Media member is the cross hairs .....
Sharyl Attkinson.....
http://www.infowars.com/explosive-what-really-happened-to-sharyl-attkisson-at-cbs/
Sharyl Attkisson, CBS’s top investigative reporter: gone, resigned, floating free, unchained, now viewed by the news establishment as an outsider, a defector, a weirdo with an axe to grind.
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/26/2014 21:36 -0400
Sharyl Attkinson.....
http://www.infowars.com/explosive-what-really-happened-to-sharyl-attkisson-at-cbs/
Explosive: What really happened to Sharyl Attkisson at CBS?
Jon Rappoport
Infowars.com
April 24, 2014
Infowars.com
April 24, 2014
Image: Youtube
Among the controversial stories she covered at CBS: Benghazi. Just as she was digging below the surface of the Obama coverup, she was cut off and shut down by her network bosses.
Here’s the crux. The Rhodes brothers.
Ben Rhodes, David Rhodes.
Ben is a deputy national security advisor to Obama and writes speeches for him. In September 2012, Ben was “instrumental,” according to ABC News, in changing the White House talking points (the story) on what happened in Benghazi.
Ben’s brother, David, is president of CBS News. Attkisson was working for David. She was investigating all the changes (12) in the Benghazi talking points. She was shut down.
Nothing to see there, move along, eyes straight ahead, go back to sleep, zombie-zombie, it’s all good don’t worry, be happy, hope and change, the audacity of whatever.
Now, on top of this, Attkisson’s computers, at work and at home, were hacked while she was still at CBS. The network acknowledged this and said “they were investigating.” They’re still investigating. So are other unnamed entities.
Who hacked her computers? CBS? The White House? NSA?
Attkisson covered other stories at CBS that were highly problematic for the White House.Fast&Furious, for example. And in the summer of 2009, Attkisson struck gold on Swine Flu. You know, the pandemic that wasn’t. She discovered that the CDC, which is tasked with tracking numbers of cases of outbreaks, had, get this, stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Stopped.
But the CDC was still trumpeting the extreme danger of Swine Flu, with no way to measure its true impact.
Dr. Peter Doshi, long after the whole Swine Flu dud was over, wrote a stunning report for the British Medical Journal Online. Seems that every year, hundreds of thousands of samples from suspected and diagnosed flu patients are sent to labs for analysis—and only about 16% of these samples turn out to be positive for the flu.
That’s a killer of a revelation. Among other things, it means that most people who are told they have the flu couldn’t possibly have been protected by any flu vaccine, even assuming the vaccines are useful and effective…because these people don’t have the flu.
I wrote Attkisson about Dr. Doshi’s finding, and she got back to me, in essence saying, well, yes, this is why the CDC stopped counting Swine Flu cases.
Huge numbers of people who were being diagnosed with Swine Flu didn’t have any kind of flu at all.
CBS shut down Attkisson on both the Fast&Furious story and the Swine Flu story.
Here’s an interesting bombshell. On April 1, 2011, Attkisson authored a piece for CBS News, “Vaccines and Autism: a new scientific review.” She dispelled the notion that the vaccine-autism connection was a dead issue. All sorts of red flags went up the flagpole. Mainstream media are supposed to treat vaccines, all vaccines, as holy sacraments of the medical cartel. Praise them, bow down to them, never accuse them of doing harm of any kind.
Sumner Redstone, the executive chairman of CBS, Attkisson’s employer, has a very significant stake in vaccines. His Foundation, on its site, states: “The Sumner M. Redstone Foundation’s contribution to the Global Poverty Project raising $118 million in pledges for vaccines…”
Redstone’s Foundation has also donated $1 million to a charity called Autism Speaks, which supportsgenetic testing for the diagnosis of Autism. You can be sure this charity has zero interest in reviving the vaccine-Autism debate and exposing the fact that there is most definitely a connection.
So Attkisson was stepping on Sumner Redstone’s toes with heavy boots.
Attkisson is now writing a book about her career. When published, it’ll land in the mainstream news cycle for a week or two at the most. Doesn’t matter how explosive its revelations are. She’s an outsider now. She isn’t in the loop. She isn’t playing the game according to the rules.
Therefore, my advice to her: come out swinging. Blast the whole rotting news establishment.
However, if Attkisson is angling for a new job at, say, FOX, or even CNN, whose ratings have gone down the toilet, she’ll have to pull her punches. Every major news outlet sits on its own reporters and gags them when things get too hot.
The first casualty in mainstream news is the truth.
and.....
http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/04/26/aftershocks-from-my-interview-with-sharyl-attkisson/
Aftershocks from my interview with Sharyl Attkisson
Aftershocks from my interview with Sharyl Attkisson
by Jon Rappoport
April 26, 2014
www.nomorefakenews.com
The ripples don’t stop. Attkisson was on to something huge at CBS, when she covered the CDC’s lies re the Swine Flu “pandemic.”
When an epidemic is promoted by governments and public health organizations, it’s an absolute disaster for them if their work is exposed as a fraud.
Much of the public believes in the medical cartel, as devotees do when they belong to a Church.
The scale of the CDC’s lies re Swine Flu, when exposed, would be on the order of a bishop saying, “You know that holy document we’ve been telling you about? It’s a fake. It never existed. We made it up.”
So here, once again, is the key question and answer from my interview with Sharyl Attkisson:
JON RAPPOPORT: In 2009, you spearheaded coverage of the so-called Swine Flu pandemic. You discovered that, in the summer of 2009, the Centers for Disease Control, ignoring their federal mandate, stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Yet they continued to stir up fear about the “pandemic,” without having any real measure of its impact. Wasn’t that another investigation of yours that was shut down? Wasn’t there more to find out?
SHARYL ATTKISSON: The implications of the story were even worse than that. We discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was “the most original story” he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others pushed to stop it and, in the end, no broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.
Do you get it? Attkisson is saying that, while at CBS, she had made Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests, and came up with evidence that the CDC had been lying about Swine Flu from the early days. They knew that almost all the purported cases had no kind of flu at all.
But they buried that knowledge. They continued to frighten the public and insist on the use of an experimental flu vaccine.
Attkisson goes on to say that her story was vetted, checked, and ready to go, for broadcast, on the news…and then it was killed. CBS wouldn’t air it.
So she wrote it for the CBS website, where it was published in October of 2009—with much less fanfare and exposure.
Her website piece explained that a) the CDC stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America in July of 2009, at the so-called height of the epidemic, and b) all 50 states were sending their counts of Swine Flu cases to the CDC, prior to the stop-order—that’s, in fact, how the CDC gathered its data on Swine Flu. The individual states handed over the data.
Attkisson: “…we asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 [Swine Flu] prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.” (CBS News, Oct. 21, 2009, “Swine Flu cases overestimated?”)
by Jon Rappoport
April 26, 2014
www.nomorefakenews.com
The ripples don’t stop. Attkisson was on to something huge at CBS, when she covered the CDC’s lies re the Swine Flu “pandemic.”
When an epidemic is promoted by governments and public health organizations, it’s an absolute disaster for them if their work is exposed as a fraud.
Much of the public believes in the medical cartel, as devotees do when they belong to a Church.
The scale of the CDC’s lies re Swine Flu, when exposed, would be on the order of a bishop saying, “You know that holy document we’ve been telling you about? It’s a fake. It never existed. We made it up.”
So here, once again, is the key question and answer from my interview with Sharyl Attkisson:
JON RAPPOPORT: In 2009, you spearheaded coverage of the so-called Swine Flu pandemic. You discovered that, in the summer of 2009, the Centers for Disease Control, ignoring their federal mandate, stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Yet they continued to stir up fear about the “pandemic,” without having any real measure of its impact. Wasn’t that another investigation of yours that was shut down? Wasn’t there more to find out?
SHARYL ATTKISSON: The implications of the story were even worse than that. We discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was “the most original story” he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others pushed to stop it and, in the end, no broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.
Do you get it? Attkisson is saying that, while at CBS, she had made Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests, and came up with evidence that the CDC had been lying about Swine Flu from the early days. They knew that almost all the purported cases had no kind of flu at all.
But they buried that knowledge. They continued to frighten the public and insist on the use of an experimental flu vaccine.
Attkisson goes on to say that her story was vetted, checked, and ready to go, for broadcast, on the news…and then it was killed. CBS wouldn’t air it.
So she wrote it for the CBS website, where it was published in October of 2009—with much less fanfare and exposure.
Her website piece explained that a) the CDC stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America in July of 2009, at the so-called height of the epidemic, and b) all 50 states were sending their counts of Swine Flu cases to the CDC, prior to the stop-order—that’s, in fact, how the CDC gathered its data on Swine Flu. The individual states handed over the data.
Attkisson: “…we asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 [Swine Flu] prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.” (CBS News, Oct. 21, 2009, “Swine Flu cases overestimated?”)
That was the core of the scandal. The CDC, all along, had been getting these reports from the states showing that the vast numbers of presumed Swine Flu cases had no Swine Flu—but the CDC didn’t make that fact public. Eventually, they stopped counting cases, in order to hide the truth.
Attkisson had wanted the content of her print article for CBS to air on its national news telecast, where it would gain much more exposure—and ignite a firestorm.
That never happened. She was shut down.
Do you want the staggering capper on this foul tale? Roughly three weeks after Attkisson’s Swine Flu revelations appeared in print, the CDC, obviously in great distress over the exposure, decided to double down. The best lie to tell would be a huge lie.
Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon)
22 million cases of Swine Flu in America. Roughly 1 out every 15 Americans came down with Swine Flu. What??
The CDC, which had stopped counting cases, because there were so few, because the vast majority of samples from suspected patients came back negative, with no sign of any kind of flu, suddenly says: 22 million American cases.
Can you imagine what would have happened had Attkisson’s story been trumpeted on the CBS Evening News? The CDC would have come back and said: new discovery: all Americans have Swine Flu from birth. This year of 2009, it was activated by comets passing the sun. And solar flares. And Martians coming here on vacation to watch the NFL Pro Bowl.
Jon Rappoport
And let's not forget James Risen .....
Attkisson had wanted the content of her print article for CBS to air on its national news telecast, where it would gain much more exposure—and ignite a firestorm.
That never happened. She was shut down.
Do you want the staggering capper on this foul tale? Roughly three weeks after Attkisson’s Swine Flu revelations appeared in print, the CDC, obviously in great distress over the exposure, decided to double down. The best lie to tell would be a huge lie.
Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon)
22 million cases of Swine Flu in America. Roughly 1 out every 15 Americans came down with Swine Flu. What??
The CDC, which had stopped counting cases, because there were so few, because the vast majority of samples from suspected patients came back negative, with no sign of any kind of flu, suddenly says: 22 million American cases.
Can you imagine what would have happened had Attkisson’s story been trumpeted on the CBS Evening News? The CDC would have come back and said: new discovery: all Americans have Swine Flu from birth. This year of 2009, it was activated by comets passing the sun. And solar flares. And Martians coming here on vacation to watch the NFL Pro Bowl.
Jon Rappoport
And let's not forget James Risen .....
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-26/guest-post-state-dept-launches-free-press-campaign-doj-tries-jail-reporter
Guest Post: State Dept Launches "Free The Press" Campaign As DoJ Tries To Jail Reporter
Submitted by Trevor Timm via The Freedom of the Press Foundation,
The US State Department announced the launch of its third annual "Free the Press" campaign today, which will purportedly highlight "journalists or media outlets that are censored, attacked, threatened, or otherwise oppressed because of their reporting." A noble mission for sure. But maybe they should kick off the campaign by criticizing their own Justice Department, which on the very same day, has asked the Supreme Court to help them force Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times reporter James Risen into jail.
Politico's Josh Gerstein reports that theJustice Department filed a legal brief today urging the Supreme Court to reject Risen's petition to hear his reporter's privilege case, in which the Fourth Circuit ruled earlier this year that James Risen (and all journalists) can be forced to testify against their sources without any regard to the confidentiality required by their profession. This flies in the face of common law precedent all over the country, as well as the clear district court reasoning in Risen's case in 2012. (The government's Supreme Court briefcan be read here.)
Associated Press reporter Matthew Lee commendably grilled the State Department spokesman about the contradiction of its press freedom campaign and the James Risen case at today's briefing on the State Department initiative, repeatedly asking if the government considers press freedom issues in the United States the same way it does abroad. The full transcript is below.
As Gerstein noted, "The Justice Department brief is unflinchingly hostile to the idea of the Supreme Court creating or finding protections for journalists," and if the Justice Department succeeds "it could place President Barack Obama in the awkward position of presiding over the jailing of a journalist in an administration the president has vowed to make the most transparent in history."
The government does mention it is working with Congress to craft a reporter's shield bill, which should give you some indication that the proposed bill is at best a watered-down, toothless version of what many courts have offered journalists for decades, and that would be no help to James Risen—the exact type of reporter that we should be attempting to protect the most. It's important to remember that in Risen's case, the government has previously analogized reporter's privilege to a criminal receiving drugs from someone and refusing to testify about it.
We'll have more on both the shield law and the Risen case soon, but it's clear that the US government still refuses to walk the walk when providing journalists the protections it claims to believe in.
Oh, and while we're on the subject, maybe the State Department can use its "Free the Press" campaign to put pressure on one of its staunchest allies, the United Kingdom, which is using terrorism laws to suppress acts of journalism—something the State Department has condemned many times in the past.
Here's the full interaction between the AP's Matthew Lee and the State Department spokesperson Jennifer Psaki on James Risen and US press freedom at today's State Department briefing:
JENNIFER PSAKI: One more announcement for all of you: With World Press Freedom Day around the world on May 3rd, the department will launch its third annual Free the Press campaign later this afternoon in New York at the U.S. U.N. mission. Beginning on Monday and all of next week, we will highlight emblematic cases of imperiled reporters and media outlets that have been targeted, oppressed, imprisoned or otherwise harassed because of their professional work. The first two cases will be announced by Assistant Secretary -- Assistant Secretary Tom Malinowski later at the -- at U.S. U.N. And we invite you of course to follow Tom at Twitter, who has -- on Twitter who, as you all know, was just confirmed several weeks, @Malinowski and to keep up with human rights issues on DRL's website.With that --Q: Sure. Just on that, reporters who are, what, harassed? I'm sorry --MS. PSAKI: Targeted, oppressed, imprisoned or otherwise harassed.Q: Otherwise harassed. Does that include those who may have been targeted, harassed, imprisoned and otherwise whatever by the United States government?MS. PSAKI: I'm --Q: No?MS. PSAKI: I think you're familiar with our Free the Press campaign, Matt, but --Q: Fair enough. So it does not include those who might have been harassed by --MS. PSAKI: We highlight, as we often do, where we see issues with media freedom around the world.Q: Right, I understand. But you would say that you don't -- the U.S. does not believe that it has a problem with press freedom, or if it does, that it's not nearly as severe as the problems in other countries.MS. PSAKI: We do not. I think we can look at many of the problems --On media press freedom?Oh. Go ahead. And then we'll go to you, (Paul ?).Did you have another question on media press freedom, or --...Q: If I could just go back to the overall, in general, the administration does not regard attempting to prosecute American journalists as an infringement of press freedom?MS. PSAKI: I'm not sure which case you're -- what you're referring to.Q: Well, there's several cases that are out there right now. The one that comes -- springs to mind is the James Risen case, where the Justice Department is attempting to prosecute. I just want to be clear. I'm not trying to --MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, I --Q: I just want to know if you regard that as an infringement on press freedom or not. And I suspect that you do not, but I want to make sure that that's the case.MS. PSAKI: As you know, and I'll, of course, refer to the Department of Justice, but the leaking of classified information is in a separate category. What we're talking about here, as you all know and unfortunately we have talk about on a regular basis here, is the targeting of journalists, the arrests, the imprisonment for simply exercising their ability to tell the story.Q: Right. I understand that. And we're all, I'm sure, myself and all my colleagues, we're very appreciative of that.But the reporters in question here have not leaked the information; they simply published it. So is it correct, then, that you don't believe -- you don't regard that as an infringement of press freedom?MS. PSAKI: We don't. I don't have anything more to say on that case.Q: OK.MS. PSAKI: Do we have a new topic?
No comments:
Post a Comment