by Jon Rappoport
January 29, 2017
A few days ago, the NY Times interviewed Trump’s special counselor, Steve Bannon. Bannon wasted no time:
“The media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just listen for awhile.”
“The media here is the opposition party. They don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States.”
“The elite media got it [their election prediction] dead wrong, 100 percent dead wrong…a humiliating defeat that they will never wash away, that will always be there.”
“The mainstream media has not fired or terminated anyone associated with following our [Trump] campaign. Look at the Twitter feeds of those people [reporters]: they were outright activists of the Clinton campaign.”
“That’s why you [the NY Times and other press outlets] have no power. You were humiliated.”
The Times asked Bannon if he thought Sean Spicer, Trump’s new press secretary, had “lost credibility with the media.”
Bannon said: “Are you kidding me? We think that’s a badge of honor… The media has zero integrity, zero intelligence, and no hard work. You’re the opposition party. Not the Democratic Party. You’re the opposition party. The media’s the opposition party.”
The Times thought they were being clever by getting Bannon’s quotes “on the record.” They knew he would attack the press, and they knew their loyal readers would tsk-tsk and shake their heads as they sipped their morning coffees. O dear, o my, who is this wild man Bannon lashing out at our beloved newspaper?
Bannon knows the game. He understands the Times and the Washington Post, and the rest of the media echo-chamber that bounces agreed-upon stories among themselves. That’s what they did during the presidential campaign, and despite their best efforts, Globalist queen, Hillary Clinton, hit the skids and ended up back in Chappaqua, the Oval Office forever out of her reach. Cry for her, America.
Bannon is right. The media is the opposition party. They oppose the people’s right to know, on hundreds of major stories, and whether you love or hate Donald Trump, the media are criminal rogues in a long-running stage play.
The media believe an election campaign is an event they own. It’s their property. They can twist it any which way.
If something can be printed on page one and put on the nightly news, the media claim ownership. This is why ABC is asserting that their recent interview with Trump cannot be aired by ANYONE after February 1. ABC owns history. They can erase it. (See here and here. Oh, and for good measure, see here.)
Sound familiar? It’s straight out of Orwell’s 1984.
And hold on: since Trump’s election, Orwell’s novel has jumped to number one on Amazon’s list of best sellers. Number one. Its publisher, Penguin, has ordered a new print run of 75,000 to keep up with the demand. 47,000 copies have been sold since Trump won the election.
My God, the basket of deplorables can read.
Something’s happening, Mr. NY Times, and you don’t know what it is.
You’re clueless. You’re outflanked. You’re throwing power-puff punches in the dark.
What’s your next move? An interview with Beelzebub, who says he voted for Trump?
My guess is you’ve got a team down in Mexico right now, talking to your principal investor, billionaire Carlos Slim, begging him for more money to refinance the refinance of your debt, so you can keep paddling along in your vast sea of red ink.
Meanwhile, more and more people will be reading Orwell’s 1984 and identifying you as the Ministry of Truth.
Even readers from Hillary’s camp, taken in by your claim that fake news brought her down, will discover, when they read 1984, that the prime number one faker is the State media apparatus, not 50,000 independent outlets.
You, the NY Times, have been THE State media apparatus for a long, long time.
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)
Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/atlantean_conspiracy/atlantean_conspiracy39.htm
Interesting. Same conclusion here….I point to the fact that in the 60’s “1984” was required reading in secondary education…like the Bible, everyone had their own copy. As an aside, I just completed a painting and titled it “Newspeak.”
I agree with Steve Bannon’s analysis of the NY Times.
I also agree with President Trump’s decision to question continued government support for the UN (United Nations), UNAS (United National Academies of Sciences) and the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).
After nations and national academies of sciences united under the UN on 24 Oct 1945, US and Scandinavian NAS’s directed government research funds and lucrative Nobel and Crafoord Prizes to scientists that supported a flawed definition of “nuclear binding energy“ and hid humanity’s total dependence of the solar pulsar that:
1. Made all our chemical elements
2. Birthed the whole Solar System 5 Ga ago.
3. Sustains and holds every atom, life and planet in the Solar System in continuous vibration today:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/TRIBUTE_TO_KURODA.pdf
The late Professor Paul Kazuo Kuroda (1917-2001) quoted the German physicist, Dr. Siegfried Flügge, to explain the extreme importance of protecting the torch of science from government meddling in the last sentence, first paragraph, on page 56 of Kuroda’s 1992 autobiography:
“for us there remained only the task to prevent the torch of science to be quenched in our country, however small its flames might become!”
http://www.omatumr.com/abstracts2005/PKKAutobiography.pdf
In the first sentence of the last paragraph on page 63 of Kuroda’s autobiography, Kuroda spoke of his own experiences in the United States and the 1983 and 1986 Nobel and Crafoord Prizes:
“It seems to me that small, seemingly minor, inaccuracies which sometimes occur in the Nobel Lectures of the world’s leading scientists, tend to have profound effects on the future course of science.”
Such a small, seemingly minor, inaccuracy in Weizsacker’s 1935 definition of “nuclear binding energy” destroyed the foundations of physics worldwide after nations and national academies of sciences united under the UN on 24 Oct 1945.
Oliver – thank you again for sharing. I managed up to page 42 of PPKAutobiography.
To begin to understand all in this, one would have to have broad scope in all; however I recognized much of what’s related in its thrust, implication & daily facts of events; and even a few elements. The remaining pages tomorrow.
Great editting job. ????
J
If you appreciate Kuroda’s writing, you will also enjoy his 1982 book, The Origin of the Chemical Elements and the Oklo Phenomenon (Springer, 165 pp):
http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Chemical-Elements-Oklo-Phenomenon/dp/3540116796
In my opinion, the book title was Kuroda’s very discrete way of telling the public that chemical elements are made in stars by the same process that powers natural nuclear reactors, “neutron repulsion,” the source of energy that was obscured by Weizsacker’s illogical, 1935 definition of “nuclear binding energy.”
Oliver – It seems reasonable that this planet Earth is a very cooled down part of the ‘sun’ star…?
Yes, it is.
And 2 Ga ago nuclear reactors burned spontaneously when geochemical forces formed uranium ores.
Makes abundant sense. Finished the bio – also ur tribute – then downloaded a copy of the book (Amazon link didn’t function – found another source).
Last pages of the bio astonished as, had no idea of all the goings on. The ‘bomb balloons’ etc. Barely a toddler then, but still recall the theater need reels of the bombings
… hate this phone & fumble fingers … NEWS reels of the times… Gawdawful all the way around – still is. Regards.
Oliver – from my position of the “Father of Geoethics” (see p. 18: http://iugs.org/uploads/EC66_Minutes_28062013.pdf ) I highly appreciate the progress of the torch of science in our hands. Any effort to inform the UN SG has been ignored until Dec. 31, 2016.
After my 4 failing efforts in the period 2013 – 2016 to reach the UN SG with important warnings the office of the new UN Secretary General has acknowledged the receipt of my message sent on January 3, 2017. Two important segments of the text:
I take the liberty to express you my deep gratitude for your first steps when starting your function: the efforts to keep the peace on our planet. There is not any sustainable alternative. I am also solidary with any effort re-orientating the climate change policy because the UN in the preceding 10 years was following a blind alley.
The most important ethical and geoethical problems demanding to arrange immediate steps concern:
a) the carbon dioxide cannot be considered as a negative factor (growing photosynthesis in the open air!);
b) the escalating strange events in the nature are caused prevailingly by dynamic forces of the Nature with a very limited – although growing – influence of human factors;
c) psychics (mentality) and physical health of human beings is being influenced by effects of the Sun storms (their high intensification was advertised already 10 years ago), recently accompanied by new discoveries confirming predictions of A. Einstein some century ago.
My own review of actual problems concerning Geoethics and Sustainability available since November 2012 at http://www.sciforum.net/presentation/900.
New important attempts to join the torch at http://www.issoquake.org.
Also other colleagues have made valuable analyses:
Arun Deep Ahluwalia (India): Mistakes are unavoidable in science. However, science ethics does not allow silence once misconduct is known.
Giovanni Gregori (Italy): Whenever a scientist is biased by his paradigms, he gets blind and deaf to every scientific argument.
Collapse of elites in Earth sciences with their servility to political representation at any level, eco- and geo-terrorism continue even nowadays. But the flames of the torch of science in our hands seem to reflex any hour more and more the shine of the Sun.
Any real ethically thinking and acting scientist is obliged for a respectful behaviour to any opponent absolutely avoiding any irony and humiliation. Some promoters of geoethics will try again to misuse the current progress in protecting science integrity by its de-politicization and in developing real geoethics from the source for their own purely personal interests and/or for interests of their lobbies and mafias.
The absolute necessity of scientific debates including those outside so called mainstreams has been strictly emphasized by Pope Francis in his encyclical Laudato sí – unfortunately forgotten by many (incl. Catholic!) main-streamers.
Thank you, Vaclav, for your comment.
Here are a few government-financed distractions from major research institutions that blocked natural advancement in public comprehension of the nearby pulsar-centered star that:
1. Made our elements;
2. Birthed the solar system 5 Ga ago; and
3. Sustains and holds in continuous vibration every atom, life and planet in the solar system today.
1. A dozen different imaginary forms of primordial neon (alphabetically named as Ne-A, Ne-B, Ne-C, etc.) obscured evidence of severe mass-fractionation in the Sun:
http://tinyurl.com/2944m9 or http://tinyurl.com/36zvrt
2. Spontaneous fission of imaginary super-heavy elements in meteorites obscured evidence of unmixed chemical and isotopic heterogeneities in fresh, solar supernova debris that formed the solar system.
http://www.omatumr.com/archive/StrangeXenon.pdf
3. Pre-solar grains from distant supernovae carried alien material into the solar system, or an imaginary supernova exploded nearby and injected fresh supernova products into the solar system as it formed.
Such false distractions from the world’s most prestigious research institutions were not properly addressed in either the 1983 Nobel Prize in Physics, nor in the 1986 Crafoord Prize in Geosciences.
My first family visit to the US took place just at the ending presidential campaign Johnson vs. Goldwater and the elections 1964. In my personal remembrances I see big billboards with Barry Goldwater and his slogan “In Your Heart You Know He’s Right”. But I remember also one comment: Goldwater in his heart knows he is not right. More details at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater_presidential_campaign,_1964. In my opinion a very appropriate analogy with the actual Ministry of Truth.
A great battle of media can be just now observed in Prague against the President of the Czech Republic Milos Zeman who was predicting the victory of Donald Trump. President Zeman is our first President in the history of Czechoslovakia and the Czech Republic elected by the people and not by the Parliament. But “in the name of the people” some campaign has been started to stop his Presidency – after almost 4 years in office with only one before the next election (with him as still a potential candidate).
Final conclusion: Historia – magistra vitae ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magistra_vitae ).
In response to this comment — “And hold on: since Trump’s election, Orwell’s novel has jumped to number one on Amazon’s list of best sellers. Number one……………Trump won the election.” — Not sure if this is good or bad. I know all of my FB friends personally. Those FB friends I have that are liberal, leftist, Black Lives Matter and Hillary supporters have posted more on FB about tyranny, encouraged the reading of ‘1984’, “Rules for Radicals” and all kinds of other information that coming from them has surprised me no end. Are they actually reading and understanding what they are posting? Because they are accusing Trump and his administration of everything that the Hillary Clinton’s of America have been doing for years. Do they not understand? Hopefully they reread 1984 and get a clue. I read ‘1984’ as a requirement for a college course I was in. Don’t remember which one.
I’ve noticed on Facebook people are posting memes using 1984 against, Trump. So I wouldn’t get too overly excited about eyes being opened and seeing the truth. Everyone looks through their own rose colored goggles.
I’m most surprised that the New York Times—I mean Ministry of Truth—permitted so much truth in one article.
The Boon of Bannon – can’t be beat…
Thanks for this great Sunday reading article. Loved reading the original form on Brietbart – yours is deeper of course.
J n m in nm
The Internet alternative media, like your site Jon, and many, many others, plus conservative talk radio shows, are killing the MSM.deader than a hammer.
They will never recover from that. They will try, but they will lose so badly that there will be no place to hide their well deserved huge defeat.
“The media believe an election campaign is an event they own. It’s their property. They can twist it any which way.”
BOOM!
I can’t count the number of times while watching/listening to the presidential debates I would say to myself, ” Who died and made you (the media moderators of the contest) God? Who gave you carte blanche to set the rules, limit the amount of time per question, grant opening statement remarks, interrupt a candidate midstream during his thoughts, grant time (severely limited of course) for closing remarks, and on and on….? The unspoken but readily apparent message of course was that THE MEDIA were the real stars of the show and that the candidates were of secondary importance…….that is until Donald Trump blew in to town.
It might be instructive to compare the “rules” going back to the Lincoln-Douglas debates more than a century ago, to what passes for debate in modern “socially-mediated” America.
There is almost no comparison.
Jon,
Interesting about George Orwell’s “1984”. Will readers draw those fairly obvious, thinly disguised parallels between Israel, Zionism through UN brokered Globalism. If everyone started to think…….well…..
And you’ve exposed the “all seeing” “Illuminati”
Best
OT
I wish I had discovered Jon Rappoport years ago, he’s definitely one of my favorite writers,
“This is why ABC is asserting that their recent interview with Trump cannot be aired by ANYONE after February 1. ABC owns history.”
The above is all the more reason to drain the media swamp in every way possible…..utter evil.
I am glad people are reading a classic. However, I have a concern that there may be many who read it who are so thoroughly conditioned, and so lacking in critical thinking skills, they will see Trump and his policies as Orwellian.
A careful reading of history will show that
1. Japan built atomic bombs at Konan, Korea
2. Stalin’s USSR troops captured that plant in Aug 1945
3. Stalin had the world’s total supply of atomic bombs when nations were united on 24 Oct 1945
4. George Orwell was dying of TB but moved to the Scottish Isle of Jura in 1946 to warn the public a new form of totalitarianism would be recognized by Nineteen Eighty Four.
IMO, George Orwell had information about the end of WWII that was hidden from the public until finally published once by David Snell in the Atlanta Constitution in Oct 1946:
See the Flight of the B-29 Hog Wild (WWII) by Bill Streifer and Irek Sabitov
The UN became Big Brother after WWII ended and nations/national Academies of Sciences united under the UN on 24 Oct 1945.
http://www.my-jia.com/The_Flight_of_the_Hog_Wild/preview.htm
Oliver’s allusion of Big Brother hegemony in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-four with UN’s climate change hegemony is quite appropriate. I also made this comparison in my book, New Emperors’ Novel Clothes: Climate Change Analysed, refer to this link (also at amazon.com): http://www.connorcourt.com/catalog1/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=43_29&products_id=266
A I Adam
Thanks for a new reference to the book and environment not yet registered. I feel as necessary to remember my abstract of the October 2015 International Conference on Geoethics focussed on the role of the UNFCCC:
B-2 V. Nemec (Czech Republic): IPCC 2009 vs. IPCC 2015 – a parade to a blind lane
A highly interested technical glossary – dated 30 Aug 2007 and issued in 2009 makes it possible to study lot of useful terms as described at that time. Let us have a look on the term Climate Change:
(a) The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines climate change as: “a change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcing, or to persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use”. .
(b) The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines climate change as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods”. .
Comment: For disaster risk reduction purposes, either of these definitions may be suitable, depending on the particular context. The UNFCCC definition is the more restricted one as it excludes climate changes attributable to natural causes. The IPCC definition can be paraphrased for popular communications as “A change in the climate that persists for decades or longer, arising from either natural causes or human activity.”
Whereas this and many other terms defined in the document are quite acceptable from a purely scientific point of view also nowadays (and until now not replaced by any other “official” technical glossary) it should be examined who has been responsible for such a strong and scientifically unsubstantiated change of practical issues of the IPCC reports in the course of the years 2009 – 2015 and for their immediate large promotion by organs of the UN and the UNFCCC as well as for the collapse of elites in various (formally independent) Earth sciences organizations.
The new positive CO2 role has an actual reflex in the petition initiated by Viv Forbes (contact info@co2coalition.org), more info http://co2coalition.org/2016/07/29/the-climate-surprise-why-co2-is-good-for-the-earth/.
In my opinion it is time to begin to differentiate climate realists and climate sceptics.