On Jun 13, 2013, at 7:15 AM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote:

> Morgan, Rothschild, Rockefeller? wouldn't "Murdoch" -- or something
> else, such as "corporate" -- be a better term

Not if one is referring to the manipulators of the media. Murdoch is an 
owner/publisher with an attitude. The banksters go much deeper, at least to the 
early days of Edward Bernays, their clandestine takeover of the nation's money 
in 1913, their insertion of "making the world safe for democracy" and "the war 
to end all wars" in the national conversation to enter WWI. And let's not 
forget the Princeton Radio Project, funded by Rockefeller that produced Orson 
Wells' War of the Worlds broadcast, an experiment foisted on the American 
public and studied to understand the mechanics of using radio for popular panic 
and manipulation. Rockefeller and his various "philanthropic" organizations 
were the only ones allowed to see the study (until recently).

I've mentioned Nelson Rockefeller's use of "the mice" before when referring to 
voters. Chomsky and others call the process manufacturing consent. The 
banksters started the process long ago.  Murdoch is just good at implementing 
it in today's world. Who actually owns the five companies that control the news 
and entertainment media (another, more subtle manipulation outlet than "news")? 
Banksters. 

Dan
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to