Reminder the Smith-Mundt act banning using propaganda on American citizens is no longer in effect. Everything we are told by the government about ISIS can now legally be a lie.
the problem is not so much that an endless barrage of propaganda is slathered over us each and every day but that so many drink of it willingly, thirstily and with satisfaction
When we lived in small tribal communities early warnings about problems facilitated survival. Now those instincts to know about threats, thru news, has been turned on us with dissinfo and deception by people who aren't concerned about the common good for society.
...but that so many drink of it willingly, thirstily and with satisfaction
this attitude of superiority really does us no favors. it's not that people enjoy being lied too, it's that sifting through this mountain of abuse and greed and theft and murder is exhausting. it takes forever and it's depressing.
personally, I'd rather have no part in this fight, I'd much rather be on some college football forum right now complaining about LSUs defensive line and calling bama fans fags. I'd much rather believe that the people we elect are basically trustworthy and well intentioned, even if I disagree with their policies.
but I know they're not.
even more than that, I have an irrational hatred for bullies. I've always been big, physically, I'm 6'5" 280 now, I don't like people being picked on, I hate the strong thinking they can take whatever they want from the weak, it enrages me, and I won't sit quietly as it happens.
but I don't blame others for simply trying to get through their day, to raise their kids, to live their lives, to spend what little free time they have on things that make them happy instead of angry. that is a very reasonable option. insulting those people is not gonna get them on our side.
not superiority, I do it too ... merely observational
revolutionaries are hard to come by these days and you cannot be fighting a revolution every moment of every day - as you say, just getting though the daily routine can be exhausting
you can end that relationship and solve the problem - the only way to end the relationship with a society that is flooded with propaganda is to become a hermit somewhere and shut it out
but it's always gone on, always will go on, so it is up to individuals to exercise their critical thinking skills and to organize into groups along the lines of various interests and discuss and rebut the official propaganda coming at them so there is always an active debate and active disagreement - when the debate and arguing stop, the people have rolled over completely
and how do we get the people who attend Davos, and Bilderberg, the Trilateralists and the overall money-movers behind the decisions that cause so much harm and spew the propaganda in handcuffs on on trial?
Here's proof they are violating their law, because I viewed it on the internet while physically being in America and simultaneously being an American citizen.
Oh, wait, that's actually not proof, that information was not prepared for an American audience, it says directly on the page "news/Europe".
It's like you people actually have no understanding of this Smith-Mundt act, which hasn't been repealed, only updated, and not updated to allow for "loopholes" that technically already existed.
The act states that they may not prepare propaganda intended for US citizens, and they don't.
They have amended the act so that US citizens can request and view archival copies of prior broadcasts for specific purposes of research and education.
No, actually I have no idea what the fucking Smith-Mundt act is. There are probably thousands and thousands of laws in this country, and nobody knows them all, prick.
Until this month, a vast ocean of U.S. programming produced by the Broadcasting Board of Governors such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks could only be viewed or listened to at broadcast quality in foreign countries.
That is wrong, as anybody in the US with a radio has been able to listen to their radio broadcasts since 1944, when they started their Voice of America radio broadcasts.
They switched over to satellite in 1994, which again, could be viewed by any American Citizen with a satellite receiver capable of picking up the transmission.
"The reforms effectively nullifies the Smith-Mundt Act"
How?
Are you capable of explaining how?
I don't believe you know what you are talking about, since you are for some reason completely incapable of providing actual support to prove your claims past quoting the same claim over and over again.
Shills, true believers and other statist drones may try to downplay the changes by cherry picking a single sentence from the new changes:
NDAA 2013 (HR 4310, Section 1078 (c)) does not make legal the dissemination of propaganda within the US that the Smith-Mundt Act has outlawed: "No funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall be used to influence public opinion in the United States."
I got into a debate with another Redditor a while back about how the changes could still be abused to disseminate propaganda in the United States while staying within the letter of the law (but ignoring its spirit)...
In any case, the worst of the changes and the loophole they create are outlined in my comments there.
They've created no loopholes, those loopholes always existed, because anybody could pick up VOA broadcasts from within the United States, it's just that those broadcasts are provably created for non-US audiences ( as much as they may sneak in covert propaganda explicitly designed for US citizens, they can always claim it's not intended to and be able to prove their claims ) so it's legal to broadcast them even if said broadcasts can be viewed by American audiences, because it's not intended for American audiences.
Sandy Hoax, Boston, Aurora, the Navy shipyard, Eliott Rogers. All part of this fraud game. All involved must be hanged for treason. The Zionist media as well. With this, we can take America back for the people. It's rightful owners.
I guess I don't see how the repeal of the fairness doctrine and the ability of entities like FOX News and radio personalities like Rush Limbaugh to simply classify their broadcasts as "entertainment" or "opinion" has made this anything but an essentialy moot issue anyway.
NDAA 2013 (HR 4310, Section 1078 (c)) does not make legal the dissemination of propaganda within the US that the Smith-Mundt Act has outlawed: "No funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall be used to influence public opinion in the United States."[2]
‘(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors from engaging in any medium or form of communication, either directly or indirectly, because a United States domestic audience is or may be thereby exposed to program material, or based on a presumption of such exposure. Such material may be made available within the United States and disseminated, when appropriate, pursuant to sections 502 and 1005 of the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1462 and 1437), except that nothing in this section may be construed to authorize the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors to disseminate within the United States any program material prepared for dissemination abroad on or before the effective date of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012.
Sections 502 and 1005 of the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948:
502:
SEC. 502. In authorizing international information activities under this Act, it is the sense of the Congress (1) that the Secretary shall reduce such Government information activities whenever corresponding private information dissemination is found to be adequate; (2) that nothing in this Act shall be construed to give the Department a monopoly in the production or sponsorship on the air of short-wave broadcasting programs, or a monopoly m any other medium of information.
1005:
SEO. 1005. In carrying out the provisions of this Act it shall be the duty of the Secretary to utilize, to the maximum extent practicable, the services and facilities of private agencies, including existing American press, publishing, radio, motion picture, and other agencies, through contractual arrangements or otherwise. It is the intent of Congress that the Secreta shall encourage participation in carrying out the purposes of this act by the maximum number of different private agencies in each field consistent with the present or potential market for their services in each country.
Hey thanks, my intention was not to say you're wrong... I should have read it more carefully. This is terrifying considering how much we know about the brain and human behavior in 2014. This is a more powerful weapon than any bomb if you ask me.
Such material may be made available within the United States and disseminated, when appropriate, pursuant to sections 502 and 1005 of the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1462 and 1437), except that nothing in this section may be construed to authorize the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors to disseminate within the United States any program material prepared for dissemination abroad on or before the effective date of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012.
So this means that they can allow people to privately view previous broadcasts, but that they still may not publicly broadcast those previous broadcasts to the American people. ( It wouldn't even make sense to do that, it makes more sense to say "no you can't look at archival copies of our previous propaganda transmissions" if you want to stay on top of the propaganda game. )
SEC. 502. In authorizing international information activities under this Act, it is the sense of the Congress (1) that the Secretary shall reduce such Government information activities whenever corresponding private information dissemination is found to be adequate; (2) that nothing in this Act shall be construed to give the Department a monopoly in the production or sponsorship on the air of short-wave broadcasting programs, or a monopoly m any other medium of information.
This is literally stating that the Secretary will NOT engage in information activities, where there is already favorable information activities coming from private entities.
In other words, if CBS is already telling Pakistanis to hate Syrians, then they should save their money because CBS is already doing their work for them.
In carrying out the provisions of this Act it shall be the duty of the Secretary to utilize, to the maximum extent practicable, the services and facilities of private agencies, including existing American press, publishing, radio, motion picture, and other agencies, through contractual arrangements or otherwise. It is the intent of Congress that the Secreta shall encourage participation in carrying out the purposes of this act by the maximum number of different private agencies in each field consistent with the present or potential market for their services in each country.
In other words, if there is already an American Broadcasting company operating in Germany, the Department of State or Broadcasting Board of Governors should utilize their already existing assets first, before going and spending ridiculous amounts of money to do the same thing.
So if "Exemplar Films" already has a studio in Berlin, then we should save the money if we can contract them to use their studio.
IN SUMMARY:
None of these updates have changed the Smith-Mundt Act so far as the ban on dissemination of domestic propaganda is concerned.
Everybody here saying "the smithmundt act banning propaganda is no longer in effect" is factually wrong, and completely ignorant of these laws.
I understand, however, because I know how to properly comprehend what I read.
They've created no loopholes, those loopholes always existed, because anybody could pick up VOA broadcasts from within the United States, it's just that those broadcasts are provably created for non-US audiences ( as much as they may sneak in covert propaganda explicitly designed for US citizens, they can always claim it's not intended to and be able to prove their claims ) so it's legal to broadcast them even if said broadcasts can be viewed by American audiences, because it's not intended for American audiences.
not superiority, I do it too ... merely observational
revolutionaries are hard to come by these days and you cannot be fighting a revolution every moment of every day - as you say, just getting though the daily routine can be exhausting
you can end that relationship and solve the problem - the only way to end the relationship with a society that is flooded with propaganda is to become a hermit somewhere and shut it out
Here's proof they are violating their law, because I viewed it on the internet while physically being in America and simultaneously being an American citizen.
Oh, wait, that's actually not proof, that information was not prepared for an American audience, it says directly on the page "news/Europe".
It's like you people actually have no understanding of this Smith-Mundt act, which hasn't been repealed, only updated, and not updated to allow for "loopholes" that technically already existed.
The act states that they may not prepare propaganda intended for US citizens, and they don't.
They have amended the act so that US citizens can request and view archival copies of prior broadcasts for specific purposes of research and education.
56 comments
53 radii314 2014-09-23
the problem is not so much that an endless barrage of propaganda is slathered over us each and every day but that so many drink of it willingly, thirstily and with satisfaction
21 keepcalmson 2014-09-23
When we lived in small tribal communities early warnings about problems facilitated survival. Now those instincts to know about threats, thru news, has been turned on us with dissinfo and deception by people who aren't concerned about the common good for society.
11 radii314 2014-09-23
messaging has become all about manipulation - buy these products, wear this, drink that, believe this, say this word, repeat this phrase, etc. etc.
the sexy packages in which this coercion is delivered (hi-tech devices and glamorous entertainments) lower resistance
those doing it are after profits and control
3 sickofallofyou 2014-09-23
They think what's good for them is good for society.
1 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-09-23
Eh, I think they pretty much know that it's only good for them. That's kind of the whole point.
11 GeauxTiger 2014-09-23
this attitude of superiority really does us no favors. it's not that people enjoy being lied too, it's that sifting through this mountain of abuse and greed and theft and murder is exhausting. it takes forever and it's depressing.
personally, I'd rather have no part in this fight, I'd much rather be on some college football forum right now complaining about LSUs defensive line and calling bama fans fags. I'd much rather believe that the people we elect are basically trustworthy and well intentioned, even if I disagree with their policies.
but I know they're not.
even more than that, I have an irrational hatred for bullies. I've always been big, physically, I'm 6'5" 280 now, I don't like people being picked on, I hate the strong thinking they can take whatever they want from the weak, it enrages me, and I won't sit quietly as it happens.
but I don't blame others for simply trying to get through their day, to raise their kids, to live their lives, to spend what little free time they have on things that make them happy instead of angry. that is a very reasonable option. insulting those people is not gonna get them on our side.
5 radii314 2014-09-23
not superiority, I do it too ... merely observational
revolutionaries are hard to come by these days and you cannot be fighting a revolution every moment of every day - as you say, just getting though the daily routine can be exhausting
8 laborinvain 2014-09-23
Uh, no. The endless barrage of propaganda slathered over us each and every day is a big fucking problem.
5 stefgosselin 2014-09-23
Indeed. It is like having a compulsive liar as a spouse, you never know when / if she is telling the truth.
2 radii314 2014-09-23
you can end that relationship and solve the problem - the only way to end the relationship with a society that is flooded with propaganda is to become a hermit somewhere and shut it out
2 johnknoefler 2014-09-23
No. You can learn to be aware and check facts. It's the fools who suck it all up and repeat the garbage like it's a holy mantra that are the problem.
1 radii314 2014-09-23
but it's always gone on, always will go on, so it is up to individuals to exercise their critical thinking skills and to organize into groups along the lines of various interests and discuss and rebut the official propaganda coming at them so there is always an active debate and active disagreement - when the debate and arguing stop, the people have rolled over completely
1 iamagod____ 2014-09-23
No, it doesn't. We force the treasonous liars into their rightful place in the gallows
1 radii314 2014-09-23
and how do we get the people who attend Davos, and Bilderberg, the Trilateralists and the overall money-movers behind the decisions that cause so much harm and spew the propaganda in handcuffs on on trial?
1 iamagod____ 2014-09-23
The citizens control the grand jury. That is the key.
2 johnknoefler 2014-09-23
Dude, you deserve gold for saying what is soooo fuckin' painfully obvious. +two Fosters makes me fukin' generous as hell.
Edit: + You said it, (wrote it) so well.
0 trachys 2014-09-23
Not really, those are horrendously mixed metaphors. The last clause is pretty good though.
2 johnknoefler 2014-09-23
I think he captured it really well. In fact, accurately in spite of lack of attention to capitulation and a period.
1 trachys 2014-09-23
How does one slather a barrage, let alone drink it?
1 johnknoefler 2014-09-23
Definition of SLATHER
: a great quantity —often used in plural
1 trachys 2014-09-23
It's used as a verb. I cannot be persuaded that this sentence is figuratively well-crafted.
1 johnknoefler 2014-09-23
It worked well enough for me. I got the point.
18 Ikari_Shinji_kun_01 2014-09-23
Since when has the US government been obliged to follow its own laws?
9 drk_etta 2014-09-23
Exactly! It's all an agenda and they feed us what we think we want to hear and where they want to go.
3 [deleted] 2014-09-23
What we have now is taxation without representation.
Tea time.
0 dsprox 2014-09-23
Here's proof they are violating their law, because I viewed it on the internet while physically being in America and simultaneously being an American citizen.
Oh, wait, that's actually not proof, that information was not prepared for an American audience, it says directly on the page "news/Europe".
It's like you people actually have no understanding of this Smith-Mundt act, which hasn't been repealed, only updated, and not updated to allow for "loopholes" that technically already existed.
The act states that they may not prepare propaganda intended for US citizens, and they don't.
They have amended the act so that US citizens can request and view archival copies of prior broadcasts for specific purposes of research and education.
1 Ikari_Shinji_kun_01 2014-09-23
No, actually I have no idea what the fucking Smith-Mundt act is. There are probably thousands and thousands of laws in this country, and nobody knows them all, prick.
17 keepcalmson 2014-09-23
http://m.sfgate.com/technology/businessinsider/article/US-Government-Funded-Domestic-Propaganda-Has-4668001.php "The reforms effectively nullifies the Smith-Mundt Act"
2 dsprox 2014-09-23
This article right here that you linked "article 1" cites this "article 2" which then cites this "article 3".
Article 2 says:
That is wrong, as anybody in the US with a radio has been able to listen to their radio broadcasts since 1944, when they started their Voice of America radio broadcasts.
They switched over to satellite in 1994, which again, could be viewed by any American Citizen with a satellite receiver capable of picking up the transmission.
0 dsprox 2014-09-23
How?
Are you capable of explaining how?
I don't believe you know what you are talking about, since you are for some reason completely incapable of providing actual support to prove your claims past quoting the same claim over and over again.
Explain how the reform nullifies the act.
14 Jeffreyrock 2014-09-23
I don't mean to rain on your parade but everything the government has said about anything since the JFK assassination has been a lie.
6 sinominous 2014-09-23
black is white up is down doublespeak is king
2 Peglius 2014-09-23
It's double plus ungood for you to point that out
3 [deleted] 2014-09-23
War is peace.
2 iamagod____ 2014-09-23
Fighting only Israel's enemies. Never our own. Israel.
2 [deleted] 2014-09-23
Quite suspicious, amirite? Benny Netanyahu says his secret weapon is that he can get the US to do whatever he wants. He said that on film.
2 iamagod____ 2014-09-23
He is absolute scum. His ownership of the USG is fading fast. It's why they've entered their endgame. May they all perish
1 iamagod____ 2014-09-23
I'm fucking ready for the Samson option if it means they are finally gone for good. At leasrt whatever humans are left might finally know peace.
2 iamagod____ 2014-09-23
Democracy ended with Kennedy. It's why he was removed. Shattering the unconstitutional CIA I to a million pieces and whatnot.
2 Jeffreyrock 2014-09-23
Yup. The fascists took over on Nov 22 1963.
9 imsrslyuguys 2014-09-23
Shills, true believers and other statist drones may try to downplay the changes by cherry picking a single sentence from the new changes:
I got into a debate with another Redditor a while back about how the changes could still be abused to disseminate propaganda in the United States while staying within the letter of the law (but ignoring its spirit)...
In any case, the worst of the changes and the loophole they create are outlined in my comments there.
1 dsprox 2014-09-23
They've created no loopholes, those loopholes always existed, because anybody could pick up VOA broadcasts from within the United States, it's just that those broadcasts are provably created for non-US audiences ( as much as they may sneak in covert propaganda explicitly designed for US citizens, they can always claim it's not intended to and be able to prove their claims ) so it's legal to broadcast them even if said broadcasts can be viewed by American audiences, because it's not intended for American audiences.
3 johnknoefler 2014-09-23
Well fuck... The government can actually lie to us? Who knew?
3 iamagod____ 2014-09-23
Sandy Hoax, Boston, Aurora, the Navy shipyard, Eliott Rogers. All part of this fraud game. All involved must be hanged for treason. The Zionist media as well. With this, we can take America back for the people. It's rightful owners.
3 [deleted] 2014-09-23
Im so with ya.
2 iamagod____ 2014-09-23
Up vote against the Zionist liars. The persona managed accounts.
1 sudo-tleilaxu 2014-09-23
I guess I don't see how the repeal of the fairness doctrine and the ability of entities like FOX News and radio personalities like Rush Limbaugh to simply classify their broadcasts as "entertainment" or "opinion" has made this anything but an essentialy moot issue anyway.
1 The_eye_in_the_sky 2014-09-23
NDAA 2013 (HR 4310, Section 1078 (c)) does not make legal the dissemination of propaganda within the US that the Smith-Mundt Act has outlawed: "No funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall be used to influence public opinion in the United States."[2]
1 ImASharkImAShark 2014-09-23
Next paragraph (emphasis mine):
H5736 sec 208(b)
Sections 502 and 1005 of the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948:
502:
1005:
2 The_eye_in_the_sky 2014-09-23
Hey thanks, my intention was not to say you're wrong... I should have read it more carefully. This is terrifying considering how much we know about the brain and human behavior in 2014. This is a more powerful weapon than any bomb if you ask me.
1 dsprox 2014-09-23
So this means that they can allow people to privately view previous broadcasts, but that they still may not publicly broadcast those previous broadcasts to the American people. ( It wouldn't even make sense to do that, it makes more sense to say "no you can't look at archival copies of our previous propaganda transmissions" if you want to stay on top of the propaganda game. )
This is literally stating that the Secretary will NOT engage in information activities, where there is already favorable information activities coming from private entities.
In other words, if CBS is already telling Pakistanis to hate Syrians, then they should save their money because CBS is already doing their work for them.
In other words, if there is already an American Broadcasting company operating in Germany, the Department of State or Broadcasting Board of Governors should utilize their already existing assets first, before going and spending ridiculous amounts of money to do the same thing.
So if "Exemplar Films" already has a studio in Berlin, then we should save the money if we can contract them to use their studio.
IN SUMMARY:
None of these updates have changed the Smith-Mundt Act so far as the ban on dissemination of domestic propaganda is concerned.
Everybody here saying "the smithmundt act banning propaganda is no longer in effect" is factually wrong, and completely ignorant of these laws.
I understand, however, because I know how to properly comprehend what I read.
1 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-09-23
We've all been propagandized since the day this country was founded and every day since.
-14 dsprox 2014-09-23
From what I have researched, that is not entirely true.
The Smith-Mundt act still is in effect, it was just updated by the NDAA 2013.
Please explain how it is "no longer in effect".
You can't just fucking post a claim without proving your claim.
1 hippylarvae 2014-09-23
Go crawl back under your bridge and enjoy it for a while til King Barry FREES it.
-1 dsprox 2014-09-23
Learn to communicate in an intelligent manner.
2 hippylarvae 2014-09-23
K
9 drk_etta 2014-09-23
Exactly! It's all an agenda and they feed us what we think we want to hear and where they want to go.
1 dsprox 2014-09-23
They've created no loopholes, those loopholes always existed, because anybody could pick up VOA broadcasts from within the United States, it's just that those broadcasts are provably created for non-US audiences ( as much as they may sneak in covert propaganda explicitly designed for US citizens, they can always claim it's not intended to and be able to prove their claims ) so it's legal to broadcast them even if said broadcasts can be viewed by American audiences, because it's not intended for American audiences.
5 radii314 2014-09-23
not superiority, I do it too ... merely observational
revolutionaries are hard to come by these days and you cannot be fighting a revolution every moment of every day - as you say, just getting though the daily routine can be exhausting
2 radii314 2014-09-23
you can end that relationship and solve the problem - the only way to end the relationship with a society that is flooded with propaganda is to become a hermit somewhere and shut it out
0 dsprox 2014-09-23
Here's proof they are violating their law, because I viewed it on the internet while physically being in America and simultaneously being an American citizen.
Oh, wait, that's actually not proof, that information was not prepared for an American audience, it says directly on the page "news/Europe".
It's like you people actually have no understanding of this Smith-Mundt act, which hasn't been repealed, only updated, and not updated to allow for "loopholes" that technically already existed.
The act states that they may not prepare propaganda intended for US citizens, and they don't.
They have amended the act so that US citizens can request and view archival copies of prior broadcasts for specific purposes of research and education.
3 [deleted] 2014-09-23
Im so with ya.