Thursday, 14 October 2010

CASE 110 - Alternative media gatekeepers

Alternative media are media (newspapers, radio, television, movies, Internet, etc.) which provide alternatives to the mainstream media in a given context, whether the mainstream media are commercial, publicly supported, or government-owned. Alternative media differ from mainstream media along one or more of the following dimensions: their content, aesthetic, modes of production, modes of distribution, and audience relations. Alternative media often aim to challenge existing powers that be, to represent marginalized groups, and to foster horizontal linkages among communities of interest. Proponents of alternative media argue that the mainstream media are biased in the selection of news and information. While sources of alternative media can also be biased (sometimes proudly so), proponents claim that the bias is significantly different than that of the mainstream media because they have a different set of values, objectives, and frameworks. Hence these media provide an "alternative" viewpoint, different information and interpretations of the world that cannot be found in the mainstream. As such, advocacy journalism tends to be a component of many alternative outlets.
Because the term "alternative" has connotations of self-marginalization, some media outlets now prefer the term "independent" over "alternative".
Several different categories of media may fall under the heading of alternative media. These include, but are not limited to, radical and dissident media, social movement media, ethnic media, indigenous media, community media, subcultural media, and avant-garde media. Each of these categories highlights the perceived shortcomings of dominant media to serve particular audiences, aims and interests, and attempts to overcome these shortcomings through their own media.

Alternative media reporters

Detection characteristics:

No significant (or truthful) information about the Vatican-Jesuit-Masonic connections to history.
Many of them do promote the "evil-Zionists-are-the-real-enemy" hegelian deception in more or less subtle ways. Note their frequent use of the words "Zionism" (an obfuscation for masonic Judaism), "The Rothschild's" (who are Knights of Malta controlled by the Vatican!), "The Illuminati", "The Elite", and "The Bankers" (the top-bankers are also Knights of Malta). Some of the less sophisticated disinfo agents simply keep repeating: "Its the Jews! Its the dirty Jews!" follow the money. None of them will explain and elaborate on the Roman (Catholic) pogroms and later genocides or the fact that the real elite dont need money, they have far greater power.
They partner with and/or promote other disinfo agents and frequently criticize other researchers, without specific details such as: personal names, sources, links, in-depth counter-arguments.
These Jesuit-Masonic temporal coadjutors are the deception/distortion/distraction speakers with a hidden agenda. They are helpers of fascistic mafia networks, to ultimately be able to control the flow of information on all sides. Jesuit-Masonic coadjutors are puppets who may tell lots of truth to build a confidence level ("rapport") among the audience. However they don't expose all the known truths and are afraid of anyone else confronting them about this. They will try to avoid any real and open debate! So ignore their work, or when needed, scrutinize it very carefully and confront them of-guard with respectful, clear and factual points for discussion. Let them expose themselves, so others can see their ignorance, fear and dishonesty for themselves.
They tend to polarize 'discussions' towards just two (flawed) viewpoints, while there are often several more viewpoints that could be taken into account. The reason for this is that three or more viewpoints would create more complex discussion dynamics, which would make the discussion control much more difficult. By setting up a weak opposition and then ridiculing it, it becomes easier to diminish the public effect of messages coming from more truthful speakers. Watch some of these controlled 'alternative' media reporters being interviewed, 'debated' and at times even theatrically ridiculed on the mass media networks (television, radio, newspapers, MSM websites). This is the old Hegelian Dialectic game.
Personal traits to look for: mental and emotional instability, tense face and voice, fearful/restless/neurotic eyes, tiredness, overweight, cultural poverty, superficial/repetitive/rigid reasoning, egoistic/messianic rambling, shouting/cursing, fear mongering.

Alex Jones
Greg Palast
Noam Chomsky
G. Edward Griffin
Aaron Russo
Amy Goodman
Jeff Rense
Bill Deagle
Devvy Kidd
Alan Watt
Jim Tucker
Daniel Estulin
Leo Lyon Zagami
Benjamin Fulford
Ted Gunderson
Ray McGovern
David Ray Griffin
Webster Tarpley
Paul Craig Roberts
John F. McManus
Michael Parenti
Alex Ansery
Judith Miller
Barrie Zwicker
Stew Webb
Tom Henneghan
David Shayler
Annie Machon
Rod Barton
Eric Hufschmid
Daryl Bradford Smith
Texe Marrs
im Marrs
Hal Turner
Jesse Ventura
Robert Steven Duncan
Cindy Sheehan
Doubt cases
Ian Crane
David Emory
John Perkins
Steve Lendman

New Age reporters

Daniel Winter
Jordan Maxwell
David Icke
Michael Tsarion
David Wilcock
Nassim Haramein
Steven M. Greer
Zecharia Sitchin
Richard Hoagland
Leonard George Horowitz
Stewart Swerdlow
Eckhart Tolle
Doubt cases
Thomas E. Bearden
Drunvalo Melchizedek
Jacques Vallée
Neil Kramer

1 comment:

Kold$hadow said...

Commendable insights! Regarding Alex Jones, as far as perception management, he not only presents his semi-sophisticated disinfo smokescreen in a composite fashion, but alludes to the potential of a plethora of perspectives one could take if being devoted to diligent discernment. Both of these tactics contribute to his reasonably substantial popularity despite his adherence to a paleocon-esque bias, with heavy scrutiny of both neolibs and neocons. In my humble opinion he devotes disproportionate emphasis towards unsustainable, tyrannical fascist threats without elaborating on the dystopian one world religion-based government that will be the final synthesis of the reaction to the former.

To perpetuate their control grid, the Illuminati need gatekeepers every step of the way . . . fortunately it would appear they got 'em! lol