Will mainstream media ever be trustworthy?

John Kaminski 11 March 2016



I had an unremarkable career in newspapers. Working for mostly small town rags, covering local brouhahas, and occasionally sketching fetching portraits of noble people who lived exemplary lives, I wrote almost nothing likely to be read beyond the leafy confines of the rural neighborhoods I covered. Until later on.

Oh, occasionally I’d have a big score that would be picked up by the wire services, or pen some prosaic editorial that people would tape to their refrigerators for awhile, but sooner or later, I’d invariably choose some subject that would rile my publisher, some subject I wasn’t supposed to talk about in public.

Like the time a local rich lady hired itinerant migrants to work in her stables, housed them in her barn and paid them peanuts, then had the insensitivity to speak in a derogatory manner about them. Well, I just had to print that, and boy, did my boss hit the roof. She was a friend of his.

After many such faux pas as this, I established two cardinal rules that all newspaper reporters should remember: 1, newspapers have the power to really hurt ordinary people, power that should be wielded with meticulous care; and 2, a reporter’s worst enemy is his own publisher, who for financial considerations would eagerly squelch what could be the most important story in the world.

So, as I grew older and evolved into different kinds of writing markets, I nevertheless kept an eye on the newspaper business, discovered, back in the days before the Internet, all sorts of alternative journalism levels, and generally observed how the big papers behaved in matters of style and content.

The paper I grew up with as a schoolkid in southeastern Massachusetts was The Boston Globe, which had an excellent reputation for truth and quality back then, and still does today, among those who are not conscious enough to realize the evil influence of Jewish ownership that has befallen almost all major newspapers in the United States.

It is not your imagination that makes you think most newspapers print exactly what our government tells them to print.

In any case, I took notice of the recent news item that the movie “Spotlight” had won the best picture Oscar at the recent Academy Awards ceremony in Hollywood, and that the term Spotlight referred to the Globe Spotlight team, an elite squad of editors and reporters that tackles broad subjects of pressing interest to the public.

The subject of the movie was the team’s rigorous investigation of the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests in the Boston archdiocese and the unwillingness of public officials and newspaper editors to address this matter in a forthright manner for many years. The stories in this series later won a Pulitzer Prize.

I had an “uh-oh” movement early on in the film when a new single Jewish editor (played by the Jewish actor Liev Schreiber in a brilliantly understated way) was appointed to lead the predominantly Catholic Globe news staff, and he immediately zeroed on why the Globe had neglected to follow up on stories of sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests dating back 20 years or more.

So I immediately suspected this was going to be just another Hollywood Jewish hit piece on its arch enemy the Catholic church. But the story, after all, was true, and both the story and the movie, uncomfortable though they may have been for Boston’s Catholic population, turned out to be riveting, understated and accurate.

The outcome of the movie, as well as the result in real life, was that the Catholic cardinal was forced to resign (and hidden in a cushy job at the Vatican) and 239 priests from various parishes in and around Boston were arrested for the repeated sexual abuse of children. The Cardinal had known from the outset, and with the approval of higher-up church officials, had covered it all up.

I haven’t seen a movie in a long time that was so well acted (especially by Mark Ruffalo, as the dogged lead reporter, and Michael Keaton, as the Spotlight team editor who was stoically keeping a dark secret), so beautifully photographed (kindling in me fond thoughts of my time in Boston), and tight, purposeful editing.

What pleased me most, however, was the way reporters were portrayed as team players who would put everything else aside to pursue the story, running at top speed, working all night, sneaking into offices when necessary, and looking out for each other above and beyond the call of duty to get the job done.

This selfless and noble camaraderie reminded me of many experiences of my own past in the business when people eagerly pulled together, ran hard into the night and shared laughter when the job was done, triggering memories I’d forgotten of times that I miss dearly.

But that was a long time ago. In more recent years, I’ve been obsessed with Jewish control of mass media, and the way corporate owned newspapers, magazines and TV stations all have conspired with a treasonous government to create an artificial reality that allows our government to kill people in our names, and then lie about the reasons they constantly commit these immoral and unnecesary mass murders.

My first real taste of the egregious phoniness of mass media happened in 1990, when an anti-Gulf War rally on Boston Common drew well over 100,000, which the Globe reported as 30,000, and I wrote a story called “Media Whiteout” that described how mainstream media played down antiwar demonstrations (and also played a significant role in destroying the antiwar movement).

It was at this point that my stories began to circulate beyond my local area and into the nearby big cities and some national publications.

It was then I first began learning that the American population was completely controlled by its mass media. Somewhere around that time I ventured into New York City and visited the offices of FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting). There, from Martin Lee and Norman Solomon, I learned more about the manipulation of Americans through media that implanted the ideas of the elite and suppressed the requirements necessary for individual freedom.

It was another decade before I learned that FAIR was just another Jewish trick to get people thinking the way our Jewish masters want us to think, hating our own country and playing right into their hands. But by then I had crossed the border from the vague descriptions of our corporate illuminati masters into how the Jewish bankers in London had controlled the United States from its bastion of the City of London since Americans wrote their Constitution.

Once I had read the Protocols of Zion and the Leuchter Report (which proves conclusively that the so-called Jewish Holocaust of World War II was and is an absolute hoax), there was no turning back into the left wing lunacy I had once embraced.

These were at the front of my mind with 9/11/2001 happened, so I had little trouble identifying the true culprits in short order, and have spent most of my time ever since trying to convince the world of this horrifying fact.

The Boston Globe, which had been privately owned by the Taylor family since 1873, was sold to The New York Times Company in 1993 for $1.1 billion. (The New York Times, it should be mentioned, is one of the major Jewish publicity outlets in the United States which has distorted public opinion and government policy in favor of the Jews throughout the 20th century.)

As a measure of how newspaper readership has been demolished by the Internet, the Times sold the Globe to billionaire John W. Henry in 2013 for a mere $70 million. Among his many other properties, Henry is principal owner of the Boston Red Sox baseball team. But he now owns the Globe all by himself.

Admittedly, I haven’t followed the fortunes of the Globe all that closely, even when I was living in New England, and I haven’t lived there since 1995. But those stories I did see were nothing exceptional. They were typical of most of the mainstream stories you saw in any major newspaper in any American big city, mostly echoing the pronouncements of the artificial reality that this so-called government we have has foisted on us.

In 2013 (I don’t know whether it was before or after the sale) I was completely offended by the way the Globe covered the Boston Marathon bombing, totally ignoring the avalanche of evidence that pointed to the events as a false flag operation and repeatedly publishing stories that no trial of the surviving Tsarnaev brother was even necessary. Just throw him jail without a trial, they said.

It was appalling, an embarrassment to the Globe and everybody who read it. Unfortunately, everybody in New England swallowed it whole, and applauded police searches of houses and neighborhoods for a patsy they knew did not commit the crimes they accused him of.

A similar situation on the West Coast has evolved this year when the Oregonian, another supposedly respected mainstream newspaper in Portland, Oregon, totally served as the government’s mouthpiece while describing the so-called standoff at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge near Bend, Oregon, in which members of the

Bundy family and their friends protested the unfair jailing of the Hammond family over a dispute with the federal Bureau of Land Management.

The Oregonian is owned by the descendants of the arch-Jew S. I. Newhouse.

The paper never mentioned that the Bundys and their friends were standing up for individual liberty and social justice in the most peaceful of ways. It even defended the premeditated murder of one of the protesters, Robert “Lavoy” Finicum, by a coalition of state and federal officials, in a totally disgusting way that failed to defend the rights of American citizens to Constitutional protections.

But recently, there has been one chink in the armor of Jewish oppression, one slight crack in the dam of journalistic tyranny reinforcing government criminality, that indicates maybe the tide is about to turn against this repulsive Jewish totalitarianism as expressed through its parrot media outlets.

It occurred, I was surprised to learn, in the Boston Globe, which is no longer under the lockstep control of the Jewish-owned New York Times, but is now owned by the non Jew billionaire John Henry.

In a piece titled “Boston Globe breaks ranks over Syria,” The New Observer Online reported,

The Washington DC “lobby” has coordinated the “shameful” and deliberately untrue controlled media reporting on the war in Syria in order to promote ignorance on the issue, the Boston Globe has finally admitted.

The newspaper—one of the few outlets in America not owned by a Jewish oligarch—is the first major media to break ranks with the establishment and admit that every report on the Syrian war presented to the American public has been a lie from the very outset.


Quoting from the Globe’s story, “The media are misleading the public on Syria,”

The Beirut-based analyst Marwa Osma asked, “The Syrian Arab Army, which is led by President Bashar Assad, is the only force on the ground, along with their allies, who are fighting ISIS — so you want to weaken the only system that is fighting ISIS?”

This does not fit with Washington’s narrative.

As a result, much of the American press is reporting the opposite of what is actually happening. Americans are being told that the virtuous course in Syria is to fight the Assad regime and its Russian and Iranian partners.

Could it be that mainstream media outlets owned by non Jews are more likely to tell the unvarnished truth about what our government is doing than what the run-of-the-mill Jewish owned newspapers are doing to reinforce our foreign-controlled government’s efforts to reduce us all to serfs and eventually take all our property so that we will have no control over our own lives?

This is but one small example that this might be the case, perhaps one small spotlight on the cause of the deliberate deterioration and destruction of our formerly sturdy and healthy country, that has now been sucked dry by certain foreign parasites.

In our neverending quest for freedom and liberty, we must encourage this kind of honesty from our local newspapers who rarely practice it, and upon failing to get it, cast the charge of criminal censorship upon the Jews who have taken control both of all these media outlets as well as the minds of the American people.

If we do not cast off this psychopathological pall of malice and misrepresentation by disingenuous Jews, we will not survive.

We need an enormous Spotlight team to investigate and expose how these poisonous parasites are ruining our lives, and expel them in any way possible from the beautiful world we wish to preserve and protect.


Source: http://therebel.is/en/news/kaminski/858953-spotlight


5 Responses to “Will mainstream media ever be trustworthy?”

  1. Lynn says:

    This scum have been bought and paid to lie to us.

    They are as treasonous as the pay masters.

    None of the hidden secret societies would have survived without this propaganda machine.
    Deliberatley lying and spinning has allowed the death and destruction of millions of innocents, they stand guilty of perverting the course of justice. Hang them too.

    • Nicky says:

      Here is one for you Lynn should you ever come across one of those paedophile enablers. Plant this little seed in there heads.
      Everytime you put on your seat belt think clunk click as you put on your Saville strap and remember your part in enabling that man and the others to continue screwing up the lives of children just like your favourite grand child.

  2. Lynn says:

    Thanks to this lying thieving scum I may never have a grandchild. I must say I am certainly not encouraging anyone have them in this unreal matrix.

  3. bangonit says:

    Main stream media will not exist when this man sits on our throne http://www.theworldoftruth.net/
    Love peace harmonies.

  4. Men Scryfa says:

    “Is Fukushima’s nuclear nightmare over? Don’t count on it
    By Christopher Busby – RT – March 12, 2016

    On the 5th Anniversary of the catastrophe, Prof Geraldine Thomas, the nuclear industry’s new public relations star, walked through the abandoned town of Ohkuma inside the Fukushima exclusion zone with BBC reporter Rupert Wingfield-Hayes.

    Thomas was described as “one of Britain’s leading experts on the health effects of radiation”. She is of the opinion that there is no danger and the Japanese refugees can come back and live there in the “zone”. Her main concern seemed to be how untidy it all was: “Left to rack and ruin,” she complained, sadly.

    At one point, Rupert pulled out his Geiger counter and read the dose: 3 microSieverts per hour. “How much radiation would it give in a year to people who came back here,” he asked. Thomas replied: “About an extra milliSievert a year, which is not much considering you get 2mSv a year from natural background”.

    “The long term impact on your health would be absolutely nothing.”

    Now anyone with a calculator can easily multiply 3 microSieverts (3 x 10-6 Sv) by 24 hours and 365 days. The answer comes out to be 26 mSv (0.026Sv), not “about 1mSv” as the “leading expert on the health effects of radiation” reported.

    I must personally ask if Gerry Thomas is a reliable expert; her CV shows she has published almost nothing in the way of original research, so we must ask how it is the BBC has taken her seriously.

    This recalled the day the first reactor exploded in 2011. I was in London, and the BBC asked me to come into the studio and comment. Also present was a nuclear industry apologist, Dr Ian Fells. Like Geraldine Thomas he seemed unconcerned about the radiation: the main problem for him was that the lifts would not work. People would have to climb stairs, he complained.

    I said then on that first day that this was a serious accident like Chernobyl, but he and everybody who followed him told the viewers that it was no problem, nothing like Chernobyl.

    Some months later, looking back, it became clear I was correct on every point, but I never was invited back to the BBC. I visited Japan, took sophisticated measuring equipment, obtained vehicle air filters, spoke to the Japanese people and advised them to take Calcium tablets to block the Strontium-90.

    My vehicle air filter measurements showed clearly that large areas of north east Japan were seriously contaminated – including Tokyo. This was too much for the nuclear industry: I was attacked in the Guardian newspaper by pro-nuclear George Monbiot in an attempt to destroy my credibility. One other attacker was Geraldine Thomas. What she said then was as madly incorrect then as what she is saying now. But the Guardian would not let me respond.

    The important evidence for me in the recent BBC clip is the measurement of dose given by Rupert’s Geiger counter: 3microSieverts per hour (3Sv/h). Normal background in Japan (I know, I measured it there) is about 0.1Sv/h. So in terms of external radiation, Ruperts’s measurement gave 30 times normal background.

    Is this a problem for human health? You bet it is. The question no-one asked is what is causing the excess dose? The answer is easy: radioactive contamination, principally of Caesium-137. On the basis of well-known physics relationships we can say that 3Sv/h at 1m above ground represents a surface contamination of about 900,000Bq per square metre of Cs-137. That is, 900,000 disintegrations per second in one square metre of surface: and note that they were standing on a tarmac road which appeared to be clean. And this is 5 years after the explosions. The material is everywhere, and it is in the form of dust particles which can be inhaled; invisible sparkling fairy-dust that kills hang in the air above such measurements.

    The particles are not just of Caesium-137. They contain other long lived radioactivity, Strontium-90, Plutonium 239, Uranium-235, Uranium 238, Radium-226, Polonium-210, Lead-210, Tritium, isotopes of Rhodium, Ruthenium, Iodine, Cerium, Cobalt 60. The list is long.

    The UN definition of ‘radioactively contaminated land’ is 37,000Bq/square meter, and so, on the basis of the measurement made by the BBC reporter, the town of Ohkuma in the Fukushima zone (and we assume everywhere else in the zone) is still, five years after the incident, more than 20 times the level where the UN would, and the Soviets did, step in and control the population.

    But the Japanese government wants to send the people back there. It is bribing them with money and housing assistance. It is saying, like Gerry Thomas, there is no danger. And the BBC is giving this misdirection a credible platform. The argument is based on the current radiation risk model of the International Commission on Radiological Protection the ICRP.

    Last month, my German colleagues and I published a scientific paper [2] in the peer reviewed journal Environmental Health and Toxicology. It uses real-world data from those exposed to the same substances that were released by Fukushima to show that the ICRP model is wrong by 1,000 times or more. This is a game-changing piece of research. But were we asked to appear on the BBC, or anywhere else? No. What do our findings and calculations suggest will have happened in the five years since the explosions and into the future? Let’s take a look at what has happened since 2011.

    The reactors are still uncontrolled five years after the explosions and continue to release their radioactive contents to the environment despite all attempts to prevent this. Concerning the melted fuel, there is no way to assess the condition or specific whereabouts of the fuel though it is clearly out of the box and in the ground.

    Meanwhile, robots fail at the extremely high radiation levels found; ground water flowing through the plant is becoming contaminated and is being pumped into storage tanks for treatment; high radiation levels and debris have delayed the removal of spent fuel from numbers 1, 2 and 3 reactor buildings. TEPCO plans to remove debris from reactor 3 and this work has begun. Then they are hoping to remove the fuel rods out of reactors 1 and 2 by 2020 and the work on removing debris from these 2 reactors has not begun yet.

    Much of the radioactivity goes into the sea, where it travels several hundreds of km. up and down the coast, destroying sea life and contaminating intertidal sediment. The radionuclides bind to fine sediment and concentrate in river estuaries and tidal areas like Tokyo Bay. Here the particles are re-suspended and brought ashore to be inhaled by those living within 1km of the coast.

    From work done by my group for the Irish government on the contaminated Irish Sea we know that this exposure will increase the rate of cancer in the coastal inhabitants by about 30 percent.

    The releases have not been stopped despite huge amounts of work, thought and action. The treated water is still highly radioactive and cannot yet be released.

    That is a real problem on site with three heavy spent fuel pools still full and largely inaccessible. Collapse of the buildings would lead to coolant loss and a fire or even an explosion releasing huge amounts of radioactivity. So this is one nightmare scenario: Son of Fukushima. A solid wall at the port side may have slowed the water down but diverting the water may cause problems with the ground water pressure on site and thus also threaten subsidence. Space for storing the radioactive water is running out and it seems likely that this will have to be eventually spilled into the Pacific.

    Only 10 percent of the plant has been cleaned up although there are 8,000 workers on site at any one time, mostly dealing with the contaminated water. Run-off from storms brings more contamination down the rivers from the mountains.

    There are millions of 1-ton container bags full of radioactive debris and other waste which has been collected in decontamination efforts outside the plant and many of these bags are only likely to last a handful of years before degrading and spilling their contents. Typhoons will spread this highly contaminated contents far and wide.

    Let’s look at the only real health data which has emerged to see if it gives any support to my original estimate of 400,000 extra cancers in the 200km radius. Prof Tsuda has recently published a paper in the peer review literature identifying 116 thyroid cancers detected over 3 years by ultrasound scanning of 380,000 0-18 year olds.

    The background rate is about 0.3 per 100,000 per year, so in three years we can expect 3.42 thyroid cancers. But 116 were found, an excess of about 112 cases. Geraldine says that these were all found because they looked: but Tsuda’s paper reports that an ultrasound study in Nagasaki (no exposures) found zero cases, and also an early ultrasound study also found zero cases. So she is wrong. The thyroid doses were reported to be about 10mSv. On the basis of the ICRP model, that gives an error of about 2000 times.

    From the results of our new genetic paper we can safely predict a 100 percent increase in congenital malformations in the population up to 200km radius.

    In an advanced technological country like Japan these will be picked up early by ultrasound and aborted, so we will not actually see them, even if there were data we could trust. What we will see is a fall in the birth rate and an increase in the death rate because we know what has been happening and what will happen; we have seen it before in Chernobyl. And just like Chernobyl, the (Western) authorities are influenced by or take their lead from the nuclear industry: the ICRP and the International Atomic Energy Agency, (IAEA) which since 1959 has taken over from the World Health Organization as the responsible authority for radiation and health (Yes!).

    They keep the lid on the truth using ill-informed individuals like Geraldine Thomas and, by analogy with New Labour: New BBC. Increasingly I could say “New Britain” as opposed the Great Britain of my childhood, a country I was proud of where you could trust the BBC. I wonder how the reporters like Rupert can live with themselves presenting such misguided information.

    Fukushima is far from being over, and the deaths have only just begun.”


    1. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35761141

    2. Genetic Radiation Risks-A Neglected Topic in the Low Dose …

    Christopher Busby is an expert on the health effects of ionizing radiation. He qualified in Chemical Physics at the Universities of London and Kent, and worked on the molecular physical chemistry of living cells for the Wellcome Foundation. Professor Busby is the Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk based in Brussels and has edited many of its publications since its founding in 1998. He has held a number of honorary University positions, including Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Health of the University of Ulster. Busby currently lives in Riga, Latvia. See also: http://www.chrisbusbyexposed.org, http://www.greenaudit.org and http://www.llrc.org.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.