Greenwald-backer Omidyar: front for CIA, data-mining, biowarfare

Posted on by

UPDATE 2:

Madsen seems to be behind The Rancid Honey Trap on this

UPDATE:

The piece I posted in excerpt, by Shimatsu, seems to rely a lot on research done at Wayne Madsen’s Report. The biowarfare conspiracy theory (the weakest part) seems to be Shimatsu’s addition. Perhaps that’s the disinformation bit meant to discredit the rest.

[lLila, March 16, 2022:  Shimatsu was a lot MORE prescient than I suspected and the biowarfare theory now sounds DEAD ON. No conspiracy at all. This was 2013 and  this is 2021 bioterror is what it is all about. Hats off to Shimatsu. ]

An excerpt from Madsen’s piece October 23, 2013)I

“And Snowden and Obama are not the only ones with connections in Hawaii. It turns out that Omidyar’s parents settled in Hawaii after living for a short time in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC before moving to Hawaii. Omidyar attended the elite private Punahou High School in Manoa for the eighth and ninth grades, having arrived at the school in 1979, the same year Obama graduated from the school. Omidyar’s wife, Pamela Wesley Omidyar, is a graduate of Hawaii’s I’olani school, another of Hawaii’s elite private secondary schools. Omidyar maintains a residence in the wealthy Kahala neighborhood of Honolulu.

Omidyar is interested in supporting Hawaiian culture. However, that ruse has been used by the Mormons for years to increase their influence not only in Hawaii but also in Pacific island nations of Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, and the Cook Islands. Another cult that is active in Hawaii is the Bahais, which originated in Persia and now have their global headquarters in Haifa, Israel. The Bahais not only push the Polynesian culture theme in the same manner as the Mormons but even consider Mormon founder Joseph Smith to be a true seer of God. Some observers have pointed out that the Omidyars’ Roshan Foundation pushes Bahai-like principles. The Shah of Iran supported the Bahais to counter the influence of the Shi’a mullahs who ultimately overthrew him in 1979, the year the Omidyars moved to Hawaii from the Washington, DC area.

Iran has accused the Bahais of being involved in cyber-attacks on Iranian computer systems and networks, as well as working with the CIA-supported terrorist Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) guerrillas that have launched violent attacks inside Iran. With their headquarters in Haifa, the links between the Bahai organization and Mossad are well-known throughout the Middle East and South Asia.

– See more at: http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/11190#sthash.hdKcrx2t.dpuf

ORIGINAL POST

Yet another embarrassing chapter in the ongoing brain-washing of the endlessly malleable public, reported by Hong-Kong journalist Yoichi Shimatsu at DavidShurter.com.

Shimatsu is a Japanese journalist who writes anti-NWO pieces. Some say he passes on disinformation. But the analysis of the Snowden story sounds quite credible to me, except for its faith in Mr. Snowden.

Shimatsu’s thesis is that the super-snitch was a patsy in a frame-up concocted by lawyer-blogger Glenn Greenwald and that Greenwald is one of the infiltrators promised by Obama’s surveillance czar, Cass Sunstein.

Cass Sunstein’s program had as its goal the  cognitive infiltration of conspiracy theorists.

First, activists and dissidents were gulled by Greenwald’s performance as “good cop” opposite Sunstein’s “bad cop” in a well-publicized face-off. That enabled Greenwald to lure his readers into the banal legal quibbling that diverted outrage against the Bush administration’s war crimes from effective prosecution into toothless debate.

In this blog post, Shimatsu presents a compelling picture of Greenwald’s new financial backer, Ebay founder and billionaire Pierre Omidyar as as an intelligence-front from way back, the perfect “minder” for the  spy warfare (MI6 & CIA versus NSA) that plausibly produced the whole Snowden saga.

Shimatsu is more trusting of Snowden’s role in all this than I am, but the post is quite a read.

Some outstanding take-aways include his description of Omidyar’s mother, a PhD linguist, engaged in work similar to that of Barack Obama’s mother, who was an anthropologist in Asia:

“For purposes of discussion here, the Omidya valorization of Persepolis indicates attachment to the Shah of Iran, whose court included many advisors and officials were Bahai followers or Jewish by birth.

Oddly, the Roshan Institute board includes only one cultural expert, Dr. Omidyar. The others are deans, which makes sense because Roshan’s main activity is to provide scholarships to students and place them in allied universities. One of the more interesting board members is former Democrat Florida congresswoman Jan Scheider, a former staffer with Terry McAuliff and lawyer for Bill Clinton. Mrs. Omidyar is one of her campaign contributors.”

and this:

“Among the board members is former University of Hawaii Mano chancellor Virgina Hinton. The microbiologist is a top expert in the avian influenza or bird flu virus, which whe weaponized poses the greatest threat of a mass-destruction epidemic. Before coming to Hawaii , Dr. Hinton served as head of the animal lab at the University of Wisconsin Madison . Her chosen successor at that position was Yoshikiko Kawaoka, the Japanese scientist from Kobe University who in fact did soon at UW weaponize H5N1 into a highly lethal and contagious super-flu strain.”

Shimatsu even sees the Greenwald-Omidyar alliance as a replay of earlier New World Order alliances:

“Occult Triangle

The triangular relationship of the Disraeli/Rothschid – Oxford Movement – Bahai/Salafism of the 19th is now being reflected in the Snowden affair with the collusion of the Zionism/Greenwald – Guardian/Royalist – Bahai/Omidyar. History repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as a farce.

As Israel edges toward a first-strike attack against Iran , while ramping up its covert wars against Iranian influence in Sudan and Palestine , is it any wonder that Pierre Omidyar and Glenn Greenwald are preparing to launch a major online propaganda mouthpiece? Is this new media venture, too, part of the Bahai plan to prepare for the imminent End of the World to be delivered by an unstoppable contagion of super-flu?”

This part seems to reach a bit but Shimatsu analyses the Snowden affair well:

“Whistle-blower Edward Snowden was taken for a ride by con artists in the service of the US and UK intelligence agencies.

[Lila: I disagree that he was “taken in.” I  think he’s part of the staging.]

Under the cover of “independent journalism”, the scammers conned him out of his trove of secret NSA files, hustled him from Hong Kong ahead of legislature-sponsored public hearings on cyber-espionage, and unceremoniously dumped him, minus documents, in a transit lounge at Moscow Airport . This report shows how the American and British spymasters retrieved the top-secret files by luring the fugitive into a well-laid trap, while the mass media went along with the deception to aid the authorities in evading public calls to abolish the global surveillance state.

Pierre Omidyar, founder of the online flea market e-Bay, is betting a reported $250 million that the accomplices of whistleblower Edward Snowden can follow up their caper with the launch of an online news site with global reach. The ethnic Iranian tycoon is funding a new media project for the team of Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Jeremy Scahill because he became “more alarmed about the pressures coming down on journalists with the various leak investigations in Washington .” (Pacific Business News)

An angel investor committed to press freedom and opposed to government surveillance is every journalist’s dream even though it sounds too good to be true. There are serious grounds for questioning the credibility of Greenwald and his newest patron, whose business venture Omidyar Network is closely connected with NSA contractor Booz Allen Hamilton, Edward Snowden’s erstwhile employer.

[Lila: Which suggests that Snowden is himself complicit in some way. Perhaps as a patsy, perhaps with more culpability.]

Known for his globalist vision and “social-impact” projects in the developing countries,

[Lila: Public philanthropy from the inner circle of the Internet billionaires is rarely charity but simply business as usual.]

..backed by immense personal wealth, Omidyar follows in the footsteps of other billionaires who launched their own electronic media projects: George Soros with his slew of propaganda organs, Ariana Huffington at HuffPost and Michael Bloomberg with his financial news arm, to name a few. These well-oiled publicity machines hardly qualify as standard-bearers of objective reporting since each of these opinion-shapers has a political agenda, from running City Hall to fomenting uprisings for regime change in support of market economics. Early on, it already appears that Omidyar, for all his sentimental sound bites, could turn out to be the worst of a bad lot.

Partnering Booz Allen

In stark contrast to his libertarian posturing

[Lila:  The Internet billionaires (Thiel, Omidyar, Zuckerberg, Brin, Page) whose corporations profit from data collecting profess everything from left to right libertarianism and liberalism]

I’ve blogged about this repeatedly, in relation to Wikileaks, Face-book, and Google.]

Omidyar is connected at the hip to the very same intelligence nexus that he publicly condemns, particularly Booz Allen Hamilton, the NSA security contractor that employed Snowden in Hawaii and Japan . One of the major investment partners with Omidyar Network, Salvadore ”Sal” Gambianco, sits on the board of directors of Booz Allen Hamilton Holdings.

[\As head of Omidyar Network’s human capital operations, Giambanco vets trainees and assesses employee performance for promotion or termination. For more than a decade, Omidyar Network has had a revolving door for its employees with Booz Allen, shuttling staffers and interns for intelligence-related postings. Just a few of these individuals who worked for both Omidyar Network and Booz Allen include:

– Dhaya Lakshminarayan who was sent to Cuba to research development programs;
– Pranay Chulet hired to head Omidyar-backed Quikr in India ;
– Patricia Sosrodjojo, Indonesian venture capital expert in Jakarta ; and
– Michael Kent, a Booz Allen counter-terrorism specialist who served as a research associate at the Omidyar campus in Redwood City , California .

The relationship, simply put, is corporate collusion, and if businesses could be married, Booz Allen and Omidyar Network are husband and wife.

Inside the NSA’s Big Tent

Booz Allen and Omidyar Network are corporate members of an NSA-linked consortium called Innocentive, a consultancy focused on crowdsourcing (read: data-mining of public-opinion polls, consumer surveys and Internet-based personal data).

[Lila: That’s what “transparency” is all about. It’s “transparency” for us and “privacy” for them.]

Other member-companies include In-Q-Tel, a developer of communications monitoring software spawned with millions in start-up capital from the CIA.

Also represented is the In-Q-Tel spin-off Palantir, which creates fictive personas or virtual trolls to mount smear campaigns to debunk or threaten journalists and critical websites online and in letters to editors.

{Lila:  I ‘ve really wondered about a few trolls who’ve followed me around. They always seemed to me to be phony…)

“Palantir, which refers to itself as an “electronic warfare” firm, has created a meta-data collection program similar to the NSA’s PRISM. Michael Leiter, former head of the National Counter-Terrorism Center , is the executive counsel to Palantir.

[Another corporate partner in Innocentive is Lilly Ventures, the investment arm of Eli Lilly pharmaceuticals, which produced LSD for the MK-ULTRA mind-control program and is now the lead partner in the Obama-sponsored national brain-mapping project. Full-spectrum surveillance is advancing from wireless electronics into the bio-network of the human synapses, the last frontier for total mind control. The objective of pre-crime pre-cognition, that is, the detection of criminal tendencies, for instance, resistance to authority, and intervention before the crime can happen. Using drugs to impair the mental capabilities of individuals is, of course, only a part of a wider and larger program of social engineering to ensure domination of the globalist elites over any increasingly dependant and expendable population.

As birds of the feather that flock together, Booz Allen Hamilton and Omidyar Network are a pair of ducks in the NSA-CIA pond. These intelligence links are so thinly guised, it beggars belief that an attorney like Greenwald who practiced law in New York City could be so oblivious to the conflict of interest in regard to the security of his client Edward Snowden.

Either Glenn Greenwald is a gullible village idiot or he is one of many actors planted in this spy charade. Nobody in the intelligence game is allowed to be that naïve, especially when it is crystal clear from these interlocking corporate connections that Pierre Omidyar is hardly an innocent when he has every incentive to work on behalf of Booz Allen and the NSA to recover the Snowden files.”

Read the rest at DavidShurter.com.

Francis Galton: Imperial eugenicist

Posted on by

Peter Quin at America on Jean Raspail’s fears of  the brown woman’s womb:

“On the face of it, Raspail’s notion of a conscience-stricken West being overwhelmed by an army of disheveled immigrants is less discomforting than laughable. The West has shown itself perfectly capable of using sufficient force whenever its vital interests are at stake—or perceived as being so—

(Lila: And its vital interests are always at stake…)

as it did most recently in the Gulf War. Indeed, for all the handw-ringing over immigration and the future of the West, there seems little appreciation that for the last 500 years at least it has been the West that has been threatening and battering the rest of the world, colonizing entire continents and waging war to secure the resources it needs. The current virulent reaction against immigrants in France, Austria and Germany—or, for that matter, the U.S.’s recent treatment of Haitian refugees—is hardly a sign of societies suffering from terminal humanitarianism.

The pessimism evinced by Connelly and Kennedy is mitigated somewhat by their call for international cooperation to deal with the underlying causes of the present population crisis. But as with so many descriptions of the threat posed by the third world, the authors’ underlying sense of the West’s vulnerability before the procreative puissance of the world’s nameless poor is far more vivid and forceful than any formulaic list of possible solutions. The threat is from below, from Raspail’s “kinky-haired, swarthy-skinned, long-despised phantoms,” from the teeming races that Rudyard Kipling once described as “lesser breeds without the law.”

(Lila: That is, without Western law. Of course, there were always Hindu, Chinese, and Islamic laws…)
“In the United States, the question of intelligence as a distinguishing characteristic between greater and lesser breeds has come to center stage with The Bell Curve (1994), the best-selling treatise by Charles Murray and the late Richard J. Hermstein. Unlike The Camp of the Saints, this sedate and statistics-laden book is not directly concerned with immigration, and its central thesis—that I.Q. is a function of race—is more subtle and complex than the horrific vision evoked by Raspail.

Despite their differences, however, there are similarities. At the heart of The Bell Curve and The Camp of the Saints, as well as of Connelly’s and Kennedy’s article, is a world in which the central divisions are racial and in which, when all is said and done, the white race is endangered. In fairness to Murray and Hermstein, they credit Asians with higher I.Q.’s than white Americans. Yet here again is found the implicit threat of a Caucasian community being challenged by another race, one that has been traditionally credited with being shrewder and craftier—in its own “inscrutable” way, smarter—than Westerners.

(Lila: Notice that when  the IQ in question is lower than that of Caucasians, it is seen as a mark of inferiority and brutishness. But when IQ is higher, then it is a mark of craft, duplicity, and moral inferiority. In other words, at the heart of racist tropes, is a confirmed and unmerited sense of one’s global superiority over others. A sense founded on ignorance of real history from subjection to decades, if not centuries, of imperial propaganda. That is, at the bottom of such racist ideologies and narratives, you  inevitably find the state.

And where the state is the strongest (I use the term state to mean not just government but the entire complex of government organs, including  corporations, media, and academia) – in the West – there too mass indoctrination is at its greatest).


“The fear that white civilization is growing steadily weaker and is at risk of being overwhelmed by barbarians from within and without marks a new life for an old and ugly tradition. The most infamous manifestation of that tradition is the Ku Klux Klan and the host of so-called Aryan resistance groups that continue to spring up on the periphery of American political life. But its most powerful and enduring effect was not limited to cross burnings or rabble-rousing assaults against blacks and immigrants. There was a far more respectable, educated version of this tradition that clothed itself in the language of science and not only won a place in the academy, but helped shape our laws on immigration, interracial marriage and compulsory sterilization of the mentally ill and retarded.

The movement derived its authority from the work of an Englishman, Francis Galton—Darwin’s cousin—who in 1883 published his masterwork, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development. In it Galton advocated the modification and improvement of human species through selective breeding and coined a name for it as well: eugenics. In Galton’s view, which was shared by many of his Victorian contemporaries and buttressed by a wealth of pseudo-scientific skull measuring and brain weighing, the races were totally distinct. Eugenics, he believed, would give “the more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable.”

At the turn of the 20th century, the United States was ripe for the gospel of eugenics. The country’s original immigrants—Anglo-Saxon and Scots-Irish Protestants—were feeling battered and besieged by the waves of newcomers from southern and eastern Europe (i.e., Italians, Slovaks and Ashkenazi Jews) who were judged so immiscible in appearance and conduct that they would undermine the country’s character and identity. According to the eugenicists, the racial “germ plasm” of these groups was riddled with hereditary proclivities to feeble-mindedness, criminality and pauperism. These suspicions were given scientific justification by studies that purported to trace family behavior across several generations and discern a clear pattern of inherited behavior.

By the eve of World War I, eugenics was taught in many colleges. Its research arm was generously funded by some of America’s wealthiest families, including the Harrimans, Rockefellers and Carnegies. Alfred Ploetz, the German apostle of “racial hygiene,” hailed the United States as a “bold leader in the realm of eugenics,” a leadership that consisted of the widespread ban on interracial marriage and the growing emphasis on compulsory sterilization.

In the wake of the First World War, the eugenicists helped direct the campaign to halt the “degeneration” of the country’s racial stock by changing its immigration laws. As framed by Henry Fairfield Osborn, the president of the Museum of Natural History (at that time a center of eugenic fervor), America would either stop the influx from southern and eastern Europe or it would perish: “Apart from the spiritual, moral and political invasion of alienism the practical question of day by day competition between the original American and the alien element turns upon the struggle for existence between the Americans and aliens whose actions are controlled by entirely different standards of living and morals.”

The eugenicists played an important role in achieving the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924, a victory noted and approved by Adolf Hitler in his book of the same year, Mein Kampf. In fact, nine years later, when the Nazis took power in Germany, they would hail U.S. laws on immigration, intermarriage and sterilization as models for their own legislation.”

Jean Raspail: sage dystopia or severe diplopia?

Posted on by
At Zobenigo blog, Jean Raspail’s gloriously muddle-headed dystopia about the destruction of a virginal Europe by inchoate brown masses (the yellow peril recycled) gets a keen rebuttal:
“The reasons for the popularity of Le Camp des saints are easy enough to decode. Here’s the novel’s synopsis from the usual place:

The story begins in Bombay, India, where the Dutch government has announced a policy that Indian babies will be adopted and raised in the Netherlands. The policy is reversed when the Dutch consulate is inundated with parents eager to give up their infant children as it would be one less mouth to feed. An Indian “wise man” then rallies the masses to make a mass exodus to live in Europe. Most of the story centers on the French Riviera, where almost no one remains except for the military and a few civilians, including a retired professor who has been watching the huge fleet of run down freighters approaching the French coast. The story alternates between the French reaction to the mass immigration and the attitude of the immigrants. They have no desire to assimilate into French culture but want the plentiful food and water that are in short supply their native India. Near the end of the story the mayor of New York City is made to share Gracie Mansion with three families from Harlem, the Queen of England must agree to have her son marry a Pakistani woman, and only one drunken Soviet soldier stands in the way of thousands of Chinese people as they swarm into Siberia.

In short, it’s the OYPA — the old yellow peril alarm — all over again.THE OYPA seems a weird beast to me since I have spent all my life being bored with the familiar and seeking out out the exotic as its antidote. I welcome Asian immigration on several grounds: first, the wonderfully zany Indians seem a million times more interesting to me than the predictable familiar boring French, whom I have no reason to love anyway; certainly, on average, Pakistani women are prettier than the English; the food they bring is more tasty; etc.

I therefore cannot fit into my head: why would not everyone else feel the same way?

What is more interesting about Jean Raspail’s brain is that it appears to be internally split: while writing his Dantean yellow perilist visions about foreigners flooding (and destroying) good old France, he simultaneously writes other books of scathing criticism of the very same modern France as a rotten perversion of its former self. He is a monarchist to the core and writes movingly about the spark of divinity which resides in the person of the king; his inviolability and irreplacability; the dire consequences of regicide; the lack of proper legitimacy in the person of a merely elected President; lack of authority; lack of respect for authority; etc. This is not merely a political fantasy: Jean Raspail senses that there is something deeply and fundamentally rotten about modern French (and, more generally, European) culture (about which he is probably right) and seeks its causes in the abolition of the monarchy two hundred years ago (I withhold my opinion).

But then he defends that very same rotten France against subversion by foreigners. Why? If France is rotten, then, heck, why not let it sink?

This is known to psychologists as cognitive dissonance.”

Thomas Fleming on Mises and Christianity

Posted on by

Note (added):

Fleming is a member of what’s been called the neo-Confederate movement. While admiring many things about the  old South, I am not.  My interest is mostly in figuring out the agendas at work in various strands of political activism.  I’m also happy to have company in thinking that a lot of modernist thinking is really on shaky grounds..

And yes, that includes revered figures of vast scholarly accomplishment, like Mises and  Rothbard. Rand at least managed to write novels that still get read on their own merits, whatever her failings as a philosopher.

ORIGINAL POST

Thomas Fleming at Chronicles is a writer I’m delighted to have discovered. It seems  I really have some solid ground to find LRC libertarianism substantially at odds with Christianity.

I found this response in the comments section especially enlightening.  Fleming says his friends at Mises, including the very sharp David Gordon, have plenty of private misgivings over Mises on philosophical issues.

“I should say that I am sorry if I seem rather curt in my short responses, but I hate using my Iphone, as useful as it is, which leads to a brevity this at can sound acerbic. I have absolutely no desire to debate Mises or Rand or Walter Block. Let their followers discuss their supposed virtues. My critique is designed to show the fundamental principles and therefore failings of the liberal tradition, from its godfather Montaigne to its ugly stepchildren the libertarians.

I am not going to go into what various Misesian friends of mine have conceded about Mises privately, (Lila: David Gordon, writes Fleming elsewhere).

because I have already done enough harm by even hinting at it. Let us just be content with the statement that Mises was not a philosopher but someone who took over a body of liberal thought uncritically and turned it into a more extreme direction. He may be the greatest economist who ever lived but his philosophy is little better than a reductio ad absurdum of Mill et al. It is like the Straussians who write books on ancient literature and philosophy–not worth the time it takes to discuss.

Ordinary people should not be discussing the problems in Scripture but accepting the tradition through which we read the Scriptures. We have the central teachings of Christ as a means of interpreting the OT Scriptures and we have the epistles to clarify those teachings and the early apostolic fathers who show how they were received and taught authoritatively. This leaves a rather small area for controversy. Marx, Hegel, Locke, Mises, et al are entirely irrelevant to any serious discussion of Christian thought. One has to choose. Either follow Locke, Mises, and/or Marx or Christ, Paul, and the Fathers.

– See more at: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2010/02/22/abuse-your-illusions/#sthash.zTqnmDlT.dpuf

Feser: Don’t concretize the abstract

Posted on by

Ed Feser, summing up what is somewhat the premise of this blog:

” The irony is that while New Atheists and others beholden to scientism pride themselves on being “reality based,” that is precisely what they are not. Actual, concrete reality is extremely complicated. There is far more to material systems than what can be captured in the equations of physics, far more to human beings than can be captured in the categories of neuroscience or economics, and far more to religion than can be captured in the ludicrous straw men peddled by New Atheists. All of these simplifying abstractions (except the last) have their value, but when we treat them as anything more than simplifying abstractions we have left the realm of science and entered that of ideology. The varieties of reductionism, eliminativism, and the “hermeneutics of suspicion” are manifestations of this tendency to replace real things with abstractions. They are all attempts to “conquer the abundance” of reality (as Paul Feyerabend might have put it), to force the world in all its concrete richness into a straightjacket.”

Metrosexual messiah for the middle-class mob

Posted on by

Chuckle.  A bit mean, but PiedCow blog has the best recent comments on the passing strange tale of Edward the Confessor:

High ArkaJune 16, 2013 at 4:24 AM

The hipster goatee thing Snowden has going on immediately makes his story 54% suspicious. That and the glasses pushes it over 61%.

If you were on a psychological operations planning committee, and you wanted to release a mole to make the voting public feel that liberal dissent was strong in this country, who would you choose? A white guy, of course. Hipster goatee and glasses with a sort of IT professional look–the guy you trust to fix your computer. Not in the military, because so many liberal people feel uncomfortable about military guys. But, has to have a “security” job so that he’s a confirmed insider.
Reply
Replies

William DueckJune 21, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Also, he made nice pay (therefore he qualifies as One Of Us) and worked in exotic locales (therefore “progressive”).

I am sorta surprised they could not find a black Jewish woman to tick a few more Stuff White People Like boxes. Wasn’t Whoopi Goldberg available?
Reply

William DueckJune 21, 2013 at 3:18 PM

It’s funny that in 2006 when Mark Klein revealed what he learned about NSA and AT&T / Verizon colluding to have warrantless NSA eavesdropping on telecommunication, Glenn Greenwald didn’t care and didn’t pay any attention to it. After all, Greenwald is an expert on civil liberties and constitutional issues, while Klein was just an expert on telecommunication network security who physically witnessed the hardware and software that enabled the NSA eavesdropping. So of course Greenwald’s paying it no mind was “the truth,” and Klein’s revelations just more conspiracy insanity.

Fast forward 7 years and a handsome metro-sexual boy named Edward Snowden approaches Greenwald with the very same news Klein shared in 2006, and Greenwald’s BS Detector (TM) didn’t sound a single alarm. Instead Greenwald dutifully reported Snowden’s story as “breaking news” (despite 7 years of age) and hurriedly wrote numerous essays and countless tweets about the heroism of that lad… (Lila: I deleted an irrelevant personal attack)

Every essay Greenwald writes confirms he’s not an expert on civil liberties or constitutional law, yet his fame grows each year and the myth of him being the Real Expert is almost bulletproof now.

It’s not like Snowden didn’t know working as an NSA contractor through BAH employment would entail eavedropping on average Joes and Janes. He’d have learned that in his job interview. So the question becomes, why did Snowden accept the job and conduct himself in that role for several years until only just recently?

Greenwald doesn’t want to know

God-father of Rothbardian libertarians was CIA source?

Posted on by

Update 2:

I found this in Calvin Kephart’s writings about his ancestor Weisel (Calvin was Robert Kephardt’s father):

“Thus, the armorial insignia of the barons in the First Crusade are the very oldest in Europe, older than those of any royal family unless a king later descended from one of these barons. They were self-designed and self-adopted and were not granted by any prince. Many had the cross in the design because of the religious aspect of this adventure; others did not. All were simple in style.

We have not yet learned whether our Weisel ancestor was among the knights in the First Crusade. If so, then this coat-of-arms dates from that time. If not, then it was designed and adopted only a generation or two later (probably by 1150), when thousands of other noble families were finding it desirable to do so, for uses in both peace and war. With this historic setting, it is a noble heritage, distinct from all others, and is the emblem of the Weisel clan in the same way that Old Glory is the emblem of the American people as a nation. Its use today is mainly sentimental, chiefly for ornamental purposes, but because of its great age and its meaning it should be prized and be preserved among our other family traditions. ”

C. I. K.

Update 2

Several people named on the list have criticized John Young for publishing the Crowley files, claiming that since the names are often the same as those listed at the professional organization for former intelligence officers (AFIO) their publication must constitute a violation of copyright, as well as an invasion of privacy.

John Young, to his credit, has not given in to the criticism and has continued to run the files at his site.

However, Daniel Brandt, creator of the news archive, NameBase.org, says the names listed at Cryptome include many people who were not sources but simply aficionados of intelligence.  However, even on his terms (see below), Kephart’s name does seem to merit its entry.

UPDATE:

For evidence that the Robert D. Kephart listed at Cryptome.org is the same Robert D. Kephart who  was the editor of Human Events and the godfather of the organizational end of Rothbardian libertarianism, I offer the following:

1.http://www.ancientfaces.com/person/robert-d-kephart/30649469

“Robert D Kephart 1922 – 2004 was a member of the Kephart family. Robert was born on March 31, 1922. Robert died on October 14, 2004 at 82 years old. Robert D. Kephart’s last known residence is at Faber, Nelson County, VA 22938.”

Cryptome lists Kephart’s address as a PO Box in Faber, Va.

http://www.crow96.20m.com/

2. The obituaries published by Liberty magazine and  Human Events give the same death date for Robert D. Kephart.

3. Friends refer to Robert D. Kephart’s helmsmanship and days in the US navy.

4. The Crowley files themselves mention a Robert Kephart of Human Events and a US Navy Commander Kephart whom they list together. I understood this to be an aggregation of all references to the same person in the files.

5. Evaluation of the Crowley list by Daniel Brandt. Brandt says that the list cannot be considered in any way an accurate list of CIA sources and includes a number of people who were merely interested in intelligence issues or approved of the use of intelligence by the US.

He matched the names against the AFIO (Association of Former Intelligence Officers) directory and listed the ones that did NOT show up. Kephart’s name is not on his list. It follows that Kephart’s name is on the AFIO list, which has gone back behind a password.

http://cryptome.org/cia-namebase.htm

6.

If I am in anyway in error in identifying Robert D. Kephart of Human Events as a CIA source, I welcome you to send this blog contradictory information.  You can do so anonymously, with a request not to publish the post, which I will honor.

I do not respond to private emails.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

I’ll begin with something related.

There was a revelatory post at Lew Rockwell about how Russell Kirk, the godfather of the American conservative movement, was on the payroll of the CIA for a short while.

QUOTE::

“You know, Russell Kirk, his writings both before and after he went on the Buckley payroll are quite wonderful on foreign policy.  During the period he was on the payroll, unfortunately, they were just like everybody else.”

This fascinating assertion wasn’t documented in any way, although I think on its face it’s quite credible. The unpalatable fact is that almost all prominent figures in the media or academics then and even now are co-opted in some fashion by the intelligence agencies.

Some wittingly, some unwittingly.

Anyway, in looking for further evidence for the Kirk-was-CIA story, I ran into passages from Murray Rothbard’s “Betrayal of the American Right” on the history of the subversion of the old right:

“In the light of hindsight, we should now ask whether or not a major objective of National Review from its inception was to transform the right wing from an isolationist to global warmongering anti-Communist movement; and, particularly, whether or not the entire effort was in essence a CIA operation. We now know that Bill Buckley, for the two years prior to establishing National Review, was admittedly a CIA agent in Mexico City, and that the sinister E. Howard Hunt was his control. His sister Priscilla, who became managing editor of National Review, was also in the CIA; and other editors James Burnham and Willmoore Kendall had at least been recipients of CIA largesse in the anti-Communist Congress for Cultural Freedom. In addition, Burnham has been identified by two reliable sources as a consultant for the CIA in the years after World War II.[10] Moreover, Garry Wills relates in his memoirs of the conservative movement that Frank Meyer, to whom he was close at the time, was convinced that the magazine was a CIA operation. With his Leninist-trained nose for intrigue, Meyer must be considered an important witness.

Furthermore, it was a standard practice in the CIA, at least in those early years, that no one ever resigned from the CIA. A friend of mine who joined the agency in the early 1950s told me that if, before the age of retirement, he was mentioned as having left the CIA for another job, that I was to disregard it, since it would only be a cover for continuing agency work. On that testimony, the case for NR being a CIA operation becomes even stronger. Also suggestive is the fact that a character even more sinister than E. Howard Hunt, William J. Casey, appears at key moments of the establishment of the New over the Old Right. It was Casey who, as attorney, presided over the incorporation of National Review and had arranged the details of the ouster of Felix Morley from Human Events.”

At least here, Rothbard doesn’t mention Kirk.

Nonetheless, confirmed or merely a suspicion, the story only adds more fuel to the widespread belief that most of the American media is infiltrated by intelligence.

I’ve suspected that and blogged as much, as you can see from this post which compiles a few of the relevant links.

What Rothbard and Rockwell don’t mention though is that it was not just the conservative movement.

There’s a good deal of evidence that the CIA is also behind a large part of the libertarian movement. I’ve blogged about that several times.

What I haven’t blogged until now is that one of the godfathers of American libertarianism is listed as a CIA source or informant.

That is Robert D.  Kephart, who died in 2004. He was the publisher of the conservative magazine, Human Events from 1968-1975.

He later became a very influential libertarian. Perhaps one of the most, from the point of view of organizing the movement.

You can find Kephart’s name listed at Cryptome.org in the Crowley files, as one of scores of CIA sources (a source is not an agent but a figure who keeps the intelligence services posted on what’s going on and how to keep it in line with the agenda of the Agency).

More here on Kephart and his ties to the whole Agora Inc. – Lew Rockwell- Mises Institute world of Rothbardians.:

“He [Kephart] was a publisher of Human Events and an early supporter of Laissez Faire Books, the world’s largest publisher of books on libertarian topics. He founded Libertarian Review magazine and Books for Libertarians in the 1970s, influencing thousands of young people who became advocates of a free society. He was dedicated to the cause of liberty.”

Laissex-faire books is now owned by Agora Inc.  and it employs former Mises scholar Jeffrey Tucker and Independent Institute scholar Wendy McElroy, both also Rothbardians from a long while back.

Kephart’s father Calvin Ira Kephart was a Southern historian, reportedly of a racist bent.

Calvin Kephart is described as a fierce opponent of the civil rights movement, an opponent of racial integration, a believer in the superiority and inferiority of races and a deep believer in eugenics.

He spent a lot of time tracing his aristocratic lineage.

Son Bob, a US naval commander, was a close friend of Rothbard himself, as well as of Lew Rockwell and of leading figures in the libertarian and hard money community,  and  John Pugsley of Agora Inc’s, Sovereign Society.

Bill Bonner, owner of Agora Inc. was a close friend of Kephart and called him the father of the newsletter business.

More specifically, this is how Kephart ties in to the libertarian movement:

First, Kephart was influential in the survivalist community,  a fringe but important part of modern American anti-state thinking.

Survivalists have had their share of intelligence infiltration. A prominent survivalist, Joel Skousen, is the older brother of Mark Skousen, who is closely associated with Agora Inc. and was himself once on the CIA payroll.

Joel Skousen was formerly in the US air-force and has been an editor of various Conservative magazines. One can only speculate how free of Agency influence he could be, especially since the Skousens are  nephews of Cleon Skousen, a conservative commentator and a racist/racialist historian who was for several years a  senior FBI agent.

Interestingly, Joel Skousen was originally a Romney supporter but later switched his support to Ron Paul.

Second. Another nexus of the libertarian movement with intelligence is through Ron Paul, also a Kephart associate.

Paul has a long-standing association with Agora Inc., which published and promoted his newsletters for decades. This, rather than the over-blown “racist” news-letter business is the real untold story, since Agora Inc. has multiple ties to intelligence and intelligence-related stock operations.

Third. Kephart was also the editor of The Libertarian Review and played a prominent role in the development of American libertarianism as a movement, though he kept in the background (maybe because of his role as an informant).

A short list of the outfits to which he “provided guidance” (as a CIA informant) include:

“For many years he has generously provided guidance and funding for a long list of organizations, including Families Against Mandatory Minimums, Forfeiture Endangers American Rights, Human Rights Watch, Institute for Justice, National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, Post-Conviction Relief, and the American Civil Liberties Union. He has also been a benefactor to organizations working for economic liberty and general restrictions on government power. These include the Foundation for Economic Education, Cato Institute, Future of Freedom Foundation, R.A. Childs Fund for Independent Scholars, and Separation of School and State Alliance.”

Many of these outfits have played a large role in promoting both Edward Snowden and Julian Assange, to the consternation of independent bloggers and activists, who have long since concluded that the two are intelligence-related operatives.

Let’s just say the CIA continues to “give guidance.”

A fourth point tying Kephart to the New World Order, with its British Israelite and masonic underpinnings, is his father.

(Correction: While he did write a history of masonry, he seems to have repudiated British Israelism. He was also an isolationist on WW2, from what I’ve read. It’s also fair to note that eugenics was advocated by many intellectuals, right and left, from Yeats to the Fabians. And, finally, Kephart’s racial notions cannot, of course, be judged by the standards of today. They were widely held).

Calvin Ira Kephart, was, as I said earlier in this blog post, a scientific racist, a Southern historian and anthropologist of race who was a passionate advocate of eugenics to create a master race and  euthanasia for the mentally handicapped or otherwise “defective.”

He opposed the civil rights movement and wanted blacks shipped backed to Africa. He was also, fascinatingly,  a masonic historian.

That’s the toxic environment from which the god-father of the libertarian movement developed:

“By 1932 Kephart had begun this research, which culminated in his lengthy book,Races of Mankind: Their Origin and Migration , published in 1960 by the Philosophical Library in New York.In this work Kephart claimed to have written the definitive “ethnographic” book on the development of “advanced and retarded races.” The collection also includes advertisements for this book as well as his Concise History of Freemasonry (1964); his short pamphlets TrueChristianity andOrigin of the Name “Russia”; an article in support of eugenics, entitled “World Population Explosion”; a few reviews of his books and articles; and nine letters to the editor from 1961 to 1968, seven published in the Evening Capital of Annapolis Maryland. In most of these letters and other writings Kephart expressed his extreme right-wing views—his fierce opposition to racial integration and the civil rights movement; support for the repatriation of African-Americans to Africa; and advocacy of the forced sterilization of the insane, the mentally retarded, prisoners, prostitutes, and women who had one or more illegitimate children.”

This doesn’t mean, of course, that Bob Kephart himself believed any of his father’s theories.

But it should make anyone who finds some echoes of this kind of thing in Rothbard’s writing or his promotion of the theories of Charles Murray look very closely at the assumptions and consequences of this “anarchist” way of thinking.

To what does it really tend?

What might be the underlying agenda of anti-state capitalism which has the benediction of a CIA informant?

What might it mean that that informant was the son of a genuine scientific racist and eugenicist, not just someone exercising his first amendment right to mouth rude epithets on the fringes, but someone whose thinking was no different from that of any Nazi theorist.

Final point.

Bob Kephart also came together in the 1970s with Murray Rothbard and two individuals who have been separately linked to intelligence themselves:

1. Noam Chomsky (alleged by John Coleman and other journalists to be deep-cover CIA)

2. James Dale Davidson,  founder of Agora Inc., and founder of the anti-tax National Tax-payer’s Union,  who is alleged to have been involved in intelligence-related stock-pumping, from several accounts.

He is linked to Rothschild journalist Rees-Mogg, also of Agora Inc.

Robert Higgs: Love your neighbor, don’t use the courts or dollars

Posted on by

Robert Higgs of the Independent Institute has a great, great piece on how, like Jesus, society should give up its allegiance to violence:

“Love turns us in the opposite direction. It seeks to build up, whereas the state seeks to overawe and kill in the service of the self-interested elites who control it at the expense of the people at large. Love has no need to flex violent muscles or seek vengeance time and again. Love intends the good of the other for its own sake, not as a means toward the end of one’s own aggrandizement. Love is patient and long-suffering; power is impatient and easily provoked.

Love does not keep score; international rivals do so in numerous dimensions. Love leads to inner peace and cordial relations with others, whereas the state remains always at war, if not against other states, then certainly against its own subjects, on whom it preys ceaselessly in order to sustain itself and to gratify the rulers’ insatiable ambitions for personal acclaim and unchecked power.”

Obviously,  this rules out the court system (upheld by violence); as well as the current dollar regime (enforced by violence); the sub-national state and municipalities (upheld by violence); private security forces (upheld by violence); as well as corporations (created by laws upheld by violence)….

Of course, to be a bit more searching, Jesus himself never told the Roman Centurion to leave his position in the Roman army, nor did he tell Peter to get rid of his sword altogether.

And  he struck a fig tree sterile when it didn’t yield figs for him to eat.

Of course,  Jesus himself said that the next time he came, it would be with a sword.

Still, I’m all agog.

When is The Independent Institute going to get rid of copyright and put my name on its books (or at least, not take me to the courts should I do some such thing)?

When is it going to stop using blood-drenched dollars?

(Just to be clear, I’m in favor of copyright laws and I hold dollars, not from love but necessity).

When is the Independent Institute  going to run a piece calling out Edward Snowden as a CIA psyop?

Except for Ivan Eland (props to him), Independent Institute scholars were out promoting Assange, an obvious New World Order mouthpiece.

So, is the national (American Christo-Zionist) police-state evil, but the international (pagan-anti-Zionist) police -state just fine?

Is a War on Terror re-branded  as “defense of private property” a different game?

Is violence the only thing Jesus was against, or was this teaching part of a complete morality that proscribed lying (including false advertising), stealing (including market fraud), greed, covetousness, murder (even of statists), bribery (even of public officials), licentiousness (even masked as women’s reproductive rights), blackmail, condemnation of others (even of evil statists), blasphemy, and many other things not mentioned  (or heartily approved of) by some Rothbardian libertarians?

(Not all).

Did Jesus preach only mercy and not also justice?

That would set him in opposition to the Jewish law.

But he said he came to fulfill Jewish law.

To put it another way, does Jesus hate lies and the father of lies, but make an exception for  CIA psyops?

Just asking…

NWO Psyop? Reserve Bank Governor affirms Indian citizenship

Posted on by

Update:

On looking through the website from which I got the information about the new RBI governor,  I began to have a few second thoughts. Although, it appears to be an anti-NWO website, some of  the information on it (besides the story about Rajan)  seems baseless or exaggerated.

I don’t know enough to say, but caveat lector.

ORIGINAL POST

I posted earlier that the new governor of the Reserve Bank of India, Raghuram Rajan, has been described by the English language media itself as an Indian and US national, and asked how that could be, as India doesn’t allow dual citizenship.

On October 29 Rajan came out clearly with a statement that he was and is an Indian citizen and only holds a US Green Card (work and permanent residence permit).

That was in The Hindu, which I’ve said before, has been very left-leaning and sympathetic to globalism, both under the chief editorship of N. Ram and under ex-editor,  Siddharth Varadarajan, brother of Tunku Varadarajan, contributing editor at the Wall Street Journal and vocal neocon.

Now, notice the comments under The Hindu piece, attacking those media outlets that raised the question of Rajan’s nationality.

The idea is that any criticism of Rajan must come from the BJP and anti-foreign xenophobes. They are dismissed as paranoid because they jumped to the conclusion that Rajan was a US citizen when he clearly wasn’t.

The implication is that everything else the BJP claims – including conspiracies about the globalists –  must be nonsense too.

Well, BJP or not,  Rajan’s citizenship is a very legitimate issue to raise, especially, as it was the Rothschild media that put out that information in the first place.

Let me show you.

Go back to my earlier blog post.

The piece I posted before linked to an anti-NWO blog,  GreatGameIndia.wordpress.com. The graphic accompanying the post clearly described Rajan as an Indian and an American national.

That makes it a legitimate question for people to raise.

Take a look at the graphic here:

http://greatgameindia.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/raghuram-rajan-new-world-order.jpg

It was taken from The New Indian Express:

http://newindianexpress.com/business/news/Rajan-says-RBI-governorship-not-meant-to-win-Facebook-likes/2013/09/05/article1769127.ece

Since the globalists (British imperialists) like to leave their signature on their capers, they also had Rajan quoting Kipling (the premier poet of the British Empire):

“But I hope to do the right thing, no matter what the criticism, even while looking to learn from the criticism,” Rajan said.

“Rudyard Kipling put it better when he mused about the requirements of an ideal central banker in his poem ‘If’: If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you, But make allowance for their doubting too: Kipling’s reference to “men” only dates these lines, but his words are clear.”

Check out the picture in the New Indian Express, which is the one carried at GreatGameIndia.

It clearly carries a description of Rajan as an American national. It also carries the logo PTI on the side of the picture.

That’s the Press Trust of India.

Now, what is the Press Trust of India?

It’s board of directors is comprised of editors of some of the leading publications in India, including The Hindu.

Here is a list of everyone on the Board, taken from the PTI’s own website (my descriptions are colored and in caps):

Mr K N Shanth Kumar     Chairman (The Printers,Mysore)

PUBLISHER OF THE DECCAN HERALD,  SOUTH INDIA, ENGLISH

Mr Mahendra Mohan Gupta    Vice Chairman (The Jagran)

DELHI  E-PAPER – HINDI

Mr R Lakshmipathy     Dinamalar

TAMIL NADU, SOUTH INDIA,  TAMIL

Mr Vineet Jain    Bennett, Coleman & Co Ltd

INDIA’S LARGEST PRESS CONGLOMERATE, OWNS THE TIMES GROUP, WHICH INCLUDES THE FLAGSHIP, “TIMES OF INDIA” PAPER; FORMERLY, FOREIGN-OWNED

(ENGLISH)

Mr M P Veerendra Kumar    Mathrubhumi

KERALA,  SOUTH INDIA  – MALAYALAM

Mr Sanjoy Narayan    Hindustan Times

NATIONAL PAPER – ENGLISH

Mr N Ravi    The Hindu

NATIONAL, TAMIL NADU, SOUTH INDIA, ENGLISH

Mr Riyad Mathew    Malayala Manorama

KERALA – SOUTH INDIA –  MALAYALAM

Mr Aveek Kumar Sarkar    Ananda Bazar Patrika

NATIONAL – HINDI

Mr Shekhar Gupta    Indian Express

NATIONAL, SOUTH INDIA – ENGLISH

Mr Hormusji N Cama    Bombay Samachar

BOMBAY –  PARSI (PARSIS HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN AFFILIATED WITH THE BRITISH EMPIRE AND THE ROTHSCHILDS)

Mr Vijay Kumar Chopra    Hind Samachar

NORTH INDIA – HINDI

Mr S P Bharucha    Former Chief Justice of India

Mr Fali S Nariman    Legal Luminary

Prof E V Chitnis    Scientist

So,  The Hindu’s editor and a dozen other leading press men are on the board of directors of the very outfit that put out the information that Rajan was an American national (which means citizen).

And what is the rest of the board like?

Out of 12 newspapers or media outfits represented there, fully SIX are based in South India, and all six belong to just two states in the South (Kerala and Tamil Nadu).

Both states are closely tied to the West

1. Through ideology – communist Kerala and corporatist Tamil Nadu

2. Through history – British intervention in South Indian secessionist movements

3. Through the English language – more prevalent in the South than in the North

4. Through finance –  especially in Chennai and Bangalore, the site of massive Western investment

5. Through religion – the church and church related organizations are both wealthy and powerful in Kerala and in Tamil Nadu.

Six newspapers from two states, while the rest of India’s 28 states are represented by one Delhi urban  paper and one Bombay paper run by a Parsi (Parsis as a community have historically been affiliated with the British empire); one international outfit (Bennett Coleman); and just TWO Hindi papers.

The weighting toward Tamil Nadu, the home of the globalist-funded Afro-Dravidian secessionist movement, is striking, and it bolsters Rajiva Malhotra’s thesis in “Breaking India.”

After the issue was raised by politicians, Rajan gave an interview in The Hindu (owned by the same N. Ram on the PTI’s board) affirming that he wasn’t an American citizen.

Comments from readers at The Hindu (and you know how they can be manipulated) claim it’s the paranoia, incompetence, and bigotry of the right-wing BJP that’s behind the whole issue.

So how could the  Press Trust of India be associated with any kind of globalist agenda?

Isn’t it just a national outfit?

Back to Wikipedia:

“It [PTI] exchanges information with several other news agencies including 100 news agencies based outside India, such as Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, The New York Times and Bloomberg L.P.. Major Indian subscribers of PTI include The Hindu, Times of India, the Indian Express, the Hindustan Times, the All India Radio and Doordarshan. PTI has offices in Bangkok, Beijing, Colombo, Dubai, Islamabad, Kuala Lumpur, Moscow, New York and Washington D.C..[3]

In other words, PTI has a  thoroughly global network, with a distinctly international point of view, at the very least. At worst, it’s a regional mouthpiece for the “international community.”

Whichever the case,  PTI is hardly a disinterested vendor of “news.” After all, what is deemed to be news is, in the first place, a very value-laden and political choice.

More from Wikipedia:

“PTI correspondents are also based in leading capitals and important business and administrative centres around the world. It also has exchange arrangements with several foreign news agencies to magnify its global news footprint.”

In other words, PTI is in business with foreign news agencies, which are, as anti-NWO activists have shown, owned by a small group of Anglo-Zionist business interests, just six companies, in fact.

These are the six, with their most notable properties:

1. General Electric  or GE (owns Universal Pictures, Focus Features)

2. Viacom (owns MTV, NICK JR, BET, CMT, Paramount Pictures)

Majority owner – Sumner Redstone (born Sumner Murray Rothstein)

Wikipedia:

“Viacom is one of the companies that uses the services of Wiki-PR, a public relations firm specialized in editing of Wikipedia that is accused of subverting Wikipedia content for business interest.[27]”

3. Disney (owns ABC, ESPN, Pixar, Miramax, Marvel Studios)

Disney is publicly owned and its CEO was until recently Michael Eisner.

4. Time Warner (owns HBO, Time, Warner Bros, CNN)

Owned by Edgar Bronfman, who until recently (2011) was the CEO.

5. Columbia Broadcast Corporation or CBS (owns Jeopardy, Sixty Minutes, NFL.com (National Football League), Smithsonian Channel, Showtime, Simon & Schuster)

Majority owner – Sumner Rothstein

6. News Corp (owns Fox, Wall Street Journal, New York Post, The Sunday Times, Times Literary Supplement, Dow Jones & Co., HarperCollins)

Created and owned by Rupert Murdoch, in 2012 turned into publicly traded companies, with Murdoch as CEO and with controlling shares.

News Corp owns the top newspapers on three continents (including but not limited to The Wall Street Journal in the US, The Sun in the UK, and The Australian, in Oz.

The 232 executives at these companies control the views of about 277 million people in the US alone, not to mention their enormous influence over the world.

In addition, there are powerful single individuals like Samuel Newhouse, who owns 2 dozen daily newspapers, the publishing companies like Random House, Knopf, Crown, Ballantine, and the Conde Nast group of magazines (including Vanity Fair, Vogue, GQ, The New Yorker)

The de facto ownership of almost all of these media conglomerates is, at the risk of coming across as anti-Semitic, Jewish and Zionist.

Murdoch, as is well-known, rose to his position with help from the Rothschilds.

[Bronfman has Rothschild ties

The Bronfman family is very active in Zionist causes:

“”The Bronfmans still move in an elegant world where the fabulously rich mingle with the powerful and famous. Edgar Jr.’s aunt Minda married a French banker with Rothschild ties and became a baroness. His father belongs to that small circle of New Yorkers who can get Presidents to answer their telephone calls. Edgar Jr.’s friends include the director Steven Spielberg and Senator Thomas Daschle.

One of the reasons the Bronfman dynasty has retained a glittering aura is that family members, though rich, have never been content to sit on their wealth and watch the world from afar. Edgar Sr. became president of the World Jewish Congress and exposed former United Nations Secretary General Kurt Waldheim’s Nazi past. His brother, Charles, is one of the founders of Birthright Israel, which pays for young Jewish people to visit the country. Now, however, the family may have to scale back its philanthropic endeavors because of what happened to Vivendi. “It hasn’t [affected my charitable giving] yet,” says Edgar Sr. darkly, “but it will.”

Every one of these media conglomerates is thus ultimately associated with the Rothschild (imperial British) entity.

Do you suppose PTI, alone among major international media,  defies the diktat of the press barons of the world? I don’t think so.

Not only that, PTI has its own satellite network according to Wikipedia:

“Press Trust of India is the only news agency in South Asia which operates its own communication satellite , an INSAT , to broadcast news and information.”

So PTI is not just a national outfit. It is a powerful international news outfit, the post-Independence heir to the Rothschild media in India. It has a bevy of Indian editors on board, with a heavy concentration from South India (the locus of foreign investment, as well as of foreign intervention), with strong business ties with the international (that is, Rothschild) press; it has its own satellite network.

Any chance PTI is NOT a globalist mouthpiece?

I’d say none whatsoever.

Now, who is the chairman of PTI?

Wikipedia again:

I”ts current chairman is R Lakshmipathy.“

An Economic Times piece describes R. Lakshmipathy, as the publisher of the Tamil daily, Dinamalar, and twice earlier the chairman of PTI.

The chairman before him was M. P. Veerendrakumar, also from a southern state, this time,  Kerala (Matrubhoomi newspaper).

There’s yet another South Indian connection.

All these Tamil papers are strongly supportive of Tamil secession.

Vice chairman Shankthakumar also represents the south, in his case, the Deccan Herald and some Kannada papers.

So PTI is tremendously slanted toward the south and to corporate investment (Chennai and Bangalore).

Tamil Nadu, as I’ve said repeatedly, is the locus for the globalist intervention intended to fracture India. Whatever one thinks of secession, it must be voluntary, not covertly manufactured by people with their own agenda.

Otherwise, its proper name is manipulation and aggression.

Given all this, is the Rajan story just an innocent blunder by the media?

No. To me it looks like a Rothschild psyop intended to discredit any criticism of Rajan as Hindu fundamentalist obfuscation.

The story looks just like the Obama birth certificate story, where the object of the media psyop was to discredit anyone who “fell” for the word of a  racist sheriff, deliberately inserted into public debate by the major media.

[Another example of this kind of media psyop was the Trayvon Martin business, where dozens of libertarian and conservative sites rose to the bait and looked like racists as a result. Of course, a few of them really are, but that’s another story.]

Edward Feser: How democracy gives rise to bull-shit

Posted on by

Edward Feser on why democracies gives rise to a higher proportion of bull-shit:

“…. as any reader of Plato’s critique of democracy in The Republic knows, the democratic ethos — with its pretence that all the views and ways of life prevalent in a pluralistic society be regarded as worthy of equal respect — inevitably tends toward bullshit.  A politician who spoke with complete frankness — who said exactly what he thought about those views and ways of life among his fellow citizens that he didn’t share, which is bound to be most of them — would never get elected, and would no doubt tick off most of those people who claim they want politicians to speak frankly. Frankfurt calls attention himself to one way in which democracy breeds bullshit:

“Bullshit is unavoidable whenever circumstances require someone to talk without knowing what he is talking about. Thus the production of bullshit is stimulated whenever a person’s obligations or opportunities to speak about some topic are more excessive than his knowledge of the facts that are relevant to that topic. This discrepancy is common in public life, where people are frequently impelled — whether by their own propensities or by the demands of others — to speak extensively about matters of which they are to some degree ignorant. Closely related instances arise from the widespread conviction that it is the responsibility of a citizen in a democracy to have opinions about everything, or at least everything that pertains to the conduct of his country’s affairs. The lack of any significant connection between a person’s opinions and his apprehension of reality will be even more severe, needless to say, for someone who believes it his responsibility, as a conscientious moral agent, to evaluate events and conditions in all parts of the world.”