TimoMalum.com

Do Wealthy Donors Influence How The Associated Press Reports The News?

The Associated Press is one of the largest news agencies in the world, writing stories that are republished or recited by hundreds of newspapers, magazines, and television news programs. Much of the news coverage you read or watch every day was created by the AP. You may not even realize the story you're reading or watching came from the AP unless you happen to notice the letters "AP" at the top of the column, or you notice that TV news hosts on different stations are saying exactly the same thing on the same day. Since news outlets can't afford to keep large staffs of reporters on their payrolls anymore, they rely on the Associated Press to take up the slack. That shouldn't be a problem if the reporting is accurate and impartial. 

Their website states "We were founded as an independent news cooperative, whose members are U.S. newspapers and broadcasters, steadfast in our mission to inform the world. To this day, AP remains independent, beholden only to the facts."

Does the AP meet that standard? Are they really independent and impartial? Do they accurately report the facts?

I took a look at the AP's website and saw news stories that definitely appeared to be pushing the political elite's agendas. There's an entire page filled with dozens of reports on climate change, but no stories from any of the thousands of scientists who dispute the official narrative that climate change is caused by human activity. If you get your news from the Associated Press, you probably have no idea that there isn't a consensus among scientists on climate change. No alternative viewpoints seem to be allowed. On their health page, there are several articles suggesting you get flu and COVID vaccines, but there's no mention of the potential risks of doing so. I saw no stories about vaccine injuries. There are no stories questioning the pseudoscience of virology. But there IS a story that defends ultraprocessed foods. And the AP's site has an entire section devoted to questionable "fact checking" on subjects including election fraud, Haitians eating pets, and FEMA's hurricane response in North Carolina. Granted, many of their articles seem to be well researched and impartial, but that's to be expected on a site that is essentially controlled opposition: sprinkle some truth onto a pile of propaganda and the public will believe it all.

So I don't buy their claim of being "beholden only to the facts". But who are they beholden to? Perhaps to their many financial supporters:

Let's take a look at some of them. The list is in alphabetical order with one glaring exception: the Gates Foundation is at the top of the list. In late 2023, the Gates Foundation gave the AP $1,829,815. It's probably safe to assume that Bill Gates has a lot of influence at the Associated Press. Gates is notorious for pushing vaccines, the COVID psyop, fake meat, digital ID's, the climate change agenda, and censorship. While the AP may say it is independent, the senior editors are almost certain to keep Gates' interests in mind when deciding which topics to cover and how they're reported. Even if there isn't an official policy to please Gates, it would be career suicide to piss him off. 

Who else funds the Associated Press? For the sake of brevity, I'll only mention the funding sources that have a clear focus on an agenda that could influence the AP's work. Some, such as the Carnegie Corporation of New York, award hundreds of grants every year for a wide range of projects and most of them look reasonably harmless. Others have a much narrower range and thus are more likely to exert influence on the media for favorable coverage of those projects.

For example, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation awards a significant number of grants to environmental issues, particularly climate change and renewable energy.

The Climate and Land Use Alliance "advances land use policies and finance that help countries achieve ambitious climate targets".

The Hearthland Foundation is focused on equity and justice, which are buzzwords of the radical left.

The Hollyhock Foundation has climate change as one of its priorities.

The KR Foundation's primary goal is "to address the root causes of climate change and environmental degradation". They fund projects that promote the elimination of fossil fuels, cars, and the consumption of meat.

The Nathan Cummings Foundation websites states "We believe the dual crises named in our mission (inequality and climate change) cannot be addressed without first addressing their root causes and oppressive manifestations. That’s why we are focused on the long-term and interconnected goal of advancing racial, economic, and environmental justice (REEJ)".

The Outrider Foundation "supports multimedia storytelling about nuclear threats and climate change". Its advisory board includes the infamous Michael E. Mann.

The Patrick J. McGovern Foundation pushes artificial intelligence and other digital technologies to solve "the world’s most pressing challenges, from the COVID-19 pandemic to climate change to health inequities".

Pivotal Philanthropies Foundation refers to Pivotal Ventures, a company founded by Melinda Gates that advances left-leaning ideologies, with diversity being their main focus.

Quadrivium has five main focus areas: democracy, technology & society, scientific understanding, climate change, and ocean health. How connected are they to the Associated Press? Their website brags, "We helped to stand up a climate desk at the Associated Press (AP). AP’s member cooperative business model helps the largest and smallest news organizations reach populations across a wide range of geographies and cultural and economic backgrounds with climate change stories that matter in their communities. Importantly, these stories improve public understanding of the existential threats we face as well as the many solutions available and underway." Quadrivium also helped set up an organization called 'SciLine', which among other things provides vaccine propaganda to news reporters. SciLine fails to mention any adverse reactions (such as death) from vaccines, choosing instead to repeat the standard "safe and effective" talking points of the medical industrial complex.

With the Associated Press accepting so much money from foundations with clear-cut agendas, especially climate change, its difficult to accept that the AP is impartial in its reporting. Reporters and editors are bound to self-censor even if there isn't a written policy to do so. News and research that runs counter to what the foundations pay for likely never sees the light of day.

Public ignorance is the inevitable result.

No Species That Claims To Be Intelligent Destroys Its Own Ecosystem.

"The true intelligence of a species should be measured by its ability to preserve and harmonize with the environment that sustains it. In a world where all life depends on the balance of the ecosystem, any action that degrades or compromises that balance is an act against its own survival. Civilizations that claim to be advanced need to recognize that progress and nature are not opposites, but complementary. Destroying the ecosystem is, ultimately, destroying the very possibility of a secure future." 

[image & text by Revellati Online]

This isn't a commentary about man-made climate change, which is more of a component of politics than science. Rather, it's a warning that we face greater threats than a degree or two of warming. It's not carbon dioxide that we need to worry about. CO2 is the gas of life, and without it the planet dies. But we're told by the wealthy elites and the news media outlets they own that we need "net zero carbon". They rarely, if ever, mention the toxins their companies force upon an unsuspecting public.

Substances such as glyphosate, pesticides, plastic waste, pharmaceutical drug residue in our water, pollution from mining, and heavy metals emitted in the exhaust of cargo ships and jet aircraft are proven to be real threats to our ecosystem and our health. Even our drinking water is intentionally polluted by many government authorities with a fertilizer by-product called fluoride. Cutting down forests lowers air quality and destroys animal habitats. And let's not forget or ignore the harm being inflicted on all life forms by EMF radiation from a rapidly growing number of sources.

It's time to focus on the things that really make a difference to our survival: clean air, clean water, clean soil, and clean food. And while we're at it, let's demand serious studies on the effects of EMF radiation and place a moratorium on new transmitter construction until its safety can be determined.

Our continued existence requires it. And demands it.

What Is The Story Behind Panda Eyes?

The "panda eyes" theory is a popular idea on the internet that suggests that dark spots around the eyes, similar to dark circles or bruises, indicate that a person has suffered abuse, violence or, in some more conspiratorial contexts, that the person has undergone some kind of ritual or traumatic procedure.

The exact origin of this theory is unclear, but it has spread through social networks and conspiracy forums, especially in communities that discuss theories about manipulation and psychological or ritualistic abuse.

How does it happen?

"Panda eyes" occurs when a victim is sodomized by some "monster". This is done so violently - on purpose - that the blood vessels around the eyes rupture due to the physical displacement of pressure.

What does "panda eyes" mean?

It is pedophile slang for child sodomy. When a child is forcibly sodomized, their eyes can turn into dark circles due to the trauma involved, making them look like those of a panda. There is even an online clothing store selling “Panda Eyes” for the pedophile community...

Many pedophiles also joke about this online when talking about children. There are many symbols and codes that they use to inform other pedophiles about their perversions.

Conclusion: “Panda eyes” are, according to conspiracy theorists, a clear sign that a person may have experienced extreme psychological and physical abuse, often associated with secret rituals and mental manipulation. These dark circles around the eyes, according to this view, are not just ordinary dark circles, but marks of intense trauma. In certain elites, these rituals are used for psychological control and submission, a way of exploiting the person emotionally and physically to “program” them according to hidden interests. Although controversial, this theory sees in the "panda eyes" visual evidence of evils practiced in the shadows.

[content contributor: Revellati Online]

Joe and Jill Biden on Halloween Day, 2024. Jill is wearing a panda costume. Why would she choose this particular costume, considering the "panda eyes" theory is well known, and the Biden family has been accused of incest and pedophilia? Is Jill Biden ignorant, or is she mocking us?

Look For The Truth Beneath The Layers Of Deception.

The deceptive art of directing public attention to one thing by focusing on an illusion.

Yet another AGENDA goes unnoticed. It is a deliberate strategy used to influence, manipulate and control public perception and behavior.

These operations create narratives that shape our understanding of reality, often obscuring the truth for other hidden agendas.

Truth becomes a victim of this war of perception, leaving the masses in a state of confusion and manipulation.

It is part of a “classic technique”, it is a reminder to question everything and look for the truth beneath the layers of deception.

In times of universal deception, the best weapon is to arm yourself with knowledge, question the narratives and dress your conscience with pride.

Stay alert, stay informed and never stop asking!

[content contributor: Revellati Online]

The Mainstream Media Is The Enemy Of The People.

"The mainstream media is the enemy of the people." [art credit: unknown]

Notes From Clown World: October 26, 2024.

I left the Democratic Party eight years ago because I got tired of their lies. Theirs is a party that gains and retains power through fear-mongering, division, promises of free stuff, and endless deception. It's an organization of wealthy political elites who pretend to care about us, but their real goal is keeping us broke and demoralized, dependent upon them for everything. For decades they've dishonestly pandered to black Americans, and sadly, their tactics have been very effective. Democrats traditionally win the majority of black votes, despite the party being the early foundation of the Ku Klux Klan and despite Hillary Clinton's hero, Margaret Sanger, being a eugenicist who targeted black Americans. The organization Sanger founded is now known as Planned Parenthood and is responsible for the murder of millions of black babies. 

Time passes, but little changes. Kamala Harris is promising free stuff to blacks and spreading fear within the black community in a desperate attempt to win this year's presidential election. On her website, she portrays Donald Trump as some sort of monster who is a "serious threat to the lives of black men", while providing no credible proof to back up her claim. She's promising 1 million forgivable loans of up to $20,000 each to black entrepreneurs, with the losses covered by hardworking Americans of all races who will have no say in the matter. She's pitching a vague plan to create a National Health Equity Initiative focused on black men, but there are no details on what this actually is or what it will cost, or why black women are excluded. And she's proposing price controls on food and rent, despite historical evidence that these sorts of schemes typically result in food and housing shortages which hurt minorities worst of all. 

Will black Americans take the bait once again and vote for Democrats in 2024? If the number of Kamala Harris yard signs I'm seeing in black neighborhoods is any indication, I'd have to say, "yes, this year more than ever". 

Perhaps some of her support is the result of endorsements from super-wealthy celebrities with more talent than brains. Already Harris has been endorsed by Bruce Springsteen, Willie Nelson, and Geraldo Rivera. Dozens of other musicians and Hollywood stars have jumped on the Kamala-train too, but doing the research so I can list them all would be nauseating. And considering what we know about the A-listers who visited Jeffrey Epstein's island and the stars allegedly involved in the Sean Combs (P Diddy) sex scandal, celebrity endorsements don't really help Harris' reputation. I doubt Willie Nelson shared baby oil with Jennifer Lopez over at Diddy's crib, but a lot of us have become very suspicious of anyone involved in the film and music industries, and rightly so. Unlike in the past, bragging about celebrity endorsements is not going to win over many hearts and minds in middle America. And this cuts both ways: endorsing a politician who pushes abortions, wars, forced vaccinations, censorship, and Communist economic policies isn't going to help movie and music sales. It could actually tank your career.

"The scariest Halloween decorations have to be those Harris signs in people's yards."

Does Keith Olbermann have any friends who can check on him? His tweets make him look like an unhinged madman. I'm thinking he might need a psychiatric evaluation before he hurts himself. He recently said "We need to arrest and detain Elon Musk immediately". On what charges, Keith? For resisting the radical left and their tyrannical, authoritarian agenda? Olbermann says Musk is "operating on behalf of Russia" (as if Russia is actually our enemy), but he offers no proof. He doesn't even want to give Musk a trial: he demands that President Biden "lock him away in a military facility". 

What country does Keith Olbermann think he lives in? This isn't North Korea, Keith, although you and your kind are pushing us toward just such a Communist, hellish existence. 

Keith, if you'll send me your address, I'll send you a copy of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. I suggest you read it and learn how things are designed to work here in America. Sending people to gulags isn't part of the plan.

Finally today, we have an ANTIFA cartoon that's funny, but more true than I'd like to think. If Donald Trump wins in November, there is no doubt in my mind that Democrats and their allies of the radical left will refuse to accept the election results. I've heard that more than 40 lawsuits have already been written, ready to be deployed if Trump wins. And I expect violence to erupt as well, with indoctrinated leftists and paid agitators leaving their mom's basements to go and burn cities, just like in the 2020 "Summer of love". But I expect the protests will go on longer, and burn hotter, because the left is even more ignorant, intolerant, and filled with hate than they were four years ago. They have an irrational hatred of Trump and all who support him, and a Trump victory will push their frail minds over the edge. If they can't have their way, they'll try to tear everything down with the hope of launching a violent Communist revolution.

Right now, they're preparing. Are you?