>>9463667

Back to this greatly unknown (by the general public) Smith Mundt Act for a sec.

Government controlled propaganda directed at the American people (through privately run media organisations? - or just through Governmental literature, social media etc etc)

Anyway, if it extends to Private media - print, TV and internet) what's the conditions and what is the punishment for non compliance, if any?

I mean, supposing a media anchor all of a sudden stops reporting from his autocue and declares that what he has been reporting has been enforced on him by a Act, that he knows he's telling untruths but obligations to his Nation made him comply with lies…..

Would there be a legal punishment for finally telling some truth?

Just curious about legalities around such an act v journalistic integrity.

Plus, I'm declaring I am not American so not trying to be a spy here….. openly asking a question as a foreigner whose own journalism in my own ountry seem to be fully controlled by the same act but couldn't be…… or could they??

Weird world for truth seekers - where do it be?????

>>9463813

I know. But who directs the lack of it? The Nationless Worldly 'Cabal' paying big bucks for transmitted lies. Or …that US Act?

If everyone is lying to us…we'll, it's war, yes….. but it's also insulting when asking for 'trust' or loyalty. "We lied to you for a few years or decades. But it was all for a good cause. But we're going to tell you the truth from here on."

Yeah…….

>>9463885

It's called hypocrisy. Communists are good at it.

Never accept that any and every political system will have those up high getting pampered with the trappings of wealth and those below, worker bees being kept docile with trinkets of illusion called entertainment.

No system has ever escaped this reality. But the dumb masses of every new generation idealistically think they can have a society where the 'leader' comrades earn the same as the lowliest toilet cleaner.