MEDIA MAFIA AND THE ULTRA WEALTHY FASCIST PRESS BARONS

  • FULL LIST OF MEDIA TOFFS HERE
  • British newspaper publishers
  • Lawyer Philippe Dauman CEO Viacom and Britain's Chann 5 the worst fucking TV station for smearing the peasants (Law society lackey controlling large area of tv programming that suits their hidden agenda)
  • The Guardian the feminazi's friend blaming all domestic violence and online trolling on men alone (The Guardian controlled by ultra rich feminist Amelia Fawcett named one of Fortune magazine's "50 most powerful women")
  • Amelia Fawcett top feminasty controlling Guardian ouput
  • The Rotten Heart of the British Press

    Deranged psychopaths who present a cosy front for the murdering gangsters running Britain. Barclay brothers (Daily Telegraph), Jonathan Harmsworth (Daily Mail), Richard Desmond (Daily Express ), Rupert Murdoch (Ex-News of the World, The Sun and Times) and former BBC's Danny Cohen

    Your reader-owned daily paper squares up to the many muck-mongers, despicable dealers and arch-hypocrites of the 2016 media landscape...

    WHAT’S wrong with the national press? It’s made up of bullies and creeps, that’s what’s wrong. At the top are some sinister and unpleasant businessmen. At the bottom are a bunch of wannabes and sycophants who will write anything to please the boss and get promoted. In the middle are a bunch of pompous Oxbridge twerps who believe their narrow conformist view of the world represents some eternal truth. The men at the top actively want to suppress a lot of news: they don’t want bad news about tax evasion, privatisation, exploitation or abuse of working people’s rights to leak out because they are deeply involved in tax evasion, privatisation, exploitation and the abuse of working people’s rights.

    At the bottom, the public school riff-raff willingly go along with this, and would much rather write voyeuristic celeb drivel than publish any real news. In the middle, the dullard columnists pump out reheated small-andbig-C conservative drivel, convinced it is intellectual gold. Sometimes good journalism gets out, but it is despite the owners and their hangers-on, not because of them.

    The Guardian/Mirror

    Two of the least offensive groups, the Mirror and Guardian — with 13 per cent and 2.5 per cent of the national newspaper market respectively — are governed by organisations not individuals: the Mirror by a corporation, the Guardian by a trust. They aren’t free of sin, but less drenched in it than other papers, suggesting ownership by the press barons is a big part of the problem.

    Malevolent Murdoch

    Rupert Murdoch is the most rotten press baron of all. His papers have 33 per cent of the national readership. He’s used them to do favours for right-wing governments, which in turn twisted the rules to keep him in business. His Wapping fortress was guarded by Maggie Thatcher’s bootboys, and in return his papers did everything to support Thatcher and cover up police misbehaviour.

    Tory and Blairite governments allowed his business to grow by getting past monopoly rules and retaining laws to keep the unions out of his titles. So he backed Tory and Blairite governments. The relationship was up-close and personal, whether it was Murdoch’s children and employees becoming part of David Cameron’s Chipping Norton set or Tony Blair putting on a white robe to help baptise Murdoch’s children on the banks of the River Jordan. Truth was the main casualty of the relationships, whether it’s Murdoch’s papers claiming Michael Foot was a KGB agent called “Comrade Boot,” or lying about Hillsborough because attacking dead football fans was seen as a favour to Thatcher and her cops, or printing absurd lies about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction to help Blair make the case for a false war or claiming Jeremy Corbyn said things he just didn’t.

    Former Sun editor David Yelland made clear that Murdoch liked him at his worst. Yelland, a recovering alcoholic, says of his job at the Sun: “I was actually paid to rush to judgement, paid to lash out and attack — it was perfect territory for the drunk.” Chris Bryant, an MP who faced down Murdoch’s smears, says the “Dirty Digger’s” henchmen act as if they were in “Godfather IV,” and the Murdoch machine feels like a protection racket, using smears to win favours. The spell was almost broken over the hacking scandal, but Cameron has brought Murdoch back into the centre of government

    The Pornographer

    Richard Desmond’s Daily Express and Daily Star have a combined five million circulation. That’s 12 per cent of the newspaper market in the sweaty hands of a porn baron. Desmond’s company Northern and Shell took off in 1982 by becoming the British publisher of Penthouse and other “top-shelf” magazines. In 2004 Desmond sold off the magazines, but he’s still an active pornographer — it’s very disguised on its website, but Desmond’s company Northern and Shell has a television arm, Portland TV, which runs “softcore” porn channels and explicit websites under the “Television X” name. Desmond likes to talk up his own riches-to-rags-to-riches story.

    His ad-man dad gambled away the family fortune, so Desmond had to crawl his way up by selling sex. In his autobiography Desmond explains how he likes to bully or buy people. He had eye problems and told his surgeon: “Look you don’t really know who I am. To you I am just a bloke off the street. But I can be very helpful to you or I can be a complete bastard. If I go fucking blind I will kill you. But if it goes well you’ve got the best friend you could ever have.” The operation was a success, so Desmond supports Moorfield Eye hospital, and didn’t have to kill anyone. But his proud boast of threatening surgeons tells us what kind of man runs the Daily Express and Daily Star, which he bought with his porn money in 2000. Desmond backed Tony Blair, but thinks David Cameron is a snob. So instead he gave Ukip £1m in 2014. Desmond’s Express has a very Ukip feel, while the Daily Star has flirted with backing the hard-right ED L. His papers attack minorities but his porn websites seek to exploit them, with “Asian,” “black” and “interacial” prominent “categories” of pornography. The sensationalist extremist politics, self-promotion and cheap celebrity are all alternatives to actual investment in news, as cost-cutting is a classic Desmond trait.

    The tax-dodging ‘patriots’

    The Daily and Sunday Mail is owned by Jonathan Harmsworth, the fourth Viscount Rothermere, who lives in a historic looking country house in Wiltshire. It seems right for a newspaper group whose fierce patriotism means it will lash out ferociously at any deviation from “British values” which, for the Mail, means an English Home Counties morality of 30 years ago, which it peddles to its six million readers — a 25 per cent share of the total. But it is an illusion. The Daily Mail and General Trust’s annual report says its “immediate parent company is Rothermere Continuation Limited (RCL), a company incorporated in Bermuda.”

    The “patriotic” Mail is owned by a family firm based offshore in a tax haven. This will help Rothermere — whose Mail-based fortune is around £800 million — avoid British tax. Leaving Britain to avoid tax is a family trait. Jonathan’s dad, Vere Harmsworth, lived in Paris as a tax exile. Jonathan inherited “nondomiciled” tax status from his dad, so can also avoid British tax using a variety of offshore trusts. British newspaper bosses don’t like attacking each other, so the story of Rothermere’s non-dom status has been exposed by Private Eye magazine, a publication outside the proprietors’ club. Rothermere’s country house is a fake as well — it was built in a mock 18th-century “Palladian” style, but the £40m building was actually erected in 2001.

    According to Private Eye, the house was built through a system of loans which would have kept more of Rothermere’s money out of the hands of the British tax man. When the Mail attacked then Labour leader Ed Miliband’s father as “the man who hated Britain,” it revived memories of the darkest side of the Rothermere family. While Ed’s dad served in the navy in WW II, Rothermere’s great-grandad, the first Viscount, made the Mail actively support fascism in the 1930s. The 1934 headline “Hurrah for the Blackshirts” is well known, but under the Harmsworths the Mail did much worse than promote Mosley’s British fascists — it also actively promoted Hitler. The first Viscount Rothermere argued in 1930 that Hitler was a great man opposed by “wealthy Jewish individuals” and “Bolshevists” of the “Hebrew race.” Even in 1937 the Mail was reporting Rothermere’s friendly visits to Hitler.

    The Tax-dodging Weirdos

    The Barclay Brothers are 81-year-old secretive identical twins who came to big media ownership late. Some minor press interests expanded into ownership of the Telegraph and Spectator in 2004, giving them 7 per cent of the newspaper market and control of some key Tory titles. The Barclays made their billions through a variety of retail and leisure businesses — if you’ve ever lost a parcel thanks to Britain’s worst delivery firm, Yodel, that’s the Barclay brothers too.

    It’s a sign of how bad the British press is that the Barclays got the Telegraph because the former owner, Lord Black, went to prison following fraud charges. The Barclays have kept the Telegraph Tory, but slashed jobs so badly it struggles with publishing hard news. BBC’s Panorama dubbed the Barclays the “tax haven twins” because their business used offshore schemes to avoid tax. They actually live offshore, in a castle on the tiny Channel Islands crop of rock called Brecqou.

    Islanders on neighbouring Sark accuse the Barclays of bullying, because the brothers closed down businesses on the island when residents refused to vote for their preferred candidates in Sark’s government. The Barclays’ “Sark Newsletter” was also accused of bullying. This miniature picture of press bullying and self-interest was recreated on a bigger scale at the Telegraph, according to its former chief political commentator, Peter Oborne. The respected journalist dramatically resigned from the Telegraph last February. He attacked staff cuts but most importantly said many bad stories about HSBC bank were supressed because the Barclays’ newspapers wanted HSBC advertising.

    Oborne said: “The Telegraph’s recent coverage of HSBC amounts to a form of fraud on its readers. It has been placing what it perceives to be the interests of a major international bank above its duty to bring the news to Telegraph readers.” The Barclays’ Telegraph put ads from HSBC over news. They may have also felt more sympathetic to HSBC because the stories often involved tax avoidance, and they too relied on HSBC financial support.

    The Ex-kgb man

    It says something about the state of the British press that the son of a former KGB boss isn’t the worst of the proprietors. Evgeny Lebedev’s London Evening Standard and Independent and have 4.5 per cent of national readership. Lebedev got his money from his dad, Alexander Lebedev, who until 1992 was the KGB’s top man in London. Lebedev used his KGB experience to become one of Russia’s top bankers, investing in Russian airlines, aeroplane-making and gas businesses.

    The oligarch and his son jointly bought the Standard and Independent in 2009-10. The Independent has long produced very strong stories on a shoestring budget. Lebedev has invested some millions in to the papers, but they don’t feel rich. Evgeney is seen as a bit of a poor-little-rich boy aesthete — liberal but dilettante. Apparently keener on partying with pop stars than politics, Lebedev has still made his money talk at the paper. Lebedev senior said his political “influence would be next to zero” when he first bought the Standard.

    But his son’s intervention is widely seen as persuading the Independent to back a vote for the Lib Dems and Conservatives over Labour in 2015, reflecting Evgeny’s political friendships more than the readers’ views.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Campaign launched against UK media censorship VIDEO
    Five Minute Speech that Got Judge Napolitano Fired from Fox News VIDEO


  • Judge Andrew Napolitano is trying to calm his outraged followers after the cancellation of his Fox Business show
  • The internet has increased information leaks and transparency
    Mass media try and take credit for leaks that they only published after they were put up online. (Previously their media lawyers would have shut them all down)

    Back in 2009, the world was a more innocent place, somehow. Isis was a river in Oxford. Tinder was a twinkle in a right-swiper’s eye. And Donald Trump was just another reality TV star.

    Then in May of that year, the Daily Telegraph published a huge trove of MPs’ expense claims, obtained from leaked computer disks. The impact was immediate, and incredible. Six government ministers resigned. Four MPs ended up in prison. Dozens more decided not to stand for re-election. The entire expenses system was overhauled. Perhaps most significantly of all, trust in politicians fell even further, with consequences that are still being felt today. Indeed, a recent survey commissioned by this newspaper found that three-quarters of Londoners still think MPs haven’t done enough to clean up politics since the expenses scandal.

    Fast forward to 2016 and the idea that a data leak might spark big political and social changes is hardly a surprise. We’ve got used to previously secretive institutions being hit by data breaches, including intelligence agencies (via Edward Snowden), diplomats (Wiki-Leaks), corporations (Sony, etc) — and now financial services, thanks to the so-called Panama Papers released to the world last week. If you take a step back, you see how with each of these examples (and others), the internet is dissolving many of the traditional information asymmetries that used to exist in our society. We used to take it for granted that governments had access to lots of information that we’d never see — and it was the same for other powerful institutions.

    Thanks to the internet, massive amounts of information can be shared instantly, free of charge, and it’s having a profound effect. And of course, digital technology is becoming more advanced all the time. The amount of data released in the Panama Papers leak was more than 1,000 times larger than the WikiLeaks release of diplomatic cables in 2010, and included around 10 million documents. Fifty years ago it would be almost unimaginable to be able to leak this much information — it’d take a ship to ferry the information away from Panama. Today, all it takes is a single encrypted email.

    Throughout history we see how significant reductions in the cost and effort of communicating information led to seismic shifts in the world around us. The printing press played a central role in the Reformation, while radio and television helped shape the 20th century. The internet is no less significant, which is why I’m so fascinated by it — especially the impact it’s having on our economy, society and culture, in ways that we may not fully understand for decades to come. But in the meantime, how should we operate in this brave new world of transparency? When the MPs’ expenses scandal broke in 2009, a decision was taken to require all Tory MPs to start publishing their expenses online, and in real time. MPs behaved very differently when they knew their expenses were being scrutinised in detail, which meant a better deal for taxpayers.

    Embracing transparency like this is the only option at a time when the internet is reshaping our institutions, and giving us all access to more information than entire governments possessed just a few decades ago. The genie is well and truly out of the bottle, and there’s no going back.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Britain's mass media is just one big royalist propaganda machine


    Britain's freemason controlled press barons swear oaths to kiss the royal arse
    "American Media Is Profoundly Restricted! We Can Criticize Every Country Except Israel! VIDEO
    A FREE press is a CONTROLLED press
    Media lawyers control the corporate rags and those who don't conform get massive libel actions against them by their lawyer lodge pals to shut them down and why the terrorists at the law society and their global monopoly hide their vast multi trillion dollar plundering

    I SPENT last Thursday re-reading Jimmy Reid’s famous address to the students of Glasgow University, 1972. It’s personal to me. While I was a student there I hoped its message would not die two generations on.

    “Reject the insidious pressures in society that would blunt your critical faculties to all that is happening around you, that would caution silence in the face of injustice lest you jeopardise your chances of promotion and self-advancement,” Reid said. Those insidious pressures remain rampant, including in every political and media organisation I have known. On principles like freedom of speech, to which many pay lip service, those pressures censor and silence. Last Friday Graham Spiers, Herald sports writer, resigned and Angela Haggerty, Sunday Herald columnist, was sacked following legal threats from Rangers FC. Scotland’s new media, countless journalists, and senior politicians expressed solidarity. The National Union of Journalists called for their reinstatement.

    This reaffirms the threat of wealthy corporate interests combined with legal power. The Herald has, ironically, been running a campaign for an overdue reform of defamation law. The media group, which includes this paper, recently stood up to legal threats from Baroness Mone. Yet in the Rangers case it capitulated. Haggerty – who for disclosure’s sake is a friend and colleague – states that Rangers raised an issue with tweets she sent in support of Spiers. That solidarity, expressed personally online, could lead to losing a job is a direct attack on both trade union principles and free expression. Is this decision, by editor-in-chief Magnus Llewellin, cowardice? Future legal threats are now emboldened. All Scottish journalists are weaker for it. What if BAE, Halliburton, Ineos, Amazon, Lockheed Martin, Exxon Mobil, or HSBC took the same action regarding other writing? Yet Llewellin has apologised for the “complicated” decision. To direct ire at individuals is to miss the problems with our media and legal systems.

    In this case, where would acting with “courage and integrity” lead? High legal costs? Pressure from corporate owners? Losing your job? It’s always easier for others to lecture rather than act on principles – especially when it’s not their job, home and family’s livelihood on the line. We all face difficult compromises to get by. We don’t always speak out or intervene – especially if it makes us feel vulnerable. That’s the conflict of our human nature, within which Jimmy’s speech pushes us to think of the common good above ourselves. Too often I feel compliant. And I hate myself for it. When the BBC told me not to mention a story on television; when during the referendum I was told what to write and what not to write; when I avoided criticising groups that could threaten me with violence, I’ve complied with my weaker instincts. Am I a coward? The opposite approach, “taking a stand” even with the noble intent of personal sacrifice, is fraught with potential contradictions. Over one particular controversy, as a student, I was outspoken when it would have been easier to stay silent. The result was damaged friendships, uncomfortable divisions and a feeling that I could have created a more constructive outcome.

    Following last week’s sackings, online aggrieved readers called for journalists to strike, resign or support boycotts. With confrontation – between surviving journalists – we’d be left with scorched earth. Instead we need discussion, cooperation and reform. How can journalists strengthen their security from legal threats? How can this process be more transparent? How can we support editors? Should Scotland’s papers be removed from corporate ownership? For a free media, trade union groups, staff teams, editors, owners and legal teams can create proposals to strengthen journalism in Scotland. The toxic atmosphere due to job cuts makes this difficult, if not impossible. Yet even an honest conversation and reforming defamation law would represent victories.

    A starting point is to admit that corporate media is in crisis. There isn’t a free press. And there isn’t equality before the law. In the short-term, this is likely to get worse not better. We can’t continue the hypocrisy of claiming we have a free media system to defend. It is a self-serving mythology. Journalism often lacks freedom and the resources to scrutinise those with real power. That those with heavy wallets can force pressure down, so that protecting stories, journalists and media integrity becomes “complicated”, is a disgrace. What will we, as citizens of a new Scotland, do about it?

    We can support this paper and the many good journalists across the industry. We can support many online alternatives. We can support defamation reform, the rights of journalists and freedom of expression in wider society. Most of all, we can reject the insidious pressures in society that blunt our critical faculties and caution silence in the face of injustice. We can stand by our friends.

    Response from The National editor Callum Baird:

    Credible legal threats can’t be ignored

    I’M HAPPY for Michael to have his say on this issue – in fact, I’ll fight for his right to do so. But in the interest of completeness, I feel it’s only fair – and Michael agrees with me – to offer a response to some of his points from a newspaper editor. Michael’s right in that there is probably no such thing as a free press. It has to comply not just with the law but also with what readers are prepared to accept as acting in the public good.

    Not many people would argue that a newspaper should be able to publish unsubstantiated rumours, for example, that a named person is a paedophile, without being confident it could prove it. The publication of graphic photographs is also regularly criticised by readers as a breach of the right to privacy. Publication is rarely a black-and-white issue. This case has been portrayed as an act of cowardice, a surrender to commercial pressure. But let’s first of all distinguish between threats from advertisers to withdraw their business and threats of legal action. In this case there is no evidence of the former and a very real possibility of the latter.

    In legal disputes newspapers regularly run apologies if they feel they have made a mistake. Most people would agree they should do so. Journalists are human. The best and the bravest make mistakes. In fact, the braver the journalism the greater the potential for error. That does not mean you censor journalists’ opinions.

    The piece at the heart of this controversy contained both opinion and "fact". If a "fact" is disputed and is regarded as potentially defamatory it is the newspaper’s legal responsibility to prove it to be true. The party which claims to have been defamed – which may be a small group of individuals – has no legal responsibility to prove the statement is not true. The onus is entirely on the newspaper. You can argue that’s unfair. You can campaign to reform the laws of defamation. But what you can’t do is ignore the law as it currently stands.

    The argument that this case puts journalists under more pressure or makes them more vulnerable doesn’t bear scrutiny. This case simply underlines the need for journalists to be able to back up their reports and allegations with evidence. If they can’t, any media outlet which publishes that work will be in trouble. This is no more true this week than it was a month ago. This newspaper, along with every other, has taken risks to back up its journalism. Like any other media organisation, it will only do so if there is a chance of success.

    If there is no chance of success, going to court is the equivalent of pouring huge sums of money down the drain; money that would be better spent on paying journalists’ wages or on funding journalism. Or perhaps it could go to fighting battles that might lead to changes to bad laws. If nothing else, after a long, difficult week for Scottish journalism, at least we’re talking about it.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Journalism a dangerous game with 2,300 killed in past 25 years VIDEO
    "The Media Doesn't Ask The REAL Questions And Has Become The Biggest Threat To Freedom! VIDEO
    Reporter Spills the Beans and Admits All the News is Fake! VIDEO
    'Us' and 'them' in media discourse VIDEO


    Where EVIL bastards are portrayed as the GOOD guys
    Why are we being told so many lies?

    When the vast majority of the world's top oligarchs just happen to be jews and in particular zionist jews who keep telling us, through their total control over the world's printing presses, that they are being constantly oppressed you start to see why LIES and only LIES ensures they remain the top dogs living a life of vast opulence while enslaving the goyim to attend to their every need.

    There is nothing more lucrative to the thieving robbing bastards than the satisfaction that the dupes are groomed into believing that the billionaires require our sympathy from their supposed oppression and that THEY are the victims of the goyim's anti-semitism. If they were like the Palestinians locked up in the Gaza concentration camp by those very scum that claim persecution you could have some sympathy for their plight but this is the monster in our midst. A massive carbuncle on the face of the earth distorting and manufacturing vast lies and deceit that keep the duped goyim in constant flux and under the threat of having their meagre lifestyles ruined by their total control over the money supplies of the world.

    They have become more greedy over the last few decades manufacturing austerity to feed that greed and why the peasants, who have been enslaved through their control of finance and manufacturing, have seen a massive reduction in their quality of life.

    Unless the goyim waken up to these zionist gangsters pulling all the strings of the west's leaders and controlling the world's resources, finances and legal mafia through freemasonry that the plunge into the depths of depravity will continue unabated . These evil bastards throughout history have been using their media platforms to point the finger at everyone else bar themselves and who can only hold onto their power and wealth as long as the repetitive lying keeps the duped goyim in their place and in a masonically induced trance.

    So fuck to their anti-semitic jibes against anyone who ignores their lies and gets to the heart of what is seriously wrong across the globe today. A satanic cult that preys on us all shutting down anything that is a threat to their power and global domination. There is truly no end to the depths these powers reach down into the rabbit hole of the most vile human traits that have manipulated society for far to long. One perfect example of what these evil bastards are getting up to behind closed doors is Lord Greville Janner a jewish lawyer and law lord who has been protected by the freemason run met to abuse young boys over decades and who still avoids jail thanks to the stranglehold they have over how the British crown have arranged one law for them and another for the goyim.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Humanity suffers from zionist rich: 85 Richest People In The World Have As Much Wealth As The 3.5 Billion Poorest!
  • Establishment cover up of jewish lawyer and homopaedo Greville Janner(VIDEO)
  • ‘Cover-ups ?’ – Lord Greville Janner
  • Zionist billionaire list
  • Owen Jones meets Peter Hitchens VIDEO
    Vile Harmsworth rag's massive overdose of royalist bullshit
    Richard Desmond(Express) and the Barclay Brothers(Telegraph) promote top UK despot


    Mass media controlled by ultra rich gangsters like zionist Richard Desmond (Express) and the Barclay Brothers (Telegraph) ensure their priorities are the promotion, in their vile fascist rags, of the richest and most toxic parasite on the planet the queen bee herself. She never lifted a finger during the war yet she gets tagged on to the many dead and injured war veterans who fought to keep her in the lavish lifestyle her and her lackeys think they deserve. SHE cares not a jot about the millions who lost their lives to keep her fascist dictatorship alive and well in the hallowed walls of Buckingham Palace and the many lavish mansions that consume vast amounts of public money and the biggest sponger on the planet.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Daily Express owner Richard Desmond has said in a new autobiography that he finds it easier doing business with fellow Jews
  • The big question for British Jews when the Telegraph changed hands in 2004 was whether the new owners, the Barclay brothers, would be as friendly towards Israel and the Zionist cause as Lord Black
  • Oliver Stone puts zionist leaning Bill Maher in his place over Gaza VIDEO
    Media godfather Murdoch undermines democracy across the globe
    Fox news self righteous Bill O'Reilly on media attack of his buddy Donald Trump VIDEO
    Sky's aggressive Kay Burley again Duuuuuuuuuuuhhhh!!!!!!!!!!! VIDEO
    American media hijacked by Israeli lobby VIDEO

    The majority of American people are uninformed about the destructive influence of the pro-Israel lobby in the United States and its dominance on US foreign policy, says a former American intelligence linguist. “All the [US] politicians unfortunately, because of the very powerful impact of the pro-Israel lobby, they will continue to approve these ridiculous military funding campaigns [for Israel],” Scott Rickard told Press TV on Tuesday. “

    It would be nice to see the Americans rise up against this kind of tyranny that does occur because of the Israel lobby, but I really don’t see any changes unfortunately because most Americans don’t have access to the right information,” Rickard said. “The information that they’re given is given from a perspective of a media that is hijacked by the same individuals that hijack the political agenda,” he added.“This opinion unfortunately is driven by news stations like Fox News, like CNN, like MSNBC, and they’re all very pro-Israel.”

    Rickard made the remarks following a new poll that shows a great majority of Americans oppose any special compensation to Israel for its concern over the nuclear agreement with Iran.The poll by Google Consumer Surveys found that 67.8 percent of Americans oppose any sort of compensation to Israel, while only 12.8 percent support it.The most influential pro-Israel advocacy group in the United States is expanding its campaign to pressure Congress into rejecting the recent accord over Iran’s nuclear program.The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the biggest Zionist group in the US, will deploy about 300 lobbyists on Capitol Hill this week to try to convince lawmakers to vote against the nuclear agreement.

    Iran and the P5+1 group -- the United States, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany – reached a conclusion on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on July 14 in the Austrian capital of Vienna following days of intensive talks over Tehran’s nuclear program.
    Channel 4 Krishnan Guru-Murthy's interview with Labour's Jeremy Corbyn erupts VIDEO
    Zionist controlled mainstream media continue pushing the disturbing transgender agenda VIDEO
    Are We Told Stories To Prepare Us For The Future? VIDEO
    “It’s a lie” Greenwald reveals British Media fail on Snowden VIDEO
    Far right wing madman Rupert Murdoch finally step down as FOX CEO VIDEO
    The Briefcase: TV For The End Of The World? VIDEO
    Mass media sick pathological obsession with the Jenners/Kardashians VIDEO
    UK media failed to investigate Trident case thoroughly VIDEO
    Convicted Mirror phone hacker: was a "widespread culture" at the paper VIDEO
    57% of Brits seek non mass media bullshit coverage VIDEO
    Ex-Murdoch henchman Andy Coulson perjury trial begins in Edinburgh
    Freemasons behind Murdoch regime

    Former News of the World editor Andy Coulson has gone on trial in Scotland accused of perjury.

    The 47-year-old journalist is accused of lying at the trial of Scottish socialist politician Tommy Sheridan at the High Court in Glasgow in 2010. Coulson, from Kent, a former head of communications at Downing Street, has entered a plea of not guilty at the High Court in Edinburgh. His trial, before judge Lord Burns, is expected to last four weeks. Coulson, dressed in a grey suit, blue shirt and green tie, sat in the dock flanked by two security officers as the jury of nine men and six women was selected. He sat impassively as the three-page indictment was read to him.

    It claims he lied about knowing a journalist and private investigator employed by the News of the World who were involved in "phone hacking". Lord Burns told the jurors they must try the case solely on the evidence they heard from the witness box. He said it was probable they had heard about Tommy Sheridan and Andrew Coulson and formed views about them. But he said: "It would be completely wrong to be influenced in any way by such views or opinions."

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • FREEMASON SET UP SPY NETWORK OF CORRUPT COPS, TAXMEN AND BANKERS
  • Murdoch henchman Jonathan Rees: Freemason private investigator who ran empire of tabloid corruption
  • Former detective confirms freemasons criminalising UK justice system(VIDEO)
  • MASS MEDIA 12
  • MASS MEDIA 11
  • MASS MEDIA 10
  • MASS MEDIA 9
  • MASS MEDIA 8
  • MASS MEDIA 7
  • MASS MEDIA 6
  • MASS MEDIA 5
  • MASS MEDIA 4
  • MASS MEDIA 3
  • MASS MEDIA 2
  • MASS MEDIA 1