Of late, the term “fake news” has become fairly popular. Just a search on the Web will bring thousands of hits. According to Wikipedia, a site passing as an online encyclopedia, but actually a repository of articles mostly based on false information to advance a political agenda, “Fake news is a type of yellow journalism or propaganda that consists of deliberate misinformation or hoaxes spread via traditional print and broadcast news media or online social media.”

According to a recent poll by Monmouth University,

“Large majorities of the American public believe that traditional media outlets engage in reporting fake news and that outside sources are actively trying to plant fake stories in the mainstream media. When it comes to the meaning of “fake news,” a majority believes that it involves editorial decisions as well as inaccurate reporting.”

The problem with fake news, however, is that even the definition of the term, such as the one advanced by Wikipedia and most of the mainstream press, is actually fake news. Actually, we can properly call fake news any information that offers a different version of events than the one advanced by the U.S. mainstream press fully under he control of the CFR’s anti-American globalist conspirators.

Now, given the fact that currently the term “fake news’ points mostly to information disseminated through the Internet, some people may think we are facing a new phenomenon. Well, it is not.

Though there are previous manifestations of fake news, we can safely surmise that the earliest best example of the use of fake news in America happened in 1898 as the result of the sinking of the USS battleship Maine docked in Havana’s harbor, allegedly as the result of a explosion caused by a Spanish mine. The explosion, which sank the ship and killed 260 U.S. sailors, was the pretext used by warmongers in the U.S. Government to launch a war against Spain. Cardinal in igniting the flames of war was press mogul William Randolph Hearst, owner of The San Francisco Examiner and The New York Journal, whose big headlines printed on yellow paper launched the war campaign by repeating over and over the mantra: Remember the Maine, To Hell With Spain. [1]

Must likely, Hearst’s success in the creation of fake news encouraged U.S. presidents to follow his example. In May 1915, during WWI, a German submarine sank the British ocean liner Lusitania. Of the 1,959 people on board, including passengers and crew, 1,198 died, including 128 Americans

The Germans justified their actions by claiming that the ship was actually carrying war materiel to their enemies in the conflict — which eventually was proven true. But President Wilson, most likely following instructions from his puppet-master, Col. Edward Mandell House, used the incident as a pretext to push America into a war he had promised he would never to send American young men to die in. The American mainstream press, without exception, published the fake news about the event without a hint of criticism or serious analysis.

On December 7, 1941, Japan launched a surprise attack on the U. S. Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii territory. The attack was used by the President Roosevelt as the motive to enter a war he had he vowed never sent American young men to die in. Many years later, revisionist historians offered abundant proof that the attack was not a surprise at all, but that the Roosevelt allowed it to happen as a necessary pretext to enter the war. As expected, the CFR conspirators and their minions in the academia and the mainstream press fought tooth and nail to silence those voices offering a different version of the official narrative.

In “The Struggle Against the Historical Blackout,” a chapter of his 1953 book Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, revisionist historian Harry Elmer Barnes stated, “It has been well established that Roosevelt lied this country into the Second World War against the wishes of at least 80 per cent of the American people.” [2] Adding,

“It may be said, with great restraint, that, never since the Middle Ages, have there been so many powerful forces organized and alerted against the assertion and acceptance of historical truth as are active today to prevent the facts about the responsibility for the second World War and its results from being made generally accessible to the American public. Even the great Rockefeller Foundation frankly admits the subsidizing of historians to anticipate and frustrate the development of any neo-Revisionism in our time. And the only difference between this foundation and several others is that it has been more candid and forthright about its policies. The Sloan Foundation later supplemented this Rockefeller grant.”[3]

Barnes was not the first. In 1947, liberal revisionist historian Charles Austin Beard already had mentioned how,

“The Rockefeller Foundation and the Council on Foreign Relations …. intend to prevent, if they can, a repetition of what they call in the vernacular “the debunking journalistic campaign following World War I.” Translated into precise English, this means that the Foundation and the Council do not want journalists or any other persons to examine too closely and criticize too freely the official propaganda and official statements relative to “our basic aims and activities” during World War II. In short, they hope that, among other things, the policies and measures of Franklin D. Roosevelt will escape in the coming years the critical analysis, evaluation and exposition that befell the policies and measures of Woodrow Wilson and the Entente Allies after World War I.” [4]

A few hours after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt called December 7, 1941, “A day that will live in infamy.” He failed to say, however that the Japanese carried out this infamous act with the help of Secretary of State Cordell Hull and Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, both of them CFR members, as well as and Roosevelt himself.

Another example of fake news happened on August 7, 1964, when the U.S. Congress approved the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that authorized President Johnson to escalate the War in Vietnam. The Resolution was the reaction of an attack by North Vietnamese patrol boats on two U.S. destroyers. The only problem is that the attack never happened. It was a blatant lie fully accepted and disseminated by the mainstream press.

But the most blatant example of fake news in modern American history is without a doubt the U.S, Government’s lie, parroted over and over by the mainstream media and court historians, of the events of September 11, 2001.

A key part of that lie, which justified the already-conceived plan for an invasion of Iraq, was that Saddam Hussein was the mastermind behind the attacks. More recently, fake news about Assad using chemical weapons against the Syrian people, most likely a lie, have been used in several occasions to justify U.S. military attacks on that sovereign country.

The widespread use of the Internet as a source of information broke the monopoly of the CFR-controlled mainstream press over the information reaching the American public. Of course, they didn’t like it, and eventually unleashed a barrage of attacks on what they termed “fake news.” [5]

Now, how we can detect fake news. Well, it is not easy. Nevertheless, as a rule, we may consider fake news (lies) any information whose source is the U.S. Government that is uncritically disseminated by the mainstream press. On the contrary, information coming from the U.S. Government that is strongly criticized by the mainstream press — as is currently the case with the Trump administration — is most likely true.

© 2018 Servando Gonzales – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Servando Gonzales: servandoglez05@yahoo.com


  1. The newspaper also published a photo of the round hole caused by the Spanish mine in the Maine’s hull. Later somebody discovered that it was actually the photo of a solar eclipse previously published in the newspaper.
  2. Harry Elmer Barnes, Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace (Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton, 1953), p. 652.
  3. Ibid., pp. 10-11.
  4. Charles Austin Beard, Saturday Evening Post, October 4, 1947, p.172.
  5. See, i.e, Lauren Easton, “The Fight Against fake News“, Decemeber 15, 2016, AP; “The Fight Against Fake News,” MSNBC, November 17, 2016; David Swanson, “Front Lines in the Fight Against Fake News“, The Village Voice, April 23, 2018.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email