Dear WND reader,

As you know all too well, the biggest reason 69 million Americans voted to elect Barack Obama as president in 2008 was the elite news media’s scandalous failure to vet him – and their cult-like worship of him as a political messiah.

Well, we’re less than five months away from the 2012 election, and guess who is once again all geared up to usher in a second – and even more disastrous – presidential term for Obama?

Right – our friends in the news media.

And while you might think three-and-a-half years of Obama-style desolation would wake up the media, in some ways the situation now is even worse!

At least in 2008, the so-called “conservative” media were trying to vet the unknown Obama and accurately report on his background. But today, in the home stretch to Election 2012, even the “New Media” entities who proudly claim to be “vetting Obama” are afraid to touch the most important, consequential – and damaging – scandals of the Obama presidency.

For instance, while almost half of registered voters tell pollsters they don’t believe Obama’s birth certificate is authentic, almost no one in the media – outside of WND – will touch the story.

When the first official U.S. law enforcement investigation into the matter, led by Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, established “probable cause” that the document released with great fanfare by the White House last April is a computer-generated forgery, a virtual media blackout on the investigation ensued.

Even when one of the six-month investigation’s bombshell findings – that the family of unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers allegedly funded “foreign student” Barack Obama through Harvard Law School – was rated by Internet ranking service as one of the top-read news stories in the entire world (thanks to coverage by WND and the Drudge Report), both the establishment press and the “conservative” media looked the other way.

Here are a few recent examples:

  • Shortly after Arpaio’s March 1 press conference, a popular column discussing Obama’s eligibility to serve as president was published on – which bills itself as the “leading conservative and political opinion website” – but then, the column inexplicably disappeared from the site.Titled “Sheriff Joe Exposes Forgery of Obama’s Selective Service Registration,” by Floyd and Mary Beth Brown of the Western Center For Journalism, it had been Townhall’s eighth-most-read and most-emailed column that day. Then suddenly it was gone – and WND’s requests for comment failed to elicit any explanation from Townhall.
  • Then another regular Townhall columnist, Diana West, wrote “Why the Silence About Obama’s Historic Scam?”but found that it wasn’t posted on Townhall at all. Worse, it was déjà vu for West, whose previous column on the same topic likewise was spiked.When WND asked West why her last two columns on the subject of Obama’s eligibility weren’t posted on Townhall, she responded: “This week’s empty hole where my column on media silence on Sheriff Arpaio’s press conference would normally go, like last month’s empty hole where my column on the Atlanta court proceeding on eligibility would normally go, speak for themselves.”
  • Recently, a top editor said he believed “there’s no evidence” to support allegations questioning Obama’s eligibility as president, adding, “It’s a waste of resources, and it’s a waste of time.”
  • Forbes online recently published a provocative article by John Mariotti, titled, “Is There An Imposter In The White House?” It started off this way: “There is something very wrong when the sitting president refuses to divulge huge pieces of information about his background. What is he hiding? Maybe the ‘birthers’ were a little extreme, but is there something wrong with this ‘manufactured candidate,’ whose history remains sealed from public view? What is he hiding? Could the ‘Hawaii birth certificate’ be a forgery? Is there something much worse – like ‘sponsorship’ by an unnamed special interest? I don’t know. I do know that the man in the White House now is an imposter.” But guess what? Shortly after it was posted, Forbes inexplicably took the story off its site. But you may read it here.
  • What about Fox News? When it was announced that talk radio powerhouse “Mancow” Muller would be featured in two one-hour Fox TV specials called “Mancow TV Worldwide,”the radio host specifically requested that WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi be his first guest. Corsi, a two-time No. 1 New York Times bestselling author and Harvard Ph.D., was set to discuss Iran and Israel, as well as globalism. When Fox was setting up the time for Corsi to be interviewed on Muller’s debut show, he was specifically prohibited by the show’s producers from discussing anything to do with the constitutional eligibility questions still plaguing Obama.Corsi has been the nation’s top investigative journalist on the Obama eligibility issue and is the author of the New York Times bestseller “Where’s the Birth Certificate?”As such, he played a central role in introducing the issue to Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The sheriff’s investigative team recently completed the first phase of an ongoing law-enforcement investigation into the many vexing and totally unvetted issues of Obama’s past that bear directly on the legality of his serving as president.Corsi agreed to the restrictions on the Mancow interview, and the Fox segment was taped and scheduled for broadcast.But then, Corsi’s publicist received a call from the show’s producer saying network executives had viewed the segment and determined that it “didn’t fit,” and thus would be scrubbed.

    “It’s clear censorship at Fox,” according to Corsi, who says it’s apparent the network didn’t want an appearance by anyone even linked to the Obama investigation, and claims it confirms the various reports that the mainstream media are censoring reports on Obama’s eligibility.

    “Fox does not want to cover the Obama eligibility issue,” he said. “It’s a clear indication Fox is moving to the left. [Owner Rupert] Murdoch must be under increasing political pressure …”

    Corsi added, “This confirms stories we’ve been gathering about the threats (against reporting on Obama’s eligibility),” he said. “In fact, it’s reaching such a level of censorship that it’s of interest to the sheriff’s posse.”

    He was referring to the “Cold Case Posse” of law-enforcement professionals and attorneys assembled by Arpaio, who announced the results of their six-month investigation on March 1.

    Arpaio’s investigation continues, but at the news conference announcing the initial results, lead investigator Mike Zullo stated, somewhat ominously: “During our investigation, we actually were told [that media] had been threatened with FTC investigations [if they continued reporting on eligibility]. Commentators [had been] threatened with their jobs.”

    The threats were so intimidating that some individuals quit their positions over safety concerns for their families, Zullo confirmed.

    Where is America’s free press?

    Friends, you cannot have a free country without a free press. Yet most of America’s “big media” today have devolved into a de facto government propaganda ministry. And even most of the “conservative” media are afraid to cover the really consequential stories that – while important to the nation – can also exact a price from news organizations reporting them, in terms of threats, ridicule, boycotts, lawsuits and financial loss.

    That’s why I’m asking you to please support WND.

    Very simply, WND does report the difficult stories others won’t. We have exposed and “vetted” Barack Obama like no other news organization – and will continue until Election Day and beyond if necessary. We believe WND is the kind of news organization America’s founders would have approved. We don’t mock patriotic Americans and tea partiers trying to set their country right. We don’t rewrite White House press releases and call it news. We don’t bow and scrape before President Obama or anyone else. We don’t pretend abortion is OK, or that same-sex marriage is good, or that global warming is “proven science,” or that more government is the solution to all problems, or that Palestinian leaders want peace, or that the Constitution is old-fashioned, or that the “Federal Reserve” is good for America. In short, we’re not politically correct and we have no sacred cows. Instead, our team of experienced, professional journalists strives to do one thing – to tell the truth that Americans desperately need and deserve to hear.

    Now, many of you read WND every day, you appreciate it, you trust it, you wouldn’t want to be without it. For that we are endlessly grateful.

    Thomas Jefferson

    But what you might not realize is that what we do is very difficult and costly. It isn’t easy reporting the important stories no one else will, taking on the media elite, slaying the dragons of political correctness, bucking the tide of conventional wisdom, and constantly challenging tyranny, injustice and lies.

    If you believe, as Thomas Jefferson did, that “the only security of all is in a free press,” and if you want to see major growth in WND’s kind of courageous, watchdog reporting – rather than the submissive, lapdog approach coming from what Rush Limbaugh calls today’s “state-run media” – I’m asking you to consider becoming a WND “subscriber.”

    But wait, you say, I thought WND was free. Yes, it is free, and will remain that way. However, here’s what I’m getting at:

    Traditionally, newspapers have relied not only on advertising, but also on reader subscriptions for financial support. But in the Internet age, we find we can deliver the news to far more people by keeping the service free. Does that mean we have to lose the needed subscription revenue? Not necessarily.

    It’s a time-honored tradition in the newspaper business that free newspapers ask for voluntary subscriptions. As a rule, satisfied readers who depend on a free publication for their news don’t mind paying a little bit for it.

    That’s why voluntary subscription donations have been the lifeblood of many “free” newspapers over the years – it’s the honor system, you might say.

    If you’d consider supporting WND with your “voluntary subscription,” here are a couple of easy options:

    1. Simply choose the amount you would like to donate for your voluntary subscription payment by using the “Amount” drop-down menu. Then select the frequency of your donation from the “Frequency” drop-down menu – either monthly or a one-time donation. If you wish to donate monthly, the amount you select will be deducted from your credit card on or around the first day of each month. (Just call or e-mail WND if you ever want to cancel or change the amount.)
    2. You may also donate to WND’s Legal Defense Fund, to help us battle the lawsuits and threats that always accompany honest journalism.

    As yet another alternative, you may send a check to, P.O. Box 1627, Medford, OR 97501. (Be sure to mark your check “voluntary subscription payment” or “legal defense fund.”)

    Finally, if you prefer, you may donate by calling our toll-free order line: 1-800-4-WND-COM (1-800-496-3266).

    Thank you very much. All of us at WND deeply appreciate your support. It’s truly what enables us to keep going. And I think you’ll agree, with everything going on in America today, we need a vibrant, free press more than ever.


    David Kupelian

    Vice President and Managing Editor

    P.S.: If you do use a credit card to make your contribution today, we’d like to say thanks by offering you three FREE issues of our popular monthly Whistleblower magazine. We can do this because we are confident you will want to purchase an annual subscription once you have an opportunity to sample this remarkable offline monthly companion to WND. That’s a $22.50 value as our thank-you for a donation of any amount.

    Support WND with your voluntary subscription.



Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.