It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CNN: Corrupt News Network

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   

CNN: Corrupt News Network


www.latimes.com

When CNN brought the Republican presidential candidates together this week for what is loosely termed a "debate," what did the country get but a discussion of immigration, Biblical inerrancy and the propriety of flying the Confederate flag?
In fact, this most recent debacle masquerading as a presidential debate raises serious questions about whether CNN is ethically or professionally suitable to play the political role the Democratic and Republican parties recently have conceded it.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   
I am not saying LA times is the most reputable of sources, but I found this to be quite fascinating...

CNN (Corrupt News Network), FN (Faux News), NBC (Nothing But Crap), CBS (Corporate Bull #) all play the fear factor when reporting news (oh, is that a television show produced by one of these companies, coincidence?).


Corruption is a strong word. But consider these facts: The gimmick behind Wednesday's debate was that the questions would be selected from those that ordinary Americans submitted to the video sharing Internet website YouTube, which is owned by Google. According to CNN, its staff culled through 5,000 submissions to select the handful that were put to the candidates. That process essentially puts the lie to the vox populi aura the association with YouTube was meant to create. When producers exercise that level of selectivity, the questions -- whoever initially formulated and recorded them -- actually are theirs.


LA times really took quite a low blow at CNN, but I enjoyed reading it
.

www.latimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 12/3/2007 by biggie smalls]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   
...I just saw this little news brief about 'Anderson Cooper' being a CIA plant:


Following his sophomore and junior years at Yale—a well-known recruiting ground for the CIA—Cooper spent his summers interning at the agency's monolithic headquarters in Langley, Virginia, in a program for students interested in intelligence work. His involvement with the agency ended there, and he chose not to pursue a job with the agency after graduation, according to a CNN spokeswoman, who confirmed details of Cooper's CIA involvement to Radar.


www.radaronline.com...



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by anhinga
 


Thanks for the link anhinga. I knew there was something fishy about Cooper, aside from the fact he was the only reporter covering the Iraq war at the start and is doing his 'planet in peril' bullcrap on CNN.

It would not surprise me in the least bit if most if not all reporters were PsyOps, whether being controlled behind the scenes by intelligence agencies, or just fed false news to spread fear.

[edit on 12/3/2007 by biggie smalls]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by biggie smalls
 


...total agreement. Project Mockingbird has a lot to do w/ exactly what you just posted.


Starting in the early days of the Cold War (late 40's), the CIA began a secret project called Operation Mockingbird, with the intent of buying influence behind the scenes at major media outlets and putting reporters on the CIA payroll, which has proven to be a stunning ongoing success. The CIA effort to recruit American news organizations and journalists to become spies and disseminators of propaganda, was headed up by Frank Wisner, Allen Dulles, Richard Helms, and Philip Graham (publisher of The Washington Post). Wisner had taken Graham under his wing to direct the program code-named Operation Mockingbird and both have presumably committed suicide.


www.prisonplanet.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 3-12-2007 by anhinga]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   
sam zell owns the la times and was a major shareholder in the tribune which owned the company before him. hes donated money to both democratic and republican candidates. but this is wiki information i tend not to trust it because it can be altered by anyone. john caroll was the head editor of the LA times but was replaced by dean baquet. while alot of information isnt available about dean you learn from people you work with. caroll was a pulitzer prize winning journalist with a long history of working for semi major news papers. he also spent two years in the army before covering the nixon white house vietnam war and conflicts in the middle east. the la times is more than likely opposed to cnn cnn being a democratic "cut and run" network. point is he had experience dealing with un-winnable wars corrupt white house officials and the middle east and he has a govvy background. he also could be part of the propaganda war and personally i think were fooling ourselves if we dont realize ALL major news networks are maybe not controlled but heavily heavily influenced by the government.




top topics
 
1

log in

join