Translate

Friday, October 31, 2014

Kate Of Gaia & Nala On Scot Free Radio - The Position Of Neutral Observation

Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo aircraft crashes in Mojave desert

Army chief seizes power in Burkina Faso after president resigns

The 500 Year Old Map that Shatters the Official History of the Human Race


Website Image Template
Buck RogersStaff Writer
Waking Times
If conventional wisdom on the history of the human race is correct, then human civilization is not old enough, nor was it advanced enough, to account for many of the mysterious monolithic and archeological sites around the world. Places like Gobekli Tepe in Turkey, theBosnian Pyramids, and Adam’s Calendar in South Africa, beg the same question: if human civilization is supposedly not old enough to have created all of these sites, then who, or what, had the capacity to create so many elaborate structures around the globe?
It is clear that our understanding of our own history is incomplete, and there is plenty of credible evidence pointing to the existence of intelligent and civilized cultures on Earth long before the first human cultures emerged from the Middle East around 4000BC. The Admiral Piri Reis world map of 1513 is part of the emerging more complete story of our history, one that challenges mainstream thinking in big ways.
Mapmaking is a complex and civilized task, thought to have emerged around 1000BC with theBabylonian clay tablets. Antarctica was officially first sighted by a Russian expedition in 1820 and is entirely covered in ice caps thought to have formed around 34-45 million years ago. Antarctica, therefore, should not be seen on any map prior to 1820, and all sighted maps of Antarctica should contain the polar ice caps, which are supposedly millions of years old.
A world map made by Ottoman cartographer and military admiral, Piri Reis, casts some doubt on what we think we know about ancient civilization.
The Piri Reis map, which focuses on Western Africa, the East Coast of South America, and the North Coast of Antarctica, features the details of a coastline that many historians and geologists believe represents Queen Maud Land, that is, Antarctica. Remarkably, as represented in this map, the frigid continent was not covered in ice caps, but, rather, with dense vegetation. How could a map drawn in 1513 feature a continent that wasn’t discovered until 1820? And if the continent had in fact been discovered by one of the civilizations known to have emerged after 4000BC, why were the ice caps not on the map?
The paradoxes presented by the map were of little significance to the world until Charles Hapgood, a history professor from New Hampshire, USA, claimed that the information in the Piri Reis map supported a different view of geology and ancient history. Hapgood believed that the map verified his global geological theory, which explains how portions of Antarctica could have remained ice-free until 4000BC.
Hapgood’s presentation is so convincing that even famed theoretical physicist and philosopherAlbert Einstein wrote the following supportive forward to a book that Hapgood wrote in 1953:
“His idea is original, of great simplicity, and – if it continues to prove itself – of great importance to everything that is related to the history of the Earth’s surface.” -Albert Einstein
Piri ReisUnquestionably not a hoax, the map is certifiably authentic, but the information on the map is of mysterious origin. Piri Reis himself notes that the map was drawn from information sourced from other, older maps, charts and logs, many of which, Hapgood suggests, may have been copied and transcribed repeatedly since before the destruction of the Library of Alexandria in Egypt, which wiped out the literature of antiquity and vast cultural knowledge.
This hypothesis opens the door to the possibility that some forgotten ancient civilization had the capacity to voyage to the Antarctic, charting the earth, with the technology to make maps, sometime before the ice caps formed. A significant departure from our present understanding of our history.
The absence of the ice caps in the Piri Reis map is peculiar, and in 1960 Hapgood brought his theories on this to the attention of the United States Air Force. Hapgood asked, among other things, if the shape of the continent, as it appeared on the Piri Reis map, was at all similar to the shape of the continent under the ice, as revealed by recent Air Force testing of seismic data on the continent. Their answer was astonishing:
“…the geographical detail shown in the lower part of the map agrees very remarkably with the results of the seismic profile made across the top of the ice-cap by the Swedish-British Antarctic Expedition of 1949.
This indicates the coastline had been mapped before it was covered by the ice-cap.
The ice-cap in this region is now about a mile thick.
We have no idea how the data on this map can be reconciled with the supposed state of geographical knowledge in 1513.
Harold Z. Ohlmeyer
Lt. Colonel, USAF
Commander”
If Hapgood’s theory has merit, as even Einstein believed, then there was a period of time from around 13000BC to 6000BC when Antarctica was located more closely to the equator and was more tropical in climate, much like parts of South America. This was caused by a sudden shift of the earth’s entire lithosphere, he theorized, simultaneously moving all of the continents into their present position, a much different view than the widely accepted explanation offered the plate tectonics theory.
If Antarctica had indeed been further North then than it presently is, and was not covered in ice only as recently as 6000BC, then who was around back then that could have mapped it, long before any known civilizations? And who could have done so long before the advent of the marine chronometer in the 18th century, which finally solved the problem of accurately tracking longitude on the high seas?
Had the entire Earth already been mapped by 4000BC, by a civilization that has been forgotten, as analysis of the Piri Reis map and the theories of Charles Hapgood suggest?
About the Author
Buck Rogers is the earth bound incarnation of that familiar part of our timeless cosmic selves, the rebel within. He is a surfer of ideals and meditates often on the promise of happiness in a world battered by the angry seas of human thoughtlessness. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com.
Sources:
– Hancock, Graham. Fingerprints of the Gods: The Evidence of Earth’s Lost Civilization. 1995, Crown Trade Paperbacks.

FBI Holds Secret Meeting To Scare Congress Into Backdooring Phone Encryption - TechDirt


from the just-in-time-for--halloween dept

In September, both Apple and Google announced plans to encrypt information on iOS and Android devices by default. Almost immediately, there was a collective freakout by law enforcement types. But, try as they might, these law enforcement folks couldn't paint any realistic scenario of where this would be a serious problem. Sure, they conjured up scenarios, but upon inspection they pretty much all fell apart. Instead, what was clear was that encryption could protect users from peoplecopying information off of phones without permission, and, in fact, the FBI itself recommends you encrypt the data on your phone.

But it didn't stop FBI director James Comey from ignoring the advice of his own agency and pushing for a new law that would create back doors (he called them front doors, but when asked to explain the difference, he admitted that he wasn't "smart enough" to understand the distinction) in such encryption.

So, now, of course, the FBI/DOJ gets to go up to Congress and tell them scary stories about just how necessary breaking encryption would be. And it's being done in total secrecy, because if it was done in public, experts might debunk the claims, like they've done with basically all of the scenarios provided in public to date.
FBI and Justice Department officials met with House staffers this week for a classified briefing on how encryption is hurting police investigations, according to staffers familiar with the meeting. The briefing included Democratic and Republican aides for the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, the staffers said. The meeting was held in a classified room, and aides are forbidden from revealing what was discussed.
It's almost guaranteed that someone will introduce some legislation, written primarily by the FBI, pushing for this (such a bill is almost certainly already sitting in some DOJ bureaucrat's desk drawer, so they just need to dot some i's, cross some t's and come up with a silly acronym name for the bill). So far, many in Congress have been outspoken against such a law, but never underestimate the ability of the FBI to mislead Congress with some FUD, leading to all sorts of scare stories about how we need this or we're all going to die.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20141030/16013228988/fbi-holds-secret-meeting-to-scare-congress-into-backdooring-phone-encryption.shtml

State of Insecurity - Political Repression in Canada

 



The RCMP have quietly formed a homeland security department without the need for pesky legislation.

This program, INSET, or National Security Enforcement Team, is Canada wide and is already being used against social movements.

The police in Canada have a long history of watching social movements including the PROFUNC program that ran from the 50's to the 70's that planned internment camps for thousands of Canadians, including Tommy Douglas.

Originally published by William Ray/CUTV on June 8, 2014: http://youtu.be/kIjJgALGiKs

Burkina Faso Unrest: Protesters set parliament, other buildings & cars ablaze

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Airplane crashes into airport building in Wichita, Kansas (PHOTOS, VIDEO) — RT USA

Airplane crashes into airport building in Wichita, Kansas (PHOTOS, VIDEO) — RT USA

1st Occupy Movement Ever Recorded - NwoSatire by Monty Python! [Brilliant!]

Germany Helped Prep Russia for War, U.S. Sources Say - The Daily Beast

Germany Helped Prep Russia for War, U.S. Sources Say - The Daily Beast


Over the past few years, NATO countries have helped Russia revolutionize its armed forces. Now questions are arising about a German defense contractor that trained the Russian military.
The world was shocked when Russian special operations forces invaded Crimea with advanced technology, drastically improved operations, and with so much operational security that even agencies in the U.S. intelligence community didn’t see it coming. In Washington, government and congressional leaders are wondering how the Russian special operations forces got so good, so fast, without anyone noticing. Some are wondering how much help Russia had from the West.
In 2011, for example, the German defense contractor Rheinmetall signed a $140 million contract to build a combat simulation training center in Mulino, in southwest Russia, that would train 30,000 Russian combat troops per year. While the facility wasn't officially scheduled to be completed until later this year, U.S. officials believe that Germany has been training Russian forces for years.
Rheinmetall defended the project even after the invasion of Crimea, up until the German government finally shut it down late last month. But many tracking the issue within the U.S. government were not happy with Germany's handling of the Russian contract, and worry that some of the training may have gone to the kind of special operations forces now operating in and around Ukraine.
“It’s unfortunate that German companies were directly supporting and training Russia’s military even during the attacks against Ukraine,” one senior Senate aide told The Daily Beast. “The U.S. government should call on our NATO allies to suspend all military connections with Russia at this point, until the Russians leave Ukraine, including Crimea.”
According to the Congressional Research Service, Rheinmetall’s partner in the deal was the Russian state-owned Oboronservis (“Defense Service”) firm. The training center, modeled after one used by the German Bundeswehr, was to be “the most advanced system of its kind worldwide.” Reinmetall saw the contract as a precursor to several more projects “in light of the plans to modernize the equipment of the Russian armed forces.”
U.S. officials, now looking back, are privately expressing anger and frustration about the German work with the Russian military. While definitive proof is hard to come by, these officials look at the radical upgrade of Moscow’s forces–especially its special operations forces–experienced since they last saw major action in 2008's invasion of Georgia. The U.S. officials believe that some of the German training over the last few years was given to the GRU Spetsnaz, the special operations forces that moved unmarked into Crimea andwho can now be found stirring up trouble in eastern Ukraine.
“People are pissed,” one U.S. intelligence official told The Daily Beast. “The chatter inside the Pentagon is that the training they were providing was going to Spetznaz.”
Rheinmetall did not respond to a request for comment.
Russia maintains close economic ties with many NATO states–especially Germany. By some estimates, the country exported nearly $50 billion in goods to Russia in 2013. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of German jobs depend on Russian trade.
The armed forces of NATO members have also been working with their counterparts in the Russian military, on and off, for years. Russia has held joint military exercises with both Germany and the U.S., for example. America has bought Russian helicopters to use in Afghanistan. And Moscow allows NATO equipment to pass through Russian territory as the gear comes into and out of the war zone.

NEWS AND VIEWS FROM THE NEFARIUM OCT - NATO, France & German Military Involvement in Russia

 

There have been important developments in NATO this week; Joseph discusses those French-built Russian aircraft carriers, the recent Russian provocations of NATO, and a little known aspect of German military involvement in Russia




Market Breaks As Stocks Explode Higher On Algo-Triggering Headline | Zero Hedge

Market Breaks As Stocks Explode Higher On Algo-Triggering Headline | Zero Hedge

CBOE: AS OF 13:07ET OPRA NOT DISSEMINATION QUOTES,LAST SALES

This was right as the Nikkei headlines hit and e-mini volume exploded.
And here is the NYSE confirming that stocks are now soaring higher on "critical Issue", aka broken market:
Confused what this means: simply said, virtually all quotes, and certainly options, are stale and unreliable, even as dark pools, internalizers and other ATS are filing orders based on 1 hour old data.
In short: a total mess.

Visualizing some of the berserk trades during the outage courtesy of Nanex:

What a total farce!

​Closure of Al-Aqsa Mosque a ‘declaration of war’ - Abbas — RT News

​Closure of Al-Aqsa Mosque a ‘declaration of war’ - Abbas — RT News

Hackers Breached White House Network... And Some Other Country Told The US About It | Techdirt

Hackers Breached White House Network... And Some Other Country Told The US About It | Techdirt

from the best-cybersecurity-folks? dept

So, there's a story in the Washington Post that's getting a bit of attention about how Russian hackers apparently breached a White House computer network (an unclassified network, so not as troubling as it could have been). And that story is kind of interesting, but it seems like the bigger deal is this:
U.S. officials were alerted to the breach by an ally, sources said.
Wait a second. After all we've been told about the brilliant minds at the NSA/US Cyber Command and their "cybersecurity" skills -- it seems immensely troubling that (1) the US didn't catch this themselves and (2) that some other country did catch it. So, uh, just why is some "ally" monitoring the White House's network?

As for the rest of the report, as the Washington Post notes, this isn't even that big of a deal. Foreign state hackers are always going to try to breach US government computers, and sometimes they're going to succeed. That's the nature of the beast. But, it does seem profoundly odd that it was discovered by some other country.

Outside The Box With Kate Of Gaia - The De-Phoenician Of Antares [10/28/...

 



Outside The Box With Kate Of Gaia on Critical Mass Radio recorded on October 28, 2014
Guests: Kathy, Shieena, Trish, Zoom, Corey
The De-Phoenician Of Antares
Antares Article: http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/...

"NAME: The master key to the entire system’s/CROWN CORPORATION’S game. The NAME is the lynch pin to the entire legal/control construct. Without a LEGAL NAME, which is your consent by agreeing to be said NAME, the system vampires cannot literally feed on your life blood/creation source energy that is typically shown in the physical materials we collect. It is only the CONSENT to be/use/have a LEGAL NAME/Mark of the Beast that is required for your absolute spiritual contract/deal with the devil motif to be in FULL FORCE AND EFFECT with you as a SLAVE and them as MASTER. For PROOF of this, look and see how much of your life/existence involves a LEGAL NAME and you will see the measure of control the system has over you."

"We are clearing this reality of these parasites exponentially now where universal law reigns supreme where none shall or can trespass. They are masters of deception so do not let your loving compassion be used against you, something that has been their most powerful tools. The bio-borg entities are already lifeless and are dependent only on being able to suck the life out of you but, like every vampire, they cannot enter your reality without an invitation. Every use of the legal NAME is the only invitation they need so best cut your ties and consent with that. Just get this concept and you have already cut the puppet strings and your causal ability returns instantly in relation to your ability to be responsible with that ultimate of powers.
To the “walking dead” (and you know what you are) , your time is over, your deceptions are powerless and now moment by now moment, you are being erased from consciousness for the invading parasites you are. We, of the living soul, are awake, aware and reclaiming our reality where yours never existed. In short, yes, you are doomed. Have a nice day!"
- Babylon Is Fallen (Excerpt) 

"Kate Of Gaia is a two spirit Gemini dragon, radio show host, researcher and investigative journalist digging deep into the illusions of this reality. She has spent her life thus far in a full learning capacity with stages as a singer songwriter, writer, poet, diver, pilot, etc with the last many years spent exposing the lies within religions, politics, legal land etc. 
She chooses to encompass as many aspects of this reality as possible to get the broadest perspective that she can."
"Kate hosts an Open Forum style radio show called 'Outside The Box'
where thoughts and ideas are shared, on any given topic or subject that is the flavour of the moment.
Kate now refers to her shows as 'episodes' and also likes to think of them as
'nightly gatherings' .
Broadcasting 7 nights a week at
7pm-9pm EST/Midnight-2am GMT
all 'episodes' are geared for the listeners to really get involved so that they are the guest speakers.
So join and share with Kate by tuning-in and calling-in.
You are always welcome.
You can listen to Kate live on air, and find the archived recordings of all her previous broadcasts here:http://www.blogtalkradio.com/critical... "

Monsanto Agritech Lobbying for the TTIP: Britain Spearheads Campaign to Make European GMO Regulation Meaningless | Global Research

Monsanto Agritech Lobbying for the TTIP: Britain Spearheads Campaign to Make European GMO Regulation Meaningless | Global Research


gmos_tomato_study_flawed_nslogo-263x164
As Washington’s trusted lapdog, the UK is spearheading US agritech’s drive to get genetically modified (GM) food into Europe. Officials, politicians, academics and media outlets have been co-opted by and are colluding with the GMO agritech industry [1-6]. These people and institutions have been spewing out falsehoods, ignoring evidence pertaining to GMOs and are putting a one-sided positive spin on GM food with the aim of forcing it onto a public that does not want it [7].
Monsanto and other agritech companies are lobbying hard for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) [8], which aims to throw Europe’s door wide open to GM food [9]. The same companies are also behind the drive to weaken the pan-European regulatory framework currently in place by attempting to push through legislation that will allow them to pick off each state one by one and force their GMOs onto people [10,11]. They have all options covered.
Now the industry and its mouthpieces and proxies are pushing to do away with European process-based regulation [12], which would effectively side-step any effective process for assessing and regulating GMOs. Process-based regulation concerns the techniques used to create a new crop variety. For example, if a new crop variety is developed through GM, it must be assessed for safety and labelled.
However, technologies have been developed that are intended to target GM gene insertion to a predetermined site within the plant’s DNA. Although the GMO industry claims these techniques are precise, studies have found that they cause unintended genomic modifications in off-target sites (the part of the plant not being targeted), potentially causing a range of harmful side-effects [13].
The Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) is the UK’s main public science funding body. It is using the supposed precision of genome editing to lobby for process-based GMO regulation to be abolished. The alternative is product-based regulation, where the regulator looks at the trait the crop is engineered to express and regulates it on that basis. Writing on the GMWatch site, Claire Robinson says that if a crop were engineered to produce a pesticide, it would be regulated as a pesticide. If it were engineered to contain higher levels of a nutrient, it would probably escape regulation, or it may be regulated as a natural food or drug, depending on the country and the product. Safety assessments specific to GM crops would not be triggered [12]. They would be treated the same as non-GMOs.
The US and Canada currently have product-based regulation and thus have minimal oversight of GMO crops and foods. The US, for example, only regulates GMOs if they are pesticides or plant pests and assumes that GMO Bt pesticidal plants are equivalent and thus harmless to humans and animals because natural Bt is allegedly harmless to humans and animals. Claire Robinson argues that this completely ignores the fact that the GMO Bt toxin is different from natural Bt in structure and mode of action, thus losing its specificity to insect pests and opening up the possibility that it is toxic or allergenic to humans and animals.
It is impossible to label GMO products if the process by which they were created is ignored. If Europe opts for product-based regulation, there will be no labelling of GMO products. The TTIP aims to force Europe to drop its GMO regulatory standards. If this occurs, Claire Robinson argues that Europe will adopt the type of worthless product-based regulatory assessments that occurs in the US. The push for product-based regulation is yet another devious tactic being used by the GMO biotech lobby to muddy the waters and erode Europe’s regulatory framework.
GMOs are not needed to feed the world [14-18]. The push to force GM food into Europe is based on lies, deceptions and falsehoods. It is part of a strategy to place the global control of agriculture into the hands of a few corporations for commercial gain. These corporations with their control of seeds and technologies via patents intend to suck massive amounts of money from agriculture [19]. Given their impacts on health and the environment and also taking into account the track records of the players who are furthering the global GM strategy (Monsanto, Gates Foundation, Rockefeller, US State Department, etc), GMOs must ultimately be regarded as a tool of imperialism and a form of biological warfare [20,21,22].
The GMO biotech lobby attempts to disguise its intentions behind the mask of altruism and tries to drive its message with a cynical dose of emotional blackmail about critics of GMOs robbing food from the mouths of the hungry [23]. Such a pity that the UK public is (unknowingly) funding the GMO agenda, not least because the BBSRC and government departments are using British taxpayers’ money to promote the industry’s lobbying messages.
Notes

20-Year CBS News Veteran Details Massive Censorship And Propaganda In Mainstream Media | Zero Hedge

20-Year CBS News Veteran Details Massive Censorship And Propaganda In Mainstream Media | Zero Hedge

Journalists should be dark, funny, mean people. It’s appropriate for their antagonistic, adversarial role.

– Matt Taibbi, in this New York Magazine article

Reporters on the ground aren’t necessarily ideological, Attkisson says, but the major network news decisions get made by a handful of New York execs who read the same papers and think the same thoughts.

Often they dream up stories beforehand and turn the reporters into “casting agents,” told “we need to find someone who will say . . .” that a given policy is good or bad. “We’re asked to create a reality that fits their New York image of what they believe,” she writes.

– From the excellent New York Post article: Ex-CBS reporter’s book reveals how liberal media protects Obama
Earlier this week, I published a piece titled, Former CBS Reporter Accuses Government of Secretly Planting Classified Docs on Her Computer, which I thought was incredible in its own right, yet the information in that post seems almost trite compared to the flood of information Attkisson has revealed to the New York Post’s Kyle Smith.
The following excerpts from the piece will confirm all of your worst suspicions about mainstream media:
Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman. Important people have told her so.

When the longtime CBS reporter asked for details about reinforcements sent to the Benghazi compound during the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack, White House national security spokesman Tommy Vietor replied, “I give up, Sharyl . . . I’ll work with more reasonable folks that follow up, I guess.”

Another White House flack, Eric Schultz, didn’t like being pressed for answers about the Fast and Furious scandal in which American agents directed guns into the arms of Mexican drug lords. “Goddammit, Sharyl!” he screamed at her. “The Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, The New York Times is reasonable. You’re the only one who’s not reasonable!”
Interesting, because as Matt Taibbi notes in the quote at the top, investigative journalists are not supposed to be reasonable. I digress…
In nearly 20 years at CBS News, she has done many stories attacking Republicans and corporate America, and she points out that TV news, being reluctant to offend its advertisers, has become more and more skittish about, for instance, stories questioning pharmaceutical companies or car manufacturers.

Working on a piece that raised questions about the American Red Cross disaster response, she says a boss told her, “We must do nothing to upset our corporate partners . . . until the stock splits.” (Parent company Viacom and CBS split in 2006).

Reporters on the ground aren’t necessarily ideological, Attkisson says, but the major network news decisions get made by a handful of New York execs who read the same papers and think the same thoughts.

Often they dream up stories beforehand and turn the reporters into “casting agents,” told “we need to find someone who will say . . .” that a given policy is good or bad. “We’re asked to create a reality that fits their New York image of what they believe,” she writes.

Reporting on the many green-energy firms such as Solyndra that went belly-up after burning through hundreds of millions in Washington handouts, Attkisson ran into increasing difficulty getting her stories on the air. A colleague told her about the following exchange: “[The stories] are pretty significant,” said a news exec. “Maybe we should be airing some of them on the ‘Evening News?’ ” Replied the program’s chief Pat Shevlin, “What’s the matter, don’t you support green energy?”

Says Attkisson: That’s like saying you’re anti-medicine if you point out pharmaceutical company fraud.

One of her bosses had a rule that conservative analysts must always be labeled conservatives, but liberal analysts were simply “analysts.” “And if a conservative analyst’s opinion really rubbed the supervisor the wrong way,” says Attkisson, “she might rewrite the script to label him a ‘right-wing’ analyst.”

In mid-October 2012, with the presidential election coming up, Attkisson says CBS suddenly lost interest in airing her reporting on the Benghazi attacks. “The light switch turns off,” she writes. “Most of my Benghazi stories from that point on would be reported not on television, but on the Web.”

Two expressions that became especially popular with CBS News brass, she says, were “incremental” and “piling on.” These are code for “excuses for stories they really don’t want, even as we observe that developments on stories they like are aired in the tiniest of increments.”

Hey, kids, we found two more Americans who say they like their ObamaCare! Let’s do a lengthy segment.

When the White House didn’t like her reporting, it would make clear where the real power lay. A flack would send a blistering e-mail to her boss, David Rhodes, CBS News’ president — and Rhodes’s brother Ben, a top national security advisor to President Obama.
I had no idea that the President of CBS News’ brother was a top national security advisor to President Obama, did you?
Attkisson, who received an Emmy and the Edward R. Murrow award for her trailblazing work on the story, says she made top CBS brass “incensed” when she appeared on Laura Ingraham’s radio show and mentioned that Obama administration officials called her up to literally scream at her while she was working the story.

One angry CBS exec called to tell Attkisson that Ingraham is “extremely, extremely far right” and that Attkisson shouldn’t appear on her show anymore. Attkisson was puzzled, noting that CBS reporters aren’t barred from appearing on lefty MSNBC shows.

No interview with Holder aired but “after that weekend e-mail exchange, nothing is the same at work,” Attkisson writes. “The Evening News” began killing her stories on Fast and Furious, with one producer telling Attkisson, “You’ve reported everything. There’s really nothing left to say.”

Sensing the political waters had become too treacherous, Attkisson did what she thought was an easy sell on a school-lunch fraud story that “CBS This Morning” “enthusiastically accepted,” she says, and was racing to get on air, when suddenly “the light switch went off . . . we couldn’t figure out what they saw as a political angle to this story.”

The story had nothing to do with Michelle Obama, but Attkisson figures that the first lady’s association with school lunches, and/or her friendship with “CBS This Morning” host Gayle King, might have had something to do with execs now telling her the story “wasn’t interesting to their audience, after all.”
The who charade is completely incestuous.
Meanwhile, she says, though no one confronted her directly, a “whisper campaign” began; “If I offered a story on pretty much any legitimate controversy involving government, instead of being considered a good journalistic watchdog, I was anti-Obama.”

Yet it was Attkisson who broke the story that the Bush administration had once run a gun-walking program similar to Fast and Furious, called Wide Receiver. She did dozens of tough-minded stories on Bush’s FDA, the TARP program and contractors such as Halliburton. She once inspired a seven-minute segment on “The Rachel Maddow Show” with her reporting on the suspicious charity of a Republican congressman, Steve Buyer.
All I have to say is thank you CBS, or should I say SeeBS. Thank you for being so horrible at reporting that you have opened an enormous gap for myself and countless others in alternative media to fill. I genuinely couldn’t have done it without your incompetence.