Vague Cover Stories And Cover Ups

VAGUE COVER STORIES AND COVER UPS

I know that many people have probably lost count already but here we are with nineteen days of wall-to-wall coverage of the missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370. I haven’t really paid attention to any of the dialogue, but I have been exposed to all of the imagery, the pie charts diagrams, and computer graphics. Most of the time while I am in the studio during the show, we monitor all of the networks and it is uncanny how when you watch something without the sound you notice a whole lot more.

You begin to notice that most of the news commentators are dumbfounded and when some military expert or even an aviation expert comes on. The news anchors have this look that I can only compare to an intellectual cow looking at a dictionary wondering if it ever could learn English instead of ‘moo’.

Not to worry though, I was at a restaurant and they were also talking about it, and those that have recognized me on the street always ask what I think. I feel bad when I have to tell them I really don’t want to talk about it anymore.

The story has turned into the equivalent of a media scab, that is crying out to be picked, just so it can bleed a little more, and the scenes of angry and heartbroken families can be seen getting hauled off by the police.

I keep thinking that it wouldn’t be too hard for news organizations to break away and cover other things. Not to be totally incredulous, the idea of reporting other things is reluctantly happening.

Unfortunately, it appears that the once neglected story about the Ukraine is getting a revival; however, news organizations are actually reporting it as if it is a television drama that needs a recap.

For example, a story that was only worth a day in the news cycle has somehow endured and no one knows why. It is the story of former RT reporter Liz Wahl. Surprisingly she got valuable airtime again when she appeared on CNN’s Reliable Sources on Sunday. What they should’ve called the program was “The Liz Wahl Agenda” where vague accusations, cover stories and cover ups are being thrown around and reported without any reason to verify sources or even motive.

In fact, Brian Stetler, the host of the show, was saying “consider the source” directed at Russia Today, when he most certainly should have pointed the finger at Wahl who has unbelievably remained relevant in the whole Ukrainian news cycle.

This actually gave me a reason to be suspicious of Wahl because, not only is she a relatively unknown reporter, her resignation from RT only deserves one day, but for CNN having her come on a weekend show is a guilty pleasure, like having Tanya Harding in a boxing match with Marie Osmond.

Keep in mind that Liz Wahl basically took advantage of the moment that was provided by RT’s Abby Martin when Martin went on her show, “Breaking The Set,” and spoke out against the Russian occupation of Crimea. Martin wasn’t fired and was given independent opinion and did not face any discipline.

Wahl on the other hand resigned and made a stink that caught the attention of the media in the United States. However, while we weren’t looking Wahl took her indignation about Russian “propaganda” and has carried it further to now attack what she calls “American conspiracy theorists.”

She pointed out that not only is the spin on Russia Today pro-Putin, but it is also pro-American conspiracy theory and that her resignation was all a well thought out plan carried out by a neo-con think tank. Here is the transcript from last Sunday’s ‘Reliable Sources’:

STELTER: “I’d like to hear people’s views that are critical of America. I’m personally turned off by extremism but I am interested in hearing those critiques. Where it gets more complicated is the notion of conspiracy theories.”

WAHL: Absolutely.

STELTER: And that’s what you hear oftentimes on this channel.

WAHL: And conspiracy theories get really dangerous. I never realized—I was never privy to this world before, but working there I realized how dangerous it is, these conspiracy theories. These people hear these conspiracy theories and think that it’s fact. I mean, the insiders there hatched a story with one of their friends saying that my resignation was part of a neo con plot.”

STELTER: Yes, this was a dust-up online this week.

WAHL: [smiling] …It was to take over the world, a neo con conspiracy theory to dupe the mainstream media. And they hear this from these people that thrive off of conspiracy theories. This is their livelihood. They’ve cultivated this kind of fringe extremist audience. And they think it’s fact and no matter what you say these are people—It doesn’t matter what kind of evidence you present to them. They do not want to believe the truth.”

This conversation is most certainly the most sickening form of gatekeeping I have seen in a while. Not since the Boston Bombing or Sandy Hook have I seen so many attempts by the mainstream media to malign those who see the story as a red herring and wish to report it.

Attempts at breaking the mainstream media’s control of the narrative have never been appreciated by the major corporate networks, and anyone who questions any point is considered a conspiracy theorist.

I posted on my Facebook page a remarkable follow up report as to why Wahl resigned. It was a TruthDig report written by journalists Max Blumenthal and Rania Khalek and called ‘How Cold War-Hungry Neocons Stage Managed RT Anchor Liz Wahl’s Resignation‘ which reported that:

“It was a full 19 minutes before Wahl resigned. Inside the offices of the Foreign Policy Initiative, a neoconservative think tank in Washington D.C., a staffer logged on to the group’s Twitter account to announce the following:”

“#WordOnTheStreet says that something big might happen on RT in about 20-25 minutes.”

The Dissenter blog on FireDogLake.com has a great piece titled, ‘CNN Host Engages in Gatekeeping, Dismisses Key Aspect of Liz Wahl’s Resignation in Interview With Her.’ It says:

“According to Khalek and Blumenthal’s report, she had been “suspended for two weeks without pay and then demoted from anchor to correspondent after a series of outbursts in the office.” She was “disgruntled about her salary” and complained she “was receiving insufficient assistance from producers in writing her monologues.””

Now going further down the rabbit hole we once again have to give you the revelation that everything that is happening with regards to the Ukrainian crisis is once again being spun by the usual cast of idiots. Liz Wahl’s “resignation ploy” seems to also be connected to Victoria Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan.

We reported when the rumors of uprising began that Nuland was the chief architect of the Ukrainian crisis and played a phone call on the air that literally painted the picture of the whole “wag the dog” scenario.

Back in February, Victoria Nuland made the news when an audio recording of her phone conversation with the U.S. Ambassador with Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, was released. I suppose that when we played the phone call on the air that no one really picked up on the fact that the conversation between her and Pyatt was the smoking gun exposing that planning of this crisis and why it was being carried out.

It went down the memory hole; however, the relationship now between Liz Wahl, Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan has not.

Robert Kagan is the Director of the of Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI).

As even RT themselves cover this in the article, ‘New report reveals how ‘American neocons’ stage attacks against alternative media‘:

“FPI was founded in 2009 by a group of high-profile neo-conservative figures, including Robert Kagan and William Kristol, founder of the Weekly Standard, who themselves were cofounders of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) — an organization that played a key role in advocating for the US invasion of Iraq by the Bush administration following the 9/11 terrorist attacks by Al-Qaeda.”

PNAC was established in order to send a clear message that the United States was no longer going to be a country on the defensive. As David Morrison wrote, PNAC was established in order to encourage the government to maintain or even increase military expenditure to enhance US dominance and deter rivals. The hard part, according to PNAC, was to convince the American people that it was necessary. In Section 5 of their plans to increase spending for the military industrial complex entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century’, it clearly states its intent:

“This report proceeds from the belief that America should seek to preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of U.S. military forces. Today, the United States has an unprecedented strategic opportunity. It faces no immediate great-power challenge; it is blessed with wealthy, powerful and democratic allies in every part of the world; it is in the midst of the longest economic expansion in its history; and its political and economic principles are almost universally embraced. At no time in history has the international security order been as conducive to American interests and ideals. The challenge for the coming century is to preserve and enhance this ‘American peace’.

“Yet unless the United States maintains sufficient military strength, this opportunity will be lost. And in fact, over the past decade, the failure to establish a security strategy responsive to new realities and to provide adequate resources for the full range of missions needed to exercise U.S. global leadership has placed the American peace at growing risk. This report attempts to define those requirements.”

The report went on to propose a revolution in US military capabilities, including increased global missile defense which is to “provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world.”

The report then falls into a bit of reverse causality when it says: This “process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor”.

A year later on September 11th, 2001 a “new Pearl Harbor” did indeed occur. That fact that this uncanny coincidence has never been investigated nor has the Project for the New American Century and their agenda never been questioned for “intent” is beyond me.

Now the same architects of the Project for the New American Century and 9/11 are now creating a ‘wag the dog’ scenario in the Ukraine.

Once again, to be clear, Khalek and Blumenthal reported that Liz Wahl’s resignation was all thought up by the Foreign Policy Initiative headed by Robert Kagan. Kagan is married to Victoria Nuland, the architect of the Ukrainian crisis. Kagan has also backed Arizona Senator John McCain on his curious relationships with known neo-Nazis, Svoboda and the Banderists.

The media has successfully buried any and all reports about what is happening in the Ukraine with its exhausting 19 day coverage of the Malaysian plane. Prior to the aviation distraction, Wahl was the flavor of the week and, in a weird turn, as the plane investigation wraps up, she conveniently shows up again to tell her far-fetched story of conscience to anyone who still wants to milk it. Meantime, the media, in cooperation with the Foreign Policy Initiative, have had time to work out the kinks in their one-sided script that they wish to unveil.

It is looking as if false narratives and vague explanations rule in the media now, and it is imperative that we somehow try and understand why certain stories are reported and why some of them won’t go away.

The fact that Liz Wahl is back sends a message that someone wants you to think that she matters. She does matter only because she is another pawn in phase two of what the Foreign Policy Initiative is wishing to accomplish and that is the next chapter of the empires strategies in the Project for the New American Century.

Source: http://www.groundzeromedia.org/vague-cover-stories-and-cover-ups/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=vague-cover-stories-and-cover-ups