Technologies SurveillanceCase Study References

Using Surveillance Results
USING SURVEILLANCE RESULTS - THE MEDIA

What happens?

  • Money is paid to (or by) corrupt agency officials or criminals in exchange for the surveillance material. Sometimes favours / goods are exchanged instead

  • The recipients are usually media (mafia) executives, corporate criminals or political players. Also, direct monitoring of surveillance frequencies is arranged whereby corrupt media personnel monitor the audio (sometimes visual) frequencies of surveillance operations set up by the CIA etc.

  • The results are used to arrange "coincidences" for the target to see or hear; ie to oppress them. Alternatively, theft of intellectual property can be the motive.

  • With reference to innocent surveillance targets (and with full knowledge of the truth) the media can also be responsible for spreading false rumours and/or lodging false complaints with corrupt police. This helps them to avoid enquiries by honest law enforcers who are often monitored themselves. In any event, investigating "protected" public figures is almost impossible. Remember, large sections of the media / entertainment industry are controlled by organised crime (esp. in the US). All they have to do is deny it or make themselves "unavailable" to any would be investigator (with lawyers at the ready).

  • Two thirds of what is gathered by the media is never presented, much being used only to blackmail / oppress political targets. In this manner the political process is warped beyond the mere agency vetting of those entering politics in the first place; taking it towards a situation where transient political figures are tightly "controlled" by the media which can destroy them just as quickly as it builds them up. In turn, large sections of the mainstream media are controlled by criminals with vested interests (eg the drug syndicates).

NB: The links between organised crime, the covert government agencies and the media (mainly at the executive level). Little wonder they say "control the media and you control the world".


Who?

Notably, anyone from researchers to writers, from story editors to floor managers, from producers (and other executives) to presenters can be involved in what is broadcast or printed. It is only necessary for a few in each media outlet to be corruptible for damage to be done through MANY articles, items, etc. Most would not know the origins of the "inserted" material but many are aware they are party to a corrupt, oppressive practice.


How?

The feedback procedures include the "spiking" of articles, program promos, advertisements, news and current affairs items with comments, phrases and events which make it clear to the target that they have no privacy. Specifically, what you say or write (or do) is "used" on a timely basis again and again and again in print or on air (with no reference to the source, of course). Public figures are also monitored closely (in private) but the results are not often fed back. Only the disempowered get surveillance feedback.


Why?

  • The purpose is not to lure the target for an interview (or research a story) but to harass you, covertly. The media do have a political agenda and break many laws. Like most politicians they are directed by vested interests.

    Also stories / rumours are often released on a timely basis to pressure honest (or semi honest) public figures and law enforcers on certain issues. These people are often monitored around the clock, keeping those who will "stop at nothing" at least "one step ahead". Often the media watchdog role is merely a public facade presented to win public favour / confidence.

  • Usually only those who are corruptible gain prominent positions within a corrupt media empire. No one who questions corrupt practices survives for long; their careers being halted.

    In other words, instead of asking why a highly paid journalist / entertainer etc would be compromised just to damage (even) a non public figure the skeptic should ask himself whether that person would have such highly paid opportunities in the first place if they weren"t corruptible. Remember, as with any job / career, ability is not the only criterion for selection in public life.



Article

The Media Mafia
By Paul Baird
Hard Evidence. Vol 1. #3 May-June 2001

Most people are aware that organised crime and covert Government agencies, especially in the USA, control large sections of the worldwide mass media. What they do not know is how they manage to do this so effectively.

Government agencies like the CIA and N.S.A have access to defence-developed technologies, which facilitate round-the-clock monitoring.

The victims of such attention include law enforcers, lobbyists, writers, justice campaigners, in fact anyone questioning the status quo by speaking out against corruption in high places. The electronic media participate as recipients of the agency information. They oppress the targets, helping to suppress information and views, ridiculing, discrediting and silencing those with opposing views.

I am describing links between organised "businessmen", covert Government agencies and a complicit media Mafia. A simple and readily understood example is the drug trade. Drugs financially fuel the Mafia and the CIA, but that same scourge hides successfully behind "legitimate" business operations including the entertainment industry (music, television, film and radio). Their veiled acceptance is at odds with the lip service paid by celebrities to drug-related health and social problems. Therefore, why doesn"t anyone point the finger…?

Observant readers may see that one of the answers is fear; fear of recrimination or vilification or merely loss of job opportunities. Those that spoke out on behalf of Lady Diana (especially after her death) are another example. Some were "quiet" for some considerable time… Another case of media control.

How do they operate?
U.S. Government agencies have access to computer-driven satellites, which monitor all telecommunications worldwide. The system is called Echelon. If certain phrases or topics are mentioned, then you draw their interest and you are monitored around-the-clock by audio/visual satellite systems so advanced that you have no privacy at all.

These surveillance signals have frequencies which can be "given" or "leaked" to the media. They have equipment to tune in. Alternatively, results can be bought, exchanged or relayed. In fact, even private investigators can be used on a simpler level to supply information to media outlets.

The surveillance results are used to create coincidences for the target to see and hear. Sceptics need to know at the outset that this is one of the media"s roles; a very common practice with respect to media targets (especially people who are not public figures).

Remember that two thirds of what is newsworthy is never reported but through systems like Echelon, the media knows most of what goes on, good or bad. They then "use" that information to terrorise their victims.

Common methods include:

  1. Using corruptible aircraft pilots and emergency services personnel to arrange aircraft "buzzes", siren wailing and more around homes, vehicles and individuals; on a timely basis. Letter writing, political discussion or criticism of media tactics is often the catalyst for this sort of harassment.
  2. Surveillance based on harassment which can help fuel scams, bribes etc. The use of union/business/political connections to restrict work opportunities disempowers and discredits the victims.
  3. Monitoring agency surveillance frequencies also facilitates blackmail etc through the co-ordination of media "coincidences". These involve references to things said or done in private on a timely repetitive basis (out of context and obviously without referring to the source). Any member of the entertainment industry can be involved in this very common practice. Notably, theft of intellectual property (especially by writers) is also a motive (on occasions) for the monitoring.
Using Surveillance Results.
The methods chosen depend on the habits, availability and character of the target as well as what they are doing to justify drawing criminals attention. Silencing an objector or covert censorship of a writer, for example, cannot be achieved via responses on a program he/she does not watch, or a newspaper they do not read… another reason for constant monitoring.

Specifically, articles, news items, advertisements, in fact ANYTHING written or read can be tainted. Researchers, writers, editors, presenters, performers, executives and others can be involved. It only takes a few to create a web of harassment for innocent victims to endure, although some media players have more corruptible employees than others. When publicly presented material contains familiar phrases, ideas, topics and events in a unique, yet constant flow (a daily or even hourly occurrence). The target can then be annoyed, confused or deceived etc. The hope is that this will keep them occupied, stopping whatever it is they were doing (lobbying, writing etc.). The more foolish can be discredited through corrupt law enforcers or medicos; ie if they make a foolish move in response to references to private conversations etc.

How frequently does this happen?
Harassing the enemies of criminals through the media Mafia is extremely common. Ridicule and oppression of disempowered campaigners for justice and true democracy (and any other righteous cause) is now a principal function of the mainstream media, but it is done covertly, as mentioned earlier.

By owning/controlling the media, criminals avoid open challenge. The media "watchdog" role is only a façade to win public approval (and ratings). A perfect example is the extended vilification of media magnate Christopher Skase. Those who pursued him the most vigorously have done worse themselves, but the public will never hear the full truth of it. Instead, the self-regulated industry motors on carefully, influencing how people see and interpret everything… yet no one watches the watchdogs…. we are listening to criminals.

This means that you only actually have democratic freedom to express your views provided you do not oppose criminals in high places. In other words, without power or influence the under classes are silenced. Little wonder the only values and views which many espouse are those fed to them by public figures who have themselves been compromised by a system which would have rejected them had they questioned the corruption around them.

My Favourite News Station(?)
Again, talent is only one prerequisite for any job. Without complicity or silence, no media identity could survive. Lies of fact and omission, vendettas, blatant bias and smear campaigns… "They" won"t ever let the truth get in the way of destroying their opponents. Remember that we are looking at an industry dominated by criminals. Yes your station…every station.

In balancing though, I have met some journalists who refused to harass innocent people nor would they stand by and see their colleagues do it. For this they were harassed themselves, losing jobs as well as opportunities. However, they are out of the industry for taking that stand and can now help no one.

Opinion
I could write a book on the matter but the summation is Freedom of the press should not grant a freedom to oppress.

Media ownership laws allow criminals (organised or otherwise) to silence private citizens on important issues. The more likely it is the activity will make criminals rich, then the more likely it is opponents will be attacked. Drug trafficking, weapons sales, nuclear proliferation, political corruption, environmental degradation, U.S. government agency global control systems, paedophile/pornography networks, prostitution etc… these are practically "protected" from public scrutiny. Naturally, the media run token stories which pay lip service to what"s right. Nobody would be fooled if they did not. Yet people suspect…They may not be able to follow the money trail to US agencies or crime bosses but they do see the media injustices; how it feeds off society while returning half truths, propaganda, and working a secret agenda.

Stories occasionally surface about scams, cash for comment scandals, manufactured reports and so on, but these are presented by another arm of the mainstream media and they amount only to in-fighting. People still believe far too much of what they are told by the media. The popular myths, supplied by the entertainment industry itself survive. Just as the media protects their co-conspirators from exposure, they, in turn, are protected by corrupt crime/agency figures. Only in organised publications like "Hard Evidence" magazine will differing views and absolute truths appear on a regular basis.

Examples of newsworthy items, which are suppressed include medical breakthroughs, laser weapon developments and various other scientific advances, which the U.S. government Defence/CIA etc want to keep secret (so they can use them for evil purposes rather than our benefit).

"Classified" tags, defence "notices" and government secrecy provisions in general are obstacles, but stories with lesser impact are constantly run. The real reason is that information empowers people so criminals insist on controlling the flow of information. The number one way to do that is by controlling the media directly through ownership, or indirectly through sympathetic, planted staff.

Conclusion
Those speaking out on important issues should be protected from the practices outlined in this article. However, no law enforcement or industry body has the power to do so. In addition, both journalists AND politicians are prepared to betray us with their silence, some going as far as to join the criminals in harassing innocent citizens. No one can stop media tyrants.

Media identities may not always know who they are harassing, but when they read material edited to contain surveillance results, they know. (Ever wondered why some comments, ads, etc made no sense?) The fact is they care only for the privileges of their positions and scorn the associated responsibilities. It means nothing that they report what is to become public knowledge when that evades or ignores the vast majority of news. Then there is the media complicity in harassing victims. Some media heavyweights have even gone as far as to approve murders to silence those too forthright to give in to blackmail, bribes, threats etc.

So, if a public figure would endure a vendetta for addressing these matters and U.S. satellite surveillance keeps tabs on everyone whos ever so much as written an angry letter to a newspaper editor on more than one or two occasions, what can be done to raise public awareness? Again, "very little" is the answer. The media are taken at face value by most. Those few who know the truth see through their act and despise their hypocrisy but the rest…. most do not care because they do not know or do not see how it affects their rights and their lives.

It is worth adding that those not silenced or discredited by these methods may have to endure further high-tech harassment at the hands of those responsible. Corrupt U.S. military/agency personnel can access satellite or ground-based equipment designed to torment and run experiments in "remote control" of individuals situations. Through media/political connections, the targets are chosen for these programs. Some very nasty laser driven devices, designed to harm and not kill, have been deployed (esp. on satellites) to silence good men and women worldwide who will not be warned off… something else the media won"t tell you. It is not quite the world you think it is.

Its little wonder many harbour an inherent distrust of the media. Unfortunately, it is all too true… control the media and you control the world, and "They" do.

Technologies | Surveillance | Surveillance Results | Case Study | References