TV News LIES

UPDATED: 20-March-2006 - Click here for more information.

The facts and allegations contained in this article are not disputed, are easily verified and are documented by the subjects in their own words. I am writing this not to tell you about some secret on to which I have stumbled, rather to explain the well defined and verifiable information that has been kept out of the public discourse by the American corporate news media. Perhaps this will serve as a prime example of how much media deception takes place in our nation. I ask you not to accept what you read in this article as truth, and I ask you not to dismiss it as an untruth, I ask you to research the claims for yourself. The information is out there and nobody is denying the claims made in this article. They are simply refusing to discuss them.
Please, don’t trust me…test me. – Jesse – Editor, TvNewsLIES.org

If you wanted to hire a child daycare professional to look after your child, it seems reasonable that you would want to know something about that person’s background. Perhaps you would check into his or her criminal history to see if there was a record of sexual offense or violence towards children. Perhaps you would check the person’s religious background to make certain he is not involved in any bizarre religious practice such as child or animal sacrifice. You surely would conduct a thorough and painstaking pursuit of all available information about the applicant.

By performing your due diligence, you would be acting in the best interest of your child; you would be acting as a fully responsible parent; and you would be ensuring that the person you hire is exactly what he or she purports to be.

Now, let’s assume that during your investigation you uncover nothing really suspicious about the person at all. All you find out is that the name of the applicant’s religion is very similar to your own. In fact, because the name is “Neo-Christianity” or “Neo-Judaism,” you feel quite comfortable with the term. After all, it sounds so familiar and suggests a close connection to your own belief system.

What if you accept this discovery and feel quite safe with the presumptions you made – even though you never took a moment to research the newly identified religion?

And what if you made a dreadful and irreparable mistake?

Let’s say you then are confident enough in the applicant to hire him to care for your child. But then one day your worst nightmare becomes a reality. You come home to find your child slaughtered and his blood splattered all over your home. And there, in the middle of the room is your new hired day care professional on his knees, praying to an unfamiliar God!

You bury your child and you live with the terrible knowledge that you can never bring your child back to life. The day care worker is arrested, and during the trial you find out that the person you hired to protect your child was participating in a ritual demanded by the precepts of his religion.

You learn that it was his religious duty to lure you into trusting him so that he could have access to your child. You discover, far too late, that your similar sounding religions are indeed nothing alike. You now deeply regret not listening to the people who warned you about the members of that particular religion. You are ashamed that you once labeled them “Neo-Christian (or Neo-Jewish) bashers” and trusted your own instincts instead. You are horrified that you refused to look at the documents about this strange religion that those “Neo-Whatever bashers” tried to share with you.

You suddenly realize that the people who tried so hard to warn you knew something you didn’t. They were actually looking out for your best interests and you would not listen. You found that out too late; far, far too late.


But first, a question to the people who support the Bush administration and their policies: Have you done your due diligence to become a well informed citizen of the United States or are you simply following the advice of a handful of people who told you to trust them? Think about it.

From here on, when I refer to “Bush” I also refer to the people who comprise his administration, the people who have defined the policies of his administration and the people who have led day to day operations and activities within his administration. For the sake of simplicity I may speak of these people by referring to the symbol of their collective deeds: George W. Bush.

I have a great deal of experience dealing with Bush supporters and with his opponents. I find that supporters and detractors of Bush often have something very interesting in common: both groups know very little about the character, principles and philosophy of the people about whom they have formed an opinion.

Let’s begin by taking a closer look at two groups that make up the Bush administration. Surely, some people in the Bush White House fall outside these groups and in most cases merely serve as window dressing for the administration. They yield little power and have no significant influence but often, as in the case of former Secretary of State Colin Powell, provide a convenient aura of legitimacy.

Let us, then, concentrate on the two groups that play an active and powerful role in the Bush administration.


We have heard the term “Neocon” for the past five years. We have been told time and time again that the bulk of key policy makers in the Bush administration are Neo-Conservatives yet we never hear much about what Neocons believe in nor do we hear anything about their principles.

I really believe that is in everybody’s best interest to stop using labels as a general reference to political groups unless we know what the label means. The order of the day, however, is to do just that: to label someone a ‘conservative’ or a “commie” or a “liberal” without the slightest knowledge of the basic principles of conservatism or communism or liberalism.

Do the name callers have a specific doctrine or platform in mind when they use a political designation as a derogatory term? Most probably, they do not. Perhaps, if they looked up the words they hurled so easily, they might be very surprised to discover how ignorant they were of the principles involved.

On the other hand, believing a name has a positive connotation can be a serious mistake as well. We hear the term ‘Neocon’ tossed around quite easily nowadays by people who have no clue as to what it means. The term is far too often embraced for its adoption of the term ‘conservative,” and presumed to share the values of the American right. However, if people on the right, - true conservatives, took the time to understand the philosophy of Neo-Conservatism, they might be terribly disappointed.

Indeed, Neo-Conservatism bears little resemblance to traditional Conservatism. As a matter of fact the naming of the ideology may have been a strategic move intended on making Republicans and Conservatives feel comfortable with the term. It might have served to allay the suspicion or curiosity of those who should have taken a much closer look into what Neocons are all about.

There is no question that there is a frighteningly powerful Neo-Conservative influence over American foreign policy in this administration. That is an undeniable reality. However, while members of the media such as Chris Matthews use the term on a fairly regular basis, they never explain what Neo-Conservatism is all about.

To counter that, let’s look at some of the basic principles of Neo-Conservatism:

The godfather of the Neocon movement was an intellectual disciple of Machiavelli named Leo Strauss. Straus was a German Zionist who immigrated to the US in the 1930s and mentored people like William Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz while advocating his philosophy of a dog-eat-dog world.

In essence, the Straussian philosophy and teachings are now known as Neo-Conservatism. Below are some of the more interesting and perhaps surprising or even disturbing aspects of Neo-Conservatism as taught by Strauss:

• Nations cannot consider collective action and multilateralism unless it is 100 percent in line with their own selfish interests
• Strong leadership is required
• Military power is essential
• Leadership ought not be encumbered by human rights discourse or a moral conscience but nonetheless must "appear" to advocate such ideas.
• Rulers need not observe the laws they impose on the ruled.
• A ruler can cheat and lie and do all sorts of things but should at all time maintain the outside appearance of adherence to human rights and caring for people.
• Leaders can use religion as one of many tools to ensure the nation keeps on course as formulated.
• Outside threats help ensure social cohesion under domestic leadership
• Altruism, environmental protection, justice etc, are not the concern of governments and ruling elites. They have no part to play in the equation of power
• Strauss questioned how, and to what extent, freedom and excellence can coexist.
• Strauss was very pre-occupied with secrecy because he was convinced that the truth is too harsh for any society to bear; and that the truth-bearers are likely to be persecuted by society, especially a liberal society because liberal democracy is about as far as one can get from the truth as Strauss understood it.
• Secular society is the worst possible thing, because it leads to individualism, liberalism, and relativism, precisely those traits that may promote dissent that in turn could dangerously weaken society's ability to cope with external threats
• Nazism was a nihilistic reaction to the ungodly and liberal nature of the Weimar Republic.
• Religion should impose moral law on the masses who would otherwise be out of control.

Machiavelli’s political doctrine serves as the foundation of Neo-Conservatism and it denies the relevance of morality in political affairs. It states that that craft and deceit are justified in pursuing and maintaining political power. It implies that when it comes to achieving or maintaining power the end justifies the means. This is essentially the core of Machiavellianism and serves as the foundation for Neo-Conservatism: The priority for the power holder is to keep the security of the state regardless of the morality of the means. Machiavelli discusses frankly, the necessity of cruel actions to keep power. He was in the business of power preservation not piety. According to the originator of Neo-Conservative ideology the leader of the state must stick to the good so long as he can, but, being compelled by necessity, he must be ready to take the way of the evil.

Let me repeat this last principle of Neo-Conservatism because it plays into the “believability factor” when considering claims made by people who accuse the Bush administration of unconscionable actions: “The leader of the state must stick to the good so long as he can, but, being compelled by necessity, he must be ready to take the way of the evil.” These people believe that evil is acceptable and necessary at times!

A question for Bush backers: Are these the principles and ideals that you chose to support when you aligned yourself with the Bush administration? I am not discussing a conspiracy theory here. We have established clearly and undeniably that George W. Bush has assembled an administration founded on Neo-Conservative principles and a Neo-Conservative agenda. What I have outlined here are the beliefs and philosophies of the Neo-Conservatives within the administration. You can verify this on your own. I implore you to do so and I wish you had done so several years ago, prior to September 11th 2001.

Let’s move on.


Fact: While Congress absconded into its many periods of recess, and under the cooperative cloak of the American corporate media, George W. Bush welcomed back into government an alarming array of individuals who have had decades of experience in undermining the democratic processes of government at its highest levels.

I am not simply talking about people who have been associated with political actions with which I strongly disagree. I am talking about people involved in serious criminal conspiracies conducted at the top echelons of our government. I am talking about convicted felons who have been personally appointed by George W. Bush to important and powerful positions without Congressional consent. I am talking about a laundry list of people who were at some time convicted of, tried for or associated with one of the biggest criminal operations ever conducted by an American administration.

While well meaning and decent Bush supporters rejoiced in the fact that they no longer had as president a man who would lie about his sex life, they did not know that their current leader was filling high level positions with people who had decades of experience subverting the democratic process and running criminal operations as part of a huge, criminal, government-operated conspiracy. Yes, the Iran-Contra gang came back to Washington and our corporate media did not have time to share this information with the American people.

The line-up is pretty impressive: John Poindexter, Elliot Abrams, Otto Reich, John Negroponte, and Rogelio Pardo-Maurer. These men were all rewarded with powerful jobs in the Bush government for their felonious and murderous backgrounds. You don’t remember what they did or why they were convicted of anything? Look them up folks; don’t trust me to fill in the blanks. Look them up and wonder why these appointments didn’t make the morning headlines when they occurred.

Ask yourself why you didn’t know that your president appointed felons and their associates to very high level positions within your government? Does this bother you at all? Is this what you thought you voted for…twice?

Let’s put this information into perspective. We have an administration that is largely controlled by a group that uses a fairly benign sounding name. Neo-Conservatism sounds very much like an acceptable and ethical political ideology. The principles involved in this group, however are the architects and power brokers of the failed and war mongering foreign policy of the Bush administration: the policy that has us now mired in Iraq, poised to strike Iran and Syria, and dead broke to boot.

Make no mistake. This is not a conservative group of politicos with an upgraded title. This is, in fact, a group that is extremely, not slightly reactionary. They are, also extremely, not slightly, dangerous. They contradict almost every concepts Americans associate with a democratic republic and they do not adhere to the restrictions and boundaries defined by the US Constitution.

The philosophy of the current administration, as defined by the doctrine of the Neocons themselves and those of their mentors, has much more in common with Fascist dictators such as Adolph Hitler and Josef Stalin. This is not a liberal rant, it is an accurate assessment based on the undisputed, fully documented and openly admitted principles of the people who currently comprise the George W. Bush administration. It is not in their best interest to let you know this, but at the same time they do not hide this information from you. Look it up. The media have done a yeoman’s job of hiding this information from you. It’s your turn to do the work.

Keep in mind that the Neo-Con philosophy states that no rules apply when it comes to achieving power, even lying and cheating. And then consider the actions of the Bush administration in every single policy it has pursued – from election results to war, from the environment to the economy. They set the rules, they do as they please. Anything goes.

Look around at all the lies, the deception and the fraud and welcome in the New World order that answers to no one – no one at all.

At this very minute, the people who are in charge of the government of the United States of America believe that no rules apply to them. They believe that religion can be used to control society and that human rights do not apply to them. They do not have to follow the laws that all other citizens must respect, and they openly believe that evil is acceptable if deemed necessary to achieve their goals.

Add to the mix the extraordinary power now in the hands of people with decades of experience in subverting the law and the democratic process, and in conducting massive criminal conspiracies from inside the government.

Put it all together and you have an administration operating at the greatest levels of secrecy of any government in history, and run by people whose goals and beliefs have never been explained to the public whose interests they are supposedly serving.

I have yet to come across a Bush supporter who is aware of the underlying philosophy of the Neocons who direct the policies of the current administration. I have yet to meet one supporter who has any clue as to the extent that our democracy and Constitution have been compromised by these powerful and ruthless ideologues.

Still I believe that if they did their homework and examined the information that is NOT reported by our broadcast media but is nonetheless available, even present day Bush supporters would be very disturbed and most probably horrified.

And if they are, there is still time to take back the nation. There is still time for all Americans to take their patriotic responsibilities seriously. There is still time for all Americans who still back this President to understand what they have been supporting.
It is not possible for anyone to defend the goals of Neo-Conservatives and still claim to be an American. It is a contradiction of terms.

The fictional parents in the introduction to this article made a tragic mistake. They assumed it was not necessary to fully investigate the person to whom they entrusted the welfare of their child. Similarly, many real people in this nation have made a terrible and irretrievable error.

Millions of Americans entrusted their well being and the well being of their nation to an administration they accepted at face value. They bought into the promotions and the mantras, and the lies and the deceits. They did not ask the questions and they believed what they were told.

As in the fictional story, the damage is done and there is no going back. But, in real life there is always a tomorrow. There has to be a moment in which each and every person who has refused to do so in the past takes the time to find out who is running this country, and to understand where these totally evil men are taking us all.

For your own sake, look them up. For your own sake, understand who is at the helm of this sinking ship. For your own sake, believe what the Neocons in power proudly and openly admit on their own web site.

For your own sake, wake up before they take us all into their distorted fantasy world of military global domination. Or, sit back and watch the end of the world as we know it. It’s your choice. Go for it.

Written as a patriot by Jesse Ricard - Editor, TvNewsLIES.org

---

UPDATED: 25-May-2008 Ron Paul names the Neocons and warns all about the threat they pose.