For More News, Visit... The Hardcore News Web Site!


America your not going to have any change till the corporate money is out
of politics and ALL of the Zionist are gone globally

Monday, May 25, 2015

The Mysteries of the Masons

By Andrew Burt - Slate - MAY 15 2015 3:33 AM 
To this day, nobody knows the true fate of Capt. William Morgan. A failed businessman and citizen of generally low repute, Morgan was abducted from his home, in the town of Batavia, New York, in the early morning of Sept. 11, 1826. He soon found himself in a Canandaigua jail cell, about 50 miles away, imprisoned for a debt of $2.65. The whole ordeal was doubtless confusing to Morgan, a man best known for his drinking. It likely became even more confusing when a stranger paid his bail. But that man had no intention of setting him free. Morgan emerged from the jail only to be forced into a carriage, reportedly screaming out “murder” while he was being dragged away.

This is the last anyone ever saw of Morgan, about whom little else is certain. Some said that he was not really a military captain, while others claimed that he had earned that title in the War of 1812. Others asserted that both theories were technically true: That he fought the British in 1812 as a pirate seeking plunder and was granted a pardon for his misdeeds by the president after the war. What we do know is that whatever happened to him, trapped inside that northbound carriage and fearing for his life, Morgan never came back.
Over the next few years, the details of Morgan’s abduction would slowly come to light, setting off a political firestorm and giving rise to the first third party in American politics. Evidence suggested that Morgan’s abduction was carried out by members of a secret organization known as the Masons. Americans soon came to believe in the existence of a Masonic plot to overthrow society from within; the country’s very existence, many proclaimed, was now in jeopardy. What began as an obscure crime in upstate New York would spark one of the first episodes of political hysteria in American history, laying the foundation for a long line of political crusades to come.




150513_HIST_Mason-Heart
Illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker
The story of Morgan’s disappearance begins in the summer of 1826, when a new era was dawning in the nation’s history. Fifty years after the Declaration of Independence, the last of America’s founding generation was dying off—a turning point highlighted by the deaths of both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams on the Fourth of July that year. What would become of America’s “great experiment” in democracy without the presence of the founders?
In upstate New York, then on the outer edges of America’s frontier, two men were occupied with a different question: how to secure personal fame and fortune. The first was David C. Miller, the publisher of Batavia’s Republican Advocate. Miller’s was an opposition paper, pitted against the policies of New York’s governor, DeWitt Clinton. Though he’d run the journal for more than a decade, he was still a struggling newspaperman searching for higher circulation. The second was William Morgan, who had moved his family restlessly throughout the countryside, working first as a brewer, now as a stoneworker, hauling his wife, Lucinda, and two young children from one failed venture to the next. Only two years earlier, Morgan had written of his desperation: “The darkness of my prospects robs my mind, and extreme misery my body.” The two men made an odd pair, but what they lacked in common background they shared in common circumstance—and now in common goals. Over that summer the two hatched a plan to expose to the world the inner workings of the secret society of Freemasons.
How, exactly, the two first came into contact is not known, but neither was held in high esteem by his community. According to one source, Miller was known to be a man “of irreligious character, great laxity of moral principle, and of intemperate habits”; much worse things were said about Morgan. Not surprisingly, both men harbored deep-seated animosity toward Freemasonry, which served as a symbol for the establishment class.
Freemasonry is thought to have originated in England and Scotland sometime in the 1500s as a trade organization made up of local stoneworkers, but it soon took on a philosophical air. The triumph of reason began to be a focal point of the organization, as did dedication to deism, or the Enlightenment belief that the existence of God is apparent through observation and study rather than miracles or revelation. Over the centuries, the fraternity of Masons would expand throughout the world, as would its ceremonies and rituals, which involved strange symbols and oaths—in addition to its more benign emphasis on civic-mindedness, religious tolerance, and communal learning. The group met in secret.
Masons were overwhelmingly men of middle- and upper-class status—doctors, lawyers, and businessmen—who had the time and leisure to join what amounted to a social club for the well-to-do. Many of the founding fathers had been Masons, including George Washington and Benjamin Franklin—indeed, 13 of the 39 signers of the Constitution claimed membership in the fraternity. In the years between America’s founding and 1826, Masonry had only grown more powerful, especially in New York. Gov. DeWitt Clinton was not only a Mason but had also been the grand master of the Grand Lodge of New York and the highest-ranking Mason in the country. By one estimate, more than half of all publicly held offices in New York were occupied by Masons.

150514_HIST_Mason-Tools
Illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker
Miller first hinted at some type of forthcoming revelation in an article published in the Advocate in August 1826. He had discovered the “strongest evidence of rottenness,” he wrote, evidence that compelled him and an unnamed collaborator, “to an act of justice to ourselves and to the public.” This bombshell was a book, to be compiled by Morgan and printed by Miller, detailing Masonic rituals and misdeeds at the highest levels of power. Morgan wasn’t a member of the Masons, but he had convinced other Masons that he was and had been granted access to a neighboring Masonic lodge. Morgan was thus able to witness the Masons’ ceremonies, recording their doings in a manuscript.
News of Miller and Morgan’s impending publication soon began to spread and Masons in neighboring counties began to worry about the disclosures. Reported one Mason at that time: “[I] never saw men so excited in my life.” Committees of Masons were quickly organized to investigate the revelations, and “everything went forward in a kind of frenzy.”
Groups of concerned Masons began harassing Miller and Morgan with prosecutions for petty debt, with the tacit cooperation of the county sheriff, who briefly placed Morgan in jail. Strange men, thought to be Masons from other counties, now began to make suspicious appearances in the villages of Ontario County, putting not just Miller and Morgan on edge but entire towns too.
On Sept. 8 a group of Masons attempted to destroy Miller’s offices. Capping a night of drinking at a local tavern, a group of several dozen men descended onto the print shop. There they found that Miller had convened a posse of his own, equipped with firearms and ready to fight. The Masons retreated, and Miller was safe—for the time being. Two nights later, Miller’s office suddenly erupted into flames, though the fire was detected early and no serious damage was done. Cotton balls dipped in turpentine were reportedly found throughout the print shop.
On Sept. 11 the conflict escalated. A half-dozen Masons showed up at Morgan’s home with an arrest warrant. The charges: petty larceny for stealing a shirt and tie, lent to Morgan by the owner of the town’s tavern, which Morgan had failed to return.
Soon Morgan was being whisked away in a carriage, though reportedly without worry. He apparently thought that testifying that he had simply forgotten to return the items would get him off the hook. He was right. The charges fell through and he was released—only to be immediately arrested again for the outstanding debt of $2.65. This time, the charges stuck.
Morgan spent the following night in jail. The next day, he was forced into the carriage that sped northward out of town, never to be seen again.
That wasn’t the end of the ordeal: A group of Masons soon came back for Miller. On Sept. 12 roughly 70 armed Masons rallied at a tavern while a constable presented the publisher with a warrant for his arrest on questionable charges and conveyed him to the nearby town of Le Roy. Luckily for Miller, his lawyer and an armed posse from Batavia followed along, carrying him back home when the charges fell through.
As Miller and his crew returned to Batavia, the story of his arrest spread throughout the neighboring villages and towns. It was loose ends like Miller, and the family that Morgan had left behind, that would cause the Masons the most trouble. The fate of Morgan’s wife, Lucinda, for example, would help to stoke up sympathy and support for Morgan’s plight, deepening the public’s anger over the Masons’ crimes. The mother of two small children now no longer had a husband to depend on.
But the Morgan affair wasn’t just about the disappearance of one man. The crime had exposed the existence of a powerful group, shrouded in secrecy, manipulating the law for its own purposes. The story of Morgan’s kidnapping, as it was told and retold throughout the coming weeks, focused on how the elite Masons had turned the public interest into a private one and how the government itself may have been perverted in the process.
Two weeks after the abduction, a series of heavily attended public meetings was held. Though the meetings were initially called to solve the mystery of Morgan’s fate, they were equally about calming the public’s fear. There was no guarantee, after all, that what happened to Morgan could not happen to others.
As a result of the Batavia meetings, a panel was established, the so-called Committee of Ten, which began sending agents into neighboring towns to investigate the abduction, gathering facts and taking down testimony. Soon neighboring towns followed suit with committees of their own, all tasked with shedding light on the crime. These public meetings were people’s meetings, and they convened people’s committees: No government authorities were called in because none, many suspected, could be trusted.
The committees were created to calm the public’s sense of fear, but in fact they helped to deepen it. Throughout the months of October and November, citizen representatives of the committees traveled throughout upstate New York spreading the story of Morgan’s abduction, serving to confirm the wild stories local newspapers were already printing about the kidnapping. Those who initially didn’t believe what they read now heard witnesses attest to the truth of the affair. Meanwhile, speculation about Morgan’s fate was becoming more and more sensational. One version of the kidnapping ended with Morgan being murdered in some sort of occult Masonic ceremony, with his throat slit “from ear to ear” and his tongue cut out with a knife.





150512_HIST_HiramDeath
Illustration from The Mysteries of Freemasonry by Captain William Morgan
Up until this point, the public effort to get to the bottom of the scandal was straightforward, if impassioned. A group of men had conspired unlawfully against Morgan and Miller, and if they were not brought to justice, nothing prevented the same crime from occurring again. Once the criminals had been locked away, everyone could move on—or so, at least, it seemed in the early days after Morgan’s disappearance. But this view would soon change.
Within a few months, the outrage over Morgan’s kidnapping transformed from public fear to political hysteria. Though clearly only a few Masons were guilty of any crime, it was the reaction of other Masons that convinced much of the public that they weren’t dealing with a simple crime but with a widespread conspiracy. Many Masons began publicly—and inexplicably—to defend Morgan’s abduction, and many of them were public figures to boot. “If they are publishing the true secrets of Masonry,” said one former member of the New York Legislature, we “should not think the lives of half a dozen such men as Morgan and Miller of any consequence in suppressing the work.” Another Masonic judge on the Genesee County court stated that, “whatever Morgan’s fate might have been, he deserved it—he had forfeited his life.”
The nascent anti-Masonic movement gained an expanded sense of purpose as the Morgan affair began working its way through the courts. In October, a group of Masons were indicted on charges of rioting and assault for the attempt to imprison Miller. In November, four other Masons were indicted for the conspiracy to abduct Morgan.
By January 1827, the trial was set to begin in Canandaigua, New York, where teams of lawyers, bankrolled by local Masonic lodges, assembled to represent the four Masonic defendants. The district attorney prosecuting the case had amassed a team of his own, which in the end would prevail—though the win would be more symbolic than substantive. The four defendants were sentenced to lenient terms, ranging from two years to one month in prison, convicted only of forcibly moving Morgan from one place to another against his will. What happened to Morgan in the end, and the larger conspiracy behind his abduction, was still conspicuously unsolved.

150513_HIST_Mason-Coffin590
Illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker
If the public wanted justice, this surely was not it. But the trial proved fulfilling in another sense, thanks in no small part to Judge Enos T. Throop. When it came time for him to read the sentencing statement to the four guilty men, Throop read much more than a simple description of their punishment. What he told the Masons, in front of a rapt courtroom, soon to be reprinted in papers across the state, revealed that their trial was about something greater than their offense alone.
Throop began by describing the four Masons’ crimes. Theirs was a “daring, wicked and presumptuous” act, he said, one that had “polluted this land.” The men had robbed the state of a citizen, left the victim’s wife and his children “helpless,” and somehow shielded the rest of the culprits from being brought to justice. But this act on its own was not even the “heaviest part of your crime,” as Throop explained:
Your conduct has created, in the people of this section of the country, a strong feeling of virtuous indignation. The court rejoices to witness it—to be made sure that a citizen’s person cannot be invaded by lawless violence, without its being felt by every individual in the community. It is a blessed spirit, and we do hope that it will not subside—that it will be accompanied by a ceaseless vigilance, and untiring activity.  . . . We see in this public sensation the spirit which brought us into existence as a nation, and a pledge that our rights and liberties are destined to endure.
The public’s outrage, in other words, was now no longer about one crime, or even the conspiracy to cover it up. It was about the “spirit which brought us into existence as a nation,” in Judge Throop’s words, and about the fear that this spirit was threatened.
What Throop saw in the public indignation was a dedication to America’s founding spirit. The citizens, it seemed, were willing to enforce the laws themselves, if that’s what it took to protect American ideals. What began as the public’s reaction to a local kidnapping was now evolving into a common dedication to protect America’s core values.
Freemasonry served as a compelling symbol for the real threat that many Americans were facing. The 1820s were a decade of great uncertainty, one in which industrialization posed profound challenges to American society. The rise of manufacturing threatened to reorganize the American labor force on a massive scale, as did immigrants and population booms in eastern cities.
“In fastening on Masonry as the foremost evil in the Republic,” writes historian Paul Goodman, “Antimasons were responding to the emergence of industrial society which clashed with the remnants of a pre-industrial order.” America, many thought, was entering an era of chaos, and one in which the principle of equality was fundamentally threatened.
With the trial now complete, the movement reached another turning point. Furious over the court’s inability to bring all of Morgan’s abductors to justice, alarmed members of the public began to advocate action in the political realm. In February, a joint meeting was held by the people of the towns of Batavia, Bethany, and Stafford, who resolved to “withhold their support at elections from all such men of the Masonic fraternity.” The people in the town of Seneca committed that “they would not vote for Freemasons, for any offices whatever.” And it wasn’t only Masonic politicians who found themselves under attack. Newspapers run by Masons, which many felt had been conspicuously silent on the Morgan affair, were also the target of the public’s ire. A meeting of the towns of Pembroke and Alexander passed a joint resolution to “discourage the circulation of any paper” that did not cover the Morgan affair accurately. In meetings throughout the towns of upstate New York, scores of similar resolutions followed suit. By February 1827, five months after Morgan had gone missing, the Anti-Masonic Party was born.
And by the end of the year, the party was already sweeping the polls in New York. In the elections of 1827, for example, the party of the sitting U.S. president, John Quincy Adams, would elect 12 members to the New York Legislature while the Anti-Masons would elect a shocking 15. The following summer, just a few months before the national elections of 1828, Adams himself had openly aligned himself with the Anti-Masons by declaring that, “I am not, never was, and never shall be a Freemason”—proving that the party had jumped from a statewide political phenomenon to become a national one.
The 1828 elections marked a major turning point for the Anti-Masons. As the movement spread from New York to states like Vermont, Ohio, Massachusetts, and Maryland, Anti-Masonic candidates won seats in state legislatures across the country. At the federal level, the Anti-Masons became the first third party in the United States to send candidates to Congress, electing nearly a half-dozen members to the House of Representatives.
Perhaps more notably, the Anti-Masons gained the mantle of the opposition party in the 1828 elections. President Andrew Jackson, an avowed Mason himself, had ousted Adams and was now in power. The Anti-Masons now not only had a prominent political platform, in both state and national legislatures. They had a villain in the White House.

150514_HIST_Mason-Scale
Illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker
By 1830, the push for a national organization was under way, aided by opposition to Jackson and the growing sense that American society was fracturing. On Sept. 11 of that year, precisely four years after Morgan had been abducted from his Batavia home, the Anti-Masons held their first national convention in Philadelphia, with delegates from New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Ohio, Maryland, and Michigan in attendance. It was here that the party hatched its grandest plans for national influence—and, ultimately, where the seeds of the movement’s downfall were first sown.
With growing national power came increased opportunity, but divisions were already stirring within the Anti-Masons’ ranks. For many of the moderates in the party, some of whom viewed Andrew Jackson’s policies as a danger equal to, if not greater than, the threat posed by Masonry, the need to build coalitions with opposition figures outside the Anti-Masonic Party soon became clear.
The problem, however, was that a large number of Anti-Masons, zealous in their beliefs, did not have the stomach for compromise—they simply refused to deal with any politicians who would not denounce all of Freemasonry. Questions about the party’s ability to handle routine political tasks now began to be posed with increasing frequency. Would the Anti-Masons be able to strike political bargains at all? Would allying themselves with other Jackson opponents undermine their cause? Put simply, would compromise dilute the Anti-Masons’ strengths or would it make the party stronger?
In the face of such disarray, the delegates agreed to postpone major decisions, such as whom to nominate for the 1832 presidential election, until the following September, when the party would hold a national nominating convention, the first of its kind in American politics, and one that is emulated by political parties to this day. Instead of party leaders choosing whom the convention would nominate, delegates to the convention, each representing their local supporters, would elect the party’s candidates. This new type of convention was a way of bridging ideological differences within the party, of importing the democratic process into the party itself. At the same time, it underscored the party’s increasingly weakened leadership.
The divisions between the moderates and the radicals in the party would only grow. One newspaper covering a local 1831 Anti-Masonic convention highlighted the now increasingly popular view “that Antimasonry had other and higher objects in view than the prostration of the Masonic fraternity.” Samuel Miles Hopkins, a longtime New York politician and one of the state’s most prominent Anti-Masons, declared that Andrew Jackson was a greater threat to the country than Freemasonry and that in the previous election he himself had voted for Masons rather than let pro-Jackson candidates win. By 1831, a year before the presidential election, the Anti-Masonic Party was rotting from within.
But rising tensions would not stop the ambitions of the party at large, which believed it had found the perfect 1832 presidential candidate in William Wirt, a Virginia politician and former attorney general, and one of the last vestiges of old-style American politics.
Wirt was a stern moralist and a devoutly religious man, and he had been tapped by Thomas Jefferson himself as a political heir. “You will become the Colossus of the republican government of your country,” Jefferson had once assured him. Wirt’s concern with America’s moral status echoed many of the Anti-Masons’ deepest concerns. It was the selfish pursuit of profit that Wirt thought was the animating evil of the times. The growing object of Americans of every stripe was simply “to grow rich: a passion which is visible, not only in the walks of private life, but which has crept into and poisoned every public body.” What Wirt identified as the flaws in American society were the same evils that the Anti-Masons saw in Freemasonry itself: a system in which the few benefited at the expense of the many.
There was one problem: Wirt had himself once been a Mason and had never explicitly renounced the order. Now, he was calling the entire conflict between Masonry and Anti-Masonry “a fitter subject for farce than tragedy,” and bemoaning the “wild and bitter and unjust persecution against so harmless an institution as Free Masonry.”




150514_HIST_Mason-Moon
Illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker
The most radical of the Anti-Masons were obviously outraged by Wirt. Increasingly sidelined, the radicals within the party watched as Wirt was selected to carry the Anti-Masonic banner in the fight against Andrew Jackson, allying with other elements of the opposition.
But by and large the rest of the party supported him, perhaps to a fault. Wirt would ultimately carry only the state of Vermont in the presidential election, winning Anti-Masonic counties in states across the country but falling severely short of any meaningful support at the national level. After Wirt’s failed candidacy, the Anti-Masonic Party “seemed as if by magic, in one moment annihilated,” wrote one 19th-century historian. Men “who had repeatedly most solemnly declared, they would never vote for an adhering Mason for any office whatever, in one day, ceased to utter a word against Masonry.”
And thus the party’s tenure in the national spotlight came to an end—though not without lasting effects. The fraternity that the party had set itself against was forever damaged. Over the course of the hysteria, Masons across the country resigned or denounced their membership, and hundreds of lodges were shuttered. “Lodges by scores and hundreds went down before the torrent and were swept away,” according to one Mason at the time. “In the State of New York alone upward of 400 lodges, or two thirds of the craft, became extinct.”
During Andrew Jackson’s second term, disparate elements of the opposition began to organize, realizing the strength of their combined power, if only they could achieve unity. It was with these goals in mind that the Whig Party, the predecessor to the modern Republican Party and the party of Lincoln, was born—a party composed of a wide variety of beliefs and many contradictions. The Whigs would slowly gain strength throughout the 1830s as former Anti-Masons and others gradually came into the new political fold.
But the rise of the Whigs did not mean the Anti-Masonic cause had passed. Throughout the following decade, a few politicians would make their names proclaiming the evils of Masonry. Some of them faded into obscurity, but others met with limited success. As late as 1836, Pennsylvania’s Thaddeus Stevens led an Anti-Masonic committee in the state Legislature that held public hearings on the threat of Masonry, interrogating Masonic witnesses and drawing some national attention. Stevens would ultimately rise to become a congressman, and later one of the U.S. House of Representatives’ most outspoken abolitionists during the Civil War.
In Massachusetts, Ohio, and Vermont, local groups of Anti-Masons met to purge their states of Freemasonry’s influence throughout the 1830s as well, and some still harbored national ambitions for their party. But cracks had emerged in the Anti-Masonic movement that were too big to plaster over, and no longer did the threat of Freemasonry captivate as large a political audience or maintain its wide appeal. The Anti-Masonic movement now operated on the fringes of American political discourse.


150514_HIST_Time
Illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker
By the 1840s, the Anti-Masonic Party was dead and gone, its most loyal adherents dismissed as zealots. But it left behind a powerful legacy: The party established a pattern that future episodes of political hysteria would repeat across American history, from the Red Scares of the 20th century to the anti-Sharia movement of today.
Each movement claims to protect our nation from an existential threat. Each parlays fears of shadowy actors undermining our democracy into populist calls to action. During the period of McCarthyism, more than 13 million Americans—roughly 20 percent of America’s working population—signed loyalty oaths. Today’s anti-Sharia movement—which seeks to demonize Islam, the world’s second largest religion—has succeeded in banning Islamic law in several states. And while movements of political hysteria always claim only to want to rid society of a single, dangerous ideology, its partisans ultimately jeopardize the very values they claim to protect: that we are an open-society committed to the coexistence of many groups and belief systems, a country founded on the principles of freedom and equality for all.
As for the former Anti-Masons themselves, many of the movement’s leaders went on to bigger achievements even after the demise of their party. Millard Fillmore, a New York Anti-Mason from the start, became president in 1850. William Seward, another New York Anti-Mason, became Abraham Lincoln’s secretary of state, serving as a key member of the president’s wartime cabinet. William Morgan’s lonely widow, Lucinda Morgan, would herself go on to further renown. She moved west and reportedly remarried a man named Joseph Smith, the founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or the Mormons—a group that, like the Freemasons, would soon find itself the target of future political crusades.

Saturday, May 23, 2015

This is the history of the merging of Hollywood Main Stream News and the US Shadow Government, Who Rules America? Who Controls The U.S. Media?

This is the history of the merging of Hollywood Main Stream News and US Government - William Randolph Hearst was an American newspaper publisher who built the nation's largest newspaper chain and whose methods profoundly influenced American journalism. - William Randolph Hearst was born on April 29, 1863, in San Francisco, California, as the only child of George Hearst, a self-made multimillionaire miner and rancher, and Phoebe Apperson Hearst. In 1887, at 23 he became "Proprietor" of the San Francisco Examiner which his father, George Hearst, accepted as payment for a gambling debt... In 1903, Mr. Hearst married Millicent Willson in New York City. The couple had five sons together during their marriage: George, William Randolph Jr., John and twins Randolph and David. Hearst died in Beverly Hills, Calif., on Aug. 14, 1951, at age 88. He is interred at the Cypress Lawn Cemetery in Colma, California..

Inspired by the journalism of Joseph Pulitzer, Hearst turned the newspaper into a combination of reformist investigative reporting and lurid sensationalism. He soon developed a reputation for employing the best journalists available. This included Ambrose Bierce, Stephen Crane, Mark Twain, Richard Harding Davis and Jack London. Hearst was a member of the United States House of Representatives (1903-07) In the 1920s Hearst built a castle on a 240,000 acre ranch at San Simeon, California. At his peak he owned 28 major newspapers and 18 magazines, along with several radio stations and movie companies. The Great Depression weakened his financial position and by 1940 he had lost personal control of his vast communications empire. Hearst upset the left-wing in America by being a pro-Nazi in the 1930s and a staunch anti-Communist in the 1940s. 

William Randolf Hearst and Lammont Dupont - In the 1920's the Du Pont company developed and patented fuel additives such as tetraethyl lead, as well as the sulfate and sulfite processes for manufacture of pulp paper and numerous new synthetic products such as nylon, cellophane, and other plastics. At the same time other companies were developing synthetic products from renewable biomass resources--especially hemp. The hemp decorticator promised to eliminate much of the need for wood-pulp paper, thus threatening to drastically reduce the value of the vast timberlands still owned by Hearst. Ford and other companies were already promising to make every product from cannabis carbohydrates that was currently currently being made from petroleum hydrocarbons. In response, from 1935 to 1937, Du Pont lobbied the chief counsel of the Treasury Department, Herman Oliphant, for the prohibition of cannabis, assuring him that Du Pont's synthetic petrochemicals (such as urethane) could replace hemp seed oil in the marketplace.


William Randolf Hearst hated minorities, and he used his chain of newspapers to aggravate racial tensions at every opportunity. Hearst especially hated Mexicans. Hearst papers portrayed Mexicans as lazy, degenerate, and violent, and as marijuana smokers and job stealers. The real motive behind this prejudice may well have been that Hearst had lost 800,000 acres of prime timberland to the rebel Pancho Villa, suggesting that Hearst's racism was fueled by Mexican threat to his empire.  


Reefer Madness is an exploitation film portraying the tragic events that ensue when high school students are lured by pushers to try “marihuana”: a hit and run accident, manslaughter, suicide, attempted rape, and madness.
[adrotate group=”3″]
It was originally financed by a church group and made under the title Tell Your Children. The film was intended to be shown to parents as a morality tale attempting to teach them about the dangers of cannabis use. Soon after being shot, however, the film was purchased by producer Dwain Esper, who re-cut the film for distribution on the exploitation film circuit.
In the early days of the USA, the hemp plant (a.k.a. cannabis) proved a valuable resource for hundreds of years, instrumental in the making of fabric, paper and other necessities. This changed during the Industrial Revolution, which rendered tree-pulp papermaking and synthetic fibers more cost-effective through the rise of assembly line manufacturing methods. A more efficient way of utilizing hemp was a bit slower in coming.It was not until the early 1930’s that a new technique for using hemp pulp for papermaking was developed by the Department of Agriculture, in conjunction with the patenting of the hemp decorticator (a machine that revolutionized the harvesting of hemp).
These innovations promised to reduce the cost of producing hemp-pulp paper to less than half the cost of tree-pulp paper. Since hemp is an annually renewable source, which requires minimal chemical treatment to process, the advent of hemp pulp paper would allegedly have been better for the environment than the sulfuric acid wood-pulping process. Hemp had many champions, who predicted that its abundance and versatility would soon revitalize the American economy.
William Randolph Hearst
William Randolph Hearst 

William Randolph Hearst, media mogul, billionaire and real-life model for Orson Welles’ Citizen Kane, had different ideas. His aggressive efforts to demonize cannabis were so effective, they continue to color popular opinion today.In the early 1930’s, Hearst owned a good deal of timber acreage; one might say that he had the monopoly on this market. The threatened advent of mass hemp production proved a considerable threat to his massive paper-mill holdings — he stood to lose many, many millions of dollars to the lowly hemp plant. Hearst cleverly utilized his immense national network of newspapers and magazines to spread wildly inaccurate and sensational stories of the evils of cannabis or “marihuana,” a phrase brought into the common parlance, in part due to frequent mentions in his publications.
The sheer number of newspapers, tabloids, magazines and film reels that Hearst controlled enabled him to quickly and to effectively inundate American media with this propaganda. Hearst preyed on existing prejudices by associating cannabis with Mexican workers who threatened to steal American jobs and African-Americans who had long been the subject of white American venom (see accompanying articles). An ironic side-note: much of this racism had already been perpetrated by the propaganda of Hearst, an unabashed racist. The American people had already developed irrational hatred for these racial groups, and so readily accepted the ridiculous stories of their crazed crimes incited by marihuana use.
Anslinger
Harry J. Anslinger, Racist Federal Narcotics Bureau Commissioner & Son-in-Law of DuPont’s Banker, Andrew Mellon
Hearst was not alone in his scheme to destroy hemp production. The new techniques also made hemp a viable option for fabric and plastics, two areas of manufacturing which together with paper seriously threatened DuPont chemicals, which at this time specialized in the chemical manufacturing of synthetic fiber and plastics, and the process of pulping paper. In fact, Hearst and Lammont DuPont had a multi-million dollar deal in the works for joint papermaking. So these two moguls, together with DuPont’s banker, Andrew Mellon, bravely joined forces to stave off the bitter onrush of bankruptcy. They combined Hearst’s yellow journalism campaign (so called because the paper developed through his and DuPont’s methods aged prematurely) and the appointment of Mellon’s nephew-in-law, Harry J. Anslinger, to Commissioner of the newly created Federal Bureau of Narcotics in order to successfully stamp out the threat of hemp. Another one of the big wigs that made a ton of money, but more importantly, his lobbying to illegalize hemp, even the industrial kind that is void of any THC, but has so many uses including manufacturing of paper. Since he owned massive amounts of land in Oregon, Washington and California, which were harvested and used in his paper mills before heading to his newspaper plants.
http://thearrowsoftruth.com/tag/lammont-dupont/


Dorothy KilgallenDorothy Kilgallen, the daughter of James Kilgallen, a successful journalist, was born in Chicago, Illinois, on 3rd July, 1913. Kilgallen studied at New Rochelle College before beginning work as a journalist at The New York Journal, a newspaper owned by William Randolph Hearst.
Kilgallen became a crime reporter and covered several important cases for her newspaper. This included the trials of Anna Antonio (1934), Eva Coo (1935) and Richard Bruno Hauptmann (1935). 

In September 1936 Kilgallen took part in a "race around the world" against fellow newsmen Bud Ekins of the New York World-Telegram and Leo Kieran of the New York Times. The trip took Kilgallen 24 days and she came second to Ekins (21 days). Afterwards she published her book, Girl Around The WorldShe also appeared in the film, Sinner Take All, in 1936. The following year she wrote the film script, Fly Away Baby

Kilgallen abandoned her film career and returned to work at The New York Journal. In November, 1937 she was given her own column, "Hollywood Scene". The following year she began writing a new column, "The Voice of Broadway", for the newspaper. 

In 1940 Kilgallen married Richard Kollmar. Over the next couple of years the couple had three children (Jill, Richard and Kerry). In April 1945 the couple began a daily morning radio show, Breakfast with Dorothy and Dick. The programme went out live: Monday to Saturday (8.15 to 8.55 a.m.) and Sunday (11.30 to 12.00). Over the years the programme was gradually commercialized. Companies paid to have their products mentioned over breakfast and theatre producers arranged to have their plays and musicals discussed over breakfast. Films and books were also promoted by the hosts.
By 1941 the column was appearing in 24 other newspapers. Kilgallen was now one of the most important gossip columnist in America. In 1950 it was estimated that she had twenty million readers. Kilgallen achieved this position by developing a very good strategy for gaining secret information about famous people. Kilgallen was swamped with requests by press agents to plug the activities of their clients. Kilgallen always refused these requests. Instead she offered a deal. "Bring me three detrimental stories concerning other stars and I will include a good piece about your client." As these stars were usual rivals of their clients, they were only too willing to do so.
Kilgallen also became a television star and was for 15 years a regular panelist on the television programme, What's My Line? (1950-1965). As well as her gossip column, Kilgallen continued to report on famous criminal case. Her investigative work secured a new trial for Sam Shepard. (His case was later the basis for the popular television series, The Fugitive).
Kilgallen sometimes wrote articles about political issues. According to several of her close friends, Kilgallen received information from the Central Intelligence Agency. A study of her writings suggests she was an important CIA media asset. Kilgallen was extremely well-informed about the situation in Cuba. In 1959 and 1960 Kilgallen included a large number of anti-Castro stories in her column. Some of this information came from Cuban exiles based in Miami.
Sometimes Kilgallen included highly subversive material in her column. For example, on 15th July, 1959, Kilgallen became the first journalist to suggest that the CIA and the Mafia were working together in order to assassinate Fidel Castro. This disclosure upset high-ranking government officials and J. Edgar Hoover began to keep a dossier on Kilgallen's activities.
In September, 1959, Kilgallen reported on the visit of Nikita Khrushchev for the Journal-American. Kilgallen created a storm when she attacked the dress sense of his wife, Nina Khrushchev: "The grisliness of her attire amounts almost to a demonstration of piety... It would be difficult to find clothes comparable to hers in the waiting room of a New York employment agency for domestic help; in this decadent capitalistic republic, applicants for jobs as launderesses, chambermaids, and cooks usually are far more a la mode than Russia's first lady." So many people complained about the article that Kilgallen feared she would have to resign.
Kilgallen was also sued for libel by the journalist Elaine Shepard. In an article published on 22nd December, 1959, it was suggested that a female member of the Washington press group that joined President Dwight Eisenhower on a tour of Europe had had an affair with someone on the White House staff. Although eighty-three reporters who accompanied Eisenhower, Shepard was the only woman. She therefore sued for $750,000 claiming that Kilgallen "had maliciously implied that she was a person of lewd and unchase character". The case was to drag on for the next few years and created a great deal of stress for Kilgallen.
In 1961 Kilgallen covered the murder trial of Bernard Finch and Carole Tregoff. Bennett Cerf of Random House was very impressed with these reports and as a result commissioned her to write a book calledMurder One. The book was to contain a series of chapters on famous murder cases she had reported on since the early 1930s.
At the end of the Stephen Ward trial, Newspapers began reporting on the sex parties attended byChristine Keeler and Mandy Rice-Davies. The Washington Star quoted Rice-Davies as saying "there was a dinner party where a naked man wearing a mask waited on table like a slave." Kilgallen wrote an article for Journal-American where she stated: "The authorities searching the apartment of one of the principals in the case came upon a photograph showing a key figure disporting with a bevy of ladies. All were nude except for the gentleman in the picture who was wearing an apron. And this is a man who has been on extremely friendly terms with the very proper Queen and members of her immediate family!"
The News of the World immediately identified the hostess at the dinner party as being Mariella Novotny. Various rumours began to circulate about the name of the man who wore the mask and apron. This included John Profumo and another member of the government, Ernest Marples. Whereas another minister, Lord Hailsham, the leader of the House of Lords at the time, issued a statement saying it was not him. Novotny refused to comment on her activities and the man in the mask remained unidentified. However, Time Magazine speculated that it was film director, Anthony Asquith, the son of former prime minister, Herbert Asquith.
In March, 1963, Kilgallen was taken to hospital suffering from anemia. Her husband, Richard Kollmar, attempted to carry on with the daily morning radio show, Breakfast with Dorothy and Dick. However, without Dorothy it lost its appeal and in April the show was brought to an end. 

Over the years Kilgallen received a great deal of information about the affairs of John F. Kennedy. However, she was a close friend of Kennedy (they had met via his mistress, Florence Pritchett). One day she was gossiping about Kennedy with her friend Allen Stokes. He asked her why she did not write about it in her column. She replied "I couldn't possibly". It would have been a great scoop. But she decided to protect him.
However, Kilgallen broke this rule when on the 3rd August, 1962, she became the first journalist to refer to Kennedy's relationship with Marilyn Monroe. She did not actually name him but left enough clues for the readers to identify Kennedy as the secret man in Monroe's life (later Kilgallen told friends she was actually referring to Robert Kennedy). One can only assume that she came under severe pressure from someone to write this story. 

The following day, Monroe was found dead. Kilgallen must have realized that she had been set her up to smear the Kennedy brothers. Rumours soon began circulating that Robert Kennedy had arranged Monroe's death to protect his brother's reputation.
John F. Kennedy was assassinated in DallasTexas, on 22nd November, 1963. Kilgallen took a keen interest in the case and soon became convinced that Kennedy had not been killed by Lee Harvey Oswald. Kilgallen had a good contact within the Dallas Police Department. He gave her a copy of the original police log that chronicled the minute-by-minute activities of the department on the day of the assassination, as reflected in the radio communications. This enabled her to report that the first reaction of Chief Jesse Curry to the shots in Dealey Plaza was: "Get a man on top of the overpass and see what happened up there". Kilgallen pointed out that he lied when he told reporters the next day that he initially thought the shots were fired from the Texas Book Depository. 

Kilgallen also had a source within the Warren Commission. This person gave her an 102 page segment dealing with Jack Ruby before it was published. She published details of this leak and so therefore ensuring that this section appeared in the final version of the report. The Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated the leak and on 30th September, 1964, Kilgallen reported in the New York Journal American that the FBI "might have been more profitably employed in probing the facts of the case rather than how I got them".
In another of her stories, Kilgallen claimed that Marina Oswald knew a great deal about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. If she told the "whole story of her life with President Kennedy's alleged assassin, it would split open the front pages of newspapers all over the world." 

Kilgallen's reporting brought her into contact with Mark Lane who had himself received an amazing story from the journalist Thayer Waldo. He had discovered that Jack RubyJ. D. Tippet and Bernard Weismann had a meeting at the Carousel Club eight days before the assassination. Waldo, who worked for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, was too scared to publish the story. He had other information about the assassination. However, he believed that if he told Lane or Kilgallen he would be killed. Kilgallen's article on the Tippit, Ruby and Weissman meeting appeared on the front page of the Journal American

Later she was to reveal that the Warren Commission were also tipped off about this gathering. 

 However, their informant added that there was a fourth man at the meeting, an important figure in the Texas oil industry. 

Kilgallen published several articles about how important witnesses had been threatened by the Dallas Police or the FBI. On 25th September, 1964, Kilgallen published an interview with Acquilla Clemons, one of the witnesses to the shooting of J. D. Tippet. In the interview Clemons told Kilgallen that she saw two men running from the scene, neither of whom fitted Oswald's description. Clemons added: "I'm not supposed to be talking to anybody, might get killed on the way to work." 

Kilgallen was keen to interview Jack Ruby. She went to see Ruby's lawyer Joe Tonahill and claimed she had a message for his client from a mutual friend. It was only after this message was delivered that Ruby agreed to be interviewed by Kilgallen. Tonahill remembers that the mutual friend was from San Francisco and that he was involved in the music industry. Kennedy researcher, Greg Parker, has suggested that the man was Mike Shore, co-founder of Reprise Records. 

The interview with Ruby lasted eight minutes. No one else was there. Even the guards agreed to wait outside. Officially, Kilgallen never told anyone about what Ruby said to her during this interview. Nor did she publish any information she obtained from the interview. There is a reason for this. Kilgallen was in financial difficulties in 1964. This was partly due to some poor business decisions made by her husband,Richard Kollmar. The couple had also lost the lucrative contract for their radio show Breakfast with Dorothy and Dick. Kilgallen also was facing an expensive libel case concerning an article she wrote about Elaine Shepard. Her financial situation was so bad she fully expected to lose her beloved house in New York City


Kilgallen was a staff member of Journal American. Any article about the Jack Ruby interview in her newspaper would not have helped her serious financial situation. Therefore she decided to include what she knew about the assassination of John F. Kennedy in Murder One. She fully expected that this book would earn her a fortune. This is why she refused to tell anyone, including Mark Lane, about what Ruby told her in the interview arranged by Tonahill. In October, 1965, told Lane that she had a new important informant in New Orleans

Kilgallen began to tell friends that she was close to discovering who assassinated Kennedy. According toDavid Welsh of Ramparts Magazine Kilgallen "vowed she would 'crack this case.' And another New York show biz friend said Dorothy told him in the last days of her life: "In five more days I'm going to bust this case wide open." Aware of what had happened to Bill Hunter and Jim Koethe, Kilgallen handed a draft copy of her chapter on the assassination to her friend, Florence Smith

On 8th November, 1965, Kilgallen, was found dead in her New York apartment. She was fully dressed and sitting upright in her bed. The police reported that she had died from taking a cocktail of alcohol and barbiturates. The notes for the chapter she was writing on the case had disappeared. Her friend,Florence Smith, died two days later. The copy of Kilgallen's article were never found. 

Some of her friends believed Kilgallen had been murdered. Marc Sinclaire was Kilgallen's personal hairdresser. He often woke Kilgallen in the morning. Kilgallen was usually out to the early hours of the morning and like her husband always slept late. When he found her body he immediately concluded she had been murdered. 

(1) Kilgallen was not sleeping in her normal bedroom. Instead she was in the master bedroom, a room she had not occupied for several years.
(2) Kilgallen was wearing false eyelashes. According to Sinclaire she always took her eyelashes off before she went to bed.
(3) She was found sitting up with the book, The Honey Badger, by Robert Ruark, on her lap. Sinclaire claims that she had finished reading the book several weeks earlier (she had discussed the book with Sinclaire at the time).
(4) Kilgallen had poor eyesight and could only read with the aid of glasses. Her glasses were not found in the bedroom where she died.
(5) Kilgallen was found wearing a bolero-type blouse over a nightgown. Sinclaire claimed that this was the kind of thing "she would never wear to go to bed".
Mark Lane also believed that Kilgallen had been murdered. He said that "I would bet you a thousand-to-one that the CIA surrounded her (Kilgallen) as soon as she started writing those stories." The only new person who became close to Kilgallen during the last few months was her new secret lover. In her book,Kilgallen, Lee Israel calls him the "Out-of-Towner". 

According to Israel she met him in Carrara in June, 1964, during a press junket for journalists working in the film industry. The trip was paid for by Twentieth Century-Fox who used it to publicize three of its films: The Sound of MusicThe Agony and the Ecstasy and Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines. Israel claims that the "Out-of-Towner" went up to Kilgallen and asked her if she was Clare Booth Luce. This is in itself an interesting introduction. Kilgallen and Luce did not look like each other. Luce and her husband (Henry Luce) however were to play an important role in the events surrounding the assassination. Luce owned Life Magazine and arranged to buy up the Zapruder Film . Clare Booth Luce had also funded covert operations against Fidel Castro (1961-63). 

It has been suggested by John Simkin that Kilgallen suspected that "Out-of-Towner" was a CIA spy. She therefore told her friends this is what he said so that if anything happened to her, a future investigator would realize that he was a CIA agent with links to Clare Booth Luce.



Ron Pataky with Dorothy Kilgallen
Ron Pataky with Dorothy Kilgallen

Lee Israel has always refused to identify the "Out-of-Towner". In 1993 the investigative reporter, David Herschel, discovered that his real name was Ron Pataky. In 1965 he had been a journalist working for the Columbus Citizen-Journal. He admitted that he was the "Out-of-Towner" and that he worked on articles about the assassination of John F. Kennedy with Kilgallen. Pataky also confessed to meeting Kilgallen several times in the Regency Hotel. However, he denied Lee Israel's claim that he was with her on the night of her death.

In December, 2005, Lee Israel admitted that the "Out-of-Towner" was Ron Pataky and that "he had something to do with it (the murder of Dorothy Kilgallen)". 


Several years ago when I received the following article - or I should say its forerunner - I tossed it off as anti-Semitic and slanderous.  Over the past ten years material sent to me by networkers and listeners were filed (because I'm a pack rat) after little more than a glance, which file eventually became three; and a couple of books which have multiplied times twenty.  

     I didn't want to use the "J" word, so my file was titled "Zionism".  Little did I know how appropriate the file label was, and I see now that my hesitance in using the "J" word - even printing it on a file folder in the privacy of my own home - was part of the brain-washing that I had absorbed by osmosis over the years.

     The day I picked Nesta Webster's book off the shelf - a little book titled "Germany and England" - was the day my journey began.  As I read about the Bolshevists in Russia and the "J" word kept popping out at me from her pages, I had more or less the same knee-jerk reaction.  Again, in the privacy of my own home I felt uneasy and confused at the same time, because a renowned and respected historian was using that "J" word and accusing them of dastardly deeds.

     Since that time about three years ago nearly all of the books have been read and I have poured over the papers in those three fat hanging files and I still feel the need to preface an article like this in case you would react as I initially did and want to go into denial.   

     I am not Christian Identity.  It makes as little sense to me as those who call themselves Jews, who are in actuality Talmudists, if we relate Jews to a religion.  Moses Mendelssohn, a learned Jew, described it this way:  "Judaism is not a religion, but a Law, religionized".  Yes... a Law that has become religionized.  That would be Talmudic Law, and I have discovered that there is, indeed, a centuries-old plan being played out nearly to its fruition today.  That 'religionized Law' is the bedrock of the plan for World Dominion. . . not under Divine LAW of our Heavenly Father of Which Jesus spoke.  

     The plan?  This world - the whole planet earth - to be ruled by man who claims to be "the chosen" of his god; who will inherit the world with all its land and treasure along with slaves to serve him. We and the 'lesser brethren' of this priestly sect would be the slaves, only the 'lesser brethren' of the elect are not aware of the plan because mostly they refuse to see, as so many who call themselves Christians refuse to see. 

     Please read the following article with an open mind, and if you don't believe it you can verify it for yourself, as the author suggests.  Keep in mind the intense and non-stop psychological conditioning being used by major media today to rouse the American people to a war that promises to be ".... maybe forever".  Little boys (and girls) today are intended - when they come of age - to be cannon fodder in "their" New Endless War on Terrorism.  It need not be.  

-- Jackie --  October 25, 2001
p.s.  A tape I highly recommend for listening is Steven Jacobson's (yes, he's a Jew) audio tape titled Media Mind Control in America  

Who Rules America?
Who Controls The U.S. Media?
    There is no greater power in the world today than that wielded by the manipulators of public opinion in America.  No king or pope of old, no conquering general or high priest ever disposed of a power even remotely approaching that of the few dozen men who control America's mass news and entertainment media.  
     Their power is not distant and impersonal; it reaches into every home in America, and it works its will during nearly every waking hour.  It is the power that shapes and molds the mind of virtually every citizen, young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated.
     The mass media form for us our image of the world and then tell us what to think about that image.  Essentially everything we know -- or think we know -- about events outside of our own neighborhood or circle of acquaintances comes to us via our daily newspaper, our weekly news magazine, our radio, or our television.  It is not just the heavy-handed suppression of certain news stories from our newspapers or the blatant propagandizing of history-distorting TV 'docudramas' that characterizes the opinion-manipulating techniques of the media masters.  They exercise both subtlety and thoroughness in their management of the news and the entertainment that they present to us.
     For example, the way in which the news is covered: which items are emphasized and which are played down, the reporter's choice of words, tone of voice, and facial expressions; the wording of headlines; the choice of illustrations -- all of these things subliminally and yet profoundly affect the way in which we interpret what we see or hear.
     On top of this, of course, the columnists and editors remove any remaining doubt from our minds as to just what we are to think about it all.  Employing carefully developed psychological techniques, they guide our thought and opinion so that we can be in tune with the "in" crowd, the "beautiful people", the "smart money".  They let us know exactly what our attitudes should be toward various types of people and behavior by placing those people or that behavior in the context of a TV drama or situation comedy and having the other TV characters react to them in the Politically Correct way.
Molding American Minds
     For example, a racially mixed couple will be respected, liked, and socially sought after by other characters, as will a "take charge" black scholar or businessman, or a sensitive and talented homosexual, or a poor but honest and hardworking illegal alien from Mexico.  On the other hand, a white racist -- that is, any racially conscious white person who looks askance at miscegenation or at the rapidly darkening racial situation in America -- is portrayed, at best, as a despicable bigot who is reviled by the other characters, or at worst, as a dangerous psychopath who is fascinated by firearms and is a menace to all law-abiding citizens.  This 'white racist gun nut', in fact, has become a familiar stereotype on TV shows.
     The average American, of whose daily life TV-watching takes such an unhealthy portion, distinguishes between these fictional situations and reality only with difficulty, if at all.  He responds to the televised actions, statements, and attitudes of  TV actors much as he does to his own peers in real life.  For all too many Americans, the real world has been replaced by the false reality of the TV environment, and it is to this false reality that his urge to conform responds.
     Thus, when a TV scriptwriter expresses approval of some ideas and actions through the TV characters for whom he is writing, and disapproval of others, he exerts a powerful pressure on millions of viewers toward conformity with his own views.
     And as it is with TV entertainment, so it is also with the news, whether televised or printed.  The insidious thing about this form of thought control is that even when we realize that entertainment or news is biased, the media masters still are able to manipulate most of us.  This is because they not only slant what they present but they establish tacit boundaries and ground rules for the permissible spectrum of opinion.
     As an example, consider the media treatment of Middle East news.  Some editors or commentators are slavishly pro-Israel in their every utterance, while others seem nearly neutral.  No one, however, dares suggest that the U.S. government is backing the wrong side in the Arab-Jewish conflict and that it served Jewish interests rather than American interests to send U.S. forces to cripple Iraq.  Israel's principal rival in the Middle East Thus, a spectrum of permissible opinions, from pro-Israel to nearly neutral, is established.
     Another example is the media treatment of racial issues in the United States.  Some commentators seem almost dispassionate in reporting news of racial strife, while others are emotionally partisan -- with the partisanship always on the non-white side.  All of the media spokesmen without exception, however, take the position that "multiculturalism" and racial mixing are here to stay, and that they are good things.
     Because there are differences in degree, however, most Americans fail to realize that they are being manipulated.  Even the citizen who complains about 'managed news' falls into the trap of thinking that because he is presented with an apparent spectrum of opinion he can escape the thought controllers' influence by believing the editor or commentator of his choice.  It's a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation.  Every point on the permissible spectrum of public opinion is acceptable to the media masters -- and no impermissible fact or viewpoint is allowed any exposure at all, if they can prevent it.
     The control of the opinion-molding media is nearly monolithic.  All of the controlled media — television, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, motion pictures speak with a single voice, each reinforcing the other.  Despite the appearance of variety, there is no real dissent, no alternative source of facts or ideas accessible to the great mass of people which might allow them to form opinions at odds with those of the media masters.
    They are presented with a single view of the world — a world in which every voice proclaims the equality of the races, the inerrant nature of the Jewish "Holocaust" tale, the wickedness of attempting to halt a flood of non-white aliens from pouring across our borders, the danger of permitting citizens to keep and bear arms, the moral equivalence of all sexual orientations, and the desirability of a "pluralistic," cosmopolitan society rather than a homogeneous one.  
    It is a view of the world designed by the media masters to suit their own ends — and the pressure to conform to that view is overwhelming.  People adapt their opinions to it, vote in accord with it, and shape their lives to fit it.
     And who are these all-powerful masters of the media?  As we shall see, to a very large extent they are Jews.  It isn't simply a matter of the media being controlled by "corporate interests".  If that were the case, the ethnicity of the media masters would reflect, at least approximately, the ratio of rich Gentiles to rich Jews.  The preponderance of Jews in the media is so overwhelming, however, that we are obliged to assume that it is due to more than mere happenstance..


Electronic News & Entertainment Media
     Continuing government deregulation of the telecommunications industry has resulted, not in the touted increased competition, but rather in an accelerating wave of corporate mergers and acquisitions that have produced a handful of multi-billion-dollar media conglomerates.
     Whenever you watch television, whether from a local broadcasting station or via a cable or satellite dish; whenever you see a feature film in a theater or at home; whenever you listen to the radio or recorded music, whenever you read a newspaper, book, or magazine — it is very likely that the information or entertainment you receive was produced and/or distributed by one of these megamedia companies.
    The largest media conglomerate today is AOL, which bought out Time Warner for $160 billion early in 2000.  The merger brought together Steve Case, a Gentile, as Chairman of the new AOL, and Gerald Levin, a Jew, as the CEO.  Although AOL isn't (yet) run entirely by Jews, the effect of this blend of leadership between a white capitalist whose biggest concern is money and a racially conscious Jew will be gradually to increase the Jewish influence within AOL.  Steve Case won't complain when Gerald Levin begins hiring mostly Jews to fill key positions beneath him because Case's own profits won't be affected.  After Case dies or retires, the Jews will have complete control at AOL.
     Before the merger, AOL was the largest Internet service provider in America, and it will now be used as an online platform for the Jewish content from Time Warner.
     Time Warner Inc, with 1997 revenues of more that $13 billion, was the second largest of the international media leviathans when it was bought by AOL.  Levin, chairman and CEO of Time Warner, had bought Turner Broadcasting System in 1996 from Ted Turner, who had been one of the few Gentile entrepreneurs in the media business.  Ted Turner, as the company president, is the number three man at the new AOL, after Case and Levin.
     When Ted Turner media maverick, made a bid to buy CBS in 1985, there was a panic in media boardrooms across the nation. Turner had made a fortune in advertising and then had built a successful cable-TV news network, CNN, with over 70 million subscribers.
     Although Turner employed a number of Jews in key executive positions in CNN and had never taken public positions contrary to Jewish interests, he is a man with a large ego and a strong personality and was regarded by Chairman William Paley and the other Jews at CBS as uncontrollable: a loose cannon who might at some time in the future turn against them.
     Furthermore, Jewish newsman Daniel Schorr, who had worked for Turner, publicly charged that his former boss held a personal dislike for Jews.
     To block Turner’s bid CBS executives invited billionaire Jewish theater, hotel, insurance, and cigarette magnate Laurence Tisch to launch a "friendly" takeover of the company, and from 1986 till 1995 Tisch was the chairman and CEO of CBS, removing any threat of non-Jewish influence there. Subsequent efforts by Turner to acquire a major network have been obstructed by Levin’s Time Warner, which owns nearly 20 percent of CBS stock and has veto power over major deals.  When his fellow Jew Sumner Redstone offered to buy CBS for $34.8 billion on September 7, 1999, Levin had no objection.
     Thus, despite being an innovator and garnering headlines, Turner never commanded the "connections" necessary for being a true media master.  He finally decided if you can't lick 'em, join 'em, and he sold out to Levin.  Ted Turner is in one respect a reflection of Steve Case.  Both of these men are capitalists with no discernible degree of racial consciousness or responsibility.
     Time Warner's subsidiary HBO is the country's largest pay-TV cable network.  Until the purchase in May 1998 of PolyGram by Edgar Bronfman, Jr., Warner Music was America's largest record company, with 50 labels, the biggest of which is Warner Brothers Records.
     Warner Music was n early promoter of "gangsta rap".  Through its involvement with Interscope Records (prior to Interscope's acquisition by MCA), it helped to popularize a genre whose graphic lyrics explicitly urge blacks to commit acts of violence against whites.
     In addition to cable and music, Time Warner is heavily involved in the production of feature films (Warner Brothers Studio, Castle Rock Entertainment, and New Line Cinema) and in publishing.  
     Time Warner's publishing division (editor-in-chief Norman Pearlstine, a Jew) is the largest magazine publisher in the country... TimeSports IllustratedPeople,Fortune.
     AOL has absorbed Time Warner financially, but ideologically it is Time Warner that has infected AOL.  Levin has lost none of his ability to pervert our culture.  Steve Case certainly will not interfere with whatever plans Levin has in that respect, since money is what he cares about.  If he can get richer by letting Levin promote anti-white music on the Internet while keeping white patriots out of AOL chatrooms, it's all the same to him.
     THe second-largest media conglomerate today, with 1997 revenues of $23 billion, is the Walt Disney Company, whose chairman and CEO, Michael Eisner, is a Jew.
     The Disney empire, headed by a man described by one media analyst as "a control freak," includes several television production companies (Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Television, Buena Vista Television), its own cable network with more than 100 million subscribers altogether.
     As for feature films, the Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group, under Walt Disney Studios, headed by Joseph E. Roth (also a Jew), includes Touchstone Pictures, Hollywood Pictures, and Caravan Pictures. Roth founded Caravan Pictures in January 1993, and it is now headed by his fellow Jew, Roger Birnbaum.  Disney also owns Miramax Films, run by the Weinstein brothers, who have produced such ultra-raunchy movies such as The Crying Game, Priests, and Kids.
     When the Disney Company was run by the Gentile Disney family prior to its takeover by Eisner in 1984, it epitomized wholesome, family entertainment. While it still holds the rights to Snow White, under Eisner the company has expanded into the production of a great deal of so-called "adult" material.
     In August 1995, Eisner acquired Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., which owns the ABC Television Network, which in turn owns ten TV stations outright in such big markets as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Houston.  In addition, it has 225 affiliated stations in the United States and is part owner of several European TV companies..
     ABC’s cable subsidiary, ESPN, is headed by president and CEO Steven Bornstein, who is a Jew. The corporation also has a controlling share of Lifetime Television and the Arts & Entertainment Network cable companies with 67 million subscribers each.  ABC Radio Network owns 26 AM and FM stations, again in major cities such as New York, Washington, and Los Angeles, and has over 3,400 affiliates.
     Although primarily a telecommunications company, Capital Cities/ABC earned over $1 billion in publishing in 1997. It owns seven daily newspapers, Fairchild Publications (Women’s Wear Daily), Chilton Publications (automotive manuals), and the Diversified Publishing group.
     Number three on the list, with 1997 revenues of just over  $13 billion, is Viacom, Inc. headed by Sumner Redstone (born Murray Rothstein). Viacom, which produces and distributes TV programs for the three largest networks, owns 13 television stations and 12 radio stations.  It produces feature films through Paramount Pictures, headed by Jewess Sherry Lansing. Redstone acquired CBS following the December 1999 stockholders' votes at CBS and Viacom.
          Its publishing division includes Simon & Schuster, Scribner, The Free Press, and Pocket Books. It distributes videos through over 4,000 Blockbuster stores. It is also involved in satellite broadcasting, theme parks, and video games.
     Viacom’s chief claim to fame, however, is as the world’s largest provider of cable programming, through its Showtime, MTV, Nickelodeon, and other networks.
     Since 1989, MTV and Nickelodeon have acquired larger and larger shares of the juvenile television audience. Redstone, who actually owns 76 percent of the shares of Viacom, until recently offered Beavis and Butthead as teen role models and is the largest single purveyor of race-mixing propaganda to white teenagers and sub-teens in America and Europe.
     MTV pumps its racially mixed rock and rap videos into 210 million homes in 71 countries and is the dominant cultural influence on white teenagers around the world.
     Nickelodeon, with about 65 million subscribers, has by far the largest share of the four-to-11-year-old TV audience in America and also is expanding rapidly into Europe. Most of its shows do not yet display the blatant degeneracy which is MTV’s trademark, but Redstone is gradually nudging the fare presented to his kiddie viewers toward the same poison purveyed by MTV.
     The new boy on the megamedia block is Edgar Bronfman, Jr. president and CEO of Seagram Company, Ltd., the liquor giant.  His father, Edgar Bronfman, SR., is president of the World Jewish Congress.  Seagram owns two large production companies, MCA and Universal Pictures (now merged under the name Universal Studios). Among its many other properties, MCA owns Interscope Records, the foremost promoter of "gangsta rap".
     Bronfman became the biggest man in the record business in May 1998 when he also acquired control of PolyGram, the European record giant, by paying $10.6 billion to the Dutch electronics manufacturer Philips.  With the expected revenue from PolyGram added to that from MCA and Universal, Bronfman will have the fourth largest media empire, with annual revenues around $12 billion.  One especially unfortunate aspect of the PolyGram acquisition is that it gives Bronfman control of the world's largest producer of classical music CDs: PolyGram owns the Deutsche Grammophon, Decca-London, and Philips record companies. 
     With three of the top four media conglomerates in the hands of Jews, and with a Jew in executive charge of the remaining one, it is difficult to believe that such an overwhelming degree of control came about without a deliberate, concerted effort on their part.
     What about the other big media companies?
     Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, which owns Fox Television Network, 20th Century Fox Films, and Fox 2000, is the fifth largest megamedia corporation in the country, with 1997 revenues of over $11 billion. It is the only other media company which comes even close to the top four. Murdoch is a Gentile Australian, but Peter Chernin, who is president and CEO of Fox Group, which includes all of News Corporation's film, television, and publishing operations in the United States, is a Jew.  
     Under Chernin, as president of 20th Century Fox, is Laura Ziskin, a Jewess who formerly headed Fox 2000. Jew Peter Roth works under Chernin as president of Fox Entertainment.  News Corporation also owns the New York Post and TV Guide, and they are published under Chernin's supervision.  Murdoch told Newsweekmagazine (July 12, 1999 that he would probably elevate Chernin to CEO of News Corporation, rather than allow the company to fall into the hands of his own children, none of whom are younger than their late twenties.  
     It is hard to imagine a Jew giving a major media corporation to a Gentile underling when he has children waiting in the wings.  For his part, Chernin was quite candid. "I get to control moves seen all over the world... what could be more fun?"
     Most of the television and movie production companies that are not owned by the largest corporations are also controlled by Jews.  For example, New World Entertainment, proclaimed by one media analyst as "the premier independent TV program producer in the United States", is owned by Ronald Perelman, a Jew who also owns Revlon cosmetics and offered a job to Monica Lewinsky when Bill Clinton was trying to keep her quiet.
     The best known of the smaller media companies, Dream Works SKG, is a strictly kosher affair.  Dream Works was formed in 1994 amid great media hype by recording industry mogul David Geffen, former Disney Pictures chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg, and film director Steven Spielberg, all three of whom are Jews.  The company produces movies animated films, television programs, and recorded music.  Considering the cash and connection that Geffen, Katzenberg, and Spielberg have, Dream Works may soon be in the same league as the big four.
     It is well known that Jews have controlled most of the production and distribution of films since shortly after the inception of the movie industry in the early decades of this century.  When Walt Disney died in 1966, the last barrier to the total Jewish domination of Hollywood was gone, and Jews were able to grab ownership of the company that Walt built.  Since then they have had everything their way in the movie industry.
     Films produced by just the four largest motion picture companies mentioned above -- Disney, Warner Brothers, Paramount (Viacom), and Universal (Seagram) -- accounted for two-thirds of the total box-office receipts for the year 1997.
     The big three in television network broadcasting used to be ABC, CBS, and NBC.  With the consolidation of the media empires, these three are no longer independent entities.  While they were independent, however, each was controlled by a Jew since its inception: ABC by Leonard Goldenson; NBC first by David Sarnoff and then by his son Robert; and CBS first by William Paley and then by Laurence Tisch.  
     Over periods of several decades these networks were staffed from top to bottom with Jews, and the essential Jewishness of network television did not change when the networks were absorbed by other corporations.  The Jewish presence in television news remains particularly strong.
     For example, the executive producers of two of the three main network news programs are Jews.  The executive producer of ABC/s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings is Paul Friedman. The executive producer of NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw is Neal Shapiro.  Until recently, the executive producer of CBS Evening News with Dan Rather was Al Ortiz, also a Jew.  Or if you get your news from CNN, the boss there is Rick Kaplan, also a Jew.
      The Print Media
     After television news, daily newspapers are the most influential information medium in America. Sixty million of them are sold (and presumably read) each day. These millions are divided among some 1,600 different publications.
     One might conclude that the sheer number of different newspapers across America would provide a safeguard against minority control and distortion. Alas, such is not the case. There is less independence, less competition, and must less representation of majority interests than a casual observer would think.
     The days when most cities and even towns had several independently owned newspaper published by local people with close ties to the community are gone. Most of them were bought out or driven out of business by the mid-1970s.  Today most "local" newspapers are owned by a rather small number of large companies controlled by executives who live and work hundreds or even thousands of miles away.
     The fact is that only about 20 percent of the country’s 1,600 papers are independently owned; the rest belong to multi-newspaper chains.  Only 104 of the total number have circulations of more then 100,000.  Only a handful are large enough to maintain independent reporting staffs outside their own communities; the rest must depend on these few for all of their national and international news.
     In only 47 cities in America are there more than one daily newspaper, and competition is frequently nominal even among them, as between morning and afternoon editions under the same ownership.  Examples of this are:
the Huntsville, Alabama, morning News and afternoon Times;
the Birmingham, Alabama, morning Post Herald and afternoon News;
the Mobile, Alabama, morning Register and afternoon Press;
the Springfield, Massachusetts, morning Union, afternoon News, and Sunday-only Republican;
the Syracuse, New York, morning Post-Standard and afternoon Herald-Journal — all owned by the Jewish Newhouse brothers through their holding company, Advance Publications.
     The Newhouse media empire provides an example of more than the lack of real competition among America’s daily newspapers: it also illustrates the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all the organs of opinion control on which they could fasten their grip.
     The Newhouses own:
26 daily newspapers, including several large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune;
Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the country’s largest cable networks;
the Sunday supplement Parade, with a circulation of more than 22 million copies per week;
some two dozen major magazines, including the New YorkerVogueMademoiselleGlamourVanity FairBride’sGentlemen’s QuarterlySelfHouse & Garden, and all the other magazines of the wholly owned Conde Nast group.
     This Jewish media empire was founded by the late Samuel Newhouse, an immigrant from Russia. When he died in 1979 at the age of 84, he bequeathed media holdings worth an estimated $1.3 billion to his two sons, Samuel and Donald.  With a number of further acquisitions, the net worth of Advance Publications has grown to more than $8 billion today.
     The gobbling up of so many newspapers by the Newhouse family was in large degree made possible by the fact that newspapers are not supported by their subscribers, but by their advertisers. It is advertising revenue — not the small change collected from a newspaper’s readers — that largely pays the editor’s salary and yields the owner’s profit.
     Whenever the large advertisers in a city choose to favor one newspaper over another with their business, the favored newspaper will flourish while its competitor dies.  
     Since the beginning of this century, when Jewish mercantile power in America became a dominant economic force, there has been a steady rise in the number of American newspapers in Jewish hands, accompanied by a steady decline in the number of competing Gentile newspapers — primarily as a result of selective advertising policies by Jewish merchants.
     Furthermore, even those newspapers still under Gentile ownership and management are so thoroughly dependent upon Jewish advertising revenue that their editorial and news reporting policies are largely constrained by Jewish likes and dislikes. It holds true in the newspaper business, as elsewhere, that he who pays the piper calls the tune.
Three Jewish Newspapers
     The suppression of competition and the establishment of local monopolies on the dissemination of news and opinion have characterized the rise of Jewish control over America’s newspapers. The resulting ability of Jews to use the press as an unopposed instrument of Jewish policy could hardly be better illustrated than by the examples of the nation’s three most prestigious and influential newspapers: the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.
     These three, dominating America’s financial and political capitals, are the newspapers which set the trends and the guidelines for nearly all the others. They are the ones which decide what is news and what isn’t, at the national and international levels. They originate the news; the others merely copy it. And all three newspapers are in Jewish hands.
     The New York Times, with a September 1998 circulation of 1,067,000, is the unofficial social, fashion, entertainment, political, and cultural guide of the nation. It tells America’s "smart set" which books to buy and which films to see; which opinions are in style at the moment; which politicians, educators, spiritual leaders, artists, and businessmen are the real comers. And for a few decades in the last century it was a genuinely American newspaper.
     The New York Times was founded in 1851 by two Gentiles, Henry J. Raymond and George Jones. After their deaths, it was purchased in 1896 from Jones’s estate by a wealthy Jewish publisher, Adolph Ochs. His great-grandson, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., is the paper’s current publisher and the chairman of the New York Times Co. The executive editor is Joseph Lelyveld, also a Jew and a rabbi's son.
     The Sulzberger family also owns, through the New York Times Co.:
33 other newspapers, including the Boston Globe, purchased in June 1993 for $1.1 billion;
twelve magazines, including McCall’s and Family Circle with circulations of more than 5 million each;
seven radio and TV broadcasting stations;
a cable-TV system; and
three book publishing companies.
     The New York Times News Service transmits news stories, features, and photographs from the New York Times by wire to 506 other newspapers, news agencies, and magazines.
     Of similar national importance is the Washington Post, which, by establishing its "leaks" throughout government agencies in Washington, has an inside track on news involving the Federal government.
     The Washington Post, like the New York Times, had a non-Jewish origin. It was established in 1877 by Stilson Hutchins, purchased from him in 1905 by John R. McLean, and later inherited by Edward B. McLean.
     In June 1933, however, at the height of the Great Depression, the newspaper was forced into bankruptcy. It was purchased at a bankruptcy auction by Eugene Meyer, a Jewish financier and former partner of the infamous Bernard Baruch, the industry czar in America during the First World War.
     The Washington Post is now run by Katherine Meyer Graham, Eugene Meyer’s daughter. She is the principal stockholder and board chairman of the Washington Post Co. In 1979, she appointed her son Donald publisher of the paper. He now also holds the posts of president and CEO of the Washington Post Co. The newspaper has a daily circulation of 810,000 and its Sunday edition sells 1.1 million copies.
     The Washington Post Co. has a number of other media holdings in newspapers (the Gazette Newspapers, including 11 military publications), in television (WDIV in Detroit, KPRC in Houston, WPLG in Miami, WKMG in Orlando, KSAT in San Antonio, WJXT in Jacksonville), and in magazines, most notably the nation’s number-two weekly newsmagazine, Newsweek.  The Washington Post's various television ventures reach a total of about 7 million homes, and its cable TV service, Cable One, has 635,000 subscribers.
     In a joint venture with the New York Times, the Post publishes the International Herald Tribune, the most widely distributed English language daily in the world.
     The Wall Street Journal, which sells 1.8 million copies each weekday, is the nation’s largest-circulation daily newspaper.  It is owned by Dow Jones & Company, Inc., a New York corporation which also publishes 24 other daily newspapers and the weekly financial tabloid Barron’s, among other things. The chairman and CEO of Dow Jones is Peter R. Kann, who is a Jew.  Kann also holds the posts of chairman and publisher of the Wall Street Journal.
     Most of New York’s other major newspapers are in no better hands than the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.  In January 1993, the New York Daily News was bought from the estate of the late Jewish media mogul Robert Maxwell (born Ludvik Hoch) by Jewish real-estate developer Mortimer B. Zukerman. TheVillage Voice is the personal property of Leonard Stern, the billionaire Jewish owner of the Hartz Mountain pet supply firm. And as mentioned above, the New York Post is owned by News Corporation under the Jew Peter Chernin..
News Magazines
The story is pretty much the same for other media as it is for television, radio and newspapers.  Consider, for example, newsmagazines. There are only three of any note published in the United States: TimeNewsweek, and U.S. News & World Report.
     Time, with a weekly circulation of 4.1 million, is published by a subsidiary of Time Warner Communications, the new media conglomerate formed by the 1989 merger of Time, Inc., with Warner Communications. The CEO of Time Warner Communications, as mentioned above, is Gerald Levin, a Jew.
     Newsweek, as mentioned above, is published by the Washington Post Company, under the Jewess Katherine Meyer Graham. Its weekly circulation is 3.2 million.
     U.S. News & World Report, with a circulation of 2.3 million, is owned and published by the aforementioned Mortimer B. Zuckerman, who has taken the position of editor-in-chief of the magazine for himself. Zuckerman also owns the Atlantic Monthly and New York’s tabloid newspaper, the Daily News, which is the sixth-largest paper in the country.
Our Responsibility
     Those are the facts of media control in America.  Anyone willing to spend a few hours in a large library looking into current editions of yearbooks on the radio and television industries and into directories of newspapers and magazines; into registers of corporations and their officers, such as those published by Standard and Poors and by Dun and Bradstreet, and into standard biographical reference works can verify their accuracy.  
     They are undeniable, and when confronted with them Jewish spokesmen customarily will use evasive tactics. "Ted Turner isn't a Jew!" they will announce triumphantly, as if that settle the issue.  If pressed further they will accuse the confronter of "anti-Semitism" for even raising the subject.  It is fear of this accusation that keeps many persons who know the facts, silent.
     But we must not remain silent on this most important of issues!  The Jewish control of the American mass media is the single most important fact of life, not just in America, but in the whole world today.  There is nothing -- plague, famine, economic collapse, even nuclear war -- more dangerous to the future of our people.
     Jewish media control determines the foreign policy of the United States and permits Jewish interests rather than American interests to decide questions of war and peace.  Without Jewish media control, there would have been no Persian Gulf war, for example.  There would have been no NATO massacre of Serb civilians.  There would be no continued beating of the drums for another war against Iraq.
     By permitting the Jews to control our news and entertainment media we are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence on our political system and virtual control of our government, we also are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children, whose attitudes and ideas are shaped more by Jewish television and Jewish films than by parents, schools, or any other influence.
     The Jew-controlled entertainment media have taken the lead in persuading a whole generation that homosexuality is a normal and acceptable way of life; there there is nothing at all wrong with white women dating or marrying black men, or with white men marrying Asian women; that all races are inherently equal in ability an character -- except that the character of the white race is suspect because of a history of suppressing other races; and that any effort by whites at racial self-preservation is reprehensible.
     We must oppose the further spreading of this poison among our people, and we must break the power of those who are spreading it.  It would be intolerable for such power to be in the hands of any alien minority, with values and interests different from our own.  but to permit the Jews, with their 3,000 year history of nation-wrecking, from ancient Egypt to Russia, to hold such power over us is tantamount to race suicide.  Indeed, the fact that so many white Americans today are so filled with a sense of racial guilt and self-hatred that they actively seek the death of their own race is a deliberate consequence of Jewish media control.
     Once we have absorbed and understood the fact of Jewish media control, it is our inescapable responsibility to do whatever is necessary to break that control.  We must shrink from nothing in combating this evil power which has fastened its deadly grip on our people and is injecting its lethal poison into their minds and souls.  If we fail to destroy it, it certainly will destroy our race.
     Let us begin now to acquire knowledge and to take action toward this necessary end.
     End of article by: National Vanguard Books
Publisher's note: Owners, managers, and corporate relationships change from time to time, of course.  All of the names and other data in this report have been checked carefully and are accurate as of June, 2000. 

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/shadow/jewishmedia.htm#.VWCBL3qaqh0

Comments... Please Be Respectful!

Hardcore News Is Brought To You By...

Bookmarks

Facebook  MySpace  Twitter  Digg  Delicious  Stumbleupon  Google Bookmarks  RSS Feed