Fake News Blues
By LMR, October 2017 (Revised September 2021)
I’ve been running this website since 2009, and researching the topics for longer, in that time I feel my knowledge has become reasonable across many subjects but I’ll be the first to admit I’m a specialist of nothing. The biggest issue I face in seeming credible to most is my lack of accreditation - perhaps had I chosen one field of interest, completed a course of further education and gained a degree or a recognised qualification then I would be considered a more reliable source of knowledge - someone who obviously knows their stuff?
Or, if a large corporate entity chose to sponsor my work and promote what I do? Perhaps if it was printed in mainstream newspapers, maybe that would give you the confidence that I’m not just a crazy tin foil hat wearing, paranoid delusional with a house full of dried food and canned goods in preparation for the next apocalypse? (Must add toilet roll to that list).
I understand these points of view. And unfortunately, the world of conspiracy research does appear to be somewhat full of nutters if you look at some of the things you find on the web, but I say even some of the nutters make a good point now and again - and some of the so-called specialists are clearly way off the mark...
That is not to mention the world of 'disinformation' that we now live in, a deliberate and clever way of discrediting pretty much anyone or anything by supporting genuine theories with obviously false information leading many readers to conclude that the whole thing must be nonsense. Dressing the truth up with lies and people just don't know what to believe, so they discredit it along with anyone else trying to make a genuine point.
A good example of this is 9/11, there is a very obvious flaw with the official investigation and its conclusions, these can be very reasonably argued with evidence, physics and science, but when people start claiming ridiculous theories that are provably untrue it stops people in their tracks from investigating it further.
All I ask is that you understand this from me; I am of sound mind, I am not in any way paid, endorsed, sponsored, encouraged, or directly influenced externally to do what I do. I believe in the goodness in mankind, but I believe in the evil in mankind... It's not all roses. (And the picture isn't me... that tin foil hat is not thick enough and it needs to cover the back of your neck for ultimate protection... (I'm joking).
I study things I enjoy and some of my favourite topics of research are Charles Manson and mind control, as separate subjects, although the two subjects overlap as is often the case. Contradictory to mainstream views on Manson, I do not believe he was a master of mind control, yet this is the reason why he is still incarcerated today for murders the mainstream also accept he did not commit. (Manson was still alive at the time of writing, he subsequently died in November 2017). Charles Manson is the only man in history who has been jailed for 'conspiracy to murder through mind control’.
Every opinion is reflective of an individuals perceived knowledge (what we think we know) and experience (what we have seen/done). Therefore, everyone’s opinion is valid under investigation of the truth even though this knowledge and experience may be different to that of our own. In fact, it is for this very reason that differing opinions should be openly discussed, because new information may lead to new opinions on previously accepted truths. We should allow ourselves to be open to alternative information with the confidence that we have the sense and intelligence to come to our own conclusions without being forcefully guided by the judgements and views of others.
The world’s mainstream media is largely responsible for our perceptions on just about everything. In many ways, we set the bar of what is believable by what is told to us by mainstream media. Anything that falls outside of the category of ‘mainstream’ falls into the category of ‘questionable’ when it comes to the general opinion on information.
The issue is that while we are right to categorise everything else as ‘questionable’, we are wrongfully believing in all that is mainstream, so what do we do?
In the US, mainstream media is almost wholly owned by a total of just six companies. What this means is that a small group of people, (some of the wealthiest people on the planet) own the entire information network in America; that’s every paper, every TV and radio station, every publisher and every broadcaster, basically every single source of news that is digested constantly by a public that believes there is a ‘free press’, or that the media are there to inform and enlighten us with the truth.
Read More on US Media Ownership.
In the UK you can see by this chart updated 2015 that the media is dominated again by just a handful of companies.
I believe there is a hidden agenda behind almost every news story, although the media is now more transparent than ever, it is far easier to see retrospectively how these apparently unconnected stories connect to the same agenda.
To use an example already mentioned, take Charles Manson - The Manson case had a profound effect on American social behaviour, and it is often considered to be a defining moment in modern American history. But it wasn’t about the murders in the summer of ’69 - it was about destroying the counterculture movement (Peace, Love, LSD) and drastically changing American society.
By his own accounts, Manson had done some pretty bad things in his time; shot people, cut people, hurt women to name a few. But he never killed anyone, and that’s not his crime anyway, his crime was ‘conspiracy to murder’ whereby, he is said to have mind-controlled others to do the killing for him. Can you see the contradiction in mainstream belief here? If I dare to mention provable and documented CIA mind control programs that have been operating for decades, I'm labelled a 'conspiracy theorist'.
Although mind control is very real and has advanced to a point whereby a person can be programmed to kill, this is not discussed in the mainstream, and most people would dismiss a man’s ability to manipulate the minds of others into becoming a killer. For example, if I say Mark David Chapman was a mind control victim, programmed to assassinate John Lennon, without any investigation I'm labelled a conspiracy theorist again. In the Manson case, however, it is widely accepted that he was the leader of a cult who used mind control to gain followers and do his evil bidding, because the mainstream media accept and promote this view. Another slice of cognitive dissonance anyone?
The mainstream media stamp of approval is so powerful and this was exactly how the case against Manson was won.
Manson’s trial was always doomed, but not least because of President Nixon’s media outburst against Manson during the trial declaring “Manson guilty”. The headline was printed in mainstream papers and seen by the jury, it should have been a mistrial, but the agenda that was at play here, required Manson to be sent down, and more importantly for this 'hippy cult leader' to become the new face of evil.
It was the mainstream view that Manson was, as quoted by some papers at the time;
the 'illegitimate son of Adolph Hitler', 'the most dangerous man alive' and known as 'Satan'.
None of this is true.
The effect this has is substantial, especially when you consider that Manson is still widely, incorrectly, labelled as a serial killer, he remains a figure of hate, and is still known as the face of evil, over 50 years on from the Summer of '69.
"It is not hard to see why. Manson's strange, hypnotic hold over his followers turned a group of peaceful hippies living in a commune into a group of merciless killers...
"...The very name Manson has now become a metaphor for evil as a result. The name is synonymous with evil today." Guardian artcile 2009
The actual murders that Summer, as documented many times over, were committed by people you’ve probably wouldn't recognise by name or face; Charles ‘Tex’ Watson, Linda Kasabian, Patricia Krenwinkle and Susan Atkins. While three of these were rightfully sent down for the murders, Linda Kasabian got away.
Linda Kasabian was present at both murder scenes. Kasabian stole a wallet off Steven Parents dead body. Kasabian watched on and did nothing as helpless victims ran out of Cielo drive and were stabbed multiple times on the front lawn. Kasabian did nothing to stop the murders, including that of Sharon Tate's unborn child. She facilitated the murders by driving the group to both murder scenes after which she tried to cover up the murders by taking the weapons, wiping them clean and dropping them in a ravine.
Despite being a crucial participant at both murder scenes, Linda Kasabian was offered immunity from prosecution on the condition that her testimony supported the prosecution’s case against Manson. She took the immunity deal and walked free, her testimony condemning Manson, without which the prosecution had no case.
Most people have no idea that there is another side to the Manson myth and that most of what we have been led to believe, through the saturation of repeated versions of false events and accounts in film and media, was largely fabricated by the prosecution itself - with no tangible evidence to support it.
The real reason Manson was the face of evil and Tex Watson wasn't? Tex Watson was clean shaven, had short, styled hair, wore nice clothes, and looked like your average young American. Manson looked like a hippy. Hippies, and all that they symbolically represented, (peace, love, togetherness, ending war etc) was the real target.
Above: "I'm the Devil, and I'm here to do the Devil's business" - Clean cut, definitely not a hippy, Charles 'Tex' Watson brutally shot, beat and stabbed victims at both murder scenes and carved the word WAR into the chest of a dying Leno LaBianca after beating and strangling him and his wife.
Below: Charles Manson. Representing every 'hippy' in America and beyond. Manson was not even present at either murder scenes during the time of the so-called 'Manson murders'.
"The Manson murders sounded the death knell for hippies and all they symbolically represented..."
"They closed an era. The 60s, the decade of love, ended on that night, on 9 August 1969." - Vincent Bugliosi, Manson Prosecutor.
Bugliosi, now dead was the author of best-selling book Helter Skelter. This book is largely fiction drawn up from the fantasies of Bugliosi. If you want a good read on Manson I recommend 'Goodbye Helter Skelter' by George Stimson, this blows the official story apart. (I'm still waiting for my copy of 'Myth and Reality of an Outlaw Shaman' to arrive, a book I've been hunting for years).
There are many books and documents which blow accepted mainstream truths to pieces, but these are only available to those who are looking for the information, it's not hard to understand why mainstream sources won’t promote their ideas and in fact go to lengths to censor them in many cases. Most of us are relying on being drip fed information to shape our perceptions and rarely do we venture outside of the mainstream box to look for any information. For all the reasons stated above, if the media don’t want a story printed, it won’t be. The media is nothing more than a propaganda machine. This has always been the case.
No matter how convincing it is, or how much evidence you can present, without that mainstream stamp of approval, alternative views are confined to conspiracy theories and rumour. That is until, one day, years later, when classified documents and information are released proving the 'tin foil hat brigade' were right all along… But our accepted version of history has already been written and continues to be taught with inaccuracy and deliberate misinformation.
Teaching People to be Stupid
The media is just one example of how a few people control the masses, the structure however is the same almost anywhere you look, the education system, for example, can be summed up as 'the blind leading the blind'. The education system is nothing more than an effective way of moulding people into unchallenging, unquestioning, authority obeying sheep, and more importantly, for filtering out those who don't fit the mould.
It is a lockdown on our consciousness that starts building walls around all possibility in the minds of wonderfully imaginative children. I’m not saying discipline isn’t needed in a stable child’s life, but School is all about confining a child’s mind within a limited box of possibility, where what is and isn’t possible isn’t discovered, but dictated (often incorrectly). For a child with potential beyond our imagination this simply shuts down the ability for them to express and be themselves, and as such they conform to the expected standard or find themselves being labelled as disruptive and uncooperative, and often put on drugs because of it, ensuring that the free mind gets shut down one way or another.
Our bizarre society believes that if kids don’t conform to education, it’s ok to drug them. What kind of world are we living in where we think this is acceptable?
School is where a child starts forming bold ideas of the world, nature, existence, spirituality, and more, yet none of us as adults can even claim to have definitive answers to some of the most important questions about human existence.
You can't expect kids to conform to being shut up in classrooms for several hours a day being spoken to like idiots by a teacher who can only follow what is in the curriculum, leaving little time to play, explore and use their imaginations. Therefore, so many kids are labelled as having 'learning disabilities' or 'attention deficit disorder', they don't have learning disabilities, they just learn differently, but education doesn't cater for that. And they don't have attention deficit disorder, they are most likely so loaded up on chemical food and medication that they are higher than your average junkie. School does far more to close the minds of children than to educate them in the true sense of the word.
Further education is no different, I’m not saying that what is taught is all wrong, far from it, what I am saying is that we are only learning within the confines of the limited possibilities that are being expressed when we do not fully understand the nature of our own reality.
The Modern Question: Science Vs God
Generally, there are two types of people, those who believe the god theory or those who believe the science theory. I agree there’s a lot more 'science' to the science theory, but it’s called the big bang theory, or the theory of evolution, for example, because there is no irrefutable proof, it is just a theory.
What we believe is the foundation of our existence is an idea, based on so-called 'intelligence', our knowledge of biology, physics, numbers, and many other factors. But it is still just a theory, and it’s only based on what we think we know, not always on the facts, and that is a very big difference.
Look closely at the big bang theory and you'll realise there isn't a shred of solid evidence, it's a theory based on a lot of theoretical theories and, let’s be kind, complete guess work.
Several hundred years ago, we believed the earth was flat and those who suggested it was a sphere were branded crazy, primarily because the extent of our knowledge at the time led us to believe the people on the other side of a sphere would fall off. Now we have scientific theories such as gravity and the laws of motion that underpin much of modern physics with 'Newton's law of universal gravitation' our knowledge has shifted and the suggestion that the world is round is a given fact, for most anyway but that’s another topic… This is a great example of how opinions can change drastically based on new information.
In 1935 Einstein and his co-authors claimed to show that quantum mechanics led to logical contradictions. That is simply to say, “it doesn’t make logical sense”.
I’m not claiming to be smarter than Einstein here, far from it, but, if you look at quantum mechanics from a scientific perspective it will contradict what you thought you knew about physics, and therefore seem illogical and “not quite right - as though something’s missing” as Einstein himself said.
Quantum physics has been confusing scientists such as Einstein ever since.
The reason is simple. Science talks about many laws, (the 'laws of physics' for example), as if they are fixed and set in stone, they are not, it is only our understanding of them that is set in stone, therefore what doesn’t fall within these parameters becomes ‘unexplainable’ or 'impossible' in scientific terms or as Einstein said, illogical.
One example of these illogical contradictions is a scientific paradox known as the Quantum Zeno effect. It was first discovered by scientists observing the radioactive decay of Uranium. Uranium is known to be unstable and to decay over time. When tests were performed unobserved the uranium decayed as expected, but, when scientists attempted to observe the process, unexplainably, they found the uranium particles would not decay.
Multiple studies now illustrate how measuring particles with increased frequency will affect the rate of decay — potentially suppressing it completely - in effect allowing the observer to stop time. We cannot explain scientifically why this is. But it is a remarkable discovery and one that absolutely challenges the nature of our own reality as quantum physics does time and time again. More on The Quantum Zeno effect here.
With all of this in mind I do dismiss mainstream education, media, science, religion, and other institutions that claim to be the be all and end all of information and truth. But I do not dismiss them as important and indeed essential to understanding the truth behind this limited version of reality that we currently experience.
Mainstream media and education are happy for you to believe one of either one of the many God theories or the Science theory… The God theorists believe God made the universe, that religion is rigidly fixed, it is unquestionably right and does not consider alternatives because it interferes with the integrity of their beliefs. The Science theorists believe in the big bang theory, Darwin’s theory of evolution from ape to man (do me a favour), it is unquestionably right because no scientific proof can disprove it, it does not consider God theory because it would interfere with the integrity of Science theory and it basically ignores quantum science because it blows their theories apart… Their justification for such ignorance hysterically being, “it’s mostly theoretical”.
Then you have conspiracy theory which is laughed at and ridiculed by mainstream media, even though researchers regularly consider science and religion among all possibilities to obtain answers/raise questions. Conspiracy theory is the suggestion that a group of two or more people are secretly planning to do something unlawful or harmful - By that definition you’d have to agree conspiracies are occurring and ongoing daily worldwide, and have been throughout history.
It is becoming increasingly harder to get your opinion heard. Sole corporations have taken over entire industries allowing them to dominate and control the information you see and share - You don’t look something up on the internet anymore, you ‘google’ it. And no one has a Myspace page or joins friends reunited anymore, they go on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc. Social media WAS briefly a great way for people to share new information and to continually allow us expression of ourselves through our individual thoughts and opinions. However, that has all been changing and I have seen a dramatic drop off in the number of visitors to my website over the last few years. That is because now, if your opinion doesn’t fall into the category of mainstream, these global corporations simply brand you as a hoax by marking a story as “disputed”. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in December 2016 the company would make it easier for people to report hoaxes, and would send suspected stories to a third-party group of fact-checkers who would mark a story as “disputed” if they conclude the story is a hoax. The company added disputed posts would be accompanied by “related articles” that would offer fact-based alternatives for users to read.
Simply put, Facebook (and the rest) will select a chosen third party who will work to parameters of fact checking set by Facebook themselves, allowing the company to deem any story as disputed, and to offer its own version of the truth as an alternative. It all sounds well and good if for one moment you thought Facebook was not just another giant wheel in the corrupt corporate world that I’ve been discussing...
But, I’m assuming you haven’t gotten all this way through the article if you believe that?
Don't forget to share this article on social media!