Monthly Archives: November 2016

synthetic esoterica

synthetic esoterica

Congress Poised To Pass Sweeping Law Covering FDA And NIH

NPR   1700 hours GMT-5 11/29/16

Legislation to bolster medical research and revamp the way new drugs and medical devices are approved is on the fast track through a Congress that has had little success to celebrate this year.

 

source of featured image: 

http://www.theopenscroll.com/pharmakeia.htm 

 

 

doyoumind_banner

http://www.ifpma.org/resource-centre/research-based-pharmaceutical-industry-launches-do-you-mind-campaign/ 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74MI_tnuzWw

 

 

[ Ed.: great graphics here, plus a lot of info]

http://www.unique-design.net/library/drugs.html 

 

 

CIA MKULTRA: drugs to ruin the nation

by Jon Rappoport

November 29, 2016

Drugs to transform individuals…and even, by implication, society.

Drug research going far beyond the usual brief descriptions of MKULTRA.

The intention is there, in the record:

A CIA document was included in the transcript of the 1977 US Senate Hearings on MKULTRA, the CIA’s mind-control program.

The document is found in Appendix C, starting on page 166. It’s simply labeled “Draft,” dated 5 May 1955 (note: scroll down to #123-125 in the document).

It states: “A portion of the Research and Development Program of [CIA’s] TSS/Chemical Division is devoted to the discovery of the following materials and methods:”

What followed was a list of hoped-for drugs and their uses.

First, a bit of background: MKULTRA did not end in 1962, as advertised. It was shifted over to the Agency’s Office of Research and Development.

John Marks is the author of the groundbreaking book, Search for the Manchurian Candidate, which exposed MKULTRA. Marks told me a CIA representative informed him that the continuation of MKULTRA, after 1962, was carried out with a greater degree of secrecy, and he, Marks, would never see a scrap of paper about it.

I’m printing below, the list of the 1955 intentions of the CIA regarding their own drug research. The range of those intentions is stunning.

Some of my comments gleaned from studying the list:

The CIA wanted to find substances which would “promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness.” Serious consideration should be given to the idea that psychiatric medications, food additives, herbicides, and industrial chemicals (like fluorides) would eventually satisfy that requirement.

The CIA wanted to find chemicals that “would produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible way.” This suggests many possibilities—among them the use of drugs to fabricate diseases and thereby give the false impression of germ-caused epidemics.

The CIA wanted to find drugs that would “produce amnesia.” Ideal for discrediting whistleblowers, dissidents, certain political candidates, and other investigators. (Scopolamine, for example.)

The CIA wanted to discover drugs which would produce “paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc.” A way to make people decline in health as if from diseases.

The CIA wanted to develop drugs that would “alter personality structure” and thus induce a person’s dependence on another person. How about dependence in general? For instance, dependence on institutions, governments?

The CIA wanted to discover chemicals that would “lower the ambition and general working efficiency of men.” Sounds like a general description of the devolution of society.

As you read the list yourself, you’ll see more implications/possibilities.

Here, from 1955, are the types of drugs the MKULTRA men at the CIA were looking for. The following statements are direct CIA quotes:

A portion of the Research and Development Program of TSS/Chemical Division is devoted to the discovery of the following materials and methods:

1. Substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be discredited in public.

2. Substances which increase the efficiency of mentation and perception.

3. Materials which will prevent or counteract the intoxicating effect of alcohol.

4. Materials which will promote the intoxicating effect of alcohol.

5. Materials which will produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible way so that they may be used for malingering, etc.

6. Materials which will render the induction of hypnosis easier or otherwise enhance its usefulness.

7. Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion during interrogation and so-called “brain-washing”.

8. Materials and physical methods which will produce amnesia for events preceding and during their use.

9. Physical methods of producing shock and confusion over extended periods of time and capable of surreptitious use.

10. Substances which produce physical disablement such as paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc.

11. Substances which will produce “pure” euphoria with no subsequent let-down.

12. Substances which alter personality structure in such a way that the tendency of the recipient to become dependent upon another person is enhanced.

13. A material which will cause mental confusion of such a type that the individual under its influence will find it difficult to maintain a fabrication under questioning.

14. Substances which will lower the ambition and general working efficiency of men when administered in undetectable amounts.

15. Substances which promote weakness or distortion of the eyesight or hearing faculties, preferably without permanent effects.

16. A knockout pill which can surreptitiously be administered in drinks, food, cigarettes, as an aerosol, etc., which will be safe to use, provide a maximum of amnesia, and be suitable for use by agent types on an ad hoc basis.

17. A material which can be surreptitiously administered by the above routes and which in very small amounts will make it impossible for a man to perform any physical activity whatsoever.

At the end of this 1955 CIA document, the author [unnamed] makes these remarks: “In practice, it has been possible to use outside cleared contractors for the preliminary phases of this [research] work. However, that part which involves human testing at effective dose levels presents security problems which cannot be handled by the ordinary contactors.

“The proposed [human testing] facility [deletion] offers a unique opportunity for the secure handling of such clinical testing in addition to the many advantages outlined in the project proposal. The security problems mentioned above are eliminated by the fact that the responsibility for the testing will rest completely upon the physician and the hospital. [one line deleted] will allow [CIA] TSS/CD personnel to supervise the work very closely to make sure that all tests are conducted according to the recognized practices and embody adequate safeguards.”

In other words, this was to be ultra-secret. No outside contractors at universities for the core of the experiments, which by the way could be carried forward for decades.

A secret in-house facility.

Over the years, more facilities could be created.

If you examine the full range of psychiatric drugs developed since 1955, you’ll see that a number of them fit the CIA’s agenda. Speed-type chemicals to addle the brain over the long term, to treat so-called ADHD. Anti-psychotic drugs, AKA “major tranquilizers,” to render patients more and more dependent on others (and government) as they sink into profound disability and incur motor brain damage. And of course, the SSRI antidepressants, like Prozac and Paxil and Zoloft, which produce extreme and debilitating highs and lows—and also push people over the edge into committing violence.

These drugs drag the whole society down into lower and lower levels of consciousness and action.

If that’s the goal of a very powerful and clandestine government agency…it’s succeeding.

Jon Rappoport

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/11/29/cia-mkultra-drugs-to-take-down-the-nation/ 

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTAwWDUwMA==/z/JfoAAOSw3xJVYFI9/$_35.JPG

In a long footnote to Book Two, Chapter Four of A Terrible Mistake, H. P. Albarelli, Trine-Day, 2009, which is found on pages 792-793, Albarelli notes:

“Readers familiar with Freemasonry will recognize that many of these esoteric subjects are related to that secret society. Some readers may also know that many of the CIA’s subcontractors under MKUKTRA and ARTICHOKE, as well as other programs, throughout the 1950s and 1960s, were Masons, some of the 33rd degree. For decades there have been rampant speculations about Freemasonry and MKULTRA. Nowhere is this best witnessed them on the Internet. Some of the speculation is been fueled by the documented activities of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry as related to behavior modification programs. The possible connections are intriguing but not a primary subject for this book. When this book was close to completion, in yet another another of numerous coincidences that occurred over the course of his writing, author Peter Levenda had just completed a book on Freemasons and America. I asked Peter about the CIA’s pursuits of such matters, and he said: “CIA’s interest in matters esoteric was prompted by several concerns. In the 1st place, esoteric organizations–secret societies, cults, etc.–run parallel to intelligence agencies in terms of the culture of secrecy and deception. A secret society operates below the radar of social and governmental oversight and control; their membership lists are secret; their members use pseudonyms; and they believe that they have secret power to control the outcome of world events. Members of secret societies are often intelligent, are familiar with foreign languages and cultures, and travel incognito across national borders. Thus, purely as a security matter, CIA would be interested in those groups and would be tempted to infiltrate them, or otherwise keep an eye on them. The SS and Gestapo did the same in Germany in the 1930s and 1940s, when it was understood that secret societies–like the Masons, but also the Golden Dawn and other groups–provided a covert network of potential anti-government operatives that had to be suppressed. In the 2nd place, the very arcane pursuits of the secret societies hinted at avenues of knowledge, power and control there were not available to the government. CIA would have wanted to know is how cults were so successful in “brainwashing” their members, convincing them of the truth of the most unbelievable ideas and concepts. Was the Korean War era method of brainwashing captured American soldiers equivalent to the approach used by cults and occult groups on their own members? What was the effect of these methods on memory, perception, volition? Did the cults know something about the functioning of the human brain that the government scientist did not?

Thirdly, the interest of CIA in such matters paralleled that of the Nazis and their SS-Ahneherbe.  Himmler’s desire to find ancient artifacts–including the holy Grail, the Ark of the covenant, etc.–was motivated not by a sincere religious sentiment but by the naked pursuit of the power they represent. This is an astonishing development, for it indicates that somewhere within the CIA’s labyrinthine bureaucracy there were (and are) individuals who were able to get funding to search the world for these artifacts. For instance, Robert K Temple in the new preface to his much acclaimed The Sirius Mystery tells of how CIA approached him as he was researching the religion of the African Dogon tribe. What possible reason could CIA have for keeping tabs on such an arcane, academic study involving ancient astronomy? If we realize that such practices as remote viewing, hallucinogenic drug research, and the investigation of cults, ESP, if hypnosis and other factors were taking place all at the same time within America’s intelligence establishment–involving not only the CIA but also the Army and the Navy–then we are forced to consider that CIA had a reason for all of this that transcends mere curiosity. It was the era of the weaponization of esoterica, something that had not been seen in the Western world since the Middle Ages.”

***

“Major Abramson, assisted by 1st Lt. Frank Olson and several other Edgewood scientists, began his search for the proper aerosol using a solution of sodium hypochlorite. Also assisting was in Dr. Vernon Bryson of the Long Island Biological Association. Still operational today, the Association is a private research group founded by 1924 by number of wealthy entrepreneurs, including J.P. Morgan and William K Vanderbilt. The group has organizational ties to the controversial eugenics research conducted by Charles Davenport’s Cold Spring Harbor Department of Eugenics. During World War II, Vannevar Bush, head of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, strongly supported the association’s work.”  [Page 40]

“In response [to Pres. Roosevelt’s increasing concern over mounting intelligence reports about the Axis powers stockpiling poison gas], the War Department created a War Research Service (WRS), and installed George Wilhelm Merck as its director. Merck was a natural for the job, as he was already a high-ranking consultant of the war Department on biological warfare. He was also head of Merck and Company, one of the oldest and largest pharmaceutical companies in the world. The firm had its beginnings in the late 1600s in Germany as the E.  Merck chemical factory. In 1891, George Merck, George Wilhelm’s father, left Germany to establish Merck and Company in New York City. His son, George Wilhelm Merck, born in West Orange, New Jersey and a Harvard graduate, assumed control had assumed control of the company in 1925. The younger Merck dynamically guided the company to become the largest full-line producer and distributor of pharmaceuticals in the world. Merck and Company has since been responsible for countless innovations in the drug industry, including many in the controversial areas of enthnogenic products and shamanic inebriants.

In 1914, Merck’s German operation was the first company worldwide to synthesize and patent methylene dioxymethamphetamine, or MDMA. As readers shall see, MDMA, a semisynthetic psychoactive drug properly known today as Ecstasy, was tested in the early 1950s under the codename EA–1475 at the Army’s Edgewood Arsenal….” [Page 42]

“George W Merck, however, was no neophyte in biological warfare. Previously, he had served as a high-ranking consultant to a top-secret group called the WBC committee. The WBC committee had been formed in the fall of 1941, two months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, when Secretary of War Henry L Stimson asked Frank B Jewett [whose dad was a Mason and is a cousin from the other branch ten generations removed], president of the National Academy of Sciences, to appoint a working group to make a complete survey of the biological warfare capacities of other nations. Wrote Stimson to Jewett, “because of the danger that might confront this country from potential enemies employing what may be broadly described as biological weapons, it seems advisable that investigations be initiated to survey the present situation and the future possibilities.”

Julie turned to his good friend Dr. Edwin B Fred at the University of Wisconsin to identify who would be best for the group. Fred picked Merck; Dr. Ira Baldwin; Thomas Bourne Turner, chair of the department bacteriology at Johns Hopkins University; Thomas Rivers, director of the Rockefeller Hospital in New York; William Hay Taliaferro at the University of Chicago; and Louis O Kunkel of the Rockefeller Institute. Merck chaired the group, which was named the War Bureau of Consultants, or, as it was commonly referred to, the WBC committee. Acting as military liaison to the committee were major Arvo Thompson and Lieut. Col. James A. Defendorf from Edgewood Arsenal.

Starkly illustrating the enemy dangers that preoccupied the Secretary of War were series of incidents that had occurred 2 years earlier in New York. The 1st incident occurred on February 3, 1939. Dr. Ryoichi Naito, an assistant to Dr. Shiro Ishii–head of Japan’s secret germ warfare program–visited the Manhattan offices of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research and asked for samples of the yellow fever virus strain stored there for use in vaccinations. The Institute refused the request, but Dr. Knight told repeatedly returned, harassing Rockefeller Institute scientists with questions about the virus.

During one of Naito’s uninvited visits, scientists were stunned to hear him brag that he had recently spent 18 months at the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin. At the time, the Koch Institute, a renowned research facility, was a hub for Nazi biological research.” [Page 43]

****

“On April 10, 1953, just 3 days before he approved MK-ULTRA, Allen Dulles made a major policy speech in Hot Springs, Virginia to the National Alumni Conference of Princeton University …  Dulles focused exclusively on what he termed “Brain Warfare”,” or the “battle for men’s minds” provoked by “the international tensions” called the Cold War. Said Dulles… :

“ The human mind is the most delicate of all instruments. It is so finely adjusted, so susceptible to the impact of outside influences, that it is proving a valuable tool in the hands of the sinister men.  The Soviets are now using brain perversion techniques as one of their main weapons in prosecuting the Cold War. Some of these techniques are so subtle and so a bar and to our way of life that we have recoiled from facing up to them.”

Dulles went on and politically recited a long litany of evil Soviet practices, including the domination of huge landmasses and populations, using “powerful jamming equipment” to “eliminate the reception of foreign radio messages,”  a “government approved” media, persecution of and mass purges of racial minority groups, religious intolerance, and a concentrated program of “brain-conditioning” directed at turning human beings “into humble confessors of crimes they never committed or [to] make them the mouthpiece for Soviet propaganda.” Dulles seemed most concerned with “brain-conditioning” and Soviet efforts to develop “new techniques” that employed Russian “science and ingenuity” in the “study of mental reactions and in the nefarious art of breaking down the human mind.”

Most alarming, Bellows declared, was that the Communists were now applying brainwashing techniques “to American prisoners in Korea.” It “was not beyond the range of possibility,” he warned, “that considerable numbers of our own boys there might be so indoctrinated as to be induced, temporarily at least, to renounce country and family.” The United States would do all possible to combat communist oppression, Dulles said, but it was “handicapped” in doing so because there were “few survivors” of Soviet brainwashing, and “we have no human guinea pigs ourselves on which to try out these extraordinary techniques.”

One can only imagine how uncomfortable it might have been from Dulles to be questioned about having “no guinea pigs” in light of the fact that CIA programs he had approved 2 months earlier were aggressively experimenting on human beings with an array of mind control and behavior modification techniques far surpassing anything the Soviets were accused of.” [Pages 136-137]

****

“By early summer 1951, Project BLUEBIRD administrators had further refined their interrogation research to focus exclusively on “special interrogation and hypnotism techniques” applied to “war and specific agency problems.” The problems were listed with startling specificity:

Can we ‘condition’, by posthypnotic suggestion, Agency employees (or persons of interest to this Agency) to prevent them from giving information to any unauthorized source or for committing any act on behalf of a foreign or domestic enemy?

Can we, in the matter of an hour, 2 hours, one day, etc., induce a hypnotized condition in the unwilling subject to such an extent that he will perform an act for our benefit?

Could we seize a subject  and in the space of an hour to by  posthypnotic control have him crash an airplane, record train, etc.?

Can we [long and short range] through posthypnotic control induces a subject to commit violence against another individual, or induces subject to murder another individual or group of individuals?

Can we through posthypnotic control create a condition whereby a subject would forget any such induced act after the subject is brought out of his “conditioned” state? [Pages 223-224, A Terrible Mistake, H. P. Albarelli, Trine-Day, 2009.]

[Ed.: Who, in the context of the year 2016, post-Patriot Act, post-NDAA, four years after the publication of the Presidential Memorandum on Insider Threat Policy ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/11/21/presidential-memorandum-national-insider-threat-policy-and-minimum-stand ) in light of extensive evidence for foreign infiltration or or interference with domestic political control and in view of alleged treason/intraparty squabble/military insurrection, controls the definition of foreign or domestic enemy?]

****

“Surviving minutes from nearly a dozen ARTICHOKE  committee meetings so that the committees work mostly focused on ARTICHOKE  team recruitment and project enhancement, and that the committee functioned in a routine in congenial fashion. However, not everything was always peachy keen with the group. A handwritten note by one CIA official on the committee reveals what might have been strong dissent among committee members. That dissent could just as easily have been expressed again some of today’s “war on terror” practices. The note reads:

“What in God’s name are we proposing here? Does it not strike anyone but a few that these projects may be immoral and unethical, and that they may fly in the face of international laws? What really are we attempting to accomplish? Where does respect for life and human dignity come into play?”

The unidentified rider was reacting to a proposal concerning “the possibilities of inducing subjects to go against their will and personal beliefs and commits acts such as murder.” Another note, scribbled by someone with the initials “JG” on a proposal drafted months later, reads: “Where does this stuff end? The sheer madness of some of these ideas is getting difficult to swallow.”

ARTICHOKE conference meetings regularly delved into consideration of immoral practices. At one of its earlier meetings, in December 1951, the six-member group discussed at length how to use a “standard electric shock machine” to produce “normal shock effects” including convulsions and eventually amnesia, “following a series of shock treatments.” An unnamed college professor, who was also identified as a psychiatrist, appeared before the conference and explained that through the use of Reiter electric-shock machines he “could guarantee amnesia for certain periods of time and particularly he could guarantee amnesia from any knowledge of use of the convulsive shock.” According to conference minutes, the professor explained that electric shock machines set up producing “lower current type of shock” would have the “effective making a man talk.” [Pages 230-231]

****

“… It is suspected that Goodenow may have consulted with the CIA and Mulholland to help devise a special pinprick type device to be used to covertly induced diseases in targeted individuals.” [Page 258]

http://www.campx.ca/CampXCanadianEdition.jpg

“White was sent to Camp X not only to be trained, but also to become a trainer himself, which he did when he was assigned in 1942 as branch chief of schools and training for the OSS counterespionage division in Washington DC. Subsequently, he became deputy chief of counterespionage, or X2, as it was commonly called. In his trainer role, White rotated among several secret sites, including area B3, a 9,000 acre center hidden away in Maryland’s Catoctin Mountain Park, a few miles from today’s Camp David presidential retreat. Another secret training site was known as area A2, a 5,000 acre wooded site near Quantico Virginia. “The Farm,” located 40 miles from Washington DC, was a 3rd site. White’s own training continued, as well. In May 1942, together with Garland Williams and Philip Strong, White took a brief break from his trainers position to attend a six-week advance commando and parachute school in Virginia.

Among White’ first OSS students were several novice officers who would later become top CIA officials: Richard Helms, Frank Wisner Jr, James Jesus Angleton, Lyman B Kirkpatrick Junior, Thomas Karmessines, and William Colby. Several other notable students were anthropologists Carleton S Coon and Gregory Bateson, psychologist Dr. James A. Hamilton, future Federal Narcotics agent Howard Chappell, and Alfred M. Hubbard, an elusive and fascinating figure who arrived at OSS’s Area B fresh from a stint in prison. Hubbard, as readers already know, would later become “the Johnny Appleseed of LSD.” Michael Burke, who would also become a CIA employee and then a high-profile executive who ran the New York Yankees in Madison Square Garden, was another of White’s trainees in Maryland…..”

****

“ Dr. Henry Murray, OSS psychological warfare chief who later conducted secret CIA-funded experiments at Harvard in the 1950s, observed:

“The whole nature of the functions of OSS were particularly inviting to psychopathic characters; it involves sensation, intrigue, the idea being a mysterious man with secret knowledge.”

It was not long before George White’s training skills were demanded that other newer locations. The OSS training complex soon expanded to several other additional locations in Maryland, including one that bordered Edgewood Arsenal, and another in Garrett County, just a few miles away from Deep Creek Lake. There were others, including a converted estate in Fairfax Virginia, and a West Coast commando center in San Clemente, California. In addition, several urban centers or “finishing schools” were established in New York City at 630 Fifth Avenue and 55 W. 42nd St., with an adjunct branch on Long Island.  Other “finishing schools,” were operated in San Francisco and in the Hollywood section of Los Angeles. These schools focus primarily on imparting the skills of “urban terrorism,” “partisan recruitment,” and counterintelligence techniques. Here it is interesting to note , the OSS’s location at 635th Ave. was the international building and Rockefeller Center, which also served at that time is the headquarters of British intelligence in the United States.

Kermit Roosevelt, OSS chief historian, reveals in his declassified war report of the OSS, that all OSS training “stressed from the beginning the importance of maintaining cover.” Students at all its schools “were forbidden to disclose their real identities and lived under assumed names. At the same time, they were instructed to attempt to pierce the cover of their fellow students.” Roosevelt explains:

“Intensive interrogation exercises of various types were carried on in attempts to force the student to break is assumed identity. In each of these the student was made familiar with the various techniques of interrogation and the importance of the most minute detail was stressed. The entire atmosphere at all training establishments was designed to prepare the trainees psychologically for the fact that the life of an agent is a constant and continuing gamble with detection.”

In the same report, Roosevelt explained the basic concept of “compartmentalization” in intelligence matters, which he dubbed the “principle of insulation,” as well as the need for, and functions of, “safe houses.”

In his position as OSS training chief, Col. White demonstrated a pronounced flair for innovation. He designed several challenging field exercises that required individual students to develop their own cover stories, secure “appropriate cover credentials,” and then attempt to penetrate a highly secured industrial establishment in one of the 4 selected cities, Chicago, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, or Philadelphia. White’s field exercises, in addition to providing training, served the added function of pointing up serious security weaknesses in the nation’s defense plants.” [Pages 399-400]

Fresh off the presses:

 

http://claritypress.com/sitebuilder/images/valentinecover-400×600.jpg

By the same author:

dissidentvoice.org/2015/09/creating-a-crime-how-the-cia-commandeered-the-dea/ 

 

landscape gardening (with new addenda)

 landscape gardening

I guess it’s a fantasy of mine, perhaps a quixotic aspect of my inexorable aging, that some form of collaborative effort could address the issues noted in the articles noted in this blog entry and the comments I added after I posted it.

They describe the recent (and ongoing?) battles between entrenched ideologies, mainstream media and the alternative media with regard to truth, truthiness, and fake news. 

I wrote to a few people about this idea and thought I’d write to a few more, but I decided to write this blog entry and then send them a link.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crkbFnAIz7U

Geoff Lowe – Bass

Pat Bitautas – Drums

Tom Tallman – Flugelhorn

Rich Moore – Tenor Saxophone 

My creeping paranoia tells me that Google saw to it that my e-mails were never delivered; my more realistic sense tells me that the recipients have been busy and pre-occupied with work, health, life and their own priorities, or perhaps that they were not quite ready to take on an entrenched authority that quite obviously has no problem killing people. I understand; such courage is difficult to summon.

I envisioned (fantasized about) some means of communicating across time and distance with an online meeting, symposium or teleconference that was devoted to strengthening the alternative media. (There are lots of technologies, including our own inherent ability to project thought to other people located far away.)  

There are probably several sub-sets of “breakouts” in some form of larger “meeting” that involve teaching and learning discernment, or how to tell “crap” from 18-karat fact and insight, or how to determine the validity, veracity and verifiability of information and sources. 

My own “crap detector” (as Hemingway called it) has been through a great deal on the last fifteen years and is probably due for some “detailing” and re-buffing. But I’ve assembled and posted files on information warfare and a lot of related topics. I’m a grizzle (or maybe grisly) veteran with scars, stripes, and a commendation or two. 

I mused about a group process that would not get bogged down, as so many do and have, in inertia, minutiae, interference or apathy, or become vulnerable to destruction from inside or outside. 

What I dreamt about (and be careful, for last night I dreamt about forgetting to go to an important job interview, though I’ve been disabled/retired for almost a decade) was the crossroads of investigative journalism, reality, high perception or awareness, and rhizomatic progression.

http://www.riponlandscapes.co.uk/images/laying-turf600.jpg

I saw an organized approach by many to 

  • develop a multi-media library that would teach about known methods of dissimulation, propaganda, information warfare, mind control, et al.;
  • build a toolchest that would enable individuals, groups and organizations to learn about methods used in legal research, archival research, and investigative journalism;
  • create a living database of media outlets that was fed by a cloud of information about their validity, authenticity, transparency and accountability.

I envisioned a process by which more and more people could get together to talk about and learn informational technologies, cybersecurity, media production skills, new methods for information dissemination (ex.: live-streaming), etc.

http://www.dfwchild.com/images/features/fw%20garden%20web%201.jpg

I envisoned a gathering that featured guest appearances by people like Wayne Madsen, Jon Rappaport, Kris Millegan, Joachim Hagopian, Wendy Painting (lonewolf research), and others. A list needs to be built of who has this kind of expertise so we can tap it, reward it, and replicate it. You can start by doing a search for tools for journalistic verification, and finding organizations devoted to the development of investigative journalists.  

https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/02/ba/92/fb/coastal-maine-botanical.jpg

I envisioned a process and an organization that would direct, nurture and nourish this on an ongoing basis. 

We could call it the society of truth horticulture; it’s a form of landscape gardening. 

 

 

[&&]{*addendum*}[##]

“… These top notch open source web conferencing software tools are proof that you don’t need to pay a bundle to get the features and functions you need. Due to the fact that they are free, you can take the opportunity to try out a few and choose the best match for your eLearning team. Keep in mind that free does not always mean better, however. If you discover that the learning curve is just too steep for your eLearning team or online users, you may want to consider going with another tool that offers the features you need combined with a user-friendly interface, even if that means sacrificing some more advanced functions. ….

https://elearningindustry.com/top-6-open-source-web-conferencing-software-tools-elearning-professionals 

Want to get more information about the various video conferencing fee structures to choose from? Read the article The Insider’s Guide To Video Conferencing Pricing Models to learn about the most common pricing models that you should keep in mind when choosing your next virtual meeting tool.”

via

https://solari.com/blog/ 

real news

real news

The getting of real news — the sort one can learn from minstrels (and perhaps from teleconferencing) — is not a mechanical act so much as a social process, and the social precondition for it is community.

Amory and Hunter Lovins

in

“The Writing on The Wall” (p. 29)

Communications in the 21st Century

(ed. Haigh, Gerbner & Byrne)

John Wiley & Sons 1981

[&&]{**}[##]

YOUR GOVERNMENT WANTS TO MILITARIZE SOCIAL MEDIA TO INFLUENCE YOUR BELIEFS

A global conference of senior military and intelligence officials taking place in London this week reveals how governments increasingly view social media as “a new front in warfare” and a tool for the Armed Forces. The overriding theme of the event is the need to exploit social media as a source of intelligence on civilian populations and enemies; as well as a propaganda medium to influence public opinion.

[&&]{**}[##]

source of featured image: 

http://www.viewzone.com/actors.html 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9az6MMNZJl8

[&&]{**}[##]

 

ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA DECLARES WAR ON THEIR COMPETITION AS “FAKE NEWS”

The establishment media is dying. This is not a biased view coming from “alternative media,” it is a fact borne out by metrics and opinion polls from within the establishment itself. It was true before the recent election, and is guaranteed to accelerate after their shameless defense of non-reality which refused to accept any discontent among the American population with standard politics. Now, with egg on their face after the botched election coverage, and a wobbling uncertainty about how they can maintain multiple threads of a narrative so fundamentally disproven, they appear to be resorting to their nuclear option: a full shut down of dissent. Voices within independent media have been chronicling the signposts toward full-on censorship as sites have encountered everything from excessive copyright infringement accusations, to de-monetization, to the open admission by advertising giants that certain images would not be tolerated. [Source:  ACTIVIST POST ]

 

[&&]{**}[##]

 

The Truth About Fake News

Posted on November 18, 2016 by WashingtonsBlog

The discredited mainstream media who have spread propaganda and lies causing the needless death and suffering of millions are now arrogantly trying to censor the alternative media who are working to expose their lies and save lives.

History has proven that the corporate/state media is the truly dangerous and deceptive “news”.

The irony is that alternative news sites would never have become popular if the mainstream media had not failed humanity by lying to us from Vietnam to Iraq.

They have the blood of millions on their hands and are panicking at the thought of brave whistleblowers and real investigative journalists exposing their crimes.

Of course there are fake stories in alternative media. It takes very little discernment to debunk these obvious frauds.

It’s like getting an email from a Nigerian prince who promises you millions. It does not take a genius to figure out it’s a scam.

We don’t need truth police censoring information the establishment does not like.

We need an honest fourth ward to speak truth to power, but they had their chance and blew it.

Now it’s our turn.

The age of the citizen journalist is here.

The age of the dinosaur media is done, and thank God for it.

 

[&&]{**}[##]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF0Vly0Pm0k

[&&]{**}[##]

 

 

“… who gets to decide what is real and what is not real? And – in an age when all sides propagate propaganda – when does conformity in support of a mainstream “truth” become censorship of reasonable skepticism?

As a journalist for more than four decades, I take seriously the profession’s responsibility to verify information as much as possible before publishing it – and as editor of Consortiumnews.com, I insist that our writers (and to the extent possible, outside commenters) back up what they say.

I personally hate “conspiracy theories” in which people speculate about a topic without real evidence and often in defiance of actual evidence. I believe in traditional journalistic standards of cross-checking data and applying common sense.

So, I am surely no fan of Internet hoaxes and baseless accusations. Yet, I also recognize that mainstream U.S. news outlets have made horrendous and wholesale factual errors, too, such as reporting in 2002-03 that Iraq had reconstituted its nuclear weapons program (The New York Times) and was hiding stockpiles of WMD (many TV and print outlets, including The Washington Post).

And, mainstream outlets getting such life-and-death stories wrong was not just a one-off affair around the Iraq invasion. At least since the 1980s, The New York Times has misreported or glossed over many international issues that put the United States and its allies in a negative light.

For instance, the Times not only missed the Nicaraguan Contra cocaine scandal, but actively covered up the Reagan administration’s role in the wrongdoing through the 1980s and much of the 1990s.

The Times lagged badly, too, on investigating the secret operations that became known as the Iran-Contra Affair. The Times’ gullibility in the face of official denials was an obstacle for those of us digging into that constitutional crisis and other abuses by the Reagan administration. [For more on this topic, see Consortiumnews.com’s “New York Times: Apologist for Power.”]

In that same era, The Washington Post performed no better. Leonard Downie, its executive editor at the time of the Contra-cocaine scandal, has continued to reject the reality of Ronald Reagan’s beloved Contras trafficking in cocaine despite the 1998 findings of CIA Inspector General Frederick Hitz that, in fact, many Contras were neck-deep in the cocaine trade and the Reagan administration covered up their criminality for geopolitical reasons.

More recently, during the mad dash to invade Iraq in 2002-03, the Post’s editorial-page editor Fred Hiatt wrote repeatedly as flat fact that Iraq was hiding WMD and mocked the few dissenting voices that challenged the “group think.”

Yet, Hiatt suffered no accountability for his falsehoods and is still the Post’s editorial-page editor, still peddling dubious examples of Washington’s conventional wisdom.

Ministry of Truth

So, who are the “responsible” journalists who should be anointed to regulate what the world’s public gets to see and hear? For that Orwellian task, a kind of Ministry of Truth has been set up by Google, called the First Draft Coalition, which touts itself as a collection of 30 major news and technology companies, including the Times and Post, tackling “fake news” and creating a platform to decide which stories are questionable and which ones aren’t.

Formed in June 2015 and funded by Google News Lab, the First Draft Coalition’s founding members included Bellingcat, an online “citizen journalism” site that has gotten many of its highest profile stories wrong and is now associated with NATO’s favorite think tank, the Atlantic Council.

Despite Bellingcat’s checkered record and its conflicts of interest through the Atlantic Council, major Western news outlets, including the Times and Post, have embraced Bellingcat, apparently because its articles always seem to mesh neatly with U.S. and European propaganda on Syria and Ukraine.

Two of Bellingcat’s (or its founder Eliot Higgins’s) biggest errors were misplacing the firing location of the suspected Syrian rocket carrying sarin gas on Aug. 21, 2013, and directing an Australian news crew to the wrong site for the so-called getaway Buk video after the July 17, 2014 shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.

But like many news outlets that support establishment “group thinks,” Bellingcat wins widespread praise and official endorsements, such as from the international MH-17 investigation that was largely controlled by Ukraine’s unsavory intelligence agency, the SBU and that accepted Bellingcat’s dubious MH-17 evidence blaming the Russians.

If such a Ministry of Truth had existed in the mid-1980s, it might well have denounced the investigative reporting on the Contra-cocaine scandal since that was initially deemed untrue. And if “Minitrue” were around in 2002-03, it almost surely would have decried the handful of people who were warning against the “group think” on Iraq’s WMD.

Power and Reality

While it’s undeniable that some false or dubious stories get pushed during the heat of a political campaign and in wartime – and journalists have a role in fact-checking as best they can – there is potentially a greater danger when media insiders arrogate to themselves the power to dismiss contrary evidence as unacceptable, especially given their own history of publishing stories that turned out to be dubious if not entirely false.

It’s even more dangerous when these self-appointed arbiters of truth combine forces with powerful Internet search engines and social media companies to essentially silence dissenting opinions and contrary facts by making them very difficult for the public to locate.

Arguably even worse is when politicians – whether President-elect Donald Trump or Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan or President Obama – get into the business of judging what is true and what is false.

On Thursday, an impassioned President Obama voiced his annoyance with “fake news” twice in his joint news conference in Berlin with German Chancellor Angela Merkel — “because in an age where there’s so much active misinformation and it’s packaged very well and it looks the same when you see it on a Facebook page or you turn on your television. … If everything seems to be the same and no distinctions are made, then we won’t know what to protect.”

Let that phrase sink in for a moment: “We won’t know what to protect”? Is President Obama suggesting that it is the U.S. government’s role to “protect” certain information and, by implication, leave contrary information “unprotected,” i.e. open to censorship?

On Friday, a New York Times front-page article took Facebook to task, in particular, writing: “for years, the social network did little to clamp down on the false news.”

The Times added, in a complimentary way, “Now Facebook, Google and others have begun to take steps to curb the trend, but some outside the United States say the move is too late.”

Info-War

This new alarm about “fake news” comes amid the U.S. government’s “information war” against Russia regarding the Syrian and Ukraine conflicts. Obama’s State Department insists that it is presenting the truth about these conflicts while Russia’s RT channel is a fount of disinformation. Yet, the State Department’s propaganda officials have frequently made false or unsupported claims themselves.

On Wednesday, there was the unseemly scene of State Department spokesman John Kirby refusing to answer reasonable questions from a Russian journalist affiliated with RT.

The RT journalist asked Kirby to identify the hospitals and clinics in Syria that he was claiming had been hit by Russian and Syrian airstrikes. You might assume that a truth-teller would have welcomed the opportunity to provide more details that could then be checked and verified.

But instead Kirby berated the RT journalist and tried to turn the rest of the State Department press corps against her.

QUESTION: Don’t you think it is important to give a specific list of hospitals that you’re accusing Russia of hitting? Those are grave accusations.

KIRBY: I’m not making those accusations. I’m telling you we’ve seen reports from credible aid organizations that five hospitals and a clinic —

QUESTION: Which hospital —

KIRBY: At least one clinic —

QUESTION: In what cities at least?

KIRBY: You can go look at the information that many of the Syrian relief agencies are putting out there publicly. We’re getting our information from them too. These reports —

QUESTION: But you are citing those reports without giving any specifics.

KIRBY: Because we believe these agencies are credible and because we have other sources of information that back up what we’re seeing from some of these reports. And you know what? Why don’t [you] ask … Here’s a good question. Why don’t you ask your defense ministry … what they’re doing and see if you can get…”

QUESTION: If you give a specific list —

KIRBY: No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

QUESTION: If you give a specific list of hospitals —

KIRBY: No, no, no.

QUESTION: My colleagues who are listening hopefully would be able to go and ask Russian officials about a specific list of hospitals that you’re accusing Russia of …”

KIRBY: You work for Russia Today, right? Isn’t that your agency?

QUESTION: That is correct. Yes.

KIRBY: And so why shouldn’t you ask your government the same kinds of questions that you’re standing here asking me? Ask them about their military activities. Get them to tell you what they’re – or to deny what they’re doing.

QUESTION: When I ask for specifics, it seems your response is why are you here? Well, you are leveling that accusation.

KIRBY: No, ma’am.

QUESTION: And if you give specifics, my colleagues would be able to ask Russian officials.

As Kirby continued to berate the RT journalist and stonewall her request for specifics, an American reporter intervened and objected to Kirby’s use of the phrase “‘your defense minister’ and things like that. I mean, she’s a journalist just like the rest of are, so it’s – she’s asking pointed questions, but they’re not …”

Kirby then insisted that since RT was “a state-owned” outlet that its journalists should not be put “on the same level with the rest of you who are representing independent media outlets.” (But the reality is that Voice of America, BBC and many other Western outlets are financed by governments or have ideological benefactors.)

Public Diplomacy

Kirby’s hostility toward legitimate questions being raised about U.S. or U.S.-allied assertions has become typical of Obama’s State Department, which doesn’t seem to want any challenges to its presentation of reality.

For instance, during the early phase of the Ukraine crisis in 2014, Secretary of State John Kerry called RT a “propaganda bullhorn” and Richard Stengel, Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy, issued a “DipNote” saying RT should be ostracized as a source of disinformation.

But Stengel’s complaint revealed a stunning ignorance about the circumstances surrounding the February 2014 putsch that overthrew Ukraine’s elected President Viktor Yanukovych.

For instance, Stengel cited RT’s “ludicrous assertion” about the U.S. investing $5 billion to promote “regime change” in Ukraine. Stengel apparently wasn’t aware that Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland had cited the $5 billion figure in support of Ukraine’s “European aspirations” during a public speech to U.S. and Ukrainian business leaders on Dec. 13, 2013.

At the time, Nuland was a leading proponent of “regime change” in Ukraine, personally cheering on the Maidan demonstrators and even passing out cookies. In an intercepted, obscenity-laced phone call with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, Nuland said her choice to lead Ukraine was Arseniy “Yats is the guy” Yatsenyuk, who ended up as Prime Minister after the coup.

So, was Stengel a purveyor of “fake news” when he was accusing RT of disseminating fake news or was he just assembling some propaganda points for his underlings to repeat to a gullible Western news media? Or was he just ill-informed?

Both democracy and journalism can be messy businesses – and credibility is something that must be earned over time by building a reputation for reliability. There is no “gold seal” from the Establishment that makes you trustworthy.

It’s simply important to do one’s best to inform the American people and the world’s public as accurately as possible. Awarding trust is best left to individual readers who must be the ultimate judges of what’s real and what’s fake.”

By Robert Parry, the investigative reporter who many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. Originally published at Parry’s Consortium News (republished with permission).

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/11/what-to-do-about-fake-news.html#more-63382 

[&&]{**}[##]

 

https://www.corbettreport.com/images/nif_journalisticobjectivity.jpg

 

https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-265-the-myth-of-journalistic-objectivity/ 

 

http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/59500/Young-Walter-Cronkite–59695.jpg

[&&]{**}[##]

 

 Emergent Complexity and the Role Attributes of Media

Davis Foulger

CUNY Brooklyn College, Montclair State University, and Evolutionary Media

May, 2005

Presented at the Spring, 2005 Meeting of the International Communication Association

Abstract

This paper explores the “roles in media” as a consequence of the processes of structuration. It treats the generic roles that people play in enabling the smooth operation of a medium as generically useful solutions that solve recurrent problems across a variety of media. The processes of structuration are explored through the development of a typology, based on a dataset that codes 18 generic roles across 167 distinct media. Seven distinct role-based clusters of media are identified within a two dimensional solution. When the clusters are viewed as endpoints within these dimensions, several emergent solutions to role complexity in media are observed, each of which appears to be a consequence of a different kind of complexity. One of these solutions appears to parallel the hierarchical subassemblies suggested by Simon (1969) as the single emergent solution to complexity. The other emergent solutions to role complexity, serial complexity and floor contention, appear entail very different role profiles. Four research questions are satisfied by the results. The typology successfully groups structurally similar media. The structures reflect general solutions to problems that are encountered in the operation of media. A fundamental set of problems, different kinds of complexity, engenders the solutions. Finally, the typology is found to have practical value in its suggestion that that while technology may enable the convergence of user interface devices for very different media, role structures may make it difficult to merge companies that manage different kinds of media.

 

http://www.evolutionarymedia.com/papers/images/RolesIn167Factors2Clusters7Annotated.gif

http://www.evolutionarymedia.com/papers/RoleAttributesOfMediaAndEmergentStructure.htm 

http://www.evolutionarymedia.com 

[##]

http://www.academia.edu/5051168/A_History_of_Mass_Communication_Six_Information_Revolutions

 

[##] [##] [##]

 

Read the many comments too; they contain links to related stories. 

Google Empire

Google Empire

JULIAN ASSANGE — ‘GOOGLE IS NOT WHAT IT SEEMS’ — THEY ‘DO THINGS THE CIA CANNOT’

November 14, 2016

Julian Assange cautioned all of us a while back, in the vein of revelations similar to those provided by Edward Snowden, that Google — the insidious search engine with a reputation for powering humanity’s research — plays the dark hand role in furthering U.S. imperialism and foreign policy agendas. Now, as the Wikileaks founder faces days of questioning by a Swedish special prosecutor over rape allegations inside his Ecuadorian Embassy haven in London today — and particularly in wake of the presidential election — Assange’s warning Google “is not what it seems” must be revisited.

Under intense scrutiny by the U.S. State Department for several controversial Wikileaks’ publications of leaked documents in 2011, Assange first met Google Executive Chairman, then-CEO, Eric Schmidt, who approached the political refugee under the premise of a new book. Schmidt, whose worth Forbes estimates exceeds $11 billion, partnered with Council on Foreign Relations and State Department veteran, Jared Cohen, for the work, tentatively titled The Empire of the Mind — and asked Assange for an interview.

Later acknowledging naïvte in agreeing to meet the pair of tech heavyweights, Assange found afterward how enmeshed in and integral to U.S. global agendas Schmidt and Cohen had become.

In fact, both have exhibited quite the fascination with technology’s role in burgeoning revolutions — including, but not-at-all limited to, the Arab Spring. Schmidt created a position for  Cohen in 2009, originally called Google Ideas, now GoogleJigsaw, and the two began weaving the company’s importance to the United States into narratives in articles, political donations, and through Cohen’s former roles at the State Department.

That same year, Schmidt and Cohen co-authored an article for the CFR journal Foreign Affairs, which, seven years hence, appears a rather prescient discussion of Google’s self-importance in governmental affairs. Under the subheading “COALITIONS OF THE CONNECTED,” they wrote [all emphasis added]:

“In an era when the power of the individual and the group grows daily, those governments that ride the technological wave will clearly be best positioned to assert their influence and bring others into their orbits. And those that do not will find themselves at odds with their citizens.

“Democratic states that have built coalitions of their militaries have the capacity to do the same with their connection technologies. […] they offer a new way to exercise the duty to protect citizens around the world who are abused by their governments or barred from voicing their opinions.”

Perhaps appearing laudable on its surface — at least to some degree — as Assange pointed out, there is a self-mischaracterization by the American and other Western governments and inaccurately-monikered ‘non-governmental organizations’ that their interests in other nations’ affairs are innately good.

This cult of government and non-government insiders have a firm belief their goals should be the unassailable, unquestionable motivator for American imperialism — whatever the U.S. thinks best as a “benevolent superpower,” so should the rest of the ‘non-evil’ world.

“They will tell you that open-mindedness is a virtue, but all perspectives that challenge the exceptionalist drive at the heart of American foreign policy will remain invisible to them,” Assange wrote in When Google Met Wikileaks.“This is the impenetrable banality of ‘don’t be evil.’ They believe that they are doing good. And that is a problem.”

Cohen, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the notorious Council on Foreign Relations, lists his expertise in “terrorism; radicalization; impact of connection technologies on 21st century statecraft; Iran,” and has worked for both Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton at the Department of State. Fortune, calling Cohen a “fascinating fellow,” noted that, in his bookChildren of Jihad, the young diplomat and technology enthusiast “advocates for the use of technology for social upheaval in the Middle East and elsewhere.”

Under the auspices of discussing technological aspects at Wikileaks’ disposal for the upcoming book, Schmidt; Cohen; Lisa Shields, a CFR vice president at the time; and Scott Malcomson — who would shortly afterward be appointed Rice’s lead speech advisor for her role as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations — descended on Assange’s safe haven in Norfolk, outside London.

It wasn’t until weeks and months after this gathering Assange fully realized how closely Google operates in tandem with the government of the United States — and how perilous the innocent mask of its public intentions truly is in light of such cooperation.

Ironically enough, in Wikileaks’ publishing three years later of the Global Intelligence Files — internal emails from private security firm, Stratfor — Cohen’s and Google’s true depth of influence became strikingly apparent. Assange wrote:

“Cohen’s directorate appeared to cross over from public relations and ‘corporate responsibility’ work into active corporate intervention in foreign affairs at a level that is normally reserved for states. Jared Cohen could be wryly named Google’s ‘director of regime change.’ 

According to the emails, he was trying to plant his fingerprints on some of the major historical events in the contemporary Middle East. He could be placed in Egypt during the revolution, meeting with Wael Ghonim, the Google employee whose arrest and imprisonment hours later would make him a PR-friendly symbol of the uprising in the Western press. Meetings had been planned in Palestine and Turkey, both of which—claimed Stratfor emails—were killed by the senior Google leadership as too risky. Only a few months before he met with me, Cohen was planning a trip to the edge of Iran in Azerbaijan to ‘engage the Iranian communities closer to the border,’ as part of Google Ideas’ project on repressive societies.”

However, most significantly, Stratfor vice president for intelligence Fred Burton, also a former official with the State Department, wrote in one of those emails:

“Google is getting WH [White House] and State Dept support and air cover. In reality they are doing things the CIA cannot do . . . [Cohen] is going to get himself kidnapped or killed. Might be the best thing to happen to expose Google’s covert role in foaming up-risings, to be blunt. The US Gov’t can then disavow knowledge and Google is left holding the shit-bag.”

Of course, the massive company — its various facets now under the umbrella of Alphabet, Inc. — has never been fully absent government involvement. Research for what would become ultimately become Google had been undertaken by company founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin in cooperation with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) — the strictly secretive technological testing and planning arm for the Department of Defense.

Indeed Google’s continued coziness with the diplomacy, military, and intelligence wings of the United States government should not be, though perpetually are, ignored.

Political establishment bulldogs on both sides of the aisle and their cheerleader corporate media presstitutes will continue for months or years to debate the failed presidential bid of Hillary Clinton and the apparently-shocking rise and election of Donald Trump, but technology played a starring role in those events. Several reports last year cautioned Google’s algorithms could swing the election — and not only the American election, but national elections around the globe.

“We estimate, based on win margins in national elections around the world,” said Robert Epstein, a psychologist with the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology and author of one of the studies, “that Google could determine the outcome of upwards of 25 percent of all national elections.”

Considering lines between the tech giant and the government have essentially been abandoned, this revelation puts power and influence into acute, if not terrifying, perspective.

Google’s ties with the Pentagon and intelligence communities never ceased. Revealed by a Freedom of Information Act request cited by Assange, Google founder Brin, together with Schmidt, corresponded casually by email with National Security Agency chief Gen. Keith Alexander in 2012, discussing a program called the “Enduring Society Framework.” Alexander wrote to Brin:

“Your insights as a key member of the Defense Industrial Base are valuable to ensure ESF’s efforts have measurable impact.”

According to the Department of Homeland Security, the Defense Industrial Base is “the worldwide industrial complex that enables research and development, as well as design, production, delivery, and maintenance of military weapons systems, subsystems, and components or parts, to meet U.S. military requirements .”

It also provides “products and services that are essential to mobilize, deploy, and sustain military operations.”

Although Schmidt and Cohen ultimately watered down their book title The Empire of the Mind into the more palatable and less blatantly imperialistic, The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations, and Business, its message amounted to self-congratulatory justification for broader foreign policy goals. Nefarious warmonger Henry Kissinger, for one, praised the work, which included telling lines by the Google execs, such as:

“What Lockheed Martin was to the twentieth century, technology and cyber-security companies will be to the twenty-first.”

So ubiquitous has Google become, its presence — like similarly U.S. government-connected Facebook — is nearly indispensable in the daily lives of hundreds of millions worldwide.

However well-known is the government intelligence framework in such platforms, it would be ill-advised to ignore the far darker Machiavellian aspects of private corporate technology’s intersection with global political agendas — and the force that coalition wields around the planet.

Whether or not the American establishment’s empire suffered a blow in the election of Donald Trump will be a debatable point for some time, but it’s a veritable guarantee its cogs — seeing themselves as the planet’s saviors — have planned in advance for just such an occasion.

“If the future of the internet is to be Google,” Assange noted, “that should be of serious concern to people all over the world—in Latin America, East and Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa, the former Soviet Union, and even in Europe—for whom the internet embodies the promise of an alternative to US cultural, economic, and strategic hegemony.”

Empire will remain empire until its dying breath — particularly if it functions under the obstinate belief it, alone, can save the world. Julian Assange should be praised for the transparency and insight he and Wikileaks have readily given the world, instead of excoriated and blamed for faults which lie in the establishment framework — it is this political, intelligence, and military web deserving of a pointed finger.

SOURCE: CLAIRE BERNISH 

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/julian-assange-google-cia/ 

via

http://www.blacklistednews.com/

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbteWH-3QlY

 

Google Will Ban Websites That Host Fake News From Using Its Ad Service

New York Times

2100 hours GMT-5 11/14/16

Google said it would ban purveyors of fake news on the web from using its online advertising service, AdSense.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYeIGxUATA0

Sony Wants To Patent A System For Scoring Journalists’ ‘Veracity’

from the the-truth-scale dept

Spotted by Eriq Gardner over at The Hollywood Reporter, Sony has applied for a patent measuring how accurate reporters are. From the patent abstract:

The methods and systems take into account a multiplicity of approaches to reputation determination and integrates them together in a way that determines not only a reputation index but a veracity scale on which to gauge that reputation. The system proposed herein will create reputation indices based on input from other participants in the ecosystem taking into account the weighting of the value of the input of the various participants based on their credibility as applied to the judgment at hand. The system will also take into account temporal components, the historical value of the work, passive input based on usage behavior, comments by casual observers as well as independent assessment in public fora. The system is able to be applied to journalists and their work to generate a veracity scale for articles.

While I’m sure many can see the value in actually rating journalists on how accurate/truthful their reporting is, the idea that a rating system like this should be patentable is fairly ridiculous. I mean:

https://i.imgur.com/jkQ7wmY.png

 

Like anyone wouldn’t have come up with such a system if there wasn’t patent protections?

Separately, as the EFF’s Vera Ranieri asks, it’s questionable whether or not granting such a patent would be consistent with the First Amendment. Remember, just a month ago, a top judge at the Federal Circuit appeals court (the place where all patent case appeals go to) noted that patents could be rejected on First Amendment grounds if “they are allowed to obstruct the essential channels of scientific, economic, and political discourse.” So if this patent were granted, and (bizarrely) it excluded others from ranking the accuracy of journalists — would that violate the First Amendment?

Hopefully the patent office rejects this patent application entirely and we never have to find out.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161111/07452136017/sony-wants-to-patent-system-scoring-journalists-veracity.shtml

via

http://www.blacklistednews.com/Sony_Wants_To_Patent_A_System_For_Scoring_Journalists%27_%27Veracity%27/55261/0/38/38/Y/M.html

mirage

mirage 

Lo and behold, well into the aforementioned book “Aberration in The Heartland”, after I’d viewed the two two-hour YouTube versions of The Disclosure Project’s DVD with videotaped sessions with people who claim to have witnessed UFO’s et al, I encountered Wendy Painting’s research on the connections between Timothy McVeigh, Area 51, the world of UFOlogy, and lots more.

source of featured image:

http://www.funktioncreep.com 

music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVlgG-Kil1Y 

Lo and behold, well into the aforementioned book “Aberration in The Heartland”, after I’d viewed the two two-hour YouTube versions of The Disclosure Project’s DVD with videotaped sessions with people who claim to have witnessed UFO’s et al, I encountered Wendy Painting’s research on the connections between Timothy McVeigh, Area 51, the world of UFOlogy, and lots more.

The videos and their description I’d watched are here:

The DVD is available to order at: http://www.disclosureproject.org/cd-dvd.shtml#4hourdvd

Top-secret military, government, intelligence and corporate witnesses to secret projects tell their true stories which disclose the greatest covert program in world history. This explosive testimony by actual government insiders proves that UFOs are real, that some are of extraterrestrial origin and that super-secret programs have energy and propulsion technologies that will enable humanity to begin a new civilization- A civilization without pollution, without poverty – A civilization capable of traveling among the stars.

In two parts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ud49Gh9yYLs 

(1:58:51)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpHAxxRKksQ 

(1:56:23)

In that long section (about halfway through the book), Dr. Painting noted Mark Pilkington’s book on the topic of UFO’s entitled Mirage Men: an adventure into paranoia, espionage, psychological warfare and UFO’s, published by SkyHorse Publishing (Hermann Graf Books) New York 2010, ISBN 978-1-60239-800-9

http://www.amazon.com/Mirage-Men-Adventure-Espionage-Psychological/dp/1602398003 

 

I apologize to my readers, I must be getting older than I think, as I had — until I read Painting — forgotten that I had reviewed that book a long time ago.

I am a pack rat, an iNTp, so of course I saved it: here it is, a 14-page PDF.

mirage-men