FCC Approves Foreign Takeover of U.S. Broadcasters

By: Jerry Kenney | Accuracy in Media


Exclusive to Accuracy in Media

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on September 29th did something worse than give up control of the Internet. They voted unanimously to put America’s entire broadcast industry on the fast track to a foreign takeover by Chinese, Russian or Muslim Brotherhood front corporations.

This new FCC rule gives foreign interests the long sought-after tools they need to shape U.S. public opinion and to censor the opposition.

Once a foreign corporation scoops up a media business, such as a chain of radio stations, it can eliminate national and local programming and substitute its own government’s propaganda. That means that conservative talkers could find themselves off the air.

Citing the need for “change” from the old “vintage” laws, Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel declared that “laws that govern broadcast investment can get in the way.”

So, rather than respect the law and Congress, the FCC decided in a 5 to 0 vote to decree a new “rule” that effectively guts a law that protected Americans from foreign interests and their propaganda. The new rule assumes that any foreign owner of a TV or radio broadcaster will be acceptable unless someone can prove otherwise.

The FCC claims that under the new rule national security concerns will be reviewed by the proper authorities. Do they mean the same authorities that signed off on the Iran nuclear deal and the Russian uranium purchase? So now, in addition to keeping an eye on terror cells in the U.S., our security agents will be required to follow the money-trail in closed societies like China, Russia and Middle Eastern monarchies to make sure that new station owners are not tied to foreign governments. Really?

Sadly, Congress appears to be content to be left in the dark on the subject.

An example of our blissfully-ignorant Congress was on display a couple of weeks prior to the FCC vote, when the entire FCC commission testified before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in a hearing entitled, “Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission.” Even though the FCC had announced it was planning a vote on new foreign ownership rules over a year ago, during a three-hour hearing the subject was never raised by one senator.

Handing over America’s public airwaves to foreign interests by sidestepping longstanding law ought to be something that the Senate “overseers” should be at least curious about, don’t you think?

At the final FCC vote, Commissioner Ajit Pai said the new rule will “give broadcasters greater access to capital.” Accessing capital by selling 100 percent interest in a business? Isn’t that called selling out?

Only in Washington is a going-out-of-business sale called “accessing capital.” If accessing capital is the main issue, I guess by that standard we should repeal the laws that make bank robbery illegal, too. After all, aren’t bank robbers just accessing capital?

No, there is much more at stake here than just capital. It’s called a free and independent press. Thanks to the FCC, soon foreign interests will be able to masquerade as your friendly neighborhood TV or radio station (the national media sold out long ago). And you can count on them waving the American flag as they do it. Remember Al Jazeera America buying Al Gore’s Current TV?

The Wall Street Journal and Reuters have reported extensively on Chinese purchases of movie theater chains and Hollywood production companies, including a current bid to buy Dick Clark Productions. Chinese interests have also leased local underperforming AM radio stations in major U.S. markets such as Washington D.C. Based on the nature of those deals and their financial losses, it is clear that China’s interest in entering the U.S. media market is more to influence public opinion than to turn a profit.

Yet in her attempt to justify the FCC action, Commissioner Rosenworcel said the old laws “were put in place to prevent foreign powers from disrupting ship-to-shore governmental communications during warfare.” She also said, “But just as horses and bayonets are not the tools of modern warfare, the cyber threats we face today are not especially well-guarded by these prohibitions.”

But cyber threats are not the only threats we face. The good old fashioned Cold War tools of warfare called “disinformation” and propaganda have been enhanced by modern technology, not made obsolete by it. Just ask the ISIS fighters who have been recruited by sophisticated Internet videos.

Broadcasting is not just another pipe through which you deliver data. A broadcaster controls the message and the content.

So why did this happen? The current FCC commissioners are mostly lawyers and lobbyists with political connections to both political parties. These political parties depend on financial contributions from major corporations, including media corporations. They want the option of dumping their broadcast properties off on cash-heavy foreign buyers, no matter what impact it has on the public’s right to know.

The system is rigged, even in favor of the foreign interests buying up America.

Jerry Kenney, a television producer from Port Orange, Florida, has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice alleging that foreign channels RT and Al Jazeera have both violated the law by not disclosing in their U.S. propaganda broadcasts that they are agents of foreign powers. He has also alleged violations of FCC rules that have given Al Jazeera and RT access to taxpayer-funded public television stations.


Foreign Interests Prepare to Can Conservative Broadcasters

By: Cliff Kincaid
America’s Survival

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is about the vote to let the Arabs, Russians and Chinese buy U.S. radio and TV licenses and force conservative broadcasters off the air. Jerry Kenney and Cliff Kincaid discuss the critical deadline coming up for public comment on this treasonous change in the law on foreign ownership of the U.S. media. The public must act now.


KGB-TV Holds Conference Starring Former DIA Chief

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

While U.S. policymakers worry about the propaganda techniques of ISIS in drawing thousands of Islamists into the fight against the West, America’s adversaries in the Arab/Muslim world as a whole, as well as Russia and China, continue to make inroads into the U.S. media market. Indeed, on Thursday in Moscow, the premier Russian propaganda channel, RT (Russia Today), is holding a conferencemarking its 10th anniversary as an outlet for Kremlin propaganda. President Obama’s former Defense Intelligence Agency chief Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn is among the speakers at the event.

“RT aired its first broadcast on December 10, 2005,” says the promotional material. “Since then, the geopolitical chessboard has been rearranged and the news media scene welcomed many new voices.” However, these “new voices” are state-funded and controlled, in contrast to the privately-funded and independent news media organizations in the U.S.—which has a First Amendment—and other Western countries. The reference to the geopolitical chessboard being rearranged refers to the influence of government-financed media in Russia, China, and much of the Arab/Muslim world in changing perceptions of the United States.

The scheduled attendance of Flynn at the RT event in Moscow is alarming to those concerned about how the propaganda channel, known as KGB-TV, uses Americans and other foreigners to spread Kremlin propaganda. Flynn, who has also appeared on the Al Jazeera English channel, has been critical of how President Obama and George W. Bush have handled the so-called war on terror. He has also said the leaks of NSA defector Edward Snowden, now living in Russia and being protected by the Putin regime, have put the lives of U.S. military personnel in jeopardy.

The Kremlin channel, which says it reaches over 700 million people in more than 100 countries in English, Arabic and Spanish, is advertising the conference as an event bringing together “prominent politicians, foreign policy experts and media executives from around the world.” RT in the U.S. is carried into tens of millions of homes on major U.S. cable systems such as Comcast.

Russia Today has been described by former KGB officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky as “a part of the Russian industry of misinformation and manipulation,” designed to mislead foreign audiences about Russian intentions.

Another participant in the RT conference, former London Mayor Ken Livingstone, known as Red Ken, recently angered victims of Islamist terrorism by claiming that the July 7, 2005 Islamist suicide bombers in England “gave their lives” to protest the war in Iraq. He is an adviser on defense issues to the British Labor Party’s new Marxist head, Jeremy Corbyn.

Other speakers at the RT event include Max Blumenthal, an anti-Israel writer who is the son of Hillary Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal, and Thom Hartmann, who is paid by RT to do a regular TV show and is described by the Moscow channel as “a prominent American progressive intellectual.” For his part, Hartmann has refused to discuss how much money he is being paid by Moscow to reach a liberal audience in the U.S. with pro-Moscow propaganda. In the current presidential campaign he has been promoting socialist Bernie Sanders for president. However, four years ago RT was promoting libertarian Ron Paul for president.

Former RT anchor Elizabeth Wahl, who resigned from the channel rather than report lies, has testified before Congress that during the war in Ukraine, RT was “mobilized as a propaganda tool” and “used as a weapon to manipulate people into believing half-truths and lies, skewing reality in the Kremlin’s favor.” She added, “There was a running joke among some employees about adopting this mindset by ‘drinking the Kool-Aid.’ I saw how employees and viewers eventually drank it all up. It’s the result of being engrossed in an environment where hating America was rewarded.”

Referring to RT, Al Jazeera, China Central Television and other foreign government-sponsored television channels, Jeff Shell, chairman of the U.S. Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), has described the “weaponization of information” by America’s adversaries and challengers in a global information war that America seems to be losing. Shell, chairman of Universal Filmed Entertainment, previously served as chairman of NBC Universal International from 2011 to 2013 and as president of the Comcast Programming Group from 2005 to 2011. The BBG is the parent organization of the U.S.-funded Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, outlets which have been starved of funds since the collapse of the old Soviet Union. Other BBG outlets include the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa), Radio Free Asia, and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting (Radio and TV Marti).

S. Enders Wimbush, a former member of the Broadcasting Board of Governors and former director of Radio Liberty, has commented on how “our adversaries have raised the quality of their media game significantly.” He says that rather than promote “big lies,” these organizations provide their own “context” for certain facts, in an effort “to explain, to obfuscate, through filters of their own interests why these facts are important, what they mean in the context of their own interests, how they contribute to historical justifications for particular actions, and why they are consistent with their identities, what they seek to achieve, and their visions of the future.”

Wimbush said that “networks like Russia Today, China’s CCTV, and the Middle East’s Al Jazeera have large followings, including increasingly in the United States where all broadcast. Their power is not that they can claim different sets of facts, but in their interpretation of facts in evidence. In a word, context. And their strategies for adjusting the context to resonate with different audiences show growing sophistication.”

Kenneth R. Weinstein, a member of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, points out that these state propaganda outlets are “well-funded” and that RT and other Russian propaganda outlets spend over $1.4 billion annually on propaganda. He cites an estimate from the Columbia Journalism Review that CCTV’s English language efforts will be 19 times the annual budget of the BBC, the world’s largest news organization. He says that Al Jazeera reportedly spent $1 billion to start Al Jazeera English, and the network receives $100 million for its annual budget.

In 2013, Al Gore and his partners at Current TV sold the cable channel to Al Jazeera, financed by the Middle Eastern regime in Qatar, for a price of $500 million. The House Committee on Homeland Security refused to hold hearings into the national security implications of the transaction.

“These differing platforms target specific audiences, especially in the West, seeking to undermine the possibility of a firm and united Western response to current policy crises,” Weinstein said. In recent testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he added, “Social media and the Internet have proven fertile ground, not just for Russian disinformation but also for spreading Islamic radicalism, free from the more truthful filter of traditional journalism. Through social media, ISIS, itself in competition with other radical Islamist groups, projects a romanticized vision of life under the Caliphate to disaffected men and women in Western Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Teenagers in Britain, Turkey or Saudi Arabia may follow the dictates of radical Imams on YouTube and abandon the comforts of home for war-torn regions of Syria or Iraq.”

As bad as the situation is, the Federal Communications Commission is poised to allow the sale of major U.S. media properties to wealthy Arabs and Russians, after the ban on foreign ownership is repealed. This means the “weaponization of information” will take a new and ugly turn, with the takeover of more radio and TV stations, and cast into doubt the continued viability of such venues as conservative talk radio in the United States. After all, why would the new Arab, Russian, and Chinese owners of media properties in the U.S. want to give airtime to conservative critics of the anti-American foreign policies of America’s enemies and adversaries?


FCC Sells American Airwaves to Arabs, Russians, Chinese

By: Cliff Kincaid
America’s Survival

It’s the story our media doesn’t cover: foreign ownership and control of our Big Media. Remember when Al Gore made $100 million by selling current TV to the terrorist-supporting Middle Eastern dictatorship of Qatar? The result was another Al Jazeera spin-off in American homes via cable and satellite TV. Other owners of media properties are now looking at selling out to billionaire Arabs and Arab governments. The FCC is preparing to make it possible. Even the governments of Mexico and Russia could buy radio and TV stations through foreign cutout corporations. ASI TV producer and co-host Jerry Kenney talks about his column, Obama’s FCC Plans Sale of U.S. Media to Foreigners. Yes indeed, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to remove the barriers to broadcast station ownership by foreigners, a move that would enable American broadcasters to sell out to foreign interests, just like Gore did. The public must respond to what the FCC is planning to do by December 21.


Terrorism, not Climate Change, Kills People

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

On November 13, the same day as the terrorist attacks in Paris, USA Today ran a full-page ad from billionaire Tom Steyer’s group NextGen Climate highlighting the alleged global threat from climate change. As hundreds of people were being injured or killed in Paris, the ad featured these quotes about the “climate crisis:”

  • Hillary Clinton: “An existential threat”
  • Bernie Sanders: “The greatest threat facing the planet”
  • Martin O’Malley: “Critical threat to our economy”

In a new development, we have just learned from Judicial Watch that Hillary Clinton was characterized by her Muslim-connected aide, Huma Abedin, as being “very confused” about the world leaders she was supposed to be communicating with as secretary of state. The confusion may also be reflected in Mrs. Clinton’s bizarre utterance that so-called climate change is an “existential threat” that is somehow comparable to Russian nuclear weapons, which could reduce America to a burned-out cinder.

Mrs. Clinton is not alone, however. All of the Democrats running for president, plus former Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, want to treat changes in the weather as something to be addressed through new treaties, international agreements and global tax schemes. This campaign has taken precedence over defeating international terrorism.

At the Democratic Party debate this past weekend, Sanders claimed that “Climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism and if we do not get our act together and listen to what the scientists say, you’re going to see countries all over the world—this is what the CIA says—they’re going to be struggling over limited amounts of water, limited amounts of land to grow their crops and you’re going to see all kinds of international conflict…”

So from one disputed claim about people causing climate change, they have reached another disputed claim that climate change is causing people to commit terrorism.

On the same day as the Paris attacks, former Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore was staging his 24-hour climate change telethon from the foot of the Eiffel Tower to focus attention on this month’s United Nations climate summit in Paris. The attacks forced him to pull the plug on the event after five hours.

In advance of his ill-fated climate change telethon, People magazine asked Gore which Democrat he was endorsing for president. “It’s still too early, in my opinion, to endorse a candidate or pick a candidate,” he said.

But why is his endorsement worth anything? Al Gore has become a very rich man, a one percenter. He and his partners sold Current TV (Gore personally netted an estimated $100 million of the $500 million sale price) to the terrorist-supporting Middle Eastern oil and gas dictatorship of Qatar.

A member of Apple, Inc.’s board of directors, Gore is today worth as much as $170 million. Even the New York Times has wondered if his climate change campaign is designed to make himself rich, while preserving his lifestyle as an elite member of the one percent.

His telethon carried the official title of “Live Earth: 24 Hours of Reality.” The reality of terrorism got in the way of the broadcast, featuring various rock stars and co-sponsored by Arianna Huffington’s television channel, HuffPost Live.

Gore and his partners sold Current TV to Qatar so another Al Jazeera spin-off could be piped into American homes. The Al Jazeera America channel was the result, and it is now publishing nonsense like the piece by Rami G. Khourientitled, “Military responses alone will not defeat ISIL.”

Khouri acknowledges that “Religion is critical for shaping the theological concept of the Islamic State and the wider Caliphate…” But, he says, “it may not be the most important reason why individuals go there to live, work and do battle.” He lists “eight reasons why people across Islamic societies join or support ISIL.”

But none of the “reasons” for the rise of the Islamic State, in his analysis, consists of the hate-filled passages from the Koran which guide their beliefs and actions.

Instead, we are told, in reason number four, that their motivations include “To live among like-minded people in a society defined by camaraderie, peace, justice and wholesome family life.” Reason number six is “To find meaning, direction and purpose to one’s personal life, or to escape family or personal problems, loneliness or alienation.”

We are supposed to believe this may be why terrorists opened fire on people in Paris. This is why the Islamic State beheads people or burns them alive?

It is easy to forget that the website publishing this material is financed by a Middle Eastern dictatorship that promotes Islamic terrorism. Like the notion of the “existential threat” allegedly posed by climate change, Al Jazeera America constitutes a diversion from what really threatens America, our way of life, and our people. Perhaps that was the intention all along.

As serious as this is, the problem of foreign propaganda in the U.S. media market could get far worse. Television producer Jerry Kenney notes that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is planning to remove the barriers to broadcast station ownership by foreigners, a move that would enable American broadcasters to sell out to foreign interests, just like Gore did. The FCC could allow the sale of local broadcast stations and other media properties to the Chinese, Russian and Mexican governments, or to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The public must respond to what the FCC is planning to do by December 21.


Obama’s FCC Plans Sale of U.S. Media to Foreigners

By: Jerry Kenney
Accuracy in Media

Special to Accuracy in Media

If you think it’s hard to get unbiased news from radio and TV now, just wait until your local broadcast stations and other media properties are owned and operated by the Chinese, Russian or Mexican governments, or the Muslim Brotherhood.

Amazingly, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) wants to make it easier for foreigners to buy and run local radio and TV stations. The federal entity that monitors the media is proposing more foreign ownership of the U.S. media in the name of “diversity.”

By law, foreigners currently can only own up to 25 percent of a TV or radio station business unless they can show on a case by case basis that they have “special considerations” which demonstrate that granting them a broadcast license would be in the American public’s interest. Only then can the FCC waive the 25 percent ownership cap that is imposed by law.

The process can be time consuming and present a high hurdle that few have overcome. Rupert Murdoch is one of a small number of media owners who successfully jumped those hurdles, and he did so in part by changing his citizenship from Australian to American. But now the FCC wants to remove those limits altogether. The FCC wants to routinely grant licenses to foreigners just like they do for the mom & pop broadcasters next door. Essentially, they want to fast track the approval process for foreign ownership. They recently issued a public notice (GNDocket No. 15-236) and they are asking for comments from the public about their plans to do so.

The change is technically titled, “Review of Foreign Ownership Policies for Broadcast, Common Carrier and Aeronautical Radio Licensees under Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended.”

What this means is that foreigners will be encouraged by our own government to buy U.S. media properties that they can use for their own propaganda purposes.

FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly said that the change would “establish a presumption that the applications (from foreigners) should be granted, thereby shifting the burden on the Commission to reject.” In other words, the FCC would assume that a foreign owner would automatically air programming that would be in the American public’s interest unless someone could prove otherwise. Another high hurdle but this time it’s one the American public has to jump.

Of course, once a license is granted, any broadcasting of distortions, deletions, or disinformation simply becomes “protected political speech” and would be nearly impossible to use for revoking a license. At that point, little will stop the propaganda machines from running full tilt. If you need an example, just watch Vladimir Putin’s Russia Today (RT) on any of the 30 non-commercial and educational taxpayer-supported public TV stations that carry a television programming service called MHz Networks Worldview. Those stations routinely defend Putin’s spewing of anti-American propaganda and outright lies as merely protected speech.

While some might call it treason for the FCC to grease the wheels of bureaucracy to encourage the foreign takeover of such a vital and fundamental American industry as local broadcasting, its supporters simply think that it’s good business, a way to get foreign “investment” into a struggling industry. And that is how it is being sold to the American public.

In twisted logic that can only come from Washington, D.C., the FCC claims that this influx of new “foreign capital” will somehow benefit females and minorities who are current broadcasters or who want to become broadcasters but lack access to capital. Exactly the opposite is true. Since foreigners will be able to hold licenses in their own names, they will no longer need a “figurehead” U.S. citizen to be in nominal control and hold a majority of the equity and/or voting ownership.

Furthermore, minority and female owned companies will then have to compete with foreign “investor/broadcasters” when they attempt to buy stations and many will be priced out of the market as the foreign broadcasters drive the purchase prices higher. Many minorities who currently own stations will very likely be enticed to sell at the higher valuations, thus resulting in fewer minority voices on the air.

Other then foreign interlopers, the main beneficiaries, however, will not be the American public or minorities and women who want to get into the broadcasting business but rather those who currently hold broadcast licenses. Many are mega-corporations. After all, money is really the heart of the matter. Current broadcasters will have many more cash buyers for their stations, stations that are in decline because of competition from the Internet.

The media took note of the $500 million windfall Al Gore cashed in on from the Middle Eastern petro-dictatorship of Qatar in the sale of his failed Current TV cable channel. The channel later became Al Jazeera America. No FCC license was required to transfer Gore’s cable channel so it sailed through.  So removing the FCC imposed barriers to broadcast station ownership by foreigners is the only thing standing in the way of broadcasters cashing in, just like Gore.

As for the new buyers, they may not care if they ever make money on the stations. Reuters recently reported that a Chinese businessman with ties to the communist Chinese government buys large blocks of airtime on multiple radio stations in the U.S.  They reported that “Many of these stations do not run ads and so do not appear to be commercially motivated.” But they do report the “news” from Beijing’s perspective.

The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) requires that those who act on behalf of foreign governments when trying to influence public opinion register with the Department of Justice and must disclose to their audience who they work for. The Obama Justice Department has chosen to ignore that law in the cases of RT and Al Jazeera. I personally lodged a complaint with the DOJ regarding Russia Today and Al Jazeera only to receive a copy of the law and a bureaucratic “Dear John” letter. Even if the DOJ were to ever attempt to enforce FARA, the propagandists are well versed at using multiple organizations and front men to hamper any would-be investigations. So it would require some effort. But the new proposed FCC policy of selling American media properties to foreigners can only make things far worse. Such a change would embolden foreign propagandists to be even more aggressive and entrenched in their campaigns to influence American public opinion.

FCC Commissioner O’Rielly promises that the commission will “preserve national security protections.” I don’t think I need to elaborate on the reliability of promises made by Obama and his appointees. The administration’s lack of enforcement of FARA is a good indicator of how vigorously they would preserve national security when doling out broadcast licenses to foreigners.

In a 2013 FCC ruling on the subject of foreign ownership, four of the five current Commissioners are on record. Their statements include:

  • “Promoting a regulatory framework that does not inhibit the flow of capital to the US communications sector is an important goal of Commission policy.”Commissioner Wheeler
  • “I am pleased to say, we clarify the Commission’s policies for foreign investment in broadcast licensees by signaling that the Commission is open to considering proposed foreign investments in broadcasting on a case-by-case basis.” Commissioner Clyburn
  • “The Commission has repeatedly recognized that foreign investment can be an ‘important source of financing…innovation, economic growth and job creation’” [for broadcasters]. Commissioner Pai
  • “U.S. broadcasters and foreign investors should know this Commission is now open to considering foreign entities holding capital stock of companies that control broadcast licenses exceeding 25 percent, perhaps up to a high of 100 percent.” Commissioner O’Rielly

Sadly, without a huge outcry from the public, passage of this policy looks like a done deal.

This FCC proposal was apparently spearheaded by a group called “The Coalition for Broadcast Investment.” According to the group’s lawyers, the members include some of the biggest media companies on the planet: CBS, Disney, Hearst Television, Clear Channel (iHeartMedia), and Univision. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), which describes itself as the voice for the nation’s radio and television broadcasters, also backs the proposal.

That might explain why you haven’t heard much about this on your evening news. The broadcasters of the news are the ones with the most to gain monetarily by keeping a low profile on this story.

By the way, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, married into a family that owns a large part of iHeartMedia. According to Bloomberg Business, iHeartMedia owned 858 radio stations as of December 2014 and is reportedly the largest owner of radio stations in the U.S.

I fear that most members of Congress who have not married into the broadcasting business would rather not pick a fight with the media giants by trying to stop this.

For my conservative friends, if you too are wondering why you too haven’t heard about this story on Fox News, just Google the problems that Rupert Murdoch had with the FCC regarding station ownership and his citizenship. It is an issue that broadcasters on the left, right and center seem to agree on. What’s good for their bottom line is good for the U.S.

Abraham Lincoln said, “He who molds public sentiment, goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions.” A license to broadcast to the public over public airwaves has far reaching long term national security implications. It cannot be compared in any way to the international trade of widgets, cars or consumer electronics, as some would like us to believe.

Other than money, what do these foreign owners have to contribute to us? Can Qatar or Russia teach us anything about freedom of speech, or freedom of the press?

If this proposal becomes FCC policy, public sentiment in the U.S. will progressively be molded by forces that owe no allegiance to the U.S. or even the truth, and many may also wish to do us harm. The roles before the FCC will be reversed with the propagandists essentially being guaranteed a license to use America’s airwaves to subvert America itself. The FCC will be legally forced to assume that anyone from anywhere who wants a license is automatically our friend unless someone can prove otherwise.

Such a policy change will undermine our First Amendment rights of free speech. Just look at the RT reporters who have quit because they were prohibited from telling the truth and ordered to spread lies.

Freedom of speech is meaningless when a foreign licensee of a broadcast station owns the mute button.

  • You must submit comments to the FCC by December 21st (Identify Docket No. 15–236).

Use any of the following methods:

Jerry Kenney, a television producer from Port Orange, Florida, has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice alleging that foreign channels RT and Al Jazeera are both violating the law by not disclosing in their propaganda broadcasts in the U.S. that they are agents of foreign powers. He has also alleged violations of FCC rules that have given Al Jazeera and RT access to taxpayer-funded public television stations. He recently lodged a complaint alleging that non-commercial educational public TV stations, which are prohibited by law from running commercials for American businesses, are running infomercials for Chinese and Vietnamese businesses.


Destroying and Killing the USA was Way Too Easy

By: Sher Zieve
Gulag Bound

Roger Nash Baldwin, ACLU founder, Marxist

Roger Nash Baldwin, ACLU founder, Marxist

The destruction of the USA and its takeover by domestic traitor and foreign forces has been in the works for many decades. In recent history, Roger Nash Baldwin (founder of the ACLU and ‘father’ of many other leftist organizations) was one of the prime “leg men” in establishing the foundation for the overthrow of the USA. Of the ACLU, he said: “Communism, of course, is the goal.” Although he is said to have ‘recanted’ that comment, he did so after too many others had discovered his real purposes. Tragically, the ACLU still remains in place. Baldwin’s history is rife with his support of Soviet Russian style Marxism and only requires a brief search to pull up the actions comprising his legacy. I have provided a beginning link below.

Although many in the past have set the table for the USA’s destruction, it was not until Barack Hussein Obama took the US White House as his own that the final phase began implementation. It has been extremely easy for Obama and his syndicate to “transform” (aka “dismantle and decimate”) the USA from within, as the people of the country had already been conditioned to following the authority of leftist-run public (government) school systems and would buckle to any far-Left Luciferian authority’s order they faced.

The new mantra is “It’s better to die than be called a racist, homophobe, Islamophobe”…etc. In order to prove they were none of those, a great portion of the liberal electorate voted for Obama so that they might be counted as a good guy or girl by their peers. Policies to actually help the country to proper and become freer no longer mattered…it was how the “selfie” crowd was perceived that counted. That remains true today. So…they elected Obama to assuage their ‘presumed shame for forgotten past sins’ and allowed him to do whatever he wanted to the country and to them.

Generations are now being raised to submit to any and all leftist authority and to regurgitate their mantras and beliefs on command. To not do so would be unseemly to the indoctrinated…and, nowadays, it has become increasingly dangerous. I and others have written innumerable columns about what Obama has been doing to destroy our country. The following are but a few from the daily barrage of the Obama-Jarrett ‘Articles of Enslavement’ of and for the American people.

Let’s take a look:

1. The FCC Commissioner is considering regulating conservative political speech and may censor and/or remove conservative websites. He indicated that the federal government (aka “ObamaGov”) has an “impulse” to regulate all conservative speech. This far the US Congress—now controlled by Republicans—has still done little to nothing to stop Obama’s growing anti-liberty and anti-Constitution polices.

2. The forced entry into the homes of Christian conservative homeschooling parents are escalating, as leftist-run sheriffs’ and police departments—effectively–engage in break-ins and warrantless searches that amount to home invasions. And, it’s not just occurring in the USA…it’s a globally coordinated phenomenon with the end goal of children being taught the same messages in schools worldwide.

3. Obama is now bypassing Congress more and more as he solidifies his dictatorship. It’s not just the Democrats that Obama and his syndicate can count on. There are many Democrat plants who have infiltrated the Republican Party and who vote fairly consistently with the Dems to enact Obama’s and the NWO’s polices.

Operation-Jade-Help-logo4. An unprecedented in it’s size and scope multi-State military exercise code named Jade Helm (Joint Assistant for Deployment and Execution Homeland Eradication of Local Militants”) is now proceeding. It is believed by some to be either the final exercise before the Obama-Jarrett team install Martial Law nationwide, while some say it’s “nothing to worry about” (a.k.a. “move along…these aren’t the droids we’re looking for”). However, one governor’s State involved in the “drill” isn’t so certain. Governor Greg Abbott of Texas has ordered the Texas State Guard to monitor the US military’s exercises to ensure the rights of Texans are not trampled.

5. After Islamists attacked a Garland, Texas awards’ ceremony (with AK-47s) for best cartoons depicting Muhammad, the 2 terrorists were shot and killed by a Texas police officer. The terrorists were the ones instigating it but, now even Fox News and Donald Trump are preaching the appeasement of Islam and blaming activist Pamela Geller who organized it! Catholic League’s Bill Donahue blasted Geller and said that Muslims have a right to be upset! This is exactly what happened before the takeover of Europe by Nazis in WW II and now by Islam. The people of each of those newly conquered by the growing Satanic cult said Muslims should be shown respect even if they Islam didn’t respect the legal citizens of the countries they invaded. You cannot appease Islam! Islam is now officially being given rights that other religions (Islam by the way is not a religion it’s a world system that uses its concocted “religion” to control its people)…and it’s being affected within the USA. Anything anyone does offends some Muslim somewhere. We are to be killed simply because we exist. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob works to build up and elevate His creation of humankind, while the god of Muhammad works to subjugate and destroy humans from the inside out. That is the Islamic way….

When the leaders within a country start saying its population must make nice and not offend its enemies, you know said country is only a short time away from its final inevitable decimation. History has repeated itself over and over again with all too few appearing to grasp its messages. The war began some time ago and too few even seemed to notice. ..or cared. Make no mistake…the enemy of God and mankind is currently winning…with the help of humans, no less. Yes…the destruction of the once great USA was all too easy…because it had help from its targeted victims. We were given free will by our Creator. It’s an abject shame we have used it so foolish.

“Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.”
–Daniel 12: 10

Roger Nash Baldwin:
at en.wikipedia.org

FCC Commissioner Feds may come after Drudge and other Conservative websites:
at examiner.com

Homeschooler parents pepper-sprayed and Tasered by police in front of kids:
at theminorityreportblog.com

German SWAT Team uses battering ram to invade home schoolers’ home:
at blog.acton.org

Homeschoolers Treated like Terrorists:
at gatestoneinstitute.org

Case worker admits lying to force entry into homeschooler’s home:
at medicalkidnap.com

Gov. Abbot Texas Guard to Monitor Jade Helm:
at gov.texas.gov

Zieve-SherSher Zieve is an author and political commentator. Zieve’s op-ed columns are widely carried by multiple internet journals and sites, and she also writes hard news. Her columns have also appeared in The Oregon Herald, Dallas Times, Sacramento Sun, in international news publications, and on multiple university websites. Sher is also a guest on multiple national radio shows.


How ‘independent’ was the net neutrality decision?

By: James Simpson

EXECUTIVE INFLUENCE: The trajectory of the Federal Communications Commission’s ruling in favor of 332-page net neutrality rule calls into question the agency’s alleged “independence.”

While the Obama administration appears to have used its power once again to force the issue of net neutrality, the FCC has been rebuked in the courts twice before, and is likely to lose on this one as well.

On Feb. 26, the five FCC commissioners voted 3-2 to place the Internet under strict common-carrier rules of Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. It was a party line vote, with the three Democrats voting for and two Republicans voting against. The FCC kept the 332-page regulation under wraps before the vote. As with Obamacare, they had to pass it so we could find out what is in it. Chairman Tom Wheeler even refused to testify before Congress on the rules under consideration. Even though they have now voted, they have yet to release the document to the public.

The FCC is supposedly an independent body, commissioned by Congress, but in a public announcement broadcast on YouTube, Obama essentially ordered Wheeler to impose “the strongest possible rules” on the Internet. Nothing new for this president, but Wheeler himself had been initially opposed to this idea, instead working on a “third way,” which used some authority from the Communications Act but avoided the heavy hand of Title II. However, as so many others who find themselves at odds with the administration, he abruptly changed his tune and began promoting what appeared to be the Obama plan. Following its vote by the commission, Wheeler announced, “Today is the proudest day of my public policy life.”

If the FCC was voting under orders from the administration, then it has created a potential constitutional crisis. The FCC’s role as an independent creation of Congress has been usurped and it has for all intents and purposes simply become another arm of the executive branch. Internet Consultant Scott Cleland says the regulation is also on very weak legal grounds:

As an analyst, one does not have to see the order’s final language to predict with confidence that the FCC’s case faces serious legal trouble overall, because the eight big conceptual legal problems spotlighted here are not dependent on the details of the FCC’s order. After two FCC failed court reviews in 2010 in Comcast v. FCC and 2014 in Verizon  v. FCC, and  decades of multiple Title II definitional and factual precedents completely contrary to the FCC’s current legal theory, the legal field of play is much more clear than usual or most appreciate.

Wheeler defended the FCC decision in a Feb. 26 statement:

The Open Internet Order reclassifies broadband Internet access as a “telecommunications service” under Title II of the Communications Act while simultaneously foregoing utility-style, burdensome regulation that would harm investment. This modernized Title II will ensure the FCC can rely on the strongest legal foundation to preserve and protect an open Internet. Allow me to emphasize that word “modernized.” We have heard endless repetition of the talking point that “Title II is old-style, 1930’s monopoly regulation.” It’s a good sound bite, but it is misleading when used to describe the modernized version of Title II in this Order.

Contacted for this article, Cleland called FCC’s legal theory “a Rube Goldberg contrivance to manufacture legal authority.” Cleland said of Wheeler’s statement:

Making a claim to modernization by using a 1934 law is Orwellian doublespeak. The problems they cite as an excuse to impose these regulations are non-existent. With over 2,000 Internet Service Providers there have been only a handful of problems—all resolved without regulation. Wheeler is mischaracterizing the issue to mask a duplicitous, premeditated strategy of control. This is a power grab, pure and simple.

So how was this decision pulled off? For starters, with lots of money. George Soros and the Ford Foundation, two of the left’s biggest money funders, tossed at least $196 million into the effort. In addition, staff from the Center for American Progress, the Free Press and others obtained key positions on the FCC and in the White House to facilitate it. The Washington Examiner characterized it as a “shadow FCC” operating out of the White House.

As explained in an earlier post, the Free Press was co-founded by Marxist Robert McChesney, who wants to see the Internet become a public utility, with the “ultimate goal” being “to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.” The former Free Press board chairman until 2011 was Tim Wu, who actually coined the phrase “network neutrality.” McChesney told the socialist magazine Monthly Review, “Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.”

So there you have it.

In pushing this power grab, the Obama administration has wrapped itself in emotional buzzwords, characterizing net neutrality as a battle for free speech, or a method to achieve an “open Internet.”  Cleland calls it “teddy bears and rainbows rhetoric.”

The Internet is the most open, most free, most innovative technological marvel of the modern age, and a rare bastion of free speech. The Obama administration is determined to smother it.

This article was written by a contributor of Watchdog Arena, Franklin Center’s network of writers, bloggers, and citizen journalists.