In our world today, who desperately needs to be “fact-checked“? The mass media, of course. And, in today’s world, who owns, funds, and controls the entire fact-checking infrastructure and conducts all the fact-checks? The mass media, of course. So, the inmates are running the asylum and the foxes are guarding the henhouse. What could possibly go wrong?
First, let’s disabuse ourselves of the foolish notion that the fact-checking performed today actually involves any checking of facts. It does not. The primary purpose of this industry is not a search for truth but is instead an insidious form of censorship, one final way of tightening the string around the sack of information to prevent the escape of inconvenient truths and, if they do escape, to club them to death at birth. A powerful secondary purpose of fact-checking is to bury knowledge of the crimes and atrocities committed by our International Cabal of Gangsters (ICG) and to protect them from public censure. The only requirement for success is a gullible and uninformed public.
One of the more tragic results of media concentration, propaganda and censorship is that fact-checking has been almost totally co-opted by the propagandists. At a time when we desperately need honest fact-checking of media claims, the media outlets themselves like Gannet Publishing, Reuters, ABC news, have moved into the forefront of this market, effectively checking themselves and, unsurprisingly, conclude they didn’t lie to us. Worse, the media fact-checking departments also function as intelligence agencies, proclaiming their chastity while attempting to ferret out and silence the ultimate sources of contrary opinion and truth. One example from my personal experience:
Several of my early articles on COVID-19 went viral with reader downloads in the millions, instantly attracting the attention of the ICG. Following this, and coincident with numerous hit pieces in the mainstream media, I received an email from a gentleman at Gannett Publishing, presenting himself as “a fact-checker for USA Today“, ostensibly wanting to determine the veracity of some of my statements. It should be obvious that ‘fact-checking’ would produce a request such as “You made this claim. Please can you provide documented evidence of its accuracy?” Not with Gannett, it didn’t.
The request displayed no interest in obtaining evidence of my claims, but a demand to know my sources. The issue was that I seemed to know many things I should not know, and they couldn’t figure out where I was getting my information. The man was of course “reaching out” to me, but what he was reaching for was my information sources. He didn’t want more supporting evidence for my claims, but to know where I had obtained the evidence I’d already presented, specifically “from where did you collect the research in your articles?” He also wanted a list of the names of other “writers, officials or commentators” who knew what I knew and who shared my views. This is not fact-checking, but intelligence-gathering for the purpose of identifying and silencing sources of dissention.
The fact-checking industry was not created to fact-check the false claims and media support for the invasions of Iraq and Libya or today’s imaginary “genocide” in China’s Xinjiang, but instead to silence those attempting to reveal the truth. It was never meant to examine the process of vaccinations (of any kind) but to silence those either expressing fears of dangerous vaccines or exposing contaminations in those vaccines.
In this latter case, the vaccine makers (or their paid promoters) are the primary source of the ‘facts’ distributed by the media and used by the fact-checkers to ridicule and attempt to invalidate genuine public concerns. All three parties steadfastly ignore the hard fact that the US government has paid billions in compensation for injuries and deaths from dangerous and contaminated vaccines. (1) And nowhere do they mention that nearly 100 million Americans were infected with a potentially cancerous simian virus from a contaminated polio vaccine. (2) Nor do they mention the CDC report that infants receiving a full slate of childhood vaccines could potentially be exposed to more than 300 contaminants. You can see the problem: much of the truth and underlying evidence, though available, is being buried by the media in their support of the ICG, while the ‘leakage‘ is dealt with by other means.
There is nothing here about checking facts. It is all about the control of information, half of which involves the identification and silencing of opposing views. It is in this light that all fact-checking must be seen.
I recently wrote a heavily-documented article on the thesis (now widely-accepted, I believe) that the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic was not influenza but was instead a now-proven bacterial infection, the tragic result of a misguided experiment by the Rockefeller Medical Institute of a meningitis vaccine that began at Fort Riley in the US and spread around the world not by the soldiers but by Rockefeller itself. (3) Reuters immediately conducted a ‘fact-check’ of the thesis and pronounced it false. Reuter’s evidence? Non-existent, the claim sufficing as irrefutable proof. (4) Moreover, some of Reuters’ claims were completely false. The intent was to bury a politically-dangerous truth and prevent its escape into the public realm.
In another case, when public concern was rapidly accelerating about the escaping radiation from Japan’s Fukushima reactor, the media almost immediately buried the story and replaced it with a flurry of articles about one single salmon in Canada’s Osoyoos Lake discovered with measurable but insignificant levels of Cesium radiation. The lake is hundreds of miles inland and irrelevant to the radiation in the Pacific Ocean, but suddenly this was the only story. Following on this, Snopes obediently ‘fact-checked’ the Fukushima Pacific radiation and used this story of the single unrelated salmon to pronounce the prior Fukushima radiation stories false. (5) Again, this is not about checking facts but about burying the truth.
This is almost an aside but, with Osoyoos Lake containing potentially millions of salmon, what are the odds that only one salmon would be contaminated and that my net would find it? But in fact, the story originated on the social media and I could find no reliable evidence of the existence of this one radioactive fish. The few people reporting it were all referencing each other or Snopes, which almost certainly means a contrived and fabricated tale was used to mislead the public about the very real dangers of Fukushima. Well-done, I thought.
Another clever ploy is to take an inflammatory and inaccurate headline from a tabloid news source, attribute it to the person in question, then ‘fact-check’ the statement, pronounce it false, and use that to defame the author who never said any such thing.
The fact-checkers not only want to bury the truth, but to bury those who reveal it. Another example from my personal experience: My heavily-documented article about the WHO vaccination program that sterilised about 150 million women without their knowledge or consent (6) was obtaining considerable attention worldwide, most notably of the ICG, who called in the fact-checkers, in this case the Poynter Institute. I will deal with them in more detail in a moment. Poynter created a web page just for me, and this is what they wrote:
“FALSE: Larry Romanoff’s statements claiming WHO has taken part in creating various viruses in the laboratories. The organization has spread the new coronavirus in the world, so that the pharmaceutical companies can make money by developing vaccines, which, for its part, will reduce the world population.” (7)
The “false” part is that I have never written any such things. I have never claimed the WHO ‘created viruses’, nor have I ever mentioned the WHO in any context related to COVID-19. Their statement, slanderous as it is, is false in its entirety. But the amazing part is to follow. Poynter didn’t stop there. They found a news article on a Georgian news website that made brief reference to my writing, but that contained no reference to the WHO or any of the other claims above. They then copied this website page – and amended it – posting the copied and amended version on one of their own websites, providing the link to their fraudulent version – presented as the original – as ‘proof’ of my having made false claims.
First, this is the link to the original news page (8). It is in Georgian script, so you won’t be able to read it and most translators cannot handle Georgian, meaning no one will know what the page actually says. The website is ge.news-front/info. Next, this is the link to Poynter’s false web page (9).You can access it by clicking on the button: READ THE FULL ARTICLE (FACTCHECK GEORGIA) on the Poynter website above (7) This website, controlled by Poynter, is https://factcheck.ge/ka. This is also in Georgian script, so you won’t be able to read it either.
If this isn’t clear, Poynter attempted to confuse readers by conflating my article about the WHO ‘anti-fertility’ vaccination programs with my other (unrelated) articles on COVID-19, then fabricated a claim that I had accused the WHO of creating the COVID-19 virus to profit the pharma companies while sterilising the world. Lacking evidence of this, they copied a web page that was in a language almost no one can read and almost no translators can handle, amended the page and posted it on their own website, presenting it as the original, and purporting to contain ‘proof‘ of my ‘false‘ claims against the WHO. In America, this is known as “fact-checking“.
The Fact-Checking Industry
The fact-checking industry began with a disguised innocence and good intentions, with websites like Snopes initially spending their time debunking urban legends and refuting claims of Elvis being seen at the mall. But in fact, these creations were hiding in the bushes waiting for the right time to attack.
Fact-checking today is a huge worldwide industry conceived and created decades ago as a powerful censorship tool, controlled by a closely-knit incestuous group and heavily funded with countless millions of dollars primarily by George Soros, the Gates Foundation, various media companies, and similar. This industry was not created to fact-check the false claims and media support for ICG crimes, but instead to silence those attempting to reveal the truth.
The so-called Poynter Institute, whom you met above, is at the forefront of this industry today, with funding from the above sources. Poynter created and controls the so-called non-partisan International Fact-checking Network (IFCN) “that sets standards for fact checkers“, virtually forcing all players into this ‘network’ or into oblivion as we have seen happen to Internet browsers and search engines. Through these machinations, Poynter has certified itself as the policeman for the news feeds of the world. It isn’t widely known, but Facebook and others do not actually perform any checking of their own, but instead use this source to automatically police their content.
Poynter are even more dangerous than the above would suggest, because they have created for themselves a position as “the journalism institute responsible for training writers and reporters“, countless thousands of young people passing through this ‘institution’ very possibly forever corrupted by their training. And Poynter’s attempts in furthering the total media control of the ICG are not imaginary:
Poynter recently published a list of 515 news websites they deemed “unreliable” (10), a list compiled from “fake news” databases curated primarily by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at University of Southern California, Merrimack University, PolitiFact and Snopes. They not only damned these websites as providing misinformation, but their original article asked advertisers to blacklist all sites on their list. The later version according to Poynter executive Barrett Golding: “Fake news is a business. Much of that business is ad-supported. Aside from journalists, researchers and news consumers, we hope that the index will be useful for advertisers that want to stop funding misinformation.”
They overplayed their hand. The backlash to this was so extreme that Poynter had to retract the list and make a public apology, excusing themselves on “weaknesses in the methodology“. It wasn’t embarrassment for an ethical failure but multiple threats of serious lawsuits that caused the retraction. However, Poynter managing editor Barbara Allen wrote “We regret that we failed to ensure that the data was rigorous before publication, and apologize for the confusion and agitation caused by its publication”. But then (to give readers a laugh), she stated, “We pledge to continue to hold ourselves to the highest standards.” One individual posted on Twitter: “Junkyard Attack Dogs Pose as Watchdogs“. Correct in all respects.
To my best knowledge, there are no fact-checkers that are not part of this worldwide network. Some are sponsored and operated by the media departments of various universities, but those departments have received funding from these same sources and therefore are subject to, and under the control of, the same people.
These “same people” are those who already own and/or control the entire mass media landscape, including newspapers, magazines, all TV and most radio networks, the book publishers, the book distributors like Amazon and Indigo, the Hollywood studios who control virtually all movies and most TV programs. They also have the same stranglehold on the social media landscape, as well as related entities like Google and Wikipedia.
As I have noted in other articles in this series, it is vital to understand that it is not Poynter, or Reuters, or Gannett who control the fact-checking industry. These statements evade the essential point that it is individuals, real people with names, who exercise this control, and who are working in concert with all other media individuals as lieutenants of the ICG, all sharing the same ‘values’ and all following the same ‘agenda’. A major part of this agenda is total information control, the fact-check portion being merely a kind of janitorial detail to sweep up and eliminate the bits of truth that succeed in escaping this information control net. And this net is nearly complete; information control and censorship in the US is alarmingly nearing a 100% level, yet few seem to have noticed. The same is true of Canada, the UK, Germany, Japan, Australia, and increasing in other Western nations.
Once again, the mass media lie to us in whole or in part about almost everything of real consequence in the world today, reading from the same script as the ICG and furthering their agenda. Wikipedia, with its massive promotion by Google, is a major misinformation site that has almost a stranglehold on popular information, but is heavily biased and edited by these same people, and is untrustworthy on most topics of consequence. Google is astonishingly selective on information it permits to reach the public. Facebook and Twitter take their marching orders from the same source and will exercise a near-total embargo on any personal communications or posts that contradict the official narrative approved by the ICG. With COVID-19, yesterday, lab sources were embargoed, these social media almost vicious in their censorship of contradictory material. Today, natural sources of the virus are embargoed, Facebook and Twitter performing an instant 180-degree turn and today banning – as “misinformation” – the opposite of what they banned yesterday.
The book-publishers determine the content of all bound material that reaches the public, most especially educational materials from kindergarten to university level. If content does not fit the ‘agenda’, the book will almost certainly never see the light of day and, if it is lucky enough to escape the net, Amazon and Indigo will be “out of stock” or will simply delist the books. The entire fact-checking industry is marching to precisely the same tune, played by the same orchestra. This is already so true that whenever any major media outlet claims that something has been fact-checked, delete this information from your consciousness because it is almost certainly false.
I am repeating myself, but it is vital to understand that all this emanates from the same single source, a group of a few hundred people centered mostly in Europe, who are extraordinarily wealthy and who determine and set the agenda – again, real people with names. The determination to control all of the world’s information, either by distribution or by censorship, originates here. It is crucially important that you connect all these dots to the same central source.
Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chapt. 2 — Dealing with Demons).
His full archive can be seen at
He can be contacted at: email@example.com
(3) The 1918 Rockefeller-US Army Worldwide Pandemic
The original source of this article is The Saker Blog