***THE UNREPORTED TRUTH***
By J. Adams
October 29th, 1996
"Mad world! Mad kings! Mad composition!"
('King John'; Act II, sc.1)
Since my experiences more than five years ago, I have been struggling to uncover the truth about why this horrific war is going to occur. As is revealed in my articles, the main reason is because the world is today totally deceived. The antichrist, Mikhail Gorbachev, has literally come into the world and is misleading everyone into a nuclear cataclysm.
So during the past five years I've tried to tell the truth contrary to the lies that dominate the modern world which are driving humanity toward self-destruction. What sort of success have I had?
Well, I'm nearly broke, my studies are in disarray and I have little to show for the huge sacrifices I've chosen to make. Meanwhile, Mikhail Gorbachev, who is preparing the coming nuclear holocaust, was recently invited to my University where he was praised for saving the world from the Cold War and threat of nuclear destruction . Then the "Ultimate War Criminal" (the title of my editorial on Gorbachev that will likely never be printed- see below) gave a keynote address on "Human Rights and the Rule of Law". So much for the truth!
Why have my efforts failed thus far? Very simple. People aren't interested in the truth. They find too much pleasure in living lies. Therefore, my efforts are apparently futile. No one values the truth, so my efforts over the past five years have, for all intents and purposes, been pointless. Our species appears to be completely irrational and unable learn from its mistakes. Thus, I can try to lead society from its suicidal course, but no one is going to follow. Rather, everyone prefers following the likes of Mikhail Gorbachev into a nuclear abyss.
Of course, one of the most irresponsible parties contributing to the destruction of civilization is the mass media. The truth needs to be reported in order to have any influence. But, as is well argued below, the current media is biased in favor of death.
The Boston Herald
October 28, 1996
"At home, abroad media bias shows"
By Don Feder
Whether it's coverage of Nicaragua's election or our own, media
bias is so blatant and heavy-handed as to be almost comical.
In headlines on stories about the Nicaraguan presidential election
last week, The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Boston
Globe all used the same phrase to describe the winner.
Not "pro-free-market" or "friendly to the U.S." - apt descriptions
of conservative businessman Arnoldo Aleman - but "rightist." In a
Central American context, the prejudicial label conjures up images of
death squads and coups.
Aleman defeated Daniel Ortega, who as head of the Sandinista junta,
turned Nicaragua into a tropical gulag during the 1980s. The Times
story only alluded to the ex-commandante's Marxism with soft words
like "socialist" and "revolution."
It noted that the Reagan administration backed the Contra rebels
during the civil war, but didn't consider it relevant to mention the
sources of Sandinista support (Fidel Castro and the Soviet Union).
Sandinista atrocities, including mass murder, didn't rate a passing
reference. Ortega was identified as the nation's ex-president,
implying an electoral mandate. Bullets, not ballots, brought him to
power in 1979 and kept him there for 11 years.
But this is all depressingly familiar. In foreign coverage, the
media rarely miss a chance to cuddle the left and cudgel
conservatives.
In reporting on the Middle East, they reflexively refer to Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud government as "hard-
line" and "right-wing."
The Labor government of Shimon Peres, which was voted out in May,
was never tagged "leftist" or "pro-appeasement." Among mediatoids,
Peres is worshipped as a statesman pursuing peace (a blind dove to
objective observers).
The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting reports that in
the first seven months of 1996, the Times characterized Netanyahu as
"hard-line" 33 times.
Syrian ruler Hafez Assad was so designated exactly twice during the
same period. The butcher of Hama may be a dictator in Damascus, but in
the pages of The New York Times, he's Syria's "president." Assad and
Ortega got their popular mandates from the same mythical source.
Its coverage of foreign affairs mirrors the media's treatment of
U.S. politics. Conservatives are regularly stigmatized as "ultra,"
"extreme" or "far" right. Rarely is militancy or extremism found among
liberals.
Those who are rash enough to question these disparities are
rebuffed as reactionary cranks. Among the more prominent is L. Brent
Bozell of the Media Research Center.
In the midst of the GOP convention, The Wall Street Journal did a
hit on Bozell. "Self-Styled Media Critic Dissects TV Coverage To
Expose Perceived Liberal Bias at Networks," the headline contended.
"Self-styled media critic?" "Perceived bias?" C'mon, guys - tell us
what you really think!
The piece by staff reporter Bob Davis sneers that Bozell is "a
sound bite in search of a microphone," who is "dismissed as a flake"
by editors and reporters.
In the October issue of his newsletter, Mediawatch, Bozell
documents the partisanship of campaign coverage. If Bob Dole strays
into areas the media want him to avoid - like the scandals swirling
around the president - anchors on the evening news grumble about the
candidate's forays into "nasty territory," which lower "the level of
civility" and make him appear "desperate and mean-spirited."
When former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop criticized Dole's
tobacco comments, he was news with a capital "N." When he castigated
Clinton's veto of the partial-birth abortion ban, the media lost
interest in the good doctor.
When the House Ethics Committee announced on Sept. 26 that it would
expand its investigation of alleged conflicts involving the college
course Newt Gingrich taught, the press pounced. Every network covered
the story that evening. "It's awful; it's serious; it's potentially
devastating," squawked NBC's Tim Russert.
Three days earlier, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s inspector
general concluded that, as a lawyer, First Lady Hillary Clinton had
drafted a real-estate document with the intent to "deceive" federal
regulators. It took almost two weeks for a nightly newscast to work up
an interest in this story.
It seems to me that media bias is so palpable as to be beyond
dispute - an opinion that marks me as a flaky self-styled critic - a
rightist whose government (if I had one) would doubtless be hard-line.
***MIKHAIL GORBACHEV: THE ULTIMATE WAR CRIMINAL***
By J. Adams
October 13th, 1996
"History is a capricious creature.
It depends on who writes it."
-Mikhail Gorbachev
"We have no right ever to forget that psychological warfare
is a struggle for winning people's minds."
-Mikhail Gorbachev
Around this time last year I submitted an editorial to the DC
entitled, "The New World Disorder" (the editorial was never printed
because of 'problems with content'). This editorial was written in
response to the 50th anniversary of the Nuremberg war trials to
prosecute Nazi war criminals after the second world war. (To see the
editorial I wrote last year and related articles, see the "Censored
Editorials" in my "Global War Articles" which are archived at-
http://www.ucc.uconn.edu/~jpa94001/content.html )
The thesis of the editorial I wrote last year was that human
rights and the rule of law, as well as our freedom and livelihood, are
imperiled even more so than when Adolph Hitler was rallying the forces
of hate and war during the 1930's. As I explained at length, there is
reason to believe that Russia, under the leadership of Mikhail
Gorbachev, has been preparing the way to launch a nuclear third world
war against the West. I believe that Moscow staged the collapse of
communism and breakup of the Soviet Union over the past decade in
order to instill a false sense of security in the West and open the
way for a surprise attack. Now that the West is unprepared and off-
guard, an all-out war can be launched that will bring utter
destruction to Israel, America and the Western allies. After the dust
settles, Russia can takeover as the leading world power and establish
an authoritarian "New World Order" to replace the seemingly chaotic
state of global affairs caused by Western society.
While the thesis of my editorial last year may seem preposterous
in relation to what most everyone believes right now, it is because
the world is utterly deceived. This has been revealed by Anatoliy
Golitsyn, an ex-KGB chief who defected to the West back in the 1960's.
In his book, "New Lies For Old", which was published in 1984, Golitsyn
anticipated the Western-style reforms and peace-oriented policies
Moscow introduced after Mikhail Gorbachev rose to power in the mid-
1980's. He also forecast how Moscow would eventually release Eastern
Europe and breakup the Soviet empire. However, Golitsyn forewarned
that the coming changes would be deceptive- nothing but 'new lies for
old'. In reality, Russia's ruling elite are still underhandedly
pursuing their long-run ambition to dominate the world.
In his most recent book, "The Perestroika Deception" (1995),
Golitsyn reviews how his earlier projections have proven true (a book
review is on the web at- http://www.fatima.org/perestoi.html). The
West, weary from the prolonged Cold War with the 'Evil Empire', was
more than happy to accept the Kremlin's bogus "New Thinking". The end
of Russian communism has brought unfettered peace, prosperity and
vast, new untapped markets, something far too tempting for the
Capitalist West to reject. Thus, the deception has succeeded.
But all the while history has been shaped seemingly in the West's
favor, the stage is, in fact, being set for the destruction of America
and the Western powers. The bogus Western-style reforms in Russia
were geared to fail and, consequently, Russian society is now in a
state similar to Weimar Germany just prior to the rise of Hitler and
the outbreak of world war two. In this way, a mad Russian dictator,
like Alexander Lebed or Vladimir Zhirinovsky, can now be brought to
power, most likely through a bogus coup like occurred in August of
1991, and unleash world war three while the West least expects it.
After the dust settles, Mikhail Gorbachev and Moscow's true ruling
elite can retake power in Moscow and claim they are saving the world
from Russian extremists. In reality, however, it is Gorbachev and his
associates who are mad extremists that are ultimately responsible for
the premeditated act of mass destruction that is about to be unleashed
on this world.
Unfortunately, since the world is utterly deceived right now,
Mikhail Gorbachev is today upheld as a prince of peace rather than the
prince of darkness he truly is. Instead of being held responsible for
unleashing a global war, he has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Instead of being on trial for the ultimate war crime against humanity
he is committing, Gorbachev is invited to give a speech to mark the
closing of "Fifty Years After Nuremberg: Human Rights and the Rule of
Law". Make no mistake about it, however, ultimately this ruler of man
will have to answer to the Rule of God's Law...
"Now is the time for judgment on this world;
now the prince of this world will be driven out."
-John 12:31
(For more information,
please see my "Spirit Of Truth"
worldwide web page at the location
(URL): http://www.ucc.uconn.edu/~jpa94001)