You may have noticed that I promote the teachings of Dr. William Pierce. It’s for good reason. He addressed the important subject of media control often, and
, like in this groundbreaking article 23 years ago, “Journalists and Canadians” at nationalvanguard.org. It is worth reading again today:
A FEW YEARS AGO, when I first began describing the lemming phenomenon, I had the naïve idea that lemmings were mostly a pretty dull bunch: grossly overweight couch potatoes who munched snacks while they watched television and believed everything they were told. I thought that intelligence was a reasonably good guarantee that a person wasn’t a lemming. Since then I’ve learned that isn’t true. I believe there probably is some correlation between intelligence and the ability to think independently, on the average, but there certainly are many, many intelligent men and women who are just as much lemmings as the dullest couch potato or baseball fan.
Talking to journalists helped me understand that. Many of the journalists with whom I’ve spoken in the past few years have been at least a little more intelligent, quicker witted, better educated, and generally more knowledgeable than the average member of the population. My estimate is that, on the average, the journalists for the more important mass media are a bit brighter than bus drivers and retail clerks, but I’ve met many more independent-minded bus drivers and retail clerks than journalists who could think for themselves. As a class, journalists are the most lemming-like professionals I’ve encountered. Virtually all of them march in ideological lockstep. There may be an independent-minded journalist somewhere, but I haven’t yet met him.
When I first began to realize the uniform nature of journalistic thinking I wondered whether it was crookedness instead of lemming behavior I was seeing. I wondered whether journalists are simply a corrupt, mercenary, amoral bunch, who tell whatever lies they are paid to tell and follow whatever party line the owner of their newspaper or television network lays down for them. I suspected that there might be some editorial directive I hadn’t seen that instructs newspaper writers and editors that in any story they publish about me the word “hate” must be used at least once in the headline and at least twice in every paragraph of text. There are certain buzzwords that are used so consistently and predictably, “hate” or its derivatives being the most common, that it seems unlikely that every journalist would have hit on them independently and begun using them of his own volition.
Well, to make a long story short, I’m sure that there are plenty of corrupt journalists, but the more experience I have with journalists generally the more I’m inclined to believe that in most cases they really are lemmings. They really believe the nonsense they say on television or write for their newspapers. It’s not just that they’re paid to do that; they really are incapable of believing anything except the party line. Maybe so many journalists, even bright ones, are lemmings because journalism departments at universities deliberately weed out the independent thinkers.
Well, maybe, but I’m not much of a believer in giant conspiracies, involving many people and crossing ethnic boundaries. If journalism students are selected for their lemming-like characteristics, I suspect that the selection is unconscious rather than calculated. Which is to say, journalism professors are lemmings themselves and they favor the more lemming-like students. More likely, it is the fundamental nature of the profession that guarantees that nearly all of them will think alike. Journalism, after all, is a fundamentally extroverted profession. Journalists spend all their lives talking with other people and writing about other people. They are less private and more highly socialized than the people in most other lines of work.
I’ve tried to talk about this and related subjects with journalists, but usually I haven’t had much luck. So my own writing about the mass media has focused less on what makes Gentile reporters tick so uniformly than on what motivates their employers, the Jewish media bosses. With more than 3,000 years of Jewish history to provide examples, the motivation of the media bosses is easier to understand and to explain.
Last month, however, something came to light that I found very interesting in this regard. As you may be aware, the mass media in Canada are as much under Jewish control as in the United States. The undisputed top media mogul in Canada is Israel Asper, who is commonly known by his nickname “Izzy.” With his sons Leonard and David and other family members, Izzy Asper owns CanWest Global Communications Corporation.
A Gentile, Conrad Black, also used to be a major player in the Canadian media, but a little over a year ago Black’s Southam News, Inc., was bought out by Izzy. CanWest now owns more than 60 per cent of Canada’s newspapers and other media outlets. That’s more than 60 per cent of all of Canada’s mass media in the hands of one Jew. Included are 14 metropolitan dailies and 128 local newspapers across the country, including the Vancouver Sun, the Vancouver Province, the Calgary Herald, and the Montreal Gazette. CanWest also owns the National Post, which is distributed throughout Canada. In addition Izzy owns media in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Northern Ireland.
Last month Izzy issued a written directive to his newspapers, instructing them that from now on they must print nothing critical of Israel or of Israeli actions or policies…
What an astonishing fact for Pierce to have uncovered. He went on to ask:
Did Canadian Gentiles rebel? No. The situation has not changed much in Canada since 2002, though Izzy is no longer with us. He turned his media empire over to his family, and control of Canadian media is still in the hands of members of Izzy’s Tribe.
