War Hypothesis Revisited

The weird thing about CIA funded news organizations is, even though it's only legal for them to do this in other countries, sometimes those news companies get quoted by the AP. So it is still possible for them to feed misinformation to the US public. It's a little rich for them to start accusing people of fake news.

I'm questioning whether he was installed or not; he lost by 3 million votes. And as part of that questioning I'm pointing out the press and governments apologetic stance toward his election. I believe they are trying to normalize censorship because the official story line makes this convenient.

Which journalists or media outlets has the CIA accused of fake news?

> Yes. Trump lost the "popular vote" by 3 million voters, but that the popular vote is not what our system is based on, so is nearly meaningless.

> Questioning Trump losing the popular vote but winning the E.C. is at best an academic discussion. Some would like to change our system, but that is not likely to happen any time soon, so it is ultimately meaningless.

> Again, I think you are misusing the word "apologetic"... who is being apologetic about Trump's legal winning of the 2016 election?

> Who is trying to normalize censorship?

> Who is being censored?

I think you are talking around your point. Please try to be more direct.

https://www.businessinsider.com/companies-funded-by-cia-2016-9

This is a story on news organizations owned by the CIA by Business Insider. It is legal for the CIA to purchase and operate news companies as fronts, but only in other countries. These organizations are used to disseminate information and misinformation originally intended to combat communism during the cold war. They are not allowed by law to run news organizations in the United States.

I think that your understanding of what the CIA does, and what the CIA can or cannot do is somewhere between overly simplistic and incorrect.

Example: "Combating communism". While the CIA "combated" the USSR (its plans, goals, intelligence agencies), that was by no means the one and only CIA mission. A more accurate description might be gathering, processing, and analyzing national security information from around the world. Communism was only one of the CIA's concerns... and not their "original" concern.

Feel free to cite that law.

Also... which "news organizations" does the CIA run? Feel free to provide facts.

I just did, the link to Business Insider is the source. Here's more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_influence_on_public_opinion

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cia-and-the-media-50-facts-the-world-needs-to-know/5471956

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/21/deep-pockets-deep-cover-the-uae-is-paying-ex-cia-officers-to-build-a-spy-empire-in-the-gulf/

feel free to copy and paste those to your browser window.

I'm pretty sure that the previous link you gave was about tech companies, not U.S. journalists and/or U.S. media companies.


1. "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird":

> States "Operation Mockingbird is an alleged large-scale program of the" but is very light on specifics about journalists actually in the USA and media companies in the USA.

2. "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_influence_on_public_opinion":

>Again... very light on specifics.

3. "https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cia-and-the-media-50-facts-the-world-needs-to-know/5471956"

> Doesn't show the CIA owning nor operations any media outlet, but only states "by the CIA which also oversees the mainstream media" but with no actual facts proving this statement.

4. "https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/21/deep-pockets-deep-cover-the-uae-is-paying-ex-cia-officers-to-build-a-spy-empire-in-the-gulf/"

> Yet again seems to lack details about U.S. journalists and U.S. media outlets.

And you still haven't cited an law that states that the CIA are not allowed by law to run news organizations in the United States.

The CIA, as far as I know, does not operate news companies in the USA. They are not supposed to. However, US news companies do cite stories from companies outside the US. When they do this, misinformation can be introduced as if it were factual to the US public.

Correct.





That is a questionable statement.




Yes... not at all surprising.



True... as is the same idea that other countries can present false information that is picked up by both conservative and liberal media...

....as is true that both conservative media (think FoxNews) and liberal media (think MSNBC) sometimes present completely and utter bulls*** (for the money)...

...which is usually completely unrelated to the CIA.

However odd that might seem to you.




>>>> And thus it is requisite upon each of us to be sober rational thinking humans who do NOT drink the Kool-Aid, but instead choose to look for verifiable facts <<<

And if verifiable facts are hard to come by....

... Consider the source.

OK. The CIA questions and banter is off topic as is the bit about Trump's election. Here is a link to an article about the CIA propaganda network. It's from the NY Times archive and in pdf format because they don't make it easy to get at their archive.

https://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/C%20Disk/CIA%20Reporters%20New%20York%20Times%20Series%2012-25-77/Item%2007.pdf

Yes I know it's long but it's legit