A
Call To Develop Alternative Social Media and
Search Engine Platform Competitors (That Aren’t
Evil)
By Rahul D. Manchanda
December
07, 2016 "Information
Clearing House"
-
"Modern
Diplomacy" -
One thing
that the events of this latest political
election have taught the American People is that
the Mainstream Media has virtually no real
credibility any more, and are essentially
working for the Deep State Plutocratic Elite,
fully owned and co-opted by the Central Bankers
of the City of London and other foreign nations
/ entities / individuals, with absolutely no
loyalty to the People to provide them with real
news that does not support their own agenda and
self-enrichment.
Since 90%
of American Media is controlled by only 6
corporations, it is unfortunately now time for a new
civil, legal, equitable, and non-violent American
Revolutionary War, this time dedicated to holding
the CEOs of the 6 major mainstream media
conglomerates to account, with non-violent
revolution.
This means
that the People should rise up and begin to file
lawsuits, left and right, against individual and
corporate entities that make up the Mainstream
Media, for a whole series and litany of civil (as
well as criminal) causes of action.
For
example, we all now know that the U.S. Government,
through the CIA’s “Operation Mockingbird,” is an
unconstitutional program developed to target and
brainwash average Americans into supporting stupid
foreign wars, getting tens of millions of people
unnecessarily killed, spending U.S. Taxpayer dollars
to the tune of $23 trillion in debt, and aiding and
abetting major international and domestic criminal
conspiracies and plots (such as the engineered
financial crisis of 2008) by either refusing to
report on them, or outright lying to the American
People by covering them up.
From a
criminal perspective, the Mainstream American Media
led by certain of their CEOs are at once guilty of
treason, acting on behalf of (favored) foreign
entities and governments (“Foreign Agents
Registration Act”), and violations of the
Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organizations
(“RICO”) Act.
TREASON
To avoid
the abuses of the English law, treason was
specifically defined in the United States
Constitution, the only crime so defined.
Article
III, section 3 reads as follows:
“Treason
against the United States, shall consist only in
levying War against them, or in adhering to their
Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person
shall be convicted of Treason unless on the
Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or
on Confession in open Court.”
The United
States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 2381 states:
“Whoever,
owing allegiance to the United States, levies war
against them or adheres to their enemies, giving
them aid and comfort within the United States or
elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer
death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five
years and fined under this title but not less than
$10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any
office under the United States.”
There is no
question that the 6 major Mainstream Media
conglomerates are owned and beholden to the
international central banks, which are by and large
non-American actors and are instead sovereign
foreign based entities headquartered in the United
Kingdom, specifically in the City of London and with
other foreign nations/entities/individuals.
FOREIGN
AGENTS REGISTRATION ACT
The Foreign
Agents Registration Act (“FARA”) is a United States
law (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.) passed in 1938
requiring that agents representing the interests of
foreign powers in a “political or quasi-political
capacity” disclose their relationship with the
foreign government and information about related
activities and finances.
The purpose
is to facilitate “evaluation by the government and
the American people of the statements and activities
of such persons.”
The law is
administered by the FARA Registration Unit of the
Counterespionage Section (“CES”) in the National
Security Division (“NSD”) of the United States
Department of Justice.
For the
same reasons as described above, the CEOs of the
above referenced 6 major media companies need to be
criminally investigated, indicted, charged,
arrested, prosecuted, and incarcerated as such.
They are
just as dangerous and subversive as any of their
foreign central banker City of London and other
foreign nations/entities/individuals masters.
The Act
originally was administered by the Department of
State until transferred to the Department of Justice
in 1942.
From
passage in 1938 until 1966 when the Act was amended,
enforcement focused on propagandists for foreign
powers (in this case the City of London
international central bankers and other foreign
nations/entities/individuals), even if it was not
“for or on behalf of” those powers.
It was
used in 23 criminal cases during World War II.
For cases
not warranting prosecution, the Department of
Justice sent letters advising prospective agents of
the law.
In 1966
the Act was amended and narrowed to emphasize agents
actually working with foreign powers who sought
economic or political advantage by influencing
governmental decision-making.
The
amendments shifted the focus of the law from
propaganda to political lobbying and narrowed the
meaning of “foreign agent.”
From that
moment on, an organization (or person) could only be
placed in the FARA database if the government proved
that it (or he or she) was acting “at the order,
request, or under the direction or control, of a
foreign principal” and proved that it (or he or she)
was engaged “in political activities for or in the
interests of such foreign principal,” including by
“representing the interests of such foreign
principal before any agency or official of the
Government of the United States.”
This
increased the government’s burden of proof; since
1966 there have been no successful criminal
prosecutions under the FARA act.
However, a
civil injunctive remedy also was added to allow the
Department of Justice to warn individuals and
entities of possible violations of the Act, ensuring
more voluntary compliance but also making it clear
when the law has been violated.
This has
resulted in a number of successful civil cases and
administrative resolutions since that time.
The Act
requires periodic disclosure of all activities and
finances by: (1) people and organizations that are
under control of a foreign government, of
organizations or of persons outside of the United
States (“foreign principal”); (2) if they act “at
the order, request, or under the direction or
control” of this principal (i.e. as “agents”) or of
persons who are “controlled or subsidized in major
part” by this principal.
I am
sometimes asked if I have any regrets about
publishing our book. As of today, my only regret is
that it is not being published now. After the
humiliations that Obama has endured at the hands of
the Israel Lobby and the Hagel circus, we would sell
even more copies and we would not face nearly as
much ill-informed criticism. — Stephen Walt,
co-author of the book.
Organizations under such foreign control can include
political agents, public relations counsel,
publicity agents, information-service employees,
political consultants, fundraisers or those who
represent the foreign power before any agency or
official of the United States government.
The law
includes news or press services owned by a foreign
principal.
To that end
if any one of the 6 major media corporations has
foreign owners or any relationships with the
international foreign central bankers based out of
the City of London and other foreign
nations/entities/individuals, they are at once
guilty of violating this Act.
RACKETEERING INFLUENCED CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS
(“RICO”) ACT
The
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act,
commonly referred to as the “RICO Act” or simply
“RICO,” is a United States federal law that provides
for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of
action for acts performed as part of an ongoing
criminal organization.
The RICO
Act focuses specifically on racketeering, and it
allows the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for
the crimes which they ordered others to do or
assisted them in doing, closing a perceived loophole
that allowed a person who instructed someone else
to, for example, murder, to be exempt from the trial
because he did not actually commit the crime
personally.
RICO was
enacted by section 901(a) of the Organized Crime
Control Act of 1970 (Pub.L. 91–452, 84 Stat. 922,
enacted October 15, 1970), and is codified at 18
U.S.C. ch. 96 as 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968.
G. Robert
Blakey, an adviser to the United States Senate
Government Operations Committee, drafted the law
under the close supervision of the committee’s
chairman, Senator John Little McClellan.
It was
enacted as Title IX of the Organized Crime Control
Act of 1970, and signed into law by Richard M.
Nixon.
While
its original use in the 1970s was to prosecute the
Mafia as well as others who were actively engaged in
organized crime, its later application has been more
widespread.
Beginning in 1972, 33 states adopted state RICO laws
to be able to prosecute similar conduct.
Under RICO,
a person who has committed “at least two acts of
racketeering activity” drawn from a list of 35
crimes — 27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes —
within a 10-year period can be charged with
racketeering if such acts are related in one of four
specified ways to an “enterprise.”
Those found
guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $250,000
and sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering
count.
In
addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten
gains and interest in any business gained through a
pattern of “racketeering activity.”
When the
U.S. Attorney decides to indict someone under RICO,
he or she has the option of seeking a pre-trial
restraining order or injunction to temporarily seize
a defendant’s assets and prevent the transfer of
potentially forfeitable property, as well as require
the defendant to put up a performance bond.
This
provision was placed in the law because the owners
of Mafia-related shell corporations often absconded
with the assets.
An
injunction and/or performance bond ensures that
there is something to seize in the event of a guilty
verdict.
Despite its
harsh provisions, a RICO-related charge is
considered easy to prove in court, as it focuses on
patterns of behavior as opposed to criminal acts.
RICO also
permits a private individual “damaged in his
business or property” by a “racketeer” to file a
civil suit.
The
plaintiff must prove the existence of an
“enterprise”.
The
defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words,
the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and
the same.
There must
be one of four specified relationships between the
defendant(s) and the enterprise: either the
defendant(s) invested the proceeds of the pattern of
racketeering activity into the enterprise (18 U.S.C.
§ 1962(a)); or the defendant(s) acquired or
maintained an interest in, or control of, the
enterprise through the pattern of racketeering
activity (subsection (b)); or the defendant(s)
conducted or participated in the affairs of the
enterprise “through” the pattern of racketeering
activity (subsection (c)); or the defendant(s)
conspired to do one of the above (subsection (d)).
In
essence, the enterprise is either the “prize,”
“instrument,” “victim,” or “perpetrator” of the
racketeers.
A civil
RICO action can be filed in either state or federal
court.
Both the
criminal and civil components allow the recovery of
treble damages (damages in triple the amount of
actual/compensatory damages).
Initially,
prosecutors were skeptical of using RICO, mainly
because it was unproven.
However,
during the 1980s and 1990s, federal prosecutors used
the law to bring charges against several Mafia
figures.
The first
major success was the Mafia Commission Trial, which
resulted in several top leaders of New York City’s
Five Families getting what amounted to life
sentences.
By the turn
of the century, RICO cases resulted in virtually all
of the top leaders of the New York Mafia being sent
to prison.
So why
can’t RICO charges (or civil lawsuits) be brought
against the 6 heads of the major Mainstream Media
organized criminal enterprise?
Examples of
required predicate criminal acts include bribery,
extortion, fraud, obstruction of justice,
racketeering, money laundering, or copyright
infringement.
Although
some of the most often used RICO predicate criminal
acts are extortion and blackmail, one of the most
successful applications of the RICO laws has been
the ability to indict and or sanction individuals
for their behavior and actions committed against
witnesses and victims in alleged retaliation or
retribution for cooperating with federal or state
law enforcement or intelligence agencies.
It is well
known that the mainstream media routinely engages in
the above described criminal acts, especially
retaliation (defamation/slander/libel for example)
when their targets don’t tow the political line as
issued by the City of London Central Bankers and
other foreign nations/individuals/entities.
Just
think of what happened to President-Elect Donald
Trump by these 6 major mainstream media
organizations simply because the Central Bankers of
the City of London and other foreign
nations/individuals/entities did not like him, or
want him to win the election.
This is not
even to mention the various and exclusively civil
causes of action that the American People could
collectively or individually bring against CEOs and
various members of the Mainstream Media, such as
Defamation, Libel, Slander, Tortious Interference
with Contract, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Breach of
the Duty of Loyalty, Unfair Trade Practices, False
Advertising, Unlawful Trespass, Civil RICO, Unjust
Enrichment, Intentional Infliction of Emotional
Distress, Negligent Infliction of Emotional
Distress, Trademark Infringement, Copyright
Infringement, and myriad other purely civil claims,
both federal and state.
The cases
against the 6 major mainstream media corporation
CEOs should involve the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (“FBI”), the U.S. Department of
Justice (“USDOJ”), the U.S. Department of State (“USDOS”),
the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”), the Federal
Trade Commission (“FTC”), the Federal Communications
Commission (“FCC”), the Department of Homeland
Security (“DHS”), the National Security Agency (“NSA”),
and other agencies – but the only problem is that it
appears that all of these “alphabet agencies” are,
at the top, run by individuals who are also
literally co-opted, bought off, and paid for by the
same enemies of the American People – the
International Central Bankers of the City of London
and other foreign nations/entities/individuals.
Until and
unless these linkages are more formally exposed, and
the relationships uncovered, the American People
(and the rest of the world) will be hard-pressed to
ever obtain any justice or release from the earthly
and hellish bondage of the 6 CEO Members of the
Mainstream Media Mafia organized criminal
enterprise.
Rahul D.
Manchanda, Esq.Ranked amongst Top Attorneys in the
United States by Newsweek Magazine in 2012 and 2013.
Copyright © 2016 Modern Diplomacy. All Rights
Reserved