references to the “holy sites,” instead of referring to them using Jewish terms.

The Christian Western Media

While Arabic newspapers in Arab lands and even some media sources in some parts of Asia, Russia and continental Europe assuredly use the above spin, by manipulating words and ideas to portray something very different from the real world, one must understand that the essence of spinning has been elevated to an art and/or science in the Christian West by the Amalekite bankers/masters, who control the bulk of the Western media (especially in Britain, Canada, Australia and the US).

Since the Amalekites are in effective control of the US national media, one will just not hear the spin outlined above for the Palestinians in America. Instead, the Amalekites reverse all of the parties involved in the eight rules. Thus, the US controlled national media spins the subject by blaming the Arabs and constantly talking about how bad Arafat is. The Arabs receive little or no support in the American media.

As a powerful demonstration of this pro-Amalekite media spin and manipulation, the April 12, 2002, “The Week” (p. 17) had a news report from Eric Alterman on MSNBC.com on the 82 most influential print and TV pundits. Some 69 of them “can be counted on to support Israel reflexively and without qualification.” Only five are pro-Palestinians.

As “The Week” noted, “if all of the news that reached America were completely objective, the bias of the punditocracy would insure that it was communicated with a rabidly pro-Israel spin.”

Three more quotations drive home the point. The May-Jun 2002 “America’s Promise” newsletter (p. 4) puts the problem in perspective by quoting writer Dale Crowley Jr from the “Capitol Hill Voice” -- “Incredibly, three Jewish-controlled newspapers admitted that Jewish interests both in the U.S. and Israel either influence or outright control the foreign policy of ‘our country.’”

This same newsletter (ibid, p. 4) also quoted Doug Bloomfield from the “Washington Jewish Week” -- “Being pro-Israel has proven to be good politics; more and more, legislators compete to prove they can be more ‘pro-Israel’ than their colleagues and competitors.” Yes, they trip over themselves to avoid being called anti-Semites and racists by the controlled media.

Moreover, “America’s Promise” (p. 5) quoted prominent Israeli leader Shimon Peres, who said on Oct 3, 2001, that “Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel, we, through the Jewish people control America and Americans know it.”

A Case Study

The Jun 3, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 11) had a story on “Media Censors Pro-Palestinian Views” by James P. Tucker Jr. Tucker pointed out several public statements by former presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan and former Congressman Pete McCloskey which were censored and not reported in the controlled US national media (as discussed elsewhere herein).

Tucker noted that Saudi Arabia tried to buy TV time to show that Saudis are friendly people. But much of the US media turned down the big advertising/programming bucks. Tucker took the position that the media censors pro-Palestinian views (which is certainly true of the US media).

The point is that the American media is owned and/or controlled outright by the Amalekite bankers/masters who are simply not going to allow the Palestinian spin meisters the time of day. The spin is all for Israel.

For example, the Arabs launched a series of suicide bomber attacks on Israelis in Palestine in March 2002, just about the time of Passover. Israel retaliated by using tanks and armor to invade the Palestinian controlled areas and kill and arrest as many young Palestinian males as possible.

Regularly and routinely, the Palestinians tried to spin this confrontation as Israeli aggression. Of course, the Israeli spin was totally on the suicide bombers and not on the Israeli attacks.

Some Difference in European Attitudes

As late as the week of April 6, 2002, the European Parliament decided to recommend that the fifteen member states of the EU impose economic sanctions on the state of Israel (Apr 19, 2002, “Jerusalem Post,” p. 5). This is almost an unprecedented move. Surely, it will pave the way for an even more dramatic point of demarcation between Europe and the Jewish state in Palestine.

This move in Europe seems to have been prompted by the Israeli military action and invasion of Palestinian lands. While the US went along with this effort, many Europeans were very upset. In particular, France, with its huge Muslim population, was very angry at the Jews.

The April 29, 2002, “Time” magazine (p. 41) assessed this new thinking in parts of Europe in an article by Michael Elliott on “Children of the Holocaust.” Elliott claims that in the 1960s and 1970s, there was much public support in Europe for the Israelis in their several conflicts with the Arabs.

Conversely, today, the streets of Europe are filled with rallies that support the Palestinians and condemn the Israeli state. Even portions of the European press does support the Palestinians (which is simply unheard in North America where the Amalekite controlled media always paints the worst picture possible for the Palestinians).

The European Media

Elliott specifically suggests that the European media has been better than the US media sources in covering the misery of the Palestinians. Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is often shown in Europe as a hate figure.

The Jun 3, 2002, “Jerusalem Report” (p. 32-33) had a story by Petter-Georg Levin on “Neutrality on Trial” which demonstrated how much of the media in continental Europe is on the side of the Palestinians. A couple of cartoons were shown to convey Ariel Sharon as a very evil man. One European cartoon showed him as a bulldozer, scooping up the many dead of the Jenin refugee camp.

The point is that the more Catholic press in continental Europe has turned increasingly against the Israelis and more in favor of the Arabs. Of course, many Jews simply claim that the Europeans are just plain anti-Semitic. Ron Rosenbaum of the “New York Observer” says that Europeans have always been anti-Semitic and always will be.

Manifestly, the Israeli offensive against the Arabs on the West Bank and in Gaza, starting in March 2002, has backfired. Sharon has not helped his image in Europe at all. Conversely, Yasser Arafat, bottled up and imprisoned by the Israelis, in his West Bank compound for 34 days, clearly came over as the victim.

For sure, the increasing Muslim populations in Europe are causing many Europeans to take a second look at the situation in the Middle East. France, Greece and certainly the Vatican are leaning heavily toward the Palestinians.

One of the tragedies of this whole subject is that the dumb gullible Christians in both America and Europe can count on being lied to, deceived and spun by the controlled media (which simply is not interested in reporting the truth).

The Israeli Reaction

In the vein that the Israelis are allegedly not getting a fair shake from the media in the war of words with the Arabs, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has organized a “dream team” of public relations (PR) people. Reportedly, this team is headed by Gideon Meir and Ra’anam Gissin. Their job seems to be one of developing spin tactics of using videos, pamphlets, conferences and other techniques to put their spin over.

The April 22, 2002, “Jerusalem Report” (p. 18-19) had a story by Leslie Susser on “Losing the Media Battle” to assess the work of the dream team people and their plans for the future. Many of their critics say that “they’re putting up a lousy fight;” while they, themselves, claim that it’s hard to counter pictures with words (since the media is able to show pictures of Israeli tanks shooting largely defenseless Arabs).

Per the story, the dream team faces an uphill media battle and especially in Europe. There is some Israeli feeling that there is a resurgence of alleged anti-Semitism and that the deck is stacked against them.

Specifically, the team has charged that the coverage has not been fair from BBC, Sky News (this must be a European news source) and CNN. Apparently, the Israelis complained to CNN and this controlled media source did back track and allow some special Israeli slants.

Meir believes that the best long term approach to improve the Israeli PR campaign (in other words, the Israeli spin), is to hold seminars and conferences across Europe and North America where the Israeli pitch can be more easily made to students.

Reportedly, many wealthy Jews (like Howard Schultz, who owns the Starbucks chain) are bankrolling this operation. Obviously, when gullible students can be collected and exposed to a guided presentation from trained and professional spin meisters, the students are not gong to get much in the way of a balanced presentation.

The Possibilities

Naturally, with the Israeli spin, it is certain that the Arabs will also try to spin the news their way. The only problem for the Arabs is that they don’t have the money or media control that the Amalekites have in the US. In fact, since CNN is owned by the most powerful of the Amalekite plutocrats, it makes no sense at all that they would ever allow anything favorable to be broadcast for the Arabs.

There is some feeling that since the Amalekite ownership of the controlled US media is well known that possibly some of this media manipulation is to purposely tilt and spin the news on the side of the Arabs. This might be the explanation of why CNN did give the Arabs a little bonus (precisely so it would not come over as the Jewish owned media spinning the news for the Israelis).

Alternatively, it is possible that the Jewish complaints involve smoke and mirrors only to stir up the water. Thus, it might be that indeed CNN does spin the news on behalf of the Israelis.

But in order to help CNN “appear” more fair, maybe the Israeli dream team has made this public complaint so that Israel can allege that she got the short end of the spin from CNN.

In any case, the Israelis and their colleagues in the US and Europe seem to be busy preparing new methods of spinning the news so that Israel will look the best in her continuing conflict with the Muslims.

The Six-Day War

If there was ever a fantastic cover-up and spin of news on the Arab-Israeli conflict in the United States, it happened in the 1967 Six-Day War involving the Arabs and the Israelis. In now reporting on an event in this war, this writer is certainly not siding with the Arabs and against the Jews.

That war was directed by YHWH and it was His decision to manage it to see that the Jews took Old Jerusalem. Now, after taking control of the old city and the Temple Mount, the Israelis failed grossly in not immediately clearing the Temple Mount and authorizing the rebuilding of the Temple. They did not do so.

Their failure to act properly has spelled out much of the continuing problem that they have faced from the Muslims in the Middle East. In other words, most of the problems that the Israelis have faced since 1967 have been due to their own failures and disobedience of YHWH in the Six-Day War (yes, disobedience because there is a mitzwah commanding the rebuilding of the Temple).

The USS Liberty

But there was a very pathetic Israeli action in the Six-Day war which was really indefensible. The US had the USS Liberty, a spy ship, operating in the Mediterranean Sea, just fifteen miles North of the Sinai coast.

While it ostensibly was spying on both Israeli and Arab communications, you can bank on it that its focus was on the Arabs and not on the Israelis. Thus, whatever intelligence this spy ship learned of would be disseminated to the American allies, the Israelis. So the ship was there in real support of Israel.

The ship was flying the US colors and there was absolutely no possibility of confusing this American ship with the ships of any of the Arabs (actually, most of the Arab nations have no Navy to speak of and certainly nothing in the context of the Liberty).

On June 8, 1967, during daylight hours, the Liberty was the subject of an Israeli reconnaissance aircraft (where the pilot flew so low that he and the ship’s crew exchanged smiles and waves--per Liberty survivor Larry Weaver).

Soon, the ship came under intense air attack by rockets and bombs. The planes in the first assault were apparently unmarked (Jun 24, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 10-11), although some of them may have been flying with some Egyptian military symbols (per some reports). The attacking planes knocked out all of the ship’s antennas (used in communications) and strafed its lifeboats (so no crewmen could escape).

One sailor was able to get one of the antennas hooked back up and the ship radioed an emergency call for help to two US carriers of the Sixth Fleet, operating some 280 miles away. The report on the attack was forwarded to the White House on the premise that the attackers were Egyptians. President Johnson ordered plans for retaliation.

After the first wave, and before rescue planes could reach the site, the Liberty was still afloat and still had the US flag flying. So a second attack occurred from three torpedo boats from the sea. Evidently, in the second wave, the torpedo boats were marked with Israeli symbols.

In the meantime, the Sixth Fleet scrambled eight fighter planes to come to the rescue of the Liberty.

The ship’s crew made a quick determination that the attacks were not from Egyptian planes and boats but from Israeli attackers. The Sixth Fleet was so notified. This message was passed on to the US White House. But upon learning that the attackers were actually Israelis and not Egyptians, President Johnson ordered the planes back to the carriers and called off retaliation plans.

If the American planes had not been recalled by Johnson, they could have reached the Liberty in time to save some lives and possibly sink the Israeli torpedo boats (ibid, p. 11).

The Follow-Up

Though 34 American sailors were killed and another 171 were wounded, the ship survived the terrible assaults that lasted for an hour and 45 minutes (ibid, p. 10). Obviously, Israel preplanned this attack and purposely carried it out to try to sink an American ship and blame it on the Egyptians.

The instant reaction was, of course, that the evil Arab Egyptians had attacked an innocent American ship in the Mediterranean Sea. And of course, the Amalekite controlled media carried its war of words against the Arabs to the full extent possible in the immediate minutes following the attack. The Arabs were naturally blamed, cussed and denigrated.

After the American ship hobbled back to US control, and the crew was able to explain that the attack didn’t come from Egypt (but from Israel), the Israelis coughed up and finally admitted the attack. But they spun it that it was an accident and mistake. Manifestly, the Israeli spin was precisely what the Amalekite controlled media bombarded the airways with in explaining the incident.

If the gullible, ignorant goyim in Christian America would have learned that the attack was deliberate, and even after the US shells out a gift of $five billion annually to the state of Israel, there would have been a lot of hard feelings in the US over the incident. But all of this stuff was hushed up and not discussed in the controlled media.

Today, in early 2003, there is almost no mention of the Liberty and the Israeli attack in American history sources. In the few times it is mentioned, the spin is presented. For instance, “An Encyclopedia of World History” (p. 1286) recorded the incident, but then spun it with the accident pitch and played up some Israeli apologies and payment of compensation.

Yes, with the apology, the Israelis forked over some money to pay for the damages. After all, the money ultimately came from the US in the first place (in the dole out of $five billion annually, plus other payoffs). So, why shouldn’t the Israelis shell out some of it in restitution.

More on the Liberty

There is an after story on this incident. While it has been successfully swept under the rug for the last 35 years, there was a movement afoot in 2002 to put pressure on Congress to investigate the attack.

The May 27, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 1, 17) had a report on the work of a group called “Liberty Alliance,” which includes members like Admiral Thomas Moorer (former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), Admiral Merlin Staring, General Ray Davis, and James Akins (former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia). This group says that evidence that the Israeli attack was deliberate is not just convincing, but conclusive.

Former Under Secretary of State George Ball (during the Kennedy and Johnson years) wrote of the attack-- “Israel knew it could get away with anything.” Ball added that if Israel had succeeded in sinking the ship with all aboard, the attack would have been blamed on Egypt.

One thing for sure, Congress will never make a fair and impartial hearing on this attack. There is no way that this Liberty Alliance group will ever get a hearing or the time of day. The Amalekites own the US Congress, just like they own everything else of importance in America.

The USS Pueblo

There was another US intelligence ship incident at sea less than a year later. This one involved the USS Pueblo which was seized by North Korean gunboats in the Sea of Japan on January 23, 1968. The official spin was that the US spy ship was operating in international waters off of North Korea. But the North Korean position was that the ship was in North Korean waters.

The crew of 82 men were held captive by the North Koreans until December 22, 1968, when they were released (“An Encyclopedia of World History,” p. 1351). After much deception, in the US State Department spin on the subject (in the context of the alleged illegal seizure of the intelligence ship in international waters), the truth finally came out. The ship was spying on North Korea in North Korean waters.

Though the US spin was to persist in official US historical records, the truth of the seizure was sufficiently advertising that only an idiot now believes the official US position hatched up by the liar and crook President Lyndon Baines Johnson (who will be more fully addressed in a later chapter).

Sal

On the Coast to Coast AM radio talk show program on April 10, 2002, an Italian American caller named Sal asked the host, George Noury (or Nory), what the difference was between a suicide bomber who kills people and a missile fired by a tank into a house which kills people.

George tried to present the Israeli spin that the suicide bomber was wrong, but his words were incoherent and made no sense. Too, if George would have allowed this conversation or question to proceed long, it would finally make some gullible Americans realize that in all of these acts of attacks, murders, killings, etc, the only issue concerns who does it.

Therefore, if the attacks involve Israelis murdering Arabs, it is proper, good and allowable. The same is true with the US attacks upon the Muslims. The US attacks are always good, proper and allowable. It is only when the Muslims retaliate and hit back that the attacks become evil acts of terrorism which must be condemned, hated and opposed.

Of course, the effort of Coast to Coast to spin this Arab-Israeli conflict subject and blame the Arabs is fairly common in much of the Amalekite controlled media in the US. Some of the European and Vatican controlled press has been leaning in the other direction of spinning the trouble in the Middle East to justify the Arabs and condemn the Israelis (the Vatican is notoriously on the side of the Arabs).

The point Sal made is most relevant. If a bomb goes off near you and you and/or your wife and children are killed or maimed, does it matter one bit whether the bomb was from a suicide bomber or a missile from an aircraft? If it kills or hurts you or your family, does it really matter whether it was fired by a Palestinian Arab, an Israeli soldier or an American war plane?

The American people and the controlled American media have been all hyped up over the alleged Muslim attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sep 11, 2002, which killed around 3000 people.

But it seems that while throwing all of this hate on the Muslims, few people were concerned when US war planes bomb, murder, kill and maim tens of thousands of innocent people (including women and children), now almost all over the world.

George H. W. Bush, Bill Slick Clinton and now young George W. Bush have all proven their capability of killing people all over the globe (who do not toe the plutocrat line).

It is easy for fat, snug Americans to sit back and suppose that it is only bad, evil, vile Muslim or Serb monsters who are being killed in these attacks. This is simply not true. While maybe some bad people do die, it is also truth that multitudes of innocent women and children die or are seriously and permanently injured.

Innocent People Suffer

When Slick Clinton launched his recent war on the Serbs in the Balkans, this writer mentioned to a neighbor that many innocent women and children would be killed. The neighbor (who was previously mentioned herein in the vein of his arrogance and mental problems) denied everything said to him (thereby calling me a liar).

This man started in that he watched TV and the media pundits declared that no innocent people would be hurt since the US would use extremely sophisticated targeting and guidance technology which insures that bombs and missiles always fall on their pre-determined targets (the allegedly evil Serb military).

My neighbor’s words were utter nonsense--though he was fed this diet of stupidity from the controlled national media (and he believed it). There is no guidance system that is 100% perfect. Any missile can go astray or fall short and kill people who were not even targeted. Too, the designated targets are not always evil military forces. Often, targeting mistakes are made and innocent people are simply shot or bombed.

In WWII, the Eisenhower team decided to demolish and destroy Dresden, Germany and its population of thousands of old people, women and children (the city was as open city without any military presence). The Allies fire-bombed the city and killed tens of thousands (more innocent women and children than were killed in England in the entire war, as discussed elsewhere herein).

Anytime someone starts using guns, missiles and bombs against others, innocent people will inevitably die for all kinds of reasons (to include so-called mistakes).

The one thing for sure, the truly bad people will usually be protected in the best bomb shelters and other secure areas, while largely innocent, poor people will be exposed to the bombs and missiles (yes, of all of the killed in Afghanistan, the Muslim leaders largely escaped unharmed while many innocent women and children died from US bombs and missiles because they had no place to hide).

Yes, evil people like Schicklgruber, Mussolini, Tojo, Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill were never killed by falling bombs.

And by all means, the plutocrats who planned and ordered WWII (like the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, etc) all escaped punishment. If this group of thugs would have been killed by falling bombs, it would have been good for so-called humanity. Instead, the bombs killed largely innocent women and children.

This writer has served in the US military in two wars. The above comments are being made in the vein that i, too, have participated in killing others (in Korea, i was in an artillery unit. When the shells were fired, i was not concerned about the deaths of enemy soldiers or innocent women and children). For the record, the next time i participate in a war, i hope to be in the army of YESHUA, and i will do however He commands.

In terms of YHWH’s Israelite army, when Yisrael came into the land of Canaan in about the 15th century BCE, it was right, honorable and just to kill all the Canaanite men, women and children, showing them no mercy. The ELOHIM justly ordained this slaughter. If i would have been alive back then, i would have willingly served in that army and complied with YHWH’s mitzwah.

The Canadian Incident

In the summer of 2002, two US Air Force F-16 planes bombed some Canadian ground forces in Afghanistan, killing four Canadians. A board of inquiry was held and charged the two pilots with involuntary manslaughter (Sep 14, 2002, “Spokane Spokesman-Review,” p. A3).

Based on the facts (the pilots were irresponsible and fired their weapons even after they were told to “hold fire”), they should be tried and courts-martialed. Yet, the difficulties of conducting warfare inevitably open the door to the murder of innocent people (again, principally the aged, women and children who cannot escape the incoming bombs).

If the just cited summer 2002 bombing incident would have been of innocent Afghanistanian women and children being killed, nothing would have been done. The “mistake” would have been pushed under the rug and quickly forgotten. It became news worthy only because it involved America’s Canadian allies.

Routinely, millions of innocent people (the aged, women and children) have died over the years in America’s wars--either because of accidents, irresponsible warriors or deliberate acts of rambo types (who have watched too many TV programs).

Of course, the US is not the lone ranger on this thing because other countries conducting warfare face the same indictment. It’s just a reality of war.

Obviously, the Arabs, Americans, Israelis and everybody else will inevitably kill multitudes of innocent women and children in their aggressive acts of war. Tragically, the evil people deserving death will usually escape any fall-out. When the bombs start falling, the evil persons are usually protected in underground bunkers (as happened with Adolf Schicklgruber in WWII), while the unprotected innocents die.

Spinning is Routine in the US

Actually, this news spinning methodology is used routinely in spinning the news and reporting on things in the US. The officials in Washington lead the spin efforts and quickly almost all American news sources follow suit. The official news coming from Washington is routinely spun to support the political position of the American rulers and plutocrats in power.

Virtually, without exception, words and ideas are conveyed in an image to induce the gullible, goyim, Christian population to think in certain directions (away from truth and into deliberate lies and deception).

Later chapters will discuss the tragedy of the case of JoAnn McGuckin, whose children were illegally and dishonesty seized in a raid by “law enforcement people.” The controlled national media characterized the seizure as a “rescue.” In the Davidian standoff (to be assessed later), David Koresh was constantly demonized while the FBI was presented as loving, kind, compassionate, honest, good people.

Leak and Then Complain

The best illustration of “spinning” an issue concerns former president Slick Clinton and how he has handled his numerous womanizing activities (which will be more fully assessed in later comments). The Slick White House had a “damage control” unit organized to work full time on how it could spin and manipulate information going to the gullible public.

Slick may have given the impression that he is a stupid, Arkansas hick, dedicated to smoking pot, sniffing cocaine and enjoying women. But in the real world, Slick was and is slick. That’s why he was elected so many times and how he stayed in power over America for eight years. He is a master at spinning and manipulating the public.

For example, Slick and his Amalek-Edomite colleagues secretly leaked information from the 1998 grand jury which was considering his sodomy scandal with Monica Lewinsky (to be later described).

Slick’s leaks were purposely a little distorted to allow Slick to initially deny the reports (since they were inaccurate in some respects) or otherwise permit him to choose when, where and how the information would be released to best spin his position and desensitize the public.

After working this scam for a while, Slick then filed a court complaint alleging that the independent prosecutor, Ken Starr, was guilty of the leaks. Slick and his agents then went on TV regularly to publicly complain over Starr and the alleged leaks.

Slick’s lies and spin personally were ultimately proven as happening when the judicial investigation and appeals panel completely absolved Starr and his staff of the leaks in Sep 1999 (Sep 20-26, 1999, “Washington Times,” p. 8). But the damage of Slick’s leak was already done back in 1998 when he was being pressured over the Lewinsky affair. He had already benefited by making the leak and controlling the spin.

Whenever an opponent is holding information which could be adverse and critical (and which is coming out anyway), there is a need to try to control the terms of its release.

In the case of Clinton, he could not stop the ultimate release of the information. But what he could do was control the when and how it was released. He routinely did this by leaking information in advance that he was privy too.

Thus, by controlling the terms of when and how critical information is released to the public, Slick was able to spin it in such a way that it would either benefit him outright in some manner or alternatively desensitize the public somewhat. So when the real true information did eventually come out, later from the court or the prosecutor, the story would be old news and offer little or no impact upon the media or the public.

Ultimately, the information was coming out anyway from the court or the prosecutor on someone else’s terms. Since this was the real world, there was no particular reason for Slick to not let some of the information leak out. Thus, if it was advantageous for him to leak something to the leftist, controlled media, he did so.

Once the news was leaked and he worked the release for all he could, he then turned his attention to blaming and attacking the independent prosecutor for the leak. He worked this scam repeatedly during the entire time of his problem with the independent prosecutor.

More Clinton Tactics

For instance, in early July 2000, the independent prosecutor believed that he had sufficient information on Clinton’s skullduggery to impanel a new grand jury. He began making steps to do this very thing. As always, Slick knew what was going on--either because the prosecutor notified him as one of the “legal” processes or he found out otherwise with his massive spying program and control of the US government.

So, early on, in the event, Clinton knew everything that was going on or would go on. He knew a new grand jury was coming down the pike. During the Democrat convention in Los Angeles in August, a strange “leak” came from someone to the liberal, leftist media about this impending grand jury.

At the Democrat convention, the leftist Democrats and their leftist media allies were indignant, hostile and vocal about the evils of the right wing Republicans who had allegedly leaked this story (supposedly about Clinton and Monica Lewinsky).

A Democrat judge appointed to the federal bench by Jimmy Carter later said he had inadvertently let the information out to the media.

Otherwise, the thing everyone seemed to miss was that the evidence was such that Slick himself could have made the leak, so he could control the timing of it and how and what was said about it in the release. Slick was never above any dishonest and deceitful act.

Of course, if it was up to Clinton, he likely would have chosen the time of the Democrat convention in order to make out how ridiculous the whole matter was by bringing up Monica Lewinsky again and in a way to interfere with the convention. The truth is that only the prosecutor, court and Clinton himself knew exactly what was in the grand jury motion. Evidently, it was more than just Lewinsky!

Another Case

One of Slick’s assistants working on damage control was a man named Sidney Blumenthal (Amalek-Edomite?) who was leaking data to the press critical of the independent prosecutor. Blumenthal was called before the grand jury.

When the clever and deceptive Blumenthal came out of the meeting, he and his lawyer went to the media to cry and moan about freedom of the press and his rights to free speech (as if they were violated).

He charged prosecutor Starr with the greatest of crimes against him. With all of his moaning and complaining, one would think that his constitutional rights had been trampled upon. As it later turned out, Blumenthal had actually refused to answer some of the grand jury questions by claiming “executive privilege.”

Since he refused to answer questions, why did he publicly complain about violations of freedom of speech and of the press? With his decision to refuse to answer, how could his constitutional rights have been violated? The answer is that the man is a classic hypocrite and spin artist out to deceive and mislead the gullible, Christian sun worshippers.

Slick was such a master spinner that his Republican opposition cowered in fear of him. That’s why Americans heard so little from them. They were afraid of Slick.

A few years ago, Slick vetoed a government appropriations bill and proceeded to shut down the government. He then went on TV to successfully spin the issue and blame the Republican Congress for the shutdown.

Clinton Went Global

“The Washington Times” paper of Aug 2-8, 1999, had a front page story by Ben Barber on “Administration spin to go global” which piercingly told how far Slick was willing to go on spinning his issues.

The gist of Barber’s comments was predicated upon statements made by a former, senior, White House official who said on July 28, 1999, that Clinton had established a new multi-agency plan to closely control the dissemination of public information abroad with a goal of “spinning the American public.”

Administration officials said that news coverage was distorted at home and that they needed to fight it at all costs by using resources that were aimed at spinning the news on Clinton’s foreign policy.

Apparently, this interesting finding developed as a result of Slick’s 1999 war in the Balkans. Perhaps he concluded that the news being released was not properly spun and twisted to support his policies.

Accordingly, Clinton issued a Presidential Decision Directive (#68) which created the International Public Information system designed to make sure that all statements to foreign nations were coordinated, manipulated and controlled.

Specifically, the agency’s charter said that its purpose was “to prevent and mitigate crises and to influence foreign audiences in ways favorable to the achievement of U.S. foreign policy objectives.” Morton Halperin of the US State Department chaired meetings of the core group which developed the new system.

The idea of this new spinning agency was to control and manipulate news being released to the foreign press, nationals and governments, so that the released news supported US foreign policy objectives which were being simultaneously spun to the American people.

In other words, to properly spin issues going to the American people (in order to twist, distort, lie and deceive them), the new agency would spin information being publicly released to foreigners to be sure that the foreigners were told the same lies, deceits and frauds being told to the American people in support of supposed US foreign policy goals.

What this amounted to was that Clinton had then established a group to spin public statements going abroad to foreigners in the same way that he spun information going to the American people. Hence, the Clinton team could lie and deceive both foreigners and the people at home, who might later learn what was being told to foreigners.

Sensing the importance of the Internet, Clinton moved in on it to disseminate his spin to Internet users.