from AO Newswire

Oct 18, 2007
from AlphaOmegaReport Website

AO Report

- The Illuminists have now put into play the final power grab to seize control of the 3 traditional forms of main stream media,

1. Television

2. Radio

3. Hardcopy-print media (newspaper, magazine, book publishing)

The United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is now set to consider total revision on the ownership of Television and radio stations. For decades a station ownership was highly restricted to prevent monopolies in local city markets. The idea was to prevent local news censorship and government corruption that might develop if all news media were under the control of a few.

The original authors of the Federal Communications Commission laws and amendments that were written fifty, sixty and seventy years ago encouraged a widely divergent ownership in order that there would be a wide range of viewpoints for local communities in part to prevent monopolies and the threat of local corruption.

However, since the mid-1970s, the pendulum began to swing away from exclusive, individual ownership and began to permit large corporations from owning more than 7 television stations and 7 radio stations in the nation. Eventually those numbers kept expanding but local limits remained, which in turn limited national ownership.

Another aspect that limited ownership of stations was the prohibition against newspaper companies also owning television and or radio stations. Eventually the rules allowed newspapers to own stations in cities where they didn't have newspapers. Now that rule is up for change too.

If the FCC chairman has his way, by the end of the year, Big Media Conglomerates will be able to complete the sweep of ownership, further shrinking supervening control and authority over "mainstream news media."

What is happening is that the Illuminists are moving swiftly now to get the final chess pieces in place for the final end-game in their quest for World Conquest and the presentation of humanity for slavery under the control of supernatural forces of the Satanic forces waging a cosmic revolution against the Creator of the Universe.

Part of the end-game strategy is to have the mainstream media under the tightest controls possible with as few hands involved in the control process as possible. To do that, media ownership needs to shrink still further than it has till now. There are still too many people, too many "owners."

It would appear that the Illuminists are ultimately looking to move total main stream media control into the hands of just two, three or maybe four or five companies, worldwide. To reach that goal, laws and regulations have to be changed and judged on how the FCC is looking to allow changes, it appears the Illuminists need it NOW.

Normally, the FCC rulings involve a long period of time for changes to be implemented. I know it used to be two or three or even as much as 5 year time frames for changes in ownership rules. To see the intention to apply a regulations change in 2 months or less is shocking and unprecedented.

So why so fast? What's up?

The Illuminists appear to be trying to step up the pace of the agenda. According to some Illuminati-watchers, the NWO agenda has fallen behind its timeline agenda for goal-achievements. Originally, the Illuminists and the New World Order crowd had intended to hand over the world and humanity to their "messiah" the Antichrist by the year 2000.

That time has come and gone without reaching that goal.

From what we now gather, the next target for the New World Order is December 21, 2012, which is the winter solstice which allegedly ends the Satanically-oriented Mayan occult calendar, which claims to be the end of the world - and the start of a new 25,000 year cycle of life.

Supposedly during the switchover, Earth aligns with the center of the galaxy or universe and undergoes great physical changes to the planet due to galactic disturbances sweeping through the solar system.

All of this is "alleged" and whether we think it or not, the thing is "They do."

For that reason, here again you're going to see further escalation of New World Order efforts to transform the world into a One-World government in the next 5 years.

For that reason, we can expect massive terror events and major warfare, perhaps nuclear war. The Illuminist's agenda as outlined by Freemaonsry's Albert Pike, aka the head of the Illuminati in the last few years of his life, indicated that a third world war would be engineered by the Illuminists.

It would be centered in the Mideast and would focus on the destruction of the three major religions of the world, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, in order to bring about a One-World Religion of peace that would honor the new world dictator who would emerge after that third global war.

If events underway now in the Middle East are any indication, watchers realize that the Illuminists are moving now as quickly as they can to get everything in place for the BIG EVENT, the war to end all wars. A war so hideous that the world will beg for gentle global dictator to stop wars between nations.

For more on the FCC story, see below report.
 

Plan Would Ease Limits on Media Owners
by Stephen Labaton
Published: October 18, 2007

from TheNewYorkTimes Website
 

WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 — The head of the Federal Communications Commission has circulated an ambitious plan to relax the decades-old media ownership rules, including repealing a rule that forbids a company to own both a newspaper and a television or radio station in the same city.

Kevin J. Martin, chairman of the commission, wants to repeal the rule in the next two months — a plan that, if successful, would be a big victory for some executives of media conglomerates.
 

Among them are Samuel Zell, the Chicago investor who is seeking to complete a buyout of the Tribune Company, and Rupert Murdoch, who has lobbied against the rule for years so that he can continue controlling both The New York Post and a Fox television station in New York.

The proposal appears to have the support of a majority of the five commission members, agency officials said, although it is not clear that Mr. Martin would proceed with a sweeping deregulatory approach on a vote of 3 to 2 — something his predecessor tried without success. In interviews on Wednesday, the agency’s two Democratic members raised questions about Mr. Martin’s approach.

Mr. Martin said he was striving to reach a consensus with his fellow commissioners, both on the schedule and on the underlying rule changes, although he would not say whether he would move the measures forward if he were able to muster only three votes.

“We’ve had six hearings around the country already; we’ve done numerous studies; we’ve been collecting data for the last 18 months; and the issues have been pending for years,” Mr. Martin said in an interview. “I think it is an appropriate time to begin a discussion to complete this rule-making and complete these media ownership issues.”

Officials said the commission would consider loosening the restrictions on the number of radio and television stations a company could own in the same city.

Currently, a company can own two television stations in the larger markets only if at least one is not among the four largest stations and if there are at least eight local stations. The rules also limit the number of radio stations that a company can own to no more than eight in each of the largest markets.

The deregulatory proposal is likely to put the agency once again at the center of a debate between the media companies, which view the restrictions as anachronistic, and civil rights, labor, religious and other groups that maintain the government has let media conglomerates grow too large.

As advertising increasingly migrates from newspapers to the Internet, the newspaper industry has undergone a wave of upheaval and consolidation. That has put new pressure on regulators to loosen ownership rules. But deregulation in the media is difficult politically, because many Republican and Democratic lawmakers are concerned about news outlets in their districts being too tightly controlled by too few companies.

In recent months, industry executives had all but abandoned the hope that regulators would try to modify the ownership rules in the waning days of the Bush administration.

“This is a big deal because we have way too much concentration of media ownership in the United States,” Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, said at a hearing on Wednesday called to examine the digital transition of the television industry.

“If the chairman intends to do something by the end of the year,” Mr. Dorgan added, his voice rising, “then there will be a firestorm of protest and I’m going to be carrying the wood.”

Supporters of the changes say that the rules are outdated and that there is ample empirical evidence to support their repeal. A small number of media companies, including The New York Times Company, are able to own both a newspaper and a radio station in the same city because the cross-ownership restrictions, which went into effect in 1974, were not applied retroactively.

Mr. Martin faces obstacles within the agency to overhauling the rules. One Democrat on the commission, Michael J. Copps, is adamantly opposed to loosening the rules. The other, Jonathan S. Adelstein, has said that the agency first needs to address other media issues, including encouraging improved coverage of local events and greater ownership of stations by companies controlled by women and minorities.

Advisers to Mr. Martin said he hoped to gain the support of at least one of the Democrats, probably Mr. Adelstein, but Mr. Adelstein said in an interview on Wednesday that Mr. Martin’s proposed timetable was “awfully aggressive.”

Three years ago, the commission lost a major court challenge to its last effort, led by Michael K. Powell, its chairman at the time, to relax the media ownership rules. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in Philadelphia, concluded that the commission had failed to adequately justify the new rules. Mr. Martin’s proposal would presumably include new evidence aimed at fending off similar legal challenges.

Mr. Powell’s effort, which had been supported by lobbyists for broadcasters, newspapers and major media conglomerates, provoked a wave of criticism from a broad coalition of opponents. Among them were the National Organization for Women, the National Rifle Association, the Parents Television Council and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The agency was flooded with nearly three million comments against changing the rules, the most it has ever received in a rule-making process.

Since the appeals court struck down the deregulatory changes, the commission has continued to study the issues at a leisurely pace, and it held a series of hearings around the nation. It had not made any new proposals, and industry executives had not expected the agency to move again so soon.

But in recent days, Mr. Martin has proposed to expedite the rule-making and hold a final vote in December. In part, he has told commission officials, he was reacting to criticism by Mr. Copps about temporary waivers that have allowed companies to own newspapers and stations in the same market.

Mr. Zell has said he wants to complete his $8.2 billion buyout of Tribune Company by the end of the year. Tribune had been granted what were supposed to be temporary waivers to the rule to allow it to control newspapers and television stations in five cities: New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Hartford and the Miami-Fort Lauderdale area.

Mr. Copps, who for years has waged a campaign against media consolidation, said that it would be hard for the commission to proceed during an election year because media consolidation has provoked deep public skepticism in the past.

He said Mr. Martin’s proposal to complete a relaxation of the rules in December would require procedural shortcuts, giving the public too little time to comment on the proposals and industry experts too little time to weigh their impact on news operations.

“We shouldn’t be doing anything without having a credible process and nothing should be done to get in the way of Congressional oversight and more importantly, public oversight,” Mr. Copps said in a telephone interview from London.

 

“We’ve got to have that public scrutiny. That was one of the big mistakes that Mr. Powell made, and he was taken to the woodshed by the Third Circuit. I fear it is déjà vu all over again.”