Friday, April 22, 2016

Jewish Media Domination and Censorship

While taking a break from contemplating the intelligence of crows, or some such important matter, I came across a piece by former UK Ambassador, His Erstwhile Excellency, Craig Murray, entitled: The New McCarthyism – The “Anti-Semitism” Hysteria Gripping the UK. In response to a post with which I was in general agreement, I made some short comment. This, however, was very soon deleted, although not before another person had commented on my comment, thereby confirming that I had indeed made, not imagined, my comment.

Such acts of censorship, especially by an avowed liberal such as Craig Murray, irritate me. If my facts or arguments are incorrect, I'd like to know why, rather seeing them arrogantly wiped from the page of the next five minutes of Internet history, probably by some politically correct ignoramus running Murray's blog. Thus I reiterated my comment with some explanation, which in anticipation of its deletion (which occurred within minutes), I reproduce here.
I Thought I'd made a comment here, but no sign of it. But wait, yes, there's Giyane's iynane reply, so I must really have made a comment. Wonder what Craig Murray or his PC filter found objectionable? Let's see, I quoted Craig's claim that:
anti-Semitism is the most emotionally charged of all political accusations. As it should be.
I disputed his conclusion "that it should be," arguing that anti-Semitism is held to be the most awful racism because that is what the mainly Jewish-controlled US media and entertainments industry and the Con/Lib/Lab/BNP Friends of Israel say it is. What's the problem with that?

What I should have added is that the mainly Jewish-controlled US media and entertainments industry are always ready to tell you that criticism of any Jewish person (Bernie Madoff, is one example) or thing (like white phosphorus in Gaza) is anti-Semititic, as is any suggestion that Jews have undue control of the American media, entertainments industry, banks, etc.

Several years ago there was a wonderful debate on the CBC, Canada's national radio channel, chaired by a Jewish person, Anna Maria Tremonte, in which three people participated, two of them Israelis, the third a Toronto Jew. The topic was whether criticism of Israel was anti-Semitic, which, they agreed, it is. Surely, no one would invent such an absurdity, since no one would believe it, yet the reality was presented in all seriousness as informative comment. Well I suppose it was informative, but not of what the participants in the discussion were discussing.

But to revert to CM's act of censorship, was my comment objectionable because I said that Jews control most of the US media and entertainments industry, including the pornography industry? But that is well known and documented by Jews.

For example, as Joel Stein wrote in the LA Times:
I have never been so upset by a poll in my life. Only 22% of Americans now believe "the movie and television industries are pretty much run by Jews," down from nearly 50% in 1964. The Anti-Defamation League, which released the poll results last month, sees in these numbers a victory against stereotyping. Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.
Or as Aberdeen University Professor Nathan Abrams wrote in the Jewish Quarterly:
A story little told is that of Jews in Hollywood’s seedier cousin, the adult film industry. Perhaps we’d prefer to pretend that the ‘triple-exthnics’ didn’t exist, but there’s no getting away from the fact that secular Jews have played (and still continue to play) a disproportionate role throughout the adult film industry in America.
The role of Jews in the US news media is less obvious, for one needs to identify not only the handful of corporate owners of the MSM, but also the directors of these various controlling conglomerates and banks. (There are, it is true, long lists on the Web of Jews in the US media, although I will not embarrass you by linking to anything so "anti-Semitic.").

What is clear, though, is that the US news media (and Canadian), are for the most part extremely cautious in criticizing things Jewish, while often crassly applying the anti-Semite label to anyone critical of Jews, or Jewish institutions, or Israel, such labels being applied even to Americans and Canadians as a whole. Amazingly, such criticism of Israel as does appear in the US news media has been blamed by one prominent Jew on the preponderance of anti-Semitic Jews in the media!

The same fear of eliciting the anti-Semitism charge is true of the British news media. Thus, Chris Elliott, the Guardian's readers' editor, for exam wrote on 6 November 2011:
"Guardian reporters, writers and editors must be more vigilant about the language they use when writing about Jews or Israel," citing recent cases where The Guardian received complaints regarding language chosen to describe Jews or Israel.
Does the media express the same extreme caution, and sensitivity about language used when writing about other groups? Apparently not


  1. The Jewish hand behind Internet; Google, Facebook, Wikipedia, Yahoo!, MySpace, eBay…!

    ---just sharing.

    1. Good point. One has to hand it to them, these are very smart people.

      Unfortunately, as a result of their success in business, finance and other spheres of life, their self-serving behavior can greatly damage, or indeed totally destroy, the interests of the rest of society — like a parasite that fails to allow the host to live a healthy life, the result tends to be disaster for both parties.

  2. Murray is a gatekeeper, controlled opposition, a coward. It's not multiple-choice, all those terms apply to him.

    He may be acting as a gatekeeper voluntarily, or someone has him by the balls. Either way, he will go "only so far" when it comes to certain topics; as far as he is allowed by those who control him and no further.

    This is why his stance on things 9/11 is such that yes, okay, you can debate 9/11 on his blog (NOT to allow this, at all, would arouse suspicions among all but the thickest of his acolytes); but such debate is marginalised, hived off to some archived thread where, unlike the Holleauxcast, it will never enjoy "top-billing":

    Yet 9/11 was the starting gun and catlayst for all this madness we see today; the wars, millions dead and (not) counting, the catch-all state-surveillance, the fear-mongering, the divide-and-conquer, the mass migrations and all manner of misery.

    And Murray won't allow any discussion of it within any "topical" thread on his site.

    That 9/11 not only was, is, and ever *will* be "topical" - because its effects impact on just about everyone to a greater or lesser degree, every day (and these effects are in their infancy, we ain't seen nothing yet) - won't elude a man of his intelligence. It just eludes his integrity.

    Meanwhile, here IS a man of integrity;

    If you haven't read it please do so.

    1. My own favorite summary of the 9/11 event is James Corbett's "A Conspiracy Theory", which has the virtue of being both short and funny (in a macabre way), while packing more relevant information into a five-minute presentation than any other commentary that I know of.

      I certainly find it impossible, to take Craig Murray at face value, yet I have a sneaking regard for him, chiefly I suppose, because he has the rare gift of writing with clarity, force and wit on technical matters about which he is well informed. Thus I find it sad that he wastes his time on a blog that offers little but propaganda for the globalist, Money-Power elite, and on a what will surely be a hugely boring book about some dead, white, Scotch male.