On December 5th, it was "U.S. House Votes 98% to Donate U.S. Weapons to Ukraine; U.S. Public Is 67% Against. Is this Democracy?"
On December 6th, it was "Ukraine Receives New Weapons."
On December 7th, it was "NATO Prepositions Weapons In Poland for Attack on Russia."
Are the public supposed to be surprised when the war between NATO and Russia starts? Because it is already a hot war, and it has already begun in Ukraine; it's being waged between the invading Ukrainian Government, proxying for Obama after his successful coup to take over that Government, and the defending breakaway region of the former Ukraine, proxying for Putin (because the Obama-installed leaders of Ukraine are dedicated to destroying Russia).
NATO is preparing to invade Russia, but our 'news'-media are hiding these preparations. And the earlier phases of these preparations have already spurred counter-preparations by Russia (which, unlike the precipitating-events on 'our' side, do receive press-coverage in the West, because, taken out of context in that way, these reports present Russia as if it were the aggressor, which it's not; the U.S. is, but the media controlled by America's aristocracy -- and their servants -- censor that fact out of their 'news').
Is the 'news'-media collectively hiding the biggest news-story of our time: the perhaps now uncontrollable buildup to World War III, with Ukraine serving as the bait, the pretext, and an eager staging-area for an attack against next-door Russia?
All of those news-reports (on December 5th, 6th, and 7th) were submitted to virtually all 'news'-media in the U.S. and Britain, but were published by only a half-dozen very small ones, and hidden by all of the rest (including by the major 'news'-media and almost all of the alternative-news sites).
When are America's 'news'-media going to start reporting, instead of covering-up, the biggest news-story of our time: the likeliest buildup toward a nuclear war since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis?
Or is the biggest news-story of our time actually that cover-up itself: the control of virtually all of our 'news'-media by the same aristocracy -- the same interconnected group of billionaires and their servants (including their 'news' executives)? And, if that's the case, then how will the public even possibly come to know about the biggest news-story of our time?
After all, when it's the case that the "U.S. House Votes 98% to Donate U.S. Weapons to Ukraine; U.S. Public Is 67% Against. Is this Democracy?" the question that's being asked there is a very serious one, indeed.
Perhaps the only way to spread the news now is via word-of-mouth and social media, as well as via reddit and other news-following sites. But the 'news'-media themselves are not reporting it. So, the news-following sites likewise report little if any of it.
Of course, the aristocracy themselves already know about it. If nothing else, the editors they've hired, who are censoring it out at their 'news'-media, can tell them about it, because they receive those reports (such as from the present independent reporter), even though the general public don't receive these reports.
Practically the only way that the general public can find out about it is by clicking onto the links in this and the few other news-reports that get published about it, and checking and verifying the sources, all of which are online, so that you can determine for yourself whether these sources are reliable ones.
Newspapers, magazines, books, TV, and radio, don't provide any similar means of easily checking out and verifying the reliability of their cited sources (no links are available in those old-style media); so, deceiving the public is much easier done in those media, than it is online.
But, of course, the traditional offline 'news' media denigrate the online ones as if only gossipy "blogs" were online; they do this in order to discourage the public from being able to verify (via the links, at sites online like this) for themselves, what is actually happening.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
4
3
2
