Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Shop Website | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues |

Category: Media

Killing Joke: Implant

Fantastic Lyrics and mindblowing animation.

More music-with-a-message from Jaz Coleman and Killing Joke:

Uncensored Magazine Issue#49 Out Now!

 

In This Issue:

Peruvian Mummy: Human? Alien? Hoax? Uncensored presents intriguing images and information on this controversial archaeological specimen on Page 64

Sex Robots In Japan: our interaction with robots has gone from science fiction to reality with startling speed, and Uncensored examines the bizarre directions the relationship between man and machine are taking on Page 39

Jared Kushner: Does Trump’s enigmatic Son-In-Law belong to a doomsday Cult? See the claims and evidence for yourself on Page 18

Illuminating Pop Stars: The images speak for themselves, see Page 49

Chemotherapy can Spread Cancer: Read the evidence on Page 79

You’re also sure to be informed by:

Uncensored think for yourselfExposing The Transgender Agenda (Page 42)

How To detox From Fluoride (Page 85)

The HUGE Revolt on Mandatory Vaccination (Page 28)

Did Europe Surrender To Radical Islam? (Page 10)

 The War On Logic (page 80)

And we’ve barely scratched the surface of what’s in Issue#49 of Uncensored Magazine!

“Think For Yourself”

 

Online Purchases:

Retailer Locations:

 

Just plain bizarre! – 124 year old books with VERY weird parallels to 2016-17

What to make of this? From the Library Of Congress: Can it be some sort of elaborate hoax?

Any enlightening info or opinions would be appreciated!

 

Published on Aug 9, 2017
August 9, 2017: Books surface from over 124 years ago, entered at the Library of Congress with many uncanny references pertaining to todays world. At first, I didn’t believe it either…links below…

 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
https://archive.org/stream/barontrump…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

https://archive.org/details/1900orlas…

http://www.dailywire.com/news/19386/s…

The good old days: Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, Scott Pelley—and Salvador Dali. By Jon Rappoport

The good old days: Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, Scott Pelley—and Salvador Dali

by Jon Rappoport

July 25, 2017

Salvador Dali, surrealist, was one of the most reviled painters of the 20th century.

He disturbed Conventional Folk who just wanted to see an apple in a bowl on a table.

Dali’s apples and bowls were executed with a technical skill few artists could match—except that the apples were coming out of a woman’s nose while she was ironing the back of a giraffe, who was on fire.

“It doesn’t go together! It doesn’t make sense! He’s Satan!”

Yet, these same Folk sit in front of the television screen every night and watch the entirely surreal network news. Elite anchors seamlessly and quickly move from blood running in the streets of a distant land to a hairdryer product-recall to an unseasonal hail storm in Michigan to a debate about public policy on pedophiles to genetically engineered mosquitoes in Florida to a possible breakthrough in storing computer simulations of human brains for later recapture to squirrels gathering nuts in New Jersey.

Dali Pelley

Nothing surreal about this??

Cognitive dissonance is imprinted on viewers’ minds. It’s the news. It must be normal, even if it’s quite insane.

The best of the best mind control is supposedly applied by the three major network anchors. Recall the old trio: Brian Williams, Scott Pelley, and Diane Sawyer. They’re all gone now. The junior varsity has taken over. David Muir, Lester Holt, and a permanent CBS anchor to be named later.

When the elite anchor goes on air and digs in, he’s paid to be seamless. He could be transitioning from mass killings in East Asia to sub-standard air conditioners, and he makes the audience track through the absurd curve in the road.

Then there is the voice itself. The elite anchor has a voice that soothes just a bit but brooks no resistance. It’s authoritative but not demanding.

Scott Pelley (CBS) was careful to watch himself on this count, because his tendency was to shove the message down the viewer’s throat like a surgeon making an incision with an icepick. Pelley was a high-IQ android who was training himself to be human.

Diane Sawyer wandered into sloppiness, like a housewife who’s still wearing her bathrobe at 4 in the afternoon. She exuded sympathetic syrup, as if she’d had a few cocktails for lunch. And she affected a pose of “caring too much.”

Brian Williams was head and shoulders above his two competitors. You had to look and listen hard to spot a speck of confusion in his delivery. He knew how to believe his act was real. He could also flick a little aw-shucks apple-pie at the viewer. Country boy who moved to the big city.

The vocal delivery of an elite anchor has to work minor poetic rhythms into prose. Shallow hills and valleys. Clip it here and there. Give the important words a pop. This is hypnosis at work. Not the cheesy stage act with three rubes sitting in chairs, waiting to be made into fools by the used-car-salesman type waving a pendulum. This is higher-class stuff. It flows with certainty. It entrains brains. The audience tunes in every night to get their fix.

That’s the key. The audience doesn’t really care about content. They want the delivery, the sound, the voice of the face.

Brain Williams could do a story about three hookers getting thrown out of a restaurant by a doctor celebrating his anniversary with his wife, and it would come across like the Pentagon sending warships into the Gulf.

Diane Sawyer couldn’t. That’s why Williams’ ratings were higher.

Segues, blends are absolutely vital. These are the transitions between one story and another. “Earlier today, in Boston.” “Meanwhile, in New York, the police are reporting.” “But on the Hill, the news was somewhat disappointing for supporters of the president.”

Doing excellent blends can earn an anchor millions of dollars. The audience doesn’t wobble or falter or make distinctions between what went before and what’s coming now. It’s all one script. It’s one winding weirdness of story every night.

Therefore, the viewer doesn’t need to think. This is the acid test. If the ratings are high enough and the audience isn’t thinking, we have a winner.

Corollary: the audience doesn’t notice the parameters of stories, how they’re bounded and defined and artificially constructed to omit deeper themes and various criminals who are committing outrageous crimes that aren’t supposed to be exposed.

Brian Williams, with just a bit of his twanging emphasis, could say, “Today, pharmaceutical giant Glaxo was fined one-point-nine billions dollars,” but he would never tie all the horrendous stories of medical-drug damage together in a searing indictment of the whole industry.

The audience needs to remain oblivious to this larger story. That’s the anchor’s job. That’s his underlying assignment.

It’s called, in intelligence circles, a limited hangout. You expose a piece of a crime, in order to transmit the illusion of “justice served,” while the true RICO dimensions are kept out of view.

Elite anchors are the princes of limit hangouts. That is their stock in trade. Sell the illusion of justice while concealing the bulk of the iceberg that is under water.

The audience can watch and listen to hours of coverage on revolutions and counter-revolutions in the Middle East, but they can’t suspect that the US and NATO are funding terrorists dressed up as freedom fighters, in order to destabilize and destroy nations in that region.

“More gunfire and explosions in the capital city today…”

Then there is a little thing called conscience. The elite anchor can’t have one. He has to pretend to have one, but it isn’t real.

Every year, the anchor covers dozens of scandals that are left to wither and die on the vine and fall down the memory hole, never to be seen again, except perhaps for a much-later task-force or commission report that equivocates and exonerates the major players.

The anchor is happy to deal with this. He’s happy to develop memory loss.

In editorial meetings at his own network offices, if someone mentions trillions in government bailouts to banks, he can frown slightly and thus impart, “It’s stale, it’s old, we already covered that, let’s move along.”

And when it comes to elites, to whom the anchor pledges allegiance, and with whom he occasionally hob-nobs? CFR, Rockefeller interests, Wall Street, Goldman Sachs, AIPAC, government-allied Big Medicine, and so on? Nothing to see, nothing to say. No problem.

Therefore, the viewing audience doesn’t suspect these controlling entities are doing anything wrong or, in some cases, even exist.

The elite anchor: “Conspiracy? Aw shucks, I really do have sympathy for the people who dig up this stuff. And I’m not saying all of it is wrong, either. But you know, journalism is about plumbing for facts and verifying them. That’s the hard truth we have to face in this business. Going on the air with a possible this and a possible that is ultimately irresponsible. If we who present the news feel an occasional impulse to wing it, we have to rein ourselves in. Restraint is part of our job…”

Show these jokers a few devastating books by Anthony Sutton or Carroll Quigley and they’ll nod and say, “I did read that one in college. It was interesting but a little thin, I thought…”

The anchors project a sense they’re doing science. Gathering facts, verifying, testing, repeating the study to see if it holds up, checking the checkers, confirming the sources, tailoring the assertions to make sure there’s no wandering off the well-researched path.

It’s part of the act.

The elite anchor has to impart the impression that he’s personally familiar with the events he’s reporting. That’s nonsense. He isn’t touching actual events with a ten-foot pole. He isn’t doing journalism himself. But the audience must think he is.

“Washington has been the scene of many battles. But the current tussle at the top of the fiscal cliff is becoming an exercise in outrage on both sides. Today, behind closed doors…”

Some anchors are managing editors of their own broadcasts. That means they sit around like newspaper editors and listen to lesser editors present the stories of the day. The anchors ask questions and pick and choose which pieces they’ll cover on the evening news, and they decide the sequence, but their hands never touch the events themselves.

It’s more illusion. A well-trained and literate high-school sophomore from Nome could go on air, with a decent haircut, and read the news.

But backed up by expert technicians, a good set decorator, and a pro make-up person, Williams, Pelley, and Sawyer gave people the kind of living fiction that has become its own genre.

Elite anchors have a dual aspect. They control minds and they also put themselves in a mind-controlled state, in order to (temporarily) believe in what they’re saying on-air. It’s all self-inflicted.

No need to censor stories from above. The anchors have a finely honed sense of what is permissible and what isn’t.

In early human societies, the story teller was a principal figure. He wove the tribe’s experiences into a coherent whole, and built layers of cosmology. Story tellers formed an elite priest caste and spun official metaphysical doctrine.

Today, people feel the same need for narrators: the anchors. Although these front men for the news no longer use metaphysics to control the masses, they do covertly obey the old rule: tell only part of story.

Guard the rest from public view.

In ancient times, the rationale for hiding key secrets was explained in terms of stages of privileged initiations into “the magic.” Today, millions of people are led to believe their news narrators are giving them everything there is. Other than anchors’ stories, there is nothing. So in this secular media religion, viewers think they have only two choices: swallow the news reality, or face a cold vacuum.

Their bottomless need for a story teller survives.

But…

Came the Internet.

And then the whole world turned upside down.

The networks began to realize they were made out of eggshells and cardboard, and the holes and fractures and disintegrating pieces were out there, on television, for all to witness.

As a veteran reporter who quit the business and went online told me, “Network mind control is expensive. You have to keep doing it every day. And that’s without competition. Now, competitors are everywhere.”

It takes a village. The “it” in this case is network news and the village is the staff and crew. But the village is experiencing typhoons. Once upon a time, crazy surreal mainstream television news required no apologies. But that entitlement has peeled away and blown offshore.

Independent online news outlets are catching up to, and in some cases, surpassing MSM audience numbers. And the content is quite different.

For one thing, the content often features devastating critiques of elite news. For example: The Washington Post, once considered (by the uninformed) an unimpeachable source, is presently owned by Jeff Bezos, the billionaire boss of Amazon. Amazon has a $600 million contract to provide cloud-computing services to the CIA.

This is more than a crippling conflict of interest. It’s a death rattle. Every story the Post publishes about the CIA, and every story that has a named or unnamed CIA source is as reliable as an antelope’s press agent justifying the extinction of all lions.

The NY Times’ daily attacks on Trump for his supposed Russian connections? Well, in 2015, the Times published a devastating piece detailing the Clintons’ role in selling 20% of US uranium production to Putin. But the Times conveniently refuses to follow up on its own story. Needless to say, if Trump had played such a decisive role in enriching Putin and transferring a top national-security resource to Russia, he’d already be wearing a prison jump suit and awaiting a firing squad.

Day by day, elite mainstream news is fading.

This is what happens to elitist authority, no matter how skillful their production.

Hypnosis leaks.

It’s not a perfect seal.

The good old days: Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, Scott Pelley—and Salvador Dali


 

Fake News Items: Not Here Thanks!

Fake News

 

 

While Uncensored is in the business of presenting sensational or controversial news items and topics, we do our utmost to check out everything that comes our way, and the old adage applies, that if it seems to good to be true, then it probably is. And don’t forget our own slogan: “Think For Yourself”.

In the past few weeks there have been a couple of examples of “deathbed confession” articles that have gone viral. One about an MI5 agent confessing to the assassination of Lady Dianna, the other, a CIA agent confessing to inside knowledge of the 911 “inside job” on the WTC.

Uncensored News Network checked out these articles at the time of their initial publication and declined to publish them as they are clearly Fake News.

After 11 years of Alternative news reporting, we have developed a repertoire of tricks to sort the pure from the manure!

Other discerning sources such as Paul Craig Roberts and Veterans Today also cottoned on to the hoax.

A big pat on the back for these guys and all others who used common sense logic coupled with diligent research:

THANKS GUYS!

Here’s an informative VT article on the subject:

Fake News

By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor
Today’s False Flag Weekly News did NOT cover the “bombshell” story of the supposed WTC-7 demolition confession by a dying CIA agent. Why not? Because it’s OBVIOUS BULLSHIT.
If you can’t tell that this is a made-up story from the way it’s written, you need to take your BS detector in for a tune-up. That’s right, Jim Fetzer, this means you!
When Jim was my co-host at FFWN, he occasionally got taken in by hoaxes like this. One such blatantly bogus fake news story was the notorious FORMER BEATLE RINGO STARR CLAIMS THE “REAL” PAUL MCCARTNEY DIED IN 1966 AND WAS REPLACED BY LOOK-ALIKE. (The story’s prose style is SO bogus – how can anyone read stuff like this with a straight face? ““When Paul died, we all panicked!” claims Ringo, obviously very emotional. “We didn’t know what to do..”)
The “Dying CIA agent confesses to WTC-7” story is just a rewrite of a previous article by the same hoaxer, Jay Greenberg.

Dying CIA Agent Makes Deathbed Confession: ‘We Blew Up WTC7 On 9/11’ is a rewrite of Dying Mi5 Agent Admits to Killing Princess Diana in Deathbed Confession
How much do they pay Greenberg to crank out this low-grade garbage? Nice work if you can get it, I guess.
These pathetic frauds constitute psychological warfare against the truth-seeking community. As Cass Sunstein explained, the 9/11 perps need to spread “beneficial cognitive diversity” among “conspiracy theorists” in order to prevent “conspiracy theorists” from exposing the 9/11 false flag crime against humanity.
These fake news stories catapult the “surely someone would have confessed” anti-truth propaganda meme.  Any suckers who might actually believe that the world’s most successful criminals will surely confess to their crimes, for no particular reason except a bad conscience (as if the high-IQ psychopaths hired for these crimes had consciences) will be left holding the bag.
Deathbed (and non-deathbed) confessions do sometimes happen. E. Howard Hunt did confess to helping the CIA murder JFK. And a US Army Col. did confess to William Pepper his role in helping orchestrate the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.. But don’t expect the MSM to tell you about THAT.
So how can you tell fake news from real news?
Keep your BS detector tuned up.
Watch False Flag Weekly News every week.
Watch out for guys like “Jay Greenberg.”
Related Posts:
And the biggest false flag story of 2016 is….
A Muslim and a Jew walk into a TV news show – and commit heresy
False flags backfire in Britain – voters repudiate lying establishment
Censors attack False Flag Weekly News, Gilad Atzmon
WE NEED YOUR HELP! False Flag Weekly News under attack for spreading the truth

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/07/14/wtc7-confess/

Needless to say, Uncensored News Network echoes the words of Kevin Barrett, and we askour readers to keep their eyes, ears and minds open, and keep us informed if you feel anything we publish is questionable. Let’s keep it real!

Martin

FAKE NEWS Is The Norm In Corporate Mainstream Media

FEEL FREE TO CHECK OUT YOUR MSM NEWS SOURCES GUYS: THIS IS REAL NEWS!

CNN fake news

 

Pulitzer Prize-winning Journalist resigns from CNN after being busted for Fabricating Fake News – Ethan Huff.
Following more than a years’ worth of binge-publishing of fake-news about the Trump campaign, CNN has announced the resignation of three of its top ‘journalists,’ including Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Eric Lichtblau. Along with Thomas Frank and Lex Haris, Lichtblau was found guilty of publishing false information about Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 Presidential election, a rumour that was apparently started by none other than failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The resignations came to a head after CNN carelessly published a story recently accusing entrepreneur Anthony Scaramucci, an ally of President Trump and a member of his transition team, of colluding with Russia to get Mr. Trump elected.
These allegations centered around a delusion by these CNN reporters that Scaramucci was somehow connected to a Russian investment fund that’s currently under Congressional investigation, a rumour that has since proven to be completely false. There was never any proof to support these allegations, other than a single “anonymous source” that CNN and many other mainstream ‘news’ outlets grabbed onto as “evidence” that President Trump had worked with the Russians to cause Clinton to lose the election.
When it became undeniable that the whole thing was completely made up, CNN had no choice but to do something – anything – to mitigate the damage to its already battered reputation. They chose to issue the following statement… “On June 22, 2017, CNN.com published a story connecting Anthony Scaramucci with investigations into the Russian Direct Investment Fund. That story did not meet CNN’s editorial standards and has been retracted. Links to the story have been disabled. CNN apologises to Mr. Scaramucci.”
CNN got it wrong about Comey’s investigation of Trump, too. That CNN would claim to have “editorial standards” is rather humorous considering this isn’t the first time the network has published fake news about President Trump based on little more than wishful thinking. Back in June, the dying network reported that former FBI Director James Comey was going to dispute the claim that President Trump was not under investigation by the agency. The CNN article, which was titled Trum“Comey expected to refute Trump,” was once again based on ‘anonymous sources’ that apparently told the network Comey’s conversations with the President were “much more nuanced,” and that Mr. Trump had gotten things wrong in claiming that he was not under investigation.
Four CNN journalists – Gloria Borger, Eric Lichtblau, Jake Tapper, and Brian Rokus – all compiled the story, with Borger, CNN’s chief political analyst, appearing on TV to state the following: “Comey is going to dispute the President on this point if he’s asked about it by Senators, and we have to assume that he will be. He will say he never assured Donald Trump that he was not under investigation, that that would have been improper for him to do so.” But that never happened, and CNN was forced to admit that the whole thing was simply untrue. CNN quickly changed the title of the article to “Comey unlikely to judge on obstruction,” issuing the following statement in a correction… “CORRECTION AND UPDATE: This article was published before Comey released his prepared opening statement. The article and headline have been corrected to reflect that Comey does not directly dispute that Trump was told multiple times he was not under investigation in his prepared testimony released after this story was published.”
More and more Americans are learning the truth… and that it can’t be found at CNN.
Sources for this article include:
TheIntercept.com
NaturalNews.com
CNN.com
TheHill.com
http://newstarget.com/2017-07-20-pulitzer-prize-winning-cnn-journalist-busted-for-fabricating-fake-news-resigns-from-cnn.html

Trump Defends Use Of Social Media, Bypassing The MSM “Fake News”

Trump Social Media

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40471536

US President Donald Trump has defended his use of social media in a series of tweets, following a row over comments he made about two MSNBC TV presenters.
“My use of social media is not presidential – it’s modern day presidential,” he tweeted on Saturday.
Earlier in the week, the president launched a crude personal attack on Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough.
His tweets were condemned by Democrats and Republicans alike, despite the White House springing to his defence.
Mr Trump’s aides have previously expressed concern over his tweets.
But the president said on Saturday that social media gave him the opportunity to connect directly to the public, bypassing the mainstream media, whose content Mr Trump regularly labels as “fake news”.
“The FAKE & FRAUDULENT NEWS MEDIA is working hard to convince Republicans and others I should not use social media,” he tweeted, adding: “But remember, I won the 2016 election with interviews, speeches and social media.”

Mr Trump also stepped up his attack on CNN after the US news network retracted an article alleging that one of the president’s aides was under investigation by Congress.
“I am extremely pleased to see that @CNN has finally been exposed as #FakeNews and garbage journalism. It’s about time!”
The story that caused the upset, which was later removed from the website following an internal investigation, resulted in the resignations of three CNN journalists: Thomas Frank, investigative unit editor and Pulitzer Prize winner Eric Lictblau and Lex Harris, who oversaw the investigations unit….

READ THE REST:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40471536

EU Slaps Huge Fine On Google

Image result for EU fines Google