Real News IS Fake News

Not exactly an Earth-shattering headline for our readers. But I saw this video linked to over at Reddit and liked it enough to share. It’s just the sort of thing to show people who are less aware of how controlled our propaganda news is, though of course it doesn’t go quite far enough:

As a bonus, I also saw this little bit, which I liked. The guy is a pretty good satirist, playing the pissed off reporter. Plays into ideological divides and party politics, but still interesting. Kind of shows us what the news might look like stripped of all the BS:

And another from the same guy:

This entry was posted in American "journalism", Empire of Lies, Fake News, Lies of our times, Propaganda. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Real News IS Fake News

  1. annspinwall4 says:

    Great job! I have to add this info. I discovered this video a few months ago, compiled by Youtuber, Barry Soetoro (LOL) In my mind this is the most damning Sandy Hook False Flag info around. Sloppy Sniper Guy….here is what is written by Barry Soetoro
    Sandy Hook FAKE SNIPER busted EVEN WORSE! Caught diving behind a car, then RUNNING AWAY on ABCNEWS LIVE!

    Watch Hollywood actor, David Wheeler, DIVE for cover — ducking ABCNEWS cameras ON THE SCHOOL DRIVEWAY!

    David Wheeler played 2 roles in the Newtown CT “school shooting.” Wheeler’s first role was SLOPPY SNIPER (Fake FBI Sniper) with NO FIREARMS TRAINING.

    Wheeler’s second role is GRIEVING FATHER of slain child (the fictional Benjamin Wheeler, fake-killed at Sandy Hook).

    This NEW footage catches David Wheeler AGAIN — busting him beyond belief! Wheeler gets caught red handed on the Sandy Hook school driveway, even WORSE than before!

    That’s PROOF Sandy Hook was a FALSE FLAG!
    this is a funny, enlightening video exposing the “fake: parents of one of the “fake” casualties

    Like

    • daddieuhoh says:

      Thanks, Annette. Great link. Notice in the description you pasted he refers to him as ‘sloppy sniper.’ Well, Soetero had another video up for awhile showing that Wheeler was a “sloppy sniper” because he didn’t know the first thing about handling a rifle, like carrying it with the muzzle pointing out horizontally behind him or holding it from the cartridge, things like that. Basically that he was obviously a complete fraud dressed up like an FBI agent. I have looked for that sloppy sniper video and cannot find it. Perhaps the evidence we just too damning so his handlers had him take it down? I did find this other video of Soetero being interviewed on AM radio where they talk about it (skip to 3:55):

      The only thing that troubled me about the whole David Wheeler thing is that they show video of from that day of someone who appears to be him either taking his helmet off or putting it on, and his head is shaved clean. But if I’m not mistaken, he was appearing on national TV as David Wheeler the dad within a couple of days, his hair looked like he would have had to grow it out for a couple of weeks to get it to that length from shaved clean. They say the guy in the video is actually FBI Agent Aldenberg, and they show a clip of a younger agent Aldenberg and how much he looks like Wheeler. So I was thinking: Maybe Wheeler and the guy in the video are twins? Though now that I went back now to check these details, I found another video showing that the bald guy everyone says is Aldenberg is probably some other guy and not David Wheeler (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYHcMfnLvzw).

      I think my favorite Sandy Hook video is the one with Gene Rosen rehearsing his lines:

      That one just cuts to the bone. Most people point to the Robbie Parker video as a kind of smoking gun, but people can easily rationalize that with “everyone grieves in different ways.” But this one? I don’t know how you could explain it away.

      And hell, while I’m sharing my favorites, I’ll link to two from Boston. One is a crisis actor who stands up, adjusts his pants because I guess they were riding up his crotch or something. The other is a stage hand dispersing some stage blood powder over a group of crisis actors (it’s a powder that turns blood red when mixed with water like this: http://www.paintandpowderstore.com/proddetail.php?prod=MM-1048).

      Here at 52 seconds in:

      Here at 33 seconds in:

      I honestly don’t know how you could watch these videos and still think Sandy Hook and the Bombing bombing were real. Or at least have some serious doubts about them.

      Ooh, Tyrone, look what I came across: “JFK TV Vintage Crisis Actors:” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxSdnwd32tQ

      For a bit of fun, here’s a link to the a crisis acting award channel:

      https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClI7ym0cb9KCC1_PpZO0tUg/videos

      For the record, although the YouTuber Soetero discloses some good stuff, he seems to me to be disinfo. He admits the hoax but always links it to Obama and a gun grab. I know that whole theory completely discredited the claim in my eyes for several years, until i started looking into these things. I think it is meant to misdirect people, as it plays into deepening the divide between left and right: “Can you believe what Obama and those libtards are willing to do to take away our guns?” vs. “Can you believe those loony right-wingers who think Obama could and would fake the murder of schoolchildren? How paranoid and wacko can you get?” So they get to have their cake and eat it, too. Meanwhile gun sales went through the roof and the fat cats laughed all the way to the bank.

      Like

      • That Chicago piece on JFK is gold. I remember it now from JFKTV. I need to go back and reread it … I sent my paper copy (100 pages) to my cousin, who does proofreading for James Douglass, asking her to forward it to him. That’s the last I heard from her.

        I have long wondered how we got such high quality and easily disassembled evidence from Boston. Sandy Hook is more intuitive, requiring the viewer to see through the veil of crisis acting. But Boston is blatant, as if they are taunting us, saying “Look at us, how easily we pull this shit off, and no one will see it but you, and we don’t care!”

        Like

        • annspinwall4 says:

          Mark, I thought the same thing about Boston…it was all so “phony”..literally, all that cell phone footage really told the story…and the guy with a severed leg being wheeled down the street. Even without any medical knowledge, most people know that you bleed out and die rather quickly from a severed artery. I agree, they were laughing at the “zombies”.

          Like

      • tyronemccloskey says:

        Ha! I’m Blue Moon, Dad! That was my handle over at Fakeologist for a long time- Not my best work, this- I haven’t really grasped Youtubing- I did a Manson getting married video but I’m so bad with keeping passwords that I can’t reach any of my channels so I don’t know where it is-

        Liked by 1 person

      • annspinwall4 says:

        Hi, I found this when I searched for images of Aldenberg…people already comparing him to sloppy sniper guy. I didn’t re-watch the video before linking and don’t remember seeing him as bald without the helmet. I did find a short “Barry Soetoro” video where he shows him as “sloppy” and carrying the gun by the magazine and upside down…also a longer video by “soetoro” channel addressing the difference – bald vs hair. Here is the image:

        Here is the short clip showing “sloppy” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPdFoEE4_A0
        and this one starts at about 15 minutes and he addresses the difference

        I had heard there was a Gene Rosen video showing him practicing his lines, but I have never watched it…thanks for the link, and thanks for the other links to Boston.
        After falling, for a short time, for the Aurora shooting, I knew this one was fake as soon as I heard about it. My sister calls me and asks if I have my TV on….I was asleep and said no. She was frantic and said there had been a horrible mass murder of small school children and it was all over the news. I said, oh no, they are at it again….she screamed at me…this isn’t one of your crazy conspiracy theories….this is real and little kids are dead and he killed his mother. I said OK, I’ll take a look….hung up, rolled back over and went back to sleep. I hate to be so jaded, but…how can the awake and aware be anything but.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Ha! One of you awake, one asleep.

          Like

        • Jack33 says:

          Ann,

          I got the same reaction from some in my family after I expressed skepticism over Sandy Hook.
          The evidence proving S.H. was a sham is plentiful, as it is with most of these fake, scripted events. The problem is nobody wants to even take a look at it.

          The false reality the average person believes in is so completely opposite from true reality to the extent it’s frightening and too uncomfortable for most to imagine.
          Besides that, over the past few decades they’ve so thoroughly and successfully brainwashed everyone into thinking negatively of anyone questioning the official story, hence the negative connotation associated with the term ‘conspiracy theorist.’

          Like

        • We are born into this system of deep indoctrination. We get it early and often in school, church, TV and news. It is thorough and meant to last our whole lives. Escape is difficult at best, usually impossible. We here at this blog are people who managed that escape. Though it is difficult, I want to be understanding of those who are still in the matrix. I was there once too, did not begin my escape until age 38.

          I read “Propaganda” by Jacques Elliot many years ago, and remember how he said that it is something people need and cherish. Without it they feel naked and afraid. So when confronted with obvious evidence that something like Sandy Hook is fake, they don’t react with normal curiosity. Instead, they turn away, choose cognitive dissonance over enlightenment. It scares them, threatens their serenity. Why, if that is fake … what else? Anger is the normal defense mechanism.

          Like

          • annspinwall4 says:

            Mark, I absolutely agree….I was 60 when I “woke up” and it has only been a bit over 5 years. I learned about the 9/11 controversy just after the 10 year anniversary. I was pissed and started researching to reassure myself that it was total bunk, our government couldn’t have had a hand in it…this is the US of A, we have been raised “knowing” we are the good guys. The evidence I found was just too overwhelming and our government is a farce. Instead of turning away, I embraced the challenge and continued researching. I sat in front of this computer 8-12 hours a day and the more I researched the more I learned how deep the rabbit hole really is. For some reason I refused to be willfully ignorant…learning “real” history gave me a sense of purpose. It is really nice that I now have like minded people to share with and continue learning.

            Like

  2. lux says:

    A new tool (or maybe not so new?) for faking news has been demonstrated by Adobe, the Photoshop software publisher. They call this new technology VoCo and it provides the means for altering speech audio so one can alter a person’s speech so they can be heard to “say” whatever you want them to say in their own voice.

    http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/11/adobe-voco-photoshop-for-audio-speech-editing/

    Like

    • My guess? A not so new tool. Everyone has a unique voiceprint, like our unique fingerprints. If games are being played with twins and zombies, the handlers would have to cover their acoustic tracks somehow. Otherwise, any amateur phonetician could easily prove that Faul is not Paul, or that Bills Hicks is Alex Jones. But … if they just run all audio footage through their little tool, they can sand off all the phonetic rough edges and make different larynxes sound the same, or the same one sound different. After all, when it comes to photos or audio, who of us has access to unquestionably unaltered data? Such data does not come from the Internet …

      Like

  3. lux says:

    The MSM have been yapping about “Fake News” recently as this odious ABC News story illustrates:
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/real-news-fake-news/story?id=44076475

    I interpret this recent trend as an attempt to muddy the waters of the growing awareness that news media stories ARE fake. So, I believe this may actually be a good sign because it means our controllers are concerned enough about this growing awareness to combat it.

    The way this works, of course, is that if you mention anything to another person about a news story being fake the listener will automatically think of these MSM disinfo “Fake News” articles instead of listening to you.

    Like

    • Yes, that’s exactly it.

      But it does get a bit more complex. While bringing this topic to the mainstream, they are also attempting to create a “Truthers are dangerous” psyop. Meaning they want the public to think people like us who question media events are crazy and dangerous.

      http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sandy-hook-victim-parent-threatened-death-florida/

      Then there is the recent shooting at Comet Ping Pong related to Pizzagate.

      Like

      • annspinwall4 says:

        I believe the shooting was a psyop to underscore how dangerous “fake news” can be. “They” are trying to cover all bases to thoroughly discredit independent journalism. “They” could also be using pizzagate to put laws in place that could limit internet access.

        Like

        • That too perhaps. Each psy-op does many things on many different levels. Regardless, it’s clear they are trying to blackwash people like us.

          It’s all good news though, it means they’re scared. It’ll be messy for a bit, but people are waking up.

          Like

      • Gull says:

        Another interesting thing about that story that they are misusing the word hoaxer on purpose to muddy the waters. In actuality, a hoaxer is someone who perpetrates hoaxes. But they are trying to redefine it as someone who BELIEVES in hoaxes (and is therefore dangerous.) If they succeed in redefining the word, we will lose the linguistic ability to accurately describe the perpetrators of hoaxes. Which would suit them just fine.

        Like

  4. steve kelly says:

    WaPo May 23, 2016 has a good article on internet censorship in China and worldwide. Can’t link it, sorry — “Secure Connection — no special permissions granted” in big red letters.

    So, the censorship systems we will see here in th e future have been test-driven, and work well. Privatization of the 1st Amendment will go unchallenged if both major parties have anything to say about it.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s