The United States Of Spying

Andrew Napolitano via Lew Rockwell:

“When Gen. Michael Hayden, the director of both the CIA and the NSA in the George W. Bush administration and the architect of the government’s massive suspicionless spying program, was recently publicly challenged to deny that the feds have the ability to turn on your computer, cellphone or mobile device in your home and elsewhere, and use your own devices to spy on you, why did he remain silent? The audience at the venue where he was challenged rationally concluded that his silence was his consent.”

When I read this, I’m convinced that my experience in the past few years of having my private conversations surface in a wide-range of web-sites was not imagination or paranoia at all.

I am more than ever certain that the right explanation is spying by someone with access to government technology who was either a lawless private contractor or the witless employee of one of those urban DHS (Dept of Homeland Security) fusion centers that have become notorious for spying on anti-government dissidents.

Witless, because even the most brain-dead flunky of the government should know that venting your political opinion on a blog, sans any act of armed insurrection, espionage, or other illegal activity, is constitutionally-protected, indeed highly valuable, speech and that the government is not permitted in any way, shape, or form, to go on fishing expeditions in people’s private lives (remember those things?) to either back into charges, in the case of people who are engaged in wrong-doing, or to twist arms, in the case of people who are not  doing anything wrong and can only be coerced by the government’s own illegal actions or threats thereo.


Charlie Hebdo: The Free Speech of Fools

From Lenin’s Tomb, a clear-eyed look at the bigotry and spite posing as satire in the pages of Charlie Hebdo:

“From what psychological depths did you drag up the nerve to “laugh” at a cartoon representing veiled women baring their buttocks as they bow in prayer towards “Mecca-relle [a pun onmaquerelle, the madam of a brothel – trans.]?  This pathetic stream of crap isn’t even shameful; its stupidity embarrasses you, even before it reveals your state of mind, your vision of the world.”



Lenin’s Tomb:

“After September 11, Charlie Hebdo was among the first in the so-called leftist press to jump on the bandwagon of the Islamic peril. Don’t deprive yourself of receiving your own share of the shit, at a moment when the number of Islamophobic acts is breaking records: 11.3% higher in the first 9 months of 2013 compared to the same period in 2012, according to l’Observatoire national de l’islamophobie. They worry about a “new phenomenon” of violence, marked by at least 14 attacks on veiled women since the start of the year.”


Here are some more Charlie Hebdo images that the mainstream media will not publish. They demonstrate convincingly that only some religions – specifically traditional Islam and traditional Christianity – were targeted by the cartoonists, not others.

They didn’t mock Judaism, for instance.

That omission makes Charlie Hebdo in effect a mouth-piece of Zionist sensibilities.

Notice also that Arabs and blacks were the main objects of the magazine’s animus,  suggesting that its so-called satire was no more than a vehicle through which it  propagated Anglo-Jewish racial supremacism.













Meanwhile,  when it came to ridiculing the  religion or beliefs of the ruling class, the COWARDS at Charlie Hebdo failed miserably. 

They published no pornographic pictures of Maimonides or Moses, no edgy jokes about the Holocaust, no genitalia of Anne Frank, no raunchy pedophile gags about Rabbis.

[And I, for one,  would not wish them to. I would wish, however, that they had extended the same respect to other people and other faiths.]

Instead, the magazine caved in and fired an employee over the whisper of anti-Semitism. 

Thus, the moniker of “equal opportunity satire” so universally applied to Charlie Hebdo is demonstrable propaganda,  intend to hoodwink the credulous.

Selective satire was the facade behind which the lewd ravings of Zionist hate-mongers flourished without public outrage,  ceaselessly stoking the searing flames of perpetual civilizational war.




The New World Order Speaks…

UPDATE: Apparently, the site is one of many written by someone called Mike Hockney, who is a bit of a fantasist, a possible cult-leader…and possibly a bit of a nut-case.

I’ve come across one of  the sister-sites before and they also served up the same sort of popular gnostic ideas – Abrahamism is evil, Jehovah is  Satan, the material world is opposed to the spiritual, organized religion is the eternal enemy….

I wonder who/what is really  behind the website…


A blog calling itself the ArmageddonConspiracy purports to be the messenger of the New World Order.

It claims that the NWO is an excellent thing and  not to be feared as Christian fundamentalists and anarcho-capitalist libertarians would have you believe.

The NWO is simply the Enlightenment, the continuation of  the philosophy of meritocracy,  sociability,  and reason, handed down from Hermes Trismegistus to Pythagorus and Plato….and revived in the 18th century in Europe.

Who could be against it, save Abrahamic fanatics, who still need savior gods and devils to rescue and terrorize them…

In other words, join us,  say the Illuminati. Get on social media and start your own revolution against the old word order.

I looked for a contact email address, because, for alleged Illuminati, the website carried some surprising errors, and I figured it would only be polite to tell them.

But I couldn’t find any contact address.

So, with hope that someone will pop over and read my post, let me take it upon myself to be kind to an Illuminatus today and diagnose why they have become confused…. in at least one  thing.

ArmageddonConspiracy claims that Christianity is mistaken, because if God rewards those who accept him and punishes those who reject him, why is it that God’s supposed enemy, Satan, does God’s work for him, i.e., does the punishing?

It would  be more logical if Satan rewarded the enemies of God, right?

Well, no.

Only in the fantasies of an Illuminatus, who thinks men can become God with a little effort and a Facebook page.

The point of Satan, as he is represented in the Bible, is that he is a deceiver and that his nature is perverse and envious.

So the notion that Satan is somehow “obliged” to reward those who accept him is based on the faulty assumption that Evil, which is based in treachery and falsity, must somehow conform to “just” notions of reciprocity and keep its word to its followers.

Elementary error number one, Illuminatus.

Elementary error two.

Satan and God are not invertible propositions or binaries at all. They do not exist ontologically in the same way.   Hence their relationship is not inverse or proportioned to each other in any way.

Syllogisms which run “If God x, then Satan y,” don’t obtain. Sorry.

Elementary error three.  God does not torture those who reject him nor does he will that anyone be tortured,  although Bible verses have been misinterpreted that way.

The state of not accepting God is in itself the state of being enslaved to Satan, per Christianity.  The punishment is carried within the act of sin itself, which is why the Bible says the wages of “sin” is death.

Since all men sin, the only way out, per Christianity, is through grace….God’s love.

That is where the savior…or avatar…comes in…that cheap, vulgar externalization of the Godhead that the Illumined  ones reject  haughtily.

Reading the blog made me, not for the first time,  a bit sad for these so-called enlightened ones, for whom Prometheus/Lucifer is the true God.

Human beings however wise in our own eyes, do not have a hundredth part of the wisdom of the angels, even (or especially) the fallen ones.

While we preen ourselves as “illumined,” the light we grasp is only the “shining” of  vain-glory….not the light of the true sun…

But that’s enough metaphysics and mythology for this blog-post.

In another, I will try to correct the gnostic confusions about the identity of Satan on ArmageddonConspiracy.



Humanitarianism: A Front For Imperialism

World Socialist Web , writing from a Marxist perspective that I don’t share,  reports that Medecins Sans Frontieres  (MSF) and other humanitarian INGOs (International Non-Governmental Organizations)  are increasingly dominated by the imperial concerns of the Western powers, a conclusion that I support:

The military mobilization around Typhoon Haiyan and the role of the MSF in Syria are just the most recent examples of the growing nexus between imperialism and INGOs.

The 2011 book, Humanitarianism Contested, Where Angels Fear to Tread authored by two leading American political scientists, Michael Barnett and Thomas G. Weiss—while written long before these specific events, is a timely read for its exposure of the trend.

The book gives an insider’s view of the business of humanitarian aid—now a veritable industry, estimated at a whopping $18 billion a year, with a staff numbering over 300,000. As one might expect, the book is in no way a critique of capitalism. The authors hold out the hope for a reform of humanitarianism, believing that it is the most significant existing effort to address poverty and the effects of war. Despite this outlook, the book brings to light the basic trajectory of the humanitarian industry: the massive growth of state-funded INGOs and their operational integration with imperialist governments.

The use of the emotional appeals to humanitarianism by the imperialist powers is not new. The Marxist movement has long sought to expose the class interests behind the crocodile tears of the ruling elite as it embarks on new rounds of conquest and plunder in the name of humanitarianism.

While treating diseases, supplying food or making micro loans, a broad range of state-funded organizations—there are 37,000 separate INGOs—are working in every area of concern to world imperialism. Many, like MSF, have become involved in CIA and military operations and serve as informants for the imperialist powers. [4]”

MSF is Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders), the French medical aid organization founded by French neo-conservative Bernard Kouchner.

As  I blogged a few days ago, MSF was the outfit hyping the Ebola virus from the start and calling for a world-wide coordinated campaign against it.

Interestingly, several MSF workers have been killed and other attacked by Africa villagers, who, for whatever reason,  believe that the presence of the team is leading to deaths among the native people.

This might not simply be the result of superstition and ignorance.

Delaware State University professor Cyril Broderick wrote an article in a large Liberian newspaper, The Liberian Observer, claiming that Ebola was manufactures by US weapons research.  Doubtless, such stories have influenced ordinary people in Africa.

But what is interesting to me is that the piece has been prominently cited by the Washington Post, which isn’t usually how “conspiracy theories” are treated.

They are usually given silent treatment.

Another point.

I mentioned earlier that Francis Boyle, the prominent human-rights activist, has been repeating the same accusation as Broderick in one of the leading alternative outlets, Russia Today.

What really lies behind such pronouncements is anyone’s guess, but it would be safe to conclude that there are many, many political and financial interests at work in this story.

When the Western major media is involved, caveat lector is always the best counsel.



Ex-KGB Spies Shape the New America

In a  “News with Views” article from 2003 Charlotte Iserbyt analyzes the dynamics of “convergence”whereby the soi-disant capitalist USA merges with the communist USSR, while the population is brain-washed to believe in a Cold War victory of “capitalism” over “communism”:

Reading:  Convergence Theory. 

Also: Convergence Theory (Social Sciences)

and Convergence Hypothesis.

[I use quotation marks around the two terms, because the manner in which they exist today suggests that they are simply two different versions of the same totalitarian system:

“United States-Russian Merger: A Done Deal?”

 Charlotte Iserbyt, News With Views, October 16, 2003

“The average American when confronted with world news that has Putin and Bush embracing one another one year and quarreling/threatening to target one another with missiles the next year, sinks into a state of “cognitive dissonance” whereby he is unable to make sense of anything or to carry on an intelligent conversation about the subject at hand, reacting to one’s comment with nothing more than a “glazed expression.”

This back and forth “planned” agenda is, of course, a brilliant psychological strategy, part of the dialectic, and highly effective in keeping the “sheeple” in line.

When, as a result, none of the conditioned “sheeple” utter a peep over such pre and post-9/11 actions, the “traitors” know that it’s “safe” to take actions such as naming Henry Kissinger, a Soviet agent, to lead an investigation of 9/11… if ever there was a fox overseeing the hen house! (Please refer to Iserbyt article, “Kissinger Out of the Closet” for documentation regarding Kissinger being a Soviet agent.)…..

..The New York Times, in an article dated 8/24/03 entitled “Former Top Russian Spy Pledges Allegiance” stated that the above Center…….

Lila: The Center for Counterintelligence and Security Studies, a consulting service in Alexandria, Virginia.

“…provides expertise and advice in counterintelligence, counterterrorism and security for the government (repeat government, ed) and companies.”

The hiring of these ex-KGB agents appears to be a result of FBI/KGB collaboration. The New American, July 30, 2001 discussed such collaboration in a news item entitled “Community Policing, East and West.”

It said: “Among Louis Freeh’s supposedly commendable achievements as FBI director, according to Robert S. Bennett, (brother of William Bennett, former Secretary of Education, ed) was the realization of his vision of a ‘global FBI.’…..

….The New York Times article also says, and this is interesting in light of the U.S.-Soviet education exchange agreements which have been going on since President Eisenhower signed the first one in 1958, “Kalugin’s relationship with America began in the late 1950’s, when Communist officials noticed his skill with languages. He was a K.G.B. trainee when he was sent to Columbia University as an exchange student.The New York Times goes on to reveal the following: “He was one of the generals of the cold war, a K.G.B. leader who did his best to undermine Western capitalism by recruiting Americans to work for Moscow….

…It was Kalugin, a frequent TV commentator and regular guest on Fox News, who stirred up a hornet’s nest last spring by spilling the beans (to an unnamed intelligence agent) on a spy cruise (go to and click on SpyTrek) regarding his associates, ex-K.G.B. Chiefs Primakov (also former President of Russia and close associate/advisor to Saddam Hussein who visited with Saddam in February of this year, prior to the war in Iraq) and General Alexander Karpov working for recently retired Admiral Poindexter’s Office of Information Awareness which is attached to the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA), an agency of the U.S. Department of Defense responsible for the development of new technology by the military.

This information is covered in detail in an article in the April 2003 issue of Soviet Analyst ( entitled “Architect of Soviet Middle East Terror to ‘Advise’ Washington“…Convergence Acquires New Meaning” by Christopher Story, a highly respected researcher and author with offices in London and New York City.

The story was also covered in the May 15, 2003 issue of The Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin in an entry entitled “GWB Names Kremlin Spymaster Primakov as Consultant to U.S. Homeland Security Team”.

Please see Iserbyt’s two articles on this subject at “Former KGB Heads to Help Spy on Americans” 4/24/03 and “Former USSR/Russian Premier to Work for Homeland Security” 4/22/03, both of which included information taken from an article in American Free Press entitled “Get Ready for the Sovietization of America”, 4/21/03 by Al Martin,, a former intelligence agent.

Al Martin’s information can also be traced to the same important source, Oleg Kalugin.”

Palin, the Prophetess? (Updated) – Part One

Image Credit: reposted at


Conservatives have been pointing out that Sarah Palin was derided for predicting in 2008 that an Obama presidency might set the stage for a Russian invasion of the Ukraine:

Speaking Tuesday at a rally in a Reno, Nevada, Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin had a little fun with her counterpart on the Democratic ticket, thanking Joe Biden for warning Barack Obama’s supporters to “gird your loins” for an international crisis if the Illinois senator wins.

Palin helpfully offered four scenarios for such a crisis, one of which was this strange one:

After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.”

On the other hand,  prophecy might have nothing to do with it.

Palin was not just the running-mate of John McCain in the 2008 elections,  she is his close friend.


This is interesting, since Palin is identified with the more conservative base of the Republican party, while McCain is often praised by Democrats, which makes him either a thoughtful moderate or an undependable RINO (Republican in Name Only), depending on where you stand.

The second interesting angle is that John McCain was one of the chief rabble-rousers on the ground in the Ukraine in December 2013:

Senator John McCain on Sunday told thousands of Ukrainian protesters camped on Kiev’s main square that Ukraine’s destiny lay in Europe and that it would make Europe better”

Numbers of observers like this one have shown up the Western media for its black-out of the real Ukraine story.


(Added, June 16, 2014. H/T to Charles Burris, LRC blog for reminding me)


Alternative blogs have called attention to the considerable evidence that the Ukraine situation was engineered, an instance of the much-flogged Hegelian Dialectic by which the Western governments and allied corporations draw greater and greater power to themselves:

Thesis (Proposition)

[A problem is created, encouraged, or exacerbated by the powers-that-be]

It is opposed by an

Antithesis (Counter-proposition) 

[This the reaction by the population, victims, or public opinion, to the problem. It demands a solution or a resolution.]

The conflict is resolved by the


[In turn this becomes a new thesis and the basis of the next triad of conflict.]

  1. The  solution is presented as a novel remedy to the population, but it is pre-planned. It is the intended goal of the powers-that-be.
  2. The new problems that lie in the solution are carefully hidden from the public until the next triad is activated. Then they become the basis for further conflict, which demands more solutions.
  3. The succeeding conflicts lead to greater and greater control by the powers-that-be.
  4. This control can be governmental or extra-governmental.



Seen in this light, Putin’s annexation of the Ukraine could be an intended consequence of the provocations staged by the CIA, with politicians like McCain, Nuland, and Kerry to lend them clout.

Palin, as a close friend of McCain’s, might have been privy to the plan, or, at least, to parts of it.

And her “prediction” of 2008 could simply be an accidental slip, exposing something she’d heard.

More likely, it’s an intentional leak to the public, with the intention of creating retrospective gravitas for Palin herself, as well as embarrassment for Obama.

One can of course take the speculation even further. Obama himself might have been selected to play this role in the weakening of the American empire…..

“Mobs” Ist Edition was 2007, not 2009

I just saw this on Amazon, in a Google search of
“Mobs, Messiahs, and Markets” (Bonner & Rajiva, Wiley, 2007)

Product Details

The 2007 publication date is what ought to be in the catalog, because that is when the first edition, the hardcover, came out.

There are six English language editions, besides foreign-language versions:

1. Hard-cover,  1st edition, August 31,  2007

2. Unknown binding, 2007 (Not sure what this is)

3.  Audible book, October 30, 2007

4. Pre–loaded digital audio, Sept. 1 2008

5.  Kindle,  May 18, 2009

6. Paper-back,  September 8, 2009

By 2009, there  were already five editions.

Yet the sixth version of “Mobs” is listed as the first edition.

And then this first edition is dated at 2009, not 2007.

Technical glitch? Careless mistake?

Or does someone want to revise the date of publication?

Inquiring minds want to know…..



FEMEN: The empire’s booby-trap

Update 2 (June 9, 2014):

OK. I just found the first documented direct link to Soros and the Open Society:

The Australian academic who directed the film about FEMEN in 2013, Sophie Pinkham, works for George Soros’ Open Society Institute.

Update 1:

I began this post simply to comment on Femen’s attacks on churches in recent months.

Then I found that, although CIA-backing of Femen is assumed by many bloggers, the links I came across didn’t show exactly how Soros or the CIA was tied into the outfit.

I will be updating the post with that information, as I find it.


The Times of Israel’s blog has a convincing criticism of one of the most visible Weapons of Mass Distraction – the annoyingly uncivilized radical “feminist” group, FEMEN, which allies itself with neo-Nazis in the Ukraine, openly spews (real) bigotry toward Muslims and Christians  and engages in breast-baring pranks, ostensibly in the service of suffering womanhood but actually in the service of the Anglo-Zionist empire.

“In support of  [Amina] Tyler, the Kiev-based feminist group FEMEN declared April 4th the International Topless Jihad Day, which consisted in white young women protesting topless against Islamist regimes at the entrance of mosques and Tunisian embassies around the globe. Because Muslim women do not have a voice of their own. They are all mute. Because Muslim women are inherently oppressed. Aha. And because the only way to liberate them all is by enforcing Western ideals upon their communities. Of course.…….

Another brilliant idea of FEMEN activists was to burn a Salafist flag in front of the Grande Mosquée de Paris. Three topless FEMEN activists started frolicking around the burning flag offending nearby worshippers. As if Parisian Muslims were responsible for the state of women rights in Islamic regimes. As if ALL Muslims were Salafists. FEMEN, congratulations for your amazing work towards perpetuating the stereotype of the Muslim community as monolithic rather than diverse. Hurrah………

In contrast to Tylor and her fellow FEMEN colleagues, who employ nudity as a tool of protest, talented Egyptian cartoonist Doaa Eladl employed her intellect to highlight issues such as underage marriage and sexual attacks against female demonstrators during the revolution. In late December, she was accused of blasphemy following the publication of one of her pieces in the Al-Masry Al-Youm. Unfortunately, her case did not receive as much attention as Tyler’s physical assets. Clearly, the media is not into pencils and brains as it is into nipples.


The world gives any woman plenty of choices.

But the dialectic promoted in the Western media – a propaganda tool of  centralizing money-power – herds these innumerable real choices of real women into two or three pre-determined avenues that  let those powers reap economic and political rewards in the swiftest possible way.

As for taking away attention from real activists, that is the point of such plastic activism, whether it is from the ubiquitous Julian Assange or from Edward Snowden or anyone else.

The point is to keep even politically discerning people fixated on mouth-pieces set up by the Central Controllers, so that real resistance is rendered impotent.

Notice that FEMEN’s lewd attacks and sacrilege are directed against mosques and mullahs and also against Catholic bishops and cathedrals:

Life-site reports that in April 2014, Femen activists attacked the Archbishop of Madrid, chanting that “abortion is sacred.”

Notice that this attack roughly corresponds to Easter season, the time of resurrection, rebirth, and fertility.

According to another report, “Top-less activists attack Brussels archbishop again,” it was again at Easter, in April 2013, that the Catholic Archbishop of the Brussels Cathedral, a staunch traditionalist on abortion and homosexuality, was attacked by half-naked “activists,” cursing him and dousing him with water from bottles shaped like the Virgin Mary.

The Femen “sextremists” mocked Christianity, altering “agnus dei” (Lamb of God or Jesus Christ) into “anus dei” (anus god), both denigrating Jesus Christ and deifying homosexuality.

Another FEMEN “activist” posed in front of the Cathedral, a black cross over her bare breasts, simulating Jesus on the cross.

Ironically, it turns out that the master-mind behind all this oestrogen run amok is a rather unreconstructed male, Viktor Svyatskiy, who gets a kick out of pretty girls  stripping for him.

And, worse,  spends his time deriding and humiliating his charges, who, some argue suffer from Stockholm syndrome:

 “It’s his movement and he handpicked the girls,” she told The Independent. “He handpicked the prettiest girls because the prettiest girls sell more papers.”

He’s “quite horrible with the girls,” Green adds. “He would scream at them and call them bitches.” One scene in the film has Svyatski displaying utter contempt for his activists. “These girls are weak,” he says. “They don’t have the strength of character… They show submissiveness, spinelessness, lack of punctuality, and many other factors which prevent them from becoming political activists. These are qualities which it was essential to teach them.”

There you have  the left’s conflicted logic:

Denounce traditional families as hotbeds of patriarchal oppression, because a male is considered the head of the house-hold…..but fawn on a thug who uses, abuses and humiliates vulnerable young women publicly for purposes they’re too naive to suspect, let alone figure out.

The bottom line is that a pimp is paying a few  prostitutes (one activist really is a professional prostitute)  good money (2-3 times the average monthly wage in Ukraine) to spew out propaganda about female liberation.

This is the old Chicks Up- front strategy of the 1960s left.

Put attractive young women, preferably half-naked, out in front of any protest movement. That attracts attention to your message and distracts from the other fellow’s.

FEMEN members themselves have seen through this game.

Amina Sboui (Tyler), the Tunisian activist mentioned in the beginning of the this post, later denounced the group for being anti-Muslim.

She said its funding sources were mysterious and suspected they might be from Israel.

A mother of one of the Ukrainian activists, Alexandra Shevchenko, regrets letting her daughter go to Kiev to study economics:

“I work in the city center and when walking to work each morning I have to listen to many people reprimanding me what they think of my daughter’s behavior,” said Lyudmyla Shevchenko, Aleksandra’s mother. “I can’t sleep. I can’t eat. I can’t live worrying about her all the time. I and her dad tried to persuade her not to do [take off her clothes] anymore. But when she’s in Kyiv she does not listen to us. Femen leaders brainwashed girls like her.

Actually, except for murder, FEMEN’s modus operandi sounds startlingly like the Charles Manson gang in the 1960s:

A charismatic sociopath picks  followers from among young, impressionable women and brow-beats them into promoting his political agenda….which involves promoting social strife…with the CIA not far behind.

But how exactly does FEMEN connect to the CIA, Israel, and/or the Anglo-Zionist enterprise? It’s still not clear to me.


First, the Victor Sviyatskiy connection.

Sviyatskiy quickly took over FEMEN from Anna Shevchenko Hutsol.

Hutsol is the activist who originally set FEMEN up, it is reported, to protest sex-trafficking in the Ukraine in 2008.

Later, Inna (Anna?) Shevchenko  spread her wings and became a resident of France.

(Lila: I might be confusing Alexandra Shevchenko with Inna. I’ll check and get back to this later today.)

An image of her is now the new Marianne image, the official symbol of France, on postage stamps.

Anna/Inna claims she left for France to avoid the patriarchal set-up in Ukraine, but it’s more accurate to say that she fled there, after she sawed down a Catholic cross and drew the attention of the local police. points out how characteristic of FEMEN such bigoted attacks are:
In a banner headline, from which we have removed foul language, Femen proclaims “Don’t Rape [us] with Your Crucifixes” , stating that, ‘For two thousand years, the supposed sacrifice of the body of Christ has been used as a tool to control women, our sexuality, our bodies, our freedom.’ This referred to their protest against The March for Life in which white crosses are carried to represent aborted children. According to Femen, ‘ Your white crosses are symbols of hate, control and fear – we will not be your sacrifice.’ As if to emphasise the Satanic nature of their protest the Femen activists who attacked Cardinal Rouco Varela in Madrid had inverted crosses painted on their backs.”
And Pravda (in Ukraine) documents that Inna’s flight had nothing to do with patriarchal oppression and everything to do with the cops:
(Google translation, with my edits)
Femen activists fled Ukraine
Saturday, August 31, 2013, 12:00

Femen activists left Ukraine on Friday after having been brought in for questioning.
According to the press service, 30 August, Femen activist Yana Zhdanov, Anna and Alexander Shevchenko Hutsol were summoned for questioning by the investigator. This means that the activists will be transferred from the status of “suspect ” to the status of ” charged “.“Fearing for their lives and freedom activists escaped from Ukraine to Europe to continue Femen activities,” so ran the statement from the activists.


The financing of the group has been as mysterious as its origin, with conflicting reports.

Three names recur in the reports:


One of FEMEN’s early donors is said to be a German, Helmut Joseph Geier, alias, DJ Hell.

DJ Hell is a disc jockey and exponent of the musical trend known as electroclash.

He popularized it in the 1980s and 1990s in his home town, Munich.


Another figure behind FEMEN is Jed Sunden, a native of Brooklyn, New York.

In 1995  Sunden  founded the Kiev Post, the first English language paper in the area.

Sunden is the owner of KP Media, which publishes the Post.

This article in the Kiev Post in April 2010 says that Sunden was one of the first to support FEMEN, which it describes as having a five-member board of directors (the names are here):

“I confirm that I do give money to Femen,” Sunden said. “I will not state the amount. After meeting with Anna Hutsol, I was impressed with her ideas and have been a supporter. I believe Anna is a young, independent voice in Ukraine. While I do not agree with all of her positions, I believe it is important to give her, and groups like hers, support.”


A third figure mentioned as a backer is a Bavarian business-woman, Beate Schober.

An interview with Schober ran in the Kiev Post in Feb 2006.

It describes her as a senior managers at Austrian Airlines and a successful relocation entrepreneur, catering to major companies.

A Berliner Zeitung article in January 2009 states that Schober had been living in Kiev for twelve years, operating her relocation business.

She was very sympathetic to the sex tourism issue raised by the activists and hosted them on her web portal.

The article  also says that fellow Bavarian and German musical entrepreneur, DJ Hell, heard of FEMEN and became interested in publicizing them.

The Swiss Sonntag Zeitung (October 2013) also reported on the funding of the group.

It mentioned that Beate Schober first supported FEMEN, but later concluded that the group was not really interested in women’s emancipation at all.

The SZ piece mentions that 40 percent of the group’s income comes from the sale of T-shirts with their images.

Friends are also mentioned as a source of funds, but no details are given.

DJ Hell is once again mentioned as a backer, but, again, there are no specific figures.

The top four FEMEN activists are reported to get some 700 euros a month  ($1000 in other accounts), which is a large sum in Ukraine.

The outfit in Paris reportedly takes $2500/mth to run.

In Kiev, FEMEN ran out of a popular cafe named after Cupid, the child of Venus (the goddess of sexuality and beauty) and Mars (the god of war).

It provided free Internet access to FEMEN’s members.

The Sonntag Zeitung piece also adds interesting details about the origin of the group.

FEMEN began at a meeting between Sviyatskiy and Anna Hutsol on a park bench in Khmeinitsky in Western Ukraine in the mid-2000’s.

The two were watching married couples at the registry when they came up with the idea.

In the only recorded interview with him, Swiatskiy says Hutsol and he had already decided on FEMEN’s media strategy by that time.

In 2009, Sophie Pinkham, an American academic who was conducting research into Ukrainian feminism,  interviewed the FEMEN chief Anna Hutsol.

She found that the “volunteer” Victor Sviyatskiy was doing most of the answering.

He was extraordinarily passionate about his mission to promote feminism and spoke eloquently about the “eroticism of the social” and his ambition to create an activist group as “cheerful” as Greenpeace.

Despite this, he remains  a shadowy figure, with no foot-print on the Internet.

The non-existent Net footprint certainly suggests an intelligence operation of some kind, but that is only speculation, so far.

In the fall of 2013, a documentary debuted at the Venice film festival- Ukraine Is Not a Brothel.

It was directed  by Australian film-maker Kitty Green, who outed Sviyatskiy as the master-mind behind FEMEN.

To sum up:

  • An American female academic calls attention to the group in 2009, only a year after its official founding.
  • Around the same time an American newspaper publisher and libertarian promotes and funds the group. He stops funding FEMEN only in 2011, because it is offending too many people.
  • Two Germans from the same town in Germany back the group. One is  a multi-millionaire corporate senior manager now in the tourism business, who has  a clientele that includes the World Health Organization. The other is a famous disc jockey. The business-woman later says she thinks they are not really feminists.
  • France quickly makes one of the lead activists its national heroine and gives her residence on the spot, to save her from the investigations of the Ukrainian police.
  • The founder and master-mind of the group is a mysterious abusive male, who admires the ultra-left environmental group, Greenpeace, and is an expert on media strategy.
  • Everyone denies this man’s involvement and he  has no trail on the net.
  • An Australian film-maker publicizes the group in 2013 and “outs” its mysterious founder, although print accounts of his involvement in FEMEN long precede her outing.

Belief in hierarchy is psychopathic, claims leftist

Anti-traditionalist propaganda from Paul Rosenberg at

A few weeks ago, I came across a reference to an unpublished conference paper, with the intriguing title, “ Does endorsement of hierarchy make you evil? SDO and psychopathy.”

So I contacted the lead author, Marc Wilson, a New Zealand psychologist at Victoria University of Wellington, to ask him about his research.

First, a bit of background. Psychopathy — once thought to be an all-or-nothing condition — is now understood in a dimensional fashion (more or less) and is measured by instruments such as  The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. While our understanding of psychopathy first developed largely from studying criminal populations, Hare himself has said, “I always said that if I wasn’t studying psychopaths in prison, I’d do it at the stock exchange,” so it’s fairly straightforward to measure and compare psychopathic tendencies and SDO. And that’s just what Wilson has done.

“The research shows that SDO and psychopathy have a reciprocal causal relationship over time — as people become more social dominant, they become more psychopathic, and vice versa,” Wilson told me. “This is based on longitudinal research that shows that, for example, increased SDO (or psychopathy) at time 1 predicts greater psychopathy (or SDO) at time 2. I’ve done this for both convenience samples (university students) and thousands of general population.”

University students get tested a lot — as Wilson indicated, they’re quite convenient. But sooner or later it’s bound to raise questions of just how well the results hold up in a larger population. So it’s significant that he’s already taken that step, and found confirmation as well.

“When SDO was originally proposed, it was argued that group dominance (as measured by SDO) is not the same thing as individual level dominance, and indeed that’s what the original research appeared to show,” he explained. “More recently there have been a few studies that have suggested SDO and psychopathy are related, and I’ve collected a lot of data now that leads me to believe they’re flip sides of the same coin — interpersonal dominance (psychopathy) on one side and group dominance (SDO) on the other.”

This is just what one might informally conclude from listening to the Donald Sterling tape. His personal abusiveness and unwarranted accusations against V. Stiviano is on one side of the coin; flip it over, and his contempt for black people is on the other. Jerk on one side, racist on the other.

[Lila:  Never mind that Stiviano was a gold-digging exhibitionist.

Never mind that she’s  made racist comments herself.

Never mind that she either pre-texted or unlawfully surveilled someone in their house.

Never mind that that is a form of moral and mental rape several orders of magnitude worse than saying rude things in your own home for your own private audience.]

“Therefore, it makes sense that environments that promote social hierarchies will also be fertile breeding grounds for individual dominance, and vice versa,” he continued. Digging down a bit into specifics was quite illuminating.

“By ‘environments’ I can imagine a few that are good candidates — financial markets for example,” Wilson said. “Indeed, some of my other work shows that people who work in commerce focused on hierarchy-enhancing wealth consolidation also tend to be more social dominant (an old finding) but also more psychopathic — indeed, people who study commerce at university are not only more psychopathic than people in other fields of study but less psychopathic commerce students are more likely to switch majors to more hierarchy-attenuating disciplines, while more psychopathic arts students (for example) are more likely to switch to commerce degrees.”

Lila:  This is the state of moral and logical confusion in public debate in the West, which, unfortunately, sets the tone for the whole world.

Take Belle Knox, the current feminist icon.

She is barely adult, has a history of body image problems and serious self-cutting; is a  porn addict who was raped and admits that she enjoys being locked up in dog-houses.

She chooses to be routinely spit on, hit in the face, verbally abused, and gang-raped in the derriere, all on camera.

But, of course, there’s no “evil hierarchy” in any of that, nor “dominance,” nor “subordination”; no psychiatric problem there.

No,  that”s  all feminist empowerment and an honest day’s work, all the way.

And you dare not so much as roll your eyes  at her.

On the other hand, if  a young man, a conservative, signs up for a degree in commerce and enjoys the rough-and-tumble of  the business world, watch out – you have Hitler or Mao on your hands.  Call the FBI… the shrinks… the NY Times…. Get Paul Rosenberg on the case.

In Rosenberg’s tendentious, dishonest, simple-minded essay, good, decent ideas with which any conservative could agree – the dignity of manual work and the value of every individual – putrefy and turn into so much slime to fling against political opponents, albeit so clumsily, the effort says more about him than about them.



Knoxious Hypocrisy

You can do whatever you want sexually,  on camera, for money, and thrust it crudely and incessantly into the public eye….you can even enact rape, violence, humiliation, and sadism toward other human beings and call it a job.

But don’t you dare voice your opinions about such things freely in Mistress Belle Knox’s  America.

On Ms. Knox’s Twitter feed, she “nudges” the serfs not to use the English language in ways that offend Her Royal  Twitterness:

Photo: I love this campaign!

If you suspect, as I do, that Knox is an intelligence-created mind-control operation… here’s some evidence:

1. She’s regurgitating, word-for-word, the CIA’s whole gender agenda on her Twitter feed – Part of that is to eliminate any words that arise from real human experience and feeling and substitute for them politically correct language.

2. She’s staging “conflict” with Pakistan’s Twitter, an obvious piece of theater intended to reinforce the meme that Islam’s traditional sexual values are anathema to the West.

Rothschild ties to Western & Russian oligarchy

An extremely thorough article by Willam Jasper at the New American confirms what I’ve said about Putin, that he is simply another tool of the NWO, an instrument of “convergence”:

“One of the important ventures that Soros and Pinchuk are financing is the Ukrainian Crisis Media Center (CMC), a collaboration of Ukrainian public relations corporations and journalists that is headquartered in Kiev’s Hotel Ukraine. Ostensibly, it was created to counter the propaganda onslaught of Putin’s Russian media cartel. Much of the “independent news” we receive from Ukraine is produced by the CMC and stamped with the Pinchuk/Soros-approved brand of propaganda. That includes cheering on or papering over the fact that the “new” government in Kiev is simply the latest rotation of musical chairs, and it has ended with Pinchuk’s fellow oligarchs (virtually all of which are “former” communists) and their parliamentary blocs and political parties occupying the most important chairs (as we reported here).

Pinchuk is a member of the Board of the Peterson Institute for International Economics and sits on the International Advisory Council of the Brookings Institution, both of which Soros has long been associated with. Another very important Soros-Pinchuk tie is their mutual connection to the famous (or infamous, as you prefer) Rothschild banking dynasty. 

In 2011, George C. Karlweis, adviser to Baron Edmond de Rothschild and his Banque Privee, revealed that it was Rothschild who provided Soros with the startup money — and, undoubtedly much (illegal) insider trading intelligence — for Soros’ fabulously successful Quantum Fund. 

The full extent of Pinchuk’s connections to the Rothschild’s global private empire would require a similar revelation from an insider. That could be Jean-Pierre Saltiel, who sits on the board of Pinchuk’s Yalta European Strategy, as well as the oligarch’s global steel and metallurgy conglomerate, Interpipe, Inc. He is also a longtime adviser to the Rothschilds and the past president of Rothschild Conseil International, one of the fabled family’s major bank holding companies. Interestingly (but not so surprising), Rothschild agent Saltiel also sits on the board of PIK Group, Russia’s largest residential real estate developer, founded by Russian oligarchs Yuri Zhukov and Kirill Pisarev (and still run by Pisarev).

Like Soros and the Rothschilds, Ukrainian oligarch Pinchuk works with and partners with a number of Russian oligarchs. And his YES summits regularly feature Putin-allied Russian oligarchs, as well as Putin-appointed Russian politicians and apparatchiks. Alfa Bank, Russia’s largest private bank, for example, is a YES sponsor. And Alfa Bank chairman, Mikhail Fridman, a Putin ally and one of Russia’s richest billionaires, sits on the CFR’s International Advisory Board and provided the funds to create the CFR’s “Russia and Russian-American Relations Lecture” program. Similarly, Rinat Akhmetov, Ukraine’s richest oligarch, a former Putin-Yanukovych supporter and ally, is now a member of the new government. He is also, along with Fridman and Soros, a YES sponsor and a business partner with Russian, EU and U.S. Insiders. What these and dozens of other similar examples indicate is that there is much more to all of the Sturm und Drang over the Ukraine-Russia-EU “crisis” than meets the eye.

Soros gave a strong clue as to what the scripted outcome of the scenario would likely be. His solution would see Russia as a “partner,” and Angela Merkel (the “former” Communist from East Germany who now runs the unified Germany) would be the broker.

“Germany should take the lead,” Soros said, in his February 26 Project Syndicate column cited above. “Chancellor Angela Merkel must reach out to President Vladimir Putin to ensure that Russia is a partner, not an opponent, in the Ukrainian renaissance.”

Putin as Prod for “Convergence”

Merkel appears to be doing just the opposite, threatening Putin with sanctions, including freezing of Russian bank accounts and restrictions on travel in the EU, unless Putin “deescalates” the situation and comes to the bargaining table. But, in reality, she is “reaching out” to Putin, and he, after providing what is deemed an appropriate level of drama, will likely come to the table and deescalate. Contrary to Russia’s current bellicose posturing, it is in the Kremlin’s interests to offload Ukraine onto the taxpayers of the EU and the United States, and it fits perfectly with their long-term strategy of “convergence” with the EU and the United States.

Anatoliy Golitsyn, arguably the most important KGB defector to escape to the West, exposed the top-secret Soviet convergence strategy in his books New Lies for Old and The Perestroika Deception. (See herehere, and here.) Mikhail Gorbachev was making oblique reference to the ongoing reality of the convergence process when he described the EU as “the new European Soviet.” As in the transmutation described in Orwell’s Animal Farm, when it became almost impossible to tell the pigs from the men, it is now becoming all but impossible to detect any substantive differences between the ruling elites of Russia, China, the EU, and the United States. And, as the EU and the United States adopt more socialist policies and police-state measures, there is less and less distinction between our societies and the one ruled over by Putin and his Kremlin cronies.”

Electronic Police States – Top Twenty Five

Cryptohippie, which seems to support Wikileaks and Assange, came out with its third and last global ranking for “electronic police-states” a few years ago.

I find Cryptohippie itself a bit “interesting.” Why did it issue only three rankings and why did the rankings stop in 2010?

There might be some innocuous reason for it, but these days it pays to subject everything to close scrutiny.

If the powers-that-be wanted to “warn” the population via a respected NGO, it would not be a “threat” but a public service, right?

In any case, Cryptohippie divides the world into black, red, orange, yellow, and green zones, in descending order of control.

Black indicates total control and only North Korea fell into that territory in 2010 .

The red zone (advanced police states) included the US, UK, Russia, China, and Europe.

India, Australia, and Canada fell into the orange zone (fast developing police states).

The yellow zone (laggards) included parts of Europe and Mexico. The green zone (relatively free but some control) included Brazil and parts of Europe and Asia.

India came in at 26 in 2010.

1. North Korea

2. China

3. Belarus

4. Russia

5. USA

6. UK

7. France

8. Israel

9. Singapore

10. Germany

11. Ireland

12. Malaysia

13. Netherlands

14. Italy

15. S. Korea

16. Australia

17. Belgium

18. Spain

19. Austria

20. Ukraine


22. Switzerland

23. Japan

24. Norway

25. Canada


Margaret Newsham: Echelon Whistle-blower, Hero

I’ve blogged before about Margaret Newsham, who was dismissed in 1984 (30 years ago) from Lockheed Martin, where she was working on the Echelon global espionage system, a project kept secret even from the US government, since it was completely unconstitutional.  In other words, it was a project of the corporate overlords of the government and the intelligence services, a product of the “shadow state” as it were, not of the day-light government.

While Mr. Greenwald and Mr. Snowden and Mr. Napolitano hold forth with no mention of thirty years of whistle-blowers,  I would like to salute Margaret Newsham, for her enormous personal sacrifices for the sake of the truth and the common good. Here is an excerpt from a 1999 interview she gave to a Danish newspaper:

From “I sold my life to Big Brother”:

” The government didn’t really know what was happening or what the many billions were actually being used for. And I felt very loyal both to the government and to the American Constitution, which was constantly being infringed. The world of espionage was also called ‘The Black World’ because most of the operations were carried out in secrecy, beyond any control.”

Since her dismissal, Margaret Newsham has been under heavy pressure, because her case against Lockheed Martin could mean that an open court case would shed light on the NSA’s ‘black projects’. Among other things, the case deals with swindling for more than 10 billion DKK (ca. 1.4 billion USD), and for the time being, her lawyer has provided her with legal assistance that is the equivalent of 140 million DKK (ca. 20 million USD).

PREMATURE DEATHS The case has had a fatal effect on her health. Since ’84 she has had seizure that left her  totally paralyzed, survived a cardiac arrest, and on top of everything else is suffering from cancer. Today, she lives on borrowed time and suffers from high blood pressure.

“It didn’t help any when my husband asked for a divorce after I had survived my cardiac arrest. He is chief of security at Lockheed Martin and has also been under a lot of pressure. He was grossly harassed because of his affiliation with me,” Newsham says.

She lives alone now and has struggled to maintain contact with her three children and six grandchildren. Today, she lives in a quiet Las Vegas suburb. Not even her neighbors know about her past.

“NSA’s activities have not only affected me, but also my former espionage colleagues at Lockheed. Nearly half of the people I worked with on clandestine projects are either dead or mortally ill today. For example, my former boss on the Echelon project, Robert Looper, died prematurely of heart failure, and Kay Nickerson, who worked on developing the Stealth bomber, died of brain damage.”

Pro-life advocacy is “torture,” claims feminist NGO

The American Center for Law and Justice reports that women’s rights NGO’s are trying to claim that the pro-life position falls under the rubric of torture:

To be clear, the effort by the Center for Reproductive Rights clearly and explicitly targets the church’s rights to free speech and religious liberty. Here’s an excerpt from its recommendations to the Committee:


Note that the Holy See has negatively interfered with states’ attempts to develop legislation on abortion that would have served to better protect women from torture or ill-treatment. Note that the Holy See’s actions are a violation of Articles 1, 2, and 16 of the Convention against Torture and that the rights of freedom of speech and of religion extend only so far as they do not undermine women’s reproductive rights, including the right to be free from torture or ill-treatment. “(Emphasis added.)


This is an astonishing statement, one that clearly targets the Catholic Church’s pro-life advocacy, equating it with state-sanctioned “torture or ill-treatment” of women and girls. By equating advocacy with torture, the Committee could begin an international legal process that would cause the U.N. to review statements or actions by pro-life public officials as “torture” within the meaning of the Convention. Radical pro-abortion groups would file amicus briefs citing new international legal standards equating pro-life advocacy with torture, thus claiming such advocacy is beyond the protection of the First Amendment.”


Official dissent: Teaching the serfs how to obey

Oh Tarzie at the Rancid Honey-Trap, points out what still isn’t clear to many people:

People don’t get on the major media unless  their “dissent” is useful to the powers-that-be.

If  they really threatened the power-structure, they wouldn’t be anywhere on the networks.

A cone of silence would descend. They would suddenly find themselves in some fringe area of the net, ignored by the right people and overlooked by the rest.

Read what happened when liberal commentator Chris Hayes timidly criticized the overuse of the word, “hero.” He correctly noted that it  encouraged  jingoism and militarism…and then he swiftly recanted:

Let me spell it out: Someone in some high place finds Hayes useful. If and when he’s no longer useful, he’ll be purged. There was a very public reminder to this effect in May when, on a Memorial Day program, Hayes expressed ambivalence about the word “hero”, because it is “so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war.”

Even though Hayes offered this tepid remark in a segment rich with militarist schmaltz, right wing pundits and veterans groups pounced. The next day, Hayes issued a revolting apology which went above and beyond the normal requirements of atonement, complete with the far right-wing suggestion that civilians can’t really speak with authority on military matters……”


Hayes’ apology was completely uncalled for, for two reasons:

One. The military is intended, constitutionally, to be under the civilian command.
Two. Civilians have often been more militaristic than the military.

So why did Hayes grovel?

Tarzie explains:

“Public capitulation rituals of this kind aren’t just a part of heat vampire liberalism; they are, in fact, its very essence. This is basically what DeBoer’s Marx/Daschle formulation describes: a clear eyed, even radical, assessment of all that’s wrong in the world coexisting with acquiescence in oligarch-approved methods for putting things right, no matter how often and resoundingly these methods fail.

So constituted, heat vampire liberals act as role models for the rest of us, reconciling things that aren’t logically reconcilable, successfully wrestling themselves into compliance with status quo fundamentals while bemoaning the particulars.”

That’s why it’s imperative to call out “official dissenters.”
I know it looks churlish: Aren’t there much worthier targets than Mr. Hayes, who makes so many apt criticisms of  war and the police-state?

No, no, a thousand times no.

There’s no hope at all of real public outrage so long as  “domesticated outrage” flourishes without embarrassment.
Hayes and Greenwald and Snowden and Assange and the rest   aren’t simply co-opted. They are actively “instructing” the rest of us in compliance. They are conscious conduits for the “second-level” brain-washing that faces anyone who extricates himself from  the”first-level” brainwashing of the masses.

Flagolatry Then and Now

Third-World Traveler has an excerpt from “Hoax,” by Nicholas Von Hoffman

(Nation Books, 2004).

Flag Waving

Flagolatry , or the excessive or demented reverence for the national symbol, has its innocent roots in the first lines of the National Anthem. Then things began to get out of hand. Respect for the flag commenced to become flagolatry, part of the degraded and antic patriotism which distorts what, in saner hands, are decent and praiseworthy feelings for one’s country. That country was hardly born before people started running Old Glory up the flag pole with a vengeance.

Some flag waving is good, a lot of flag waving is tolerable, incessant flag waving is crazy and dangerous and easily manipulated by the war party to get people bubbling at the mouth in fear and rage.

… when flagalotry takes over the landscape, as it has in the last generation, it says something about people who dwell in that country. Not only does every unpaid-for, overly-mortgaged house in the United States boast its own copy of Old Glory, but so does every SUV, every truck, every truck stop, the side of every barn.

I suppose that the purpose of flag display is inspirational, but taken together with allegiance-pledging and such, its effect is stifling, confining, and intimidating. It was used for the same purpose in the months leading up to America’s entry into World War I. An electric sign was strung across New York City’s 5th Avenue in 1916 flashing the orders for “Absolute and Unqualified Loyalty to Our Country.” In a society of lapel pin flags and standing to attention and red, white, and bluing, the uninterruptedly repeated message is don’t talk, listen up, and get ready to rumble.

ADL releases global anti-Semitism poll

Abraham Foxman of the ADL has released his Global 100 poll of world-wide anti-Semitism.

The poll assessed the reaction of people to the following statements. Agreeing with 6 or more of the following makes one an anti-Semite.


1) Jews are more loyal to Israel than to [this country/the countries they live in].
2) Jews have too much power in the business world.
3) Jews have too much power in international
financial markets.
4) Jews
don’t care about what happens to anyone but their own kind.
5) Jews have too much control over global affairs.
6) People hate Jews because of the way Jews behave.
7) Jews think they are better than other people.
8) Jews have too much control over the United States government.
9) Jews have too much control over the global media.
10) Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust.
11) Jews are responsible for most of the world’s wars.

According to the results, 1.09 billion people in the world, about 26%percent of its entire population, harbor anti-Semitic beliefs.

The highest scores were in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), which registered 74%.

This was followed by Eastern Europe 34%.

Then comes Western Europe at 24%.

Sub-Saharan Africa is at 23%.

Asia is at 22%.

The Americas are at 19%.

Oceania is at 14%.

The highest non-MENA score was found in Greece – 69%
Iran held the highest MENA score – 56%.

I don’t know what conclusions Mr. Foxman draws from all this, but here are my thoughts:

The areas with the highest levels of anti-Semitism – Greece, MENA, Eastern Europe, are also ones where either the communists or the global financial industry, has had a significant negative impact.

This is not intended as hate speech. I’m just looking for logical causes for the existence of such a wide-spread feeling, since I don’t really believe in a spontaneous eruption of irrational hatred toward one group of people for no other cause but their religion or ethnicity.

To believe in such “motiveless malignance” would require me to ascribe a mysterious and non-human quality to Jewishness, which sounds a lot like real anti-Semitism to me.

Besides, if motiveless malignance is everywhere, why is so little of it in the US?

But so it is. America has less anti-Semitic feeling than anywhere else.

It follows that humanitarian anti-anti-Semitic libertarians should be aiming their sermons about anti-Semitism at some other region of the world than the USA – perhaps at the Ukraine?

But they aren’t, are they?

Instead, it seems that the Humanitarian libertarians are making common cause with the anti-Semites in the Ukraine.

Now why is that, I wonder. Could it be that “anti-anti-Semitism” is not about anti-Semitism at all?

If so, what is it really about?

Website corrects error in post of 2011 piece,  a site supporting the Palestinian cause, reprinted  a piece I posted at Veterans Today in 2011, the deleted chapter from my first book.

It uses language and holds positions that I do not, although of course I endorse its support for the Palestinians and its exposes of extreme Zionism.

Unfortunately, someone has added several lines to the original piece, to make me endorse a certain interpretation of the events of 9-11, bolstered by the context of the site,

It’s a delicate matter, because in a time of repression of serious dissent and forceful speech, I don’t want to distance myself to make myself  “look good” at someone else’s expense.

But my positions are different and it’s just as wrong to allow distortions of my position to replicate themselves, whether intentionally or not.

I hadn’t seen the post before and just noticed it when I clicked on one of the images popping up on top of a Google search of my name.

I wrote to the editors to correct it and they seem to have, which was very nice of them.

I much appreciate the courtesy.

Here’s my comment, which they didn’t publish:

Lila Rajiva says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
May 18, 2014 at 5:31 pm


I notice that you have published a piece of mine and altered my writing, without my permission.

I did not write these lines:

“I am posting them here at Veterans Today to be read in conjunction with Jonathan Azaziah’s “9-11: Israel’s Grand Deception.”

They have been inserted by someone at your site, perhaps accidentally, as you can see from the original link.

To clarify, I stopped posting at Veterans Today, because I did not agree with the writing of several of the people posting there, including some whom I consider war-criminals, as I have stated on my blog.

I also do not equate Kashmir as an issue with Palestine, nor am I in favor of general economic sanctions against Israel, as I have also repeatedly stated on my blog, since I am against general economic sanctions against any nation.

Targeted boycotts are a different matter.

I appreciate your sympathy for the Palestinians and criticisms of extreme Zionism, but I believe that you are unwittingly misrepresenting my position by adding those lines.

I would much appreciate a correction and removal of those lines.

Thank you very much.

Lila Rajiva



Malum in se: Do not comply with “secular sharia”

Anthony Esolen writing on the degree to which a Christian must submit to the law or the state.

He calls the law secular sharia.

But really sharia would be much better, because, in sharia law I would at least find a governing authority whose thinking I respected.

Islam is not my religion, but I understand and respect its demands. The pornocracy I hold in utter contempt.

“For Thomas, as opposed to Augustine, the state is not simply a necessary evil, something we have to endure because we are sinners who would otherwise pitch ourselves into bloodshed and riot.  When man uses right reason to order his affairs on earth, he is actually participating in God’s providential governing of the world.  Now that, I think, is a fruitful position to take.  It does render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, granting to the secular powers a legitimate sphere of action, while subordinating that action to the common good.  And, since the common good is a human good, it cannot be conceived apart from what makes man good in himself; so the ultimate object of the lawgiver, says Thomas, is to make his subjects good.  That does not mean blessed; he cannot take one tiny step towards accomplishing that.  But he can encourage them, by law and example and custom, to become more temperate, braver, wiser, and more just.  It is a noble calling, which the lawgiver cannot fulfill unless he acknowledges the limits of his rights.  That is, Caesar receives what is Caesar’s due, when Caesar acknowledges that God must receive God’s due…..

…Them’s fighting words now — or I wish they were.  But what do you do when the state does not know what it is and what it is for, and flattens the legitimate societies beneath it, including the family?  Well, Thomas gives us two ways in which laws may be unjust.  The first way is divided, as is typical of the medieval summa, into three subordinate ways: the law may be unjust because the wrong authority has enacted it (which may be the case in California, though I have heard arguments defending the judge’s interpretation of the foolish law), because it was enacted with no thought for the common good (for instance, as when a tyrant or a tyrannical faction uses public means for private ends), or because it distributes rewards and burdens inequitably (as when the publican takes half of the middle class contractor’s next dollar). 

The second way a law may be unjust is if it commands what is malum in se, evil in itself. For instance, a law that overrides the natural right of parents to educate their children is demanding, of its enforcers, actions that are evil in themselves.  Or a law that would require all citizens to expose their children to pornography — say, the popular bit of pornoganda, Angels in America, now returning to public schools in Illinois; that too would be evil in itself.  Such laws, says Thomas, are not laws at all; they do not have the character of lex — meaning that which justly binds the conscience.  They are violences, he says.”

The political use of “anti-Semitism” in the Ukraine

Tablet Magazine:

“It’s use the Jew day in Ukraine—again. For millennia, treatment of a country’s Jews has served as the canary in the coal mine, and now the canary is tweeting all over the American and Israeli media. According to reports, a leaflet, now basically debunked and yet still inspiring fury all over Twitter, was handed out in Donetsk, the heavily Russian-speaking town in Eastern Ukraine, instructing Jews to register with authorities.

According to Ynet, the flier read as follows:

“Dear Ukraine citizens of Jewish nationality, due to the fact that the leaders of the Jewish community of Ukraine supported Bendery Junta [Stepan Bandera] and oppose the pro-Slavic People’s Republic of Donetsk, (the interim government) has decided that all citizens of Jewish descent, over 16 years of age and residing within the republic’s territory are required to report to the Commissioner for Nationalities in the Donetsk Regional Administration building and register.”

The media response was predictable. USA Today, the Jerusalem Post, and others were quick to proclaim “Jews ordered to register in Ukraine!” cleverly omitting one important question: By whom? The word “Jews” is even trending on Twitter.

The flyer is both real, and not. It’s important to see this in the context of how the Jews have been used from the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine: as fodder for the provocation machine. Indeed, Julia Ioffe at The New Republic reached out to the Donetsk Jewish community, who dismissed the flier as an attempt by Western Ukrainians to delegitimize the pro-Russian sentiment in the Eastern part of the country, just as the Russians used accusations of anti-Semitism to delegitimize the Maidan revolutionaries.

As Ioffe puts it, “This may be just another tactic to smear the so-called anti-Maidan in the east of Ukraine: you think we’re fascists? Well, take a look at these guys.” The Jews of Ukraine are not registering.”

40% of acid-attack victims are men

A Voice for Men overturns the feminist claim that acid-attacks are gender-based violence (a claim that I, unfortunately, once trusted):

“On another acid survivors website from Cambodia they have numbers from 1999 – 2013. There numbers show that 40% of the adult victims were adult males, 44.8% were adult females, 7.3% were male children under the age of 13 and 8% were females under the age of 13.

Despite about 40% of the acid attack victims being male acid survivors foundation true to feminist form states:

“Acid violence is a form of gender based violence that reflects and perpetuates the inequality of women in society.”

And helping that lie spread was boosted by COMBATING ACID VIOLENCE IN BANGLADESH, INDIA, AND CAMBODIA

This is subtitled as:

Report by the Avon Global Center for Women and Justice at Cornell
Law School, the Committee on International Human Rights of the New
York City Bar Association, the Cornell Law School International Human
Rights Clinic, and the Virtue Foundation

Notice the list of organizations who are helping promote this heinous lie that acid attacks is gender violence? All of them owe a duty of care to us, society to be honest but hey their feminists so that duty of care is tossed in the manure pile. Too bad their reports aren’t there too, where they belong.
Here is what these alleged groups wrote when describing acid attacks;

“Acid violence is gender-based violence that reflects and perpetuates the
inequality of women in society and as such is prohibited by international law

I call BULLSHIT. There is a about a 10% difference between the sexes in acid attacks. That is not gender based violence. Even if we include the children the percentage of men only drops down to just over 35% that is still not gender based violence.

And what about the criminals inflicting incredible human suffering you ask. Well it is not just men who are tossing acid on women:

Woman throws acid on sister-in-law over land dispute

Two women accused of plotting an acid attack that left a local woman disfigured have been found guilty

Just like every other feminist claim of gender-based violence this one too is a half truth. Omitting the male population from the awareness campaigns is the standard operating procedure of feminism.

To reference my compatriot, Robert St. Estephe again, please note: neither historically nor in modern times have acid attacks been something “men to do women.” It’s something people do to each other, in various times and places. If you doubt there’s anything weird or unusual about women using acid as a weapon, in addition to Robert’s other article (referenced above) see Three New York “Acid Queens” of 1901.

I’ve said it earlier in this article and I’ll say it again:

The feminist claim that acid attacks is gender violence is BULLSHIT.”



“Mystery of the sudden surge in acid attacks on men by women,” Kerry Mcqueeney Daily Mail, UK, May 10, 2012

Acid attacks on men related to gang violence, say experts,” Ruth Evans, BBC,  November 9, 2013

As Partners for Law in Development notes in a paper on the subject, acid-attack legislation needs to be framed gender-neutrally, so that the increasing number of male victims and female perpetrators will be included in its provisions.

Birth-Control Fatwas & Oops Factors

denver colorado skyline

Zahir Ebrahim, author of The Poor Man’s Guide to Modernity, brings up a problem in the comment section to my previous post.

I reproduce it here as a separate post, because it’s something that has stumped me, as well.

Briefly: How to get in front of false-flags, red herrings, and black ops before they unfold, or, at least, how to derail them after they’ve begun?

How indeed.

Bloggers and activists who write as things unfold are quietly censored through Internet filtering and monitoring, (eg. Google). and content manipulation (eg. Wikipedia).

Or, we are dismissed as “conspiracy theorists” by the mandarins of the mainstream media, because we cannot reach into our pockets and come up at once with documents in triplicate with signed confessions from the Mossad and CIA to prove our claims.

Of course, some forty years hence, some appointed mouthpiece will, at tax-payer expense,  force open the requisite dusty archive where half-redacted memos, still greasy with guilt, will give the game away.

Masks will briefly slip from Olympian profiles, but until then…..

….even if activists do get heard, the media prince-lings who deign to respond, choose their place and time in ways that leave us bloodied and the issues even more bedraggled.

During the ruckus that ensues, the false-flag or black operation unfolds with the panache of an Augustan comedy….except that to those of us in the peanut-gallery it is tragedy.

That is how, as Zahir Ebrahim writes, no less than the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran fell victim to the Malthusian disinformation of the banking cartel:

Iran under Ayatollah Khomeini introduced Birth Control through a fatwa (I haven’t seen the fatwa myself, only read or heard about it), as the population of Iran had almost doubled from the time of the Shah by the time of this fatwa in the late 1980s.

Well in the 2000s (I do not recall the year), the successor Ayatollah had to issue a new Fatwa encouraging families to have more children and not less children.

According to the understanding given to me on this topic, the first fatwa on birth-control had been issued because of the fears of over-population and Iran not being able to feed itself under the Malthusian construct.

(Not obvious how this fear was implanted in Iran under the Ayatollah, for he was always most wary of the Western agenda. But then again, he also fell victim to it in uncontrollably waging the eight-year war against Iraq — a war that was foisted by the West upon both the peoples of Iran and Iraq equally, and not just Iran alone ,which the people of Iran always tend to forget.)

Anyway, After the birth rate among the Shia Muslims declined drastically, while the minority Sunni Muslims (aprox. 20% of Iranians) had ignored the fatwa and had concentrated on having more and more children (Sunni Muslims do not accept Fatwas from Shia theologians, and vice versa), the demographics of Iran suddenly started to change. T

The Sunni strategy, I imagine both intellectually and financially supported from somewhere, was to come to key positions of power in Iran through the change in demographic. All legal, nothing subversive about it. In fact, it is the method that Palestinians have been employing to overwhelm their Israeli conquerors these past six decades. A most effective strategy!

This strategy, and the declining birth-rate among the middle class in the Shia households, woke up the Iranian government to the folly of the previous “ill-conceived” and “flawed” fatwa.

Now the impetus in Iran is to encourage more children — but not unsurprisingly, the next generation of the middle class and upper middle class, those whose parents or themselves grew up under the directive of the first fatwa, don’t seem to be energetically inclined towards having more children. Career paths dominate in Iran as much as they do in the West. A more detailed study of this is of course necessary. This is just the anecdotal version.

What this shows me however, is that “oops” cannot always be avoided — we are all human. But surely, as you put it: “that the ultimate source of such laws is an ideology crafted with MALEVOLENT intent by the foundation-funded think-tanks and research institutes.” can always be recognized and interdicted. No?

Provided of course that the government machinery, its media, and its intellectuals, are not already co-opted into either silence, acquiescence, or actually putting down their signatures to their own enslavement.

This is the real problem facing both India, Pakistan, and South East Asia. How to overcome our “asininity” which continually leads us to “oops” ex post facto?

Google’s “Hummingbird”: IP Theft & Mind-Control

Google’s new search algorithm Hummingbird adds to the company’s sinister reputation among privacy advocates.

Google’s creepy Google Glass didn’t help it either.

Now comes Hummingbird, the biggest algorithm change in the search engine in twelve years.

“Hummingbird should better focus on the meaning behind the words,” Sullivan reports. “It may better understand the actual location of your home, if you’ve shared that with Google. It might understand that ‘place’ means you want a brick-and-mortar store. It might get that ‘iPhone 5s’ is a particular type of electronic device carried by certain stores. Knowing all these meanings may help Google go beyond just finding pages with matching words.”

(Hummingbird is Google’s biggest algorithm change in 12 years,” WebProNews,  Sept. 28, 2013)

Simply put, Hummingbird is about Google trying to find the holistic meaning behind the individual words of a search-string (the query or series of words you input into the search function),  or, in the case of websites, the overall intent behind the key-words most used.

Bottom-line: Google is trying to figure out what’s going on in your mind when you type out certain words.

That is terribly similar to an area of research dear to the defense and spy agencies – predictive software and technology.

For instance,  DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) is very interested in developing the cognitive footprints of users for identification purposes.

The goal is to bypass the need for passwords, which tend to be cumbersome for users and vulnerable to password-cracking, phishing, social-engineering, memory failures, and hardware theft.

Software biometric modalities” are to be used to develop what it terms Active Authentication.

Anyone can see how useful the new Hummingbird algorithm would be to DARPA.

Indeed, given Google’s prior collaboration with the CIA in the monitoring of social media, it wouldn’t be surprising if Hummingbird has also come out of a joint project with the government.

The defense agencies come up with the technology to figure out what random “bad guys” are up to. Google monetizes it and returns the favor by data-sharing with the government.

The consumer might have his every need…indeed wish…met, but web-users are now going to find that Google’s “free lunch:” is not only not free, it’s not remotely cheap.

And web users are the ones footing the bill.

Here’s how.

“Google Hummingbird: Where no search has gone before,” Jeremy Hull, iProspect, Wired, October 15, 2013

Google has updated its search algorithm many times over the past few years, but previous updates were focused on making Google better at gathering information — for example, indexing websites more often and identifying spammy content. Hummingbird is focused on the user. It’s about Google getting better at understanding what searchers really want and providing them with better answers.”

That’s Google’s stated objective, of course. But how about websites?

When you search Google for answers to questions, what website owners want is for you to go to their site to get the information.

This is not only because they might hope to sell you something and thereby earn a living.

It’s also because they hope that by giving you good information not available in the mainstream media,  they might attract you to their site and persuade you on other issues.

By offering free information, web writers hope you will find them reliable, credible, or interesting and become committed readers. That’s why millions of writers and websites, spend inordinate amounts of energy and time finding answers and giving them away to others for free.

Of course, ethics and decency demand that readers who benefit from that information cite the place they found it and give the author credit.

Not Hummingbird.

It harvests information from the net and puts it on Information cards that pop up in answer to searches.

Now, if the information is immediately given to the reader by Google, why will they visit the websites from which Google might have culled the answer?

They won’t.  That means that Google is not only stealing the private data of its users through Gmail, Google Earth, and a bunch of other programs, it’s also stealing from the websites it’s supposed to be helping.

But “Hummingbird” is not just unfriendly to websites offering information to the public, it acts to control what information is presented to you and how.

Hummingbird’s graphic is an easy way for Google to give you what Google (and very likely, the government) want you to know, rather than what you might learn if you delved into your search results yourself.

The new graphic could even give you downright misleading or inaccurate information. Just think about Snopes, the ostensibly myth-busting site that somehow manages to bust myths only in left-liberal ways.

So, Hummingbird is not only using your personal information for Google’s own commercial (and the government’s surveillance) purposes, it’s using information from blogs/websites, without their permission, for its own operations.

That’s two counts of IP theft.

Then, the whole business of trying to determine exactly what you’re thinking when you type certain things into the search function sounds awfully like mind-reading to me. In order to do that kind of mind-reading, all sorts of personal information from your web usage (even more than Google has been collecting so far) has to be collated and compared. Mapped, if you will.

That’s two counts of privacy invasion.

Finally, by manipulating access to the knowledge available on the Internet, under the guise of consumer satisfaction, by giving you pre-packaged answers before it gives you your search results, Google is actually  trying to control your thinking.

That’s one count of mind-control.

Is it any surprise that the new algorithm shares its name with DARPA’s nano flying robot/drone Hummingbird, which beats its wings like a bird?.

DARPA’s Hummingbird is a spy drone:

“The drone, built by AeroVironment with funding from DARPA, is able to fly forwards, backwards, and sideways, as well as rotate clockwise and counterclockwise. Not only does the ‘bot resemble its avian inspiration in size (it’s only slightly larger than a hummingbird, with a 6.5-inch wingspan and a weight of 19 grams), it also looks impressively like a hummingbird in flight.

But that’s not vanity — it’s key to the drone’s use as a spy device, as it can perch near its subject without alerting it.”

Google’s Hummingbird seems no less innocuous and no less insidious.

It’s more evil-doing from the Franken-SearchEngine that routinely spies for the NSA and CIA and systematically  commits Intellectual Property theft.

Read more at Entrepreneur .com

“Ex-Pentagon” Analyst Made “Devyani Durga” Video


SHOCKER: Ex-Pentagon analyst behind a urination-and-rape video of Bin Laden, as well as the “Durga” video of Khobragade’s arrest.

“Early on in the Khobragade story, a video representation of the arrest of Devyani Khobragade appeared on the net. It was later removed.

The video was an animation of the arrest, in which, as in pictures in later news reports, Khobragade kept turning into a multi-armed figure reminiscent of the Goddess Durga/Kali:

“The one-and-a-half-minute spoof has been posted by a group called “Next Media Animation TV. And though not everyone will be amused by the fact that the sari-clad Khobragade keeps turning into a Goddess Kali-like entity, the idea seems essentially to tell the basic story of the row wittily. Subtitles include one that goes “US not sari”.

Next Media Animation is an animation company in Taiwan. It is run by a former Pentagon analyst, Mark Simon from Virginia, which is the headquarters of  the US intelligence community and of the government-subsidized electronic snooping industry. [See below.]

Next Media Animation is a subsidiary of Next Media, a Hong Kong-based media conglomerate that creates humorous animations of news events.

Next Media  is the creation of serial entrepreneur and devout  Catholic Jimmy Lai and it’s the largest media group in Hong Kong.

While Lai might be Catholic, one cannot assume Mark Simon – who runs Next Animation – is.

So, the “Durga” video need not be read as a display of personal religious animosity toward a “pagan, polytheistic” religion.

The video might just have been a clumsy attempt to use religious symbolism for political purposes.

Jimmy Lai is known as the “Rupert Murdoch of Asia” and is responsible for bringing in a flashy, tabloid-style of media into Asia. (Added: Jan 20, 2014)

Lai owns the biggest media operation in Hong-Kong.

Lai is highly critical of the Chinese government for its human-rights violations and lack of democracy, which has got wide coverage in Western mainstream outlets, like the BBC.

Also see this flattering Asia Week report of Lai, the maverick, republished at CNN.

(Added: Jan 21, 2014)

Lai has been targeted, reportedly, because of his political outspokenness.

Lai’s position on China seems close to the position of the US State Dept.

The Catholic Lai  has worked with Cardinal Joseph Zen in a campaign against the Beijing government’s attempt to replace Hong-Kong’s free educational system with organizing committees in each school.

The new government committees will replace the educational institutions (including the Catholic church) that now run the schools.

In China, there is a “legal” Catholic church that toes the official Marxist line on abortion, among other things, and there is also an “illegal” church that doesn’t and therefore suffers persecution and suppression.

Jimmy Lai seems to be an outlet for CIA disinformation and psyops.

NEWS REPORT: A Pentagon defense analyst runs Lai’s pro-democracy efforts


“Lai had made donations of nearly $8 million over five years to pro-democracy groups and individuals — and that [Mark] Simon, as head of his private office, handled the payments.”


“Simon, who spends most of his time in Taiwan, where he runs Next Media’s animation unit, dismissed the whole affair as a “sloppy farce.”

NEWS REPORT: A New York Times interview with Lai mentions a video made by Next Media Animation that showed Osama Bin Laden being urinated on and raped in hell.  Lai says the video was an “accident” by young employees


New Links Added Will Be Dated In Red On The Side When Needed

I have corrected whatever was blocking comments  (I think)

Image from Wikipedia of Goddess Durga.



What was the significance of several news reports on the Khobragade story showing an Indian woman with multiple arms on the posters of domestic workers protesting the treatment of Khobragade’ maid?

The female icon with multiple arms in Hinduism is the goddess Durga, who represents the Divine Female (feminine energy) or Shakti.

[This the Hindu equivalent of Shekhinah in Judaism.]

Shakti is the consort of Shiva, the third person of the Divine Trinity in the Hindu pantheon.

Durga is the motherly form of the Divine Feminine, while the fierce form of the Divine Feminine is Kali.

Early on in the Khobragade story, a video representation of the arrest appeared on the net. It was later removed.

The video was an animation of the arrest, in which, as in the news reports, Khobragade kept turning into a multi-armed figure reminiscent of the Goddess Kali:

“The one-and-a-half-minute spoof has been posted by a group called “Next Media Animation TV. And though not everyone will be amused by the fact that the sari-clad Khobragade keeps turning into a Goddess Kali-like entity, the idea seems essentially to tell the basic story of the row wittily. Subtitles include one that goes “US not sari”.

Next Media Animation is an animation company in Taiwan.

It is run by a former Pentagon analyst, Mark Simon, from Virginia, headquarters of US intelligence and of the government-subsidized electronic snooping industry. [See below.]

It is a subsidiary of Next Media, a Hong Kong- based media conglomerate that creates humorous animations of news events.

Next media is the creation of serial entrepreneur Jimmy Lai and it is the largest media group in Hong Kong.

Jimmy Lai is known as the “Rupert Murdoch of Asia” for bringing in a flashy, tabloid-style of media into Asia. (Added: Jan 20, 2014)

Lai owns the biggest media operation in Hong-Kong.

Lai is highly critical of the Chinese government for its human-rights violations and lack of democracy, which has got wide coverage in propaganda outlets, like the BBC. (Added: Jan 21, 2014)

He has been targeted because of this, it is reported.

Lai’s position on China seems close to the position of the US State Dept. A further nexus between Lai and the West is the Catholic church. Lai is said to be a devout Catholic.

Durga is not only a significant icon in the Hindu pantheon, she has also been used to represent the nation of India, more specifically,  PM Indira Gandhi, who was famously painted as Durga in a portrait by a Muslim artist.

Indira Gandhi was in charge of Operation Blue-Star, to put down Sikh militancy in 1984. She was later assassinated by one of her own guards, a Sikh, in retaliation for Blue-Star.

The quadruple significance of Durga (as representing feminine energy, Hinduism as such, the Indian nation, and Mrs Gandhi) suggests the Devyani episode was a carefully planned operation, not a random event.  It also suggests the political motivations at work.


Jimmy Lai seems to be an outlet for CIA disinformation and psyops.

NEWS REPORT: A Pentagon defense analyst headed Lai’s pro-democracy activism


“Lai had made donations of nearly $8 million over five years to pro-democracy groups and individuals — and that [Mark] Simon, as head of his private office, handled the payments.”


“Simon, who spends most of his time in Taiwan, where he runs Next Media’s animation unit, dismissed the whole affair as a “sloppy farce.”

NEWS REPORT: This interview with Lai in the New York Times mentions a video made by Next Media that showed Osama Bin Laden being urinated on and raped in hell.  Lai says the video was an “accident” by young employees.


1. The Federal Reserve Cartel: The Eight Families, Global Research, June 1, 2011

2. The Invisible House of Rothschild

Assistant Secretary of State, Uzra Zey, who seems to be the chief architect of Nanny-Gate, has been very critical of Chinese human rights. (Added: Jan 20, 2014)

Imagery reminiscent of Kali/Durga also shows up in photographs of domestic workers groups protesting the treatment of the diplomat’s maid in New York City. The photos were repeatedly run in news reports.

The news photos of the groups showed them carrying pictures of a woman with multiple arms:

#StandwithSangeeta Rally for justice for Domestic Workers

Stand With Sangeeta Rally For Justice For Domestic Workers

(Added: Jan 20, 2014)

The superimposition of images of Kali/Durga on the  story of a “slave-nanny” suggests a demonstration along the lines of the “Pussy Riot” demonstrations in Russia, which have been  reported to be a CIA operation. (Added: Jan 21, 2014)

Conspiracy by the US State Department, NGOs, and US Embassy in India

(Durga Riot and Sikh Spring for India?)

The Indian nanny-gate conspiracy is the latest episode in the US State Department’s  machinations in India.

Those machinations are apparently entailed by the Asian Pivot strategy enunciated by US President Barack Obama in 2011, to use the Indian sub-continent to contain China and project US power in Asia.

As part of this strategy, senior members of the US State Dept are reported to have orchestrated a case against a senior Indian diplomat to high-light the US-UN Anti-Trafficking agenda.

This was done over several months in 2013, in co-ordination with the highly publicized global Modern Slavery campaign promoted by the Corporate/CIA/NGO  establishment, along with labor unions (AFL-CIO) and philanthropic foundations, like Walk Free, the creation of an Australian billionaire.

Anti-trafficking and modern slavery are intended to provide the “humanitarian” case for UN intervention into a country.

For that reason, it’s important to remember who represents the US in the UN.

The US Ambassador to the UN is Samantha Power, a noted proponent of humanitarian intervention who is married to Cass Sunstein, Obama’s information czar.

Sunstein is infamous for advocating “cognitive infiltration” into dissident groups.

Samantha Power was directly lobbied by Freedom Network (anti-trafficking NGO) to support the anti-trafficking agenda early on in the Khobragade story (see below).

All this is obvious.

What is less obvious is that Nanny-gate seems to have been orchestrated in coordination with (or in connivance with) a radical Sikh separatist (Khalistani) group that has been pushing Sikh-genocide claims against the Indian government in the US, UK, and Canada.

These genocide claims have been pushed most strongly by the group, Sikhs For Justice, based in New York.

In Nanny-gate, an analysis of the time-line of events (see below) suggests that Sikhs For Justice was acting in concert with the US court system in New York and with the NGO behind the nanny, Safe-Horizon, also based in New York.

The time-line buttresses the argument that the Devyani Khobragade strip-search was a planned event in the unfolding drama of a Color Revolution in India.

Color Revolutions use propaganda, covert (black) operations, espionage, provocations, and human-rights claims to destabilize and undermine/destroy national sovereignty to precipitate the balkanization of a region.

Examples of assault on Indian sovereignty:

Item: The custodial rape on in December, 2013, of a senior Indian diplomat, formerly consul to Pakistan, is in gross breach of the Vienna Convention.

Item: The T3 trafficking visa granted to Sangeeta Richard and her family, circumvented the Indian judiciary, which had a non-bailable warrant out for her arrest for extortion and theft. The exfiltration of Philip Richard and their two children from India was also illegal under international and Indian law. Both actions also violated US law.

Item: The recent case (January 2014) of alleged rape, in which the Danish victim is planning to use a Danish medical examination, even though Delhi police have found no evidence of rape.

This seems to be part of an ongoing UN-sponsored “Rape Crisis” hysteria in Delhi.


Events are being orchestrated to build a public case of India as a “failed state” lacking sovereignty, de facto and thus de jure.


Close association of Bharara, maid’s law-firm, trade unions, human rights NGOs,  and Khalistani Sikh separatists


Dana Sussman, the lawyer for the maid, works for Kane Kessler, a New York corporate law firm.

Kane Kessler has represented the NY State Division of Human Rights in US Federal Court in the Southern District of New York.

Preetinder Singh (“Preet”) Bharara is the US Attorney for the Southern District of NY.

He is the son Dr. Jagdish S. Bharara, a Khatri (upper-caste Hindu of Kshatriya class) Sikh pediatrician in Asbury Park, New Jersey, and his Hindu wife, Desh.

Bharara’s wife is half-Jewish and half-Muslim. She is the daughter of a Pakistani doctor father and an Israeli mother, (Added: January 21, 2014).


“An intimate recalls that he was married not once but four times: first a Hindu ceremony, then a Sikh ceremony, then a Muslim ceremony, culminating in “the main event”—a Jewish ceremony.”

Preet Bharara’s brother Vineet (“Vinnie”) is also an attorney.

Vineet Bharara is Deputy Mayor at New York City Authority.

He owned, which he sold to Amazon for $540 million.

NEWS REPORT: Sikhs for Justice files suit against Congress over the killing of Sikhs in 1984 on May 30, 2011, in the Southern Dt of NY, where Bharara is the US attorney.


Dana Sussman/Kane Kessler teams up with Preet Bharara and with AFL-CIO in a case in November  2013

This is one more piece of evidence for the close affiliation of Bharara, the unions (AFL-CIO), and Human Rights NGOs

There are many other pieces.


Dana Sussman is affiliated with Safe-Horizon (the largest victims services group in the world) and Freedom Network, the national coalition of anti-trafficking NGOs in the US,

Leadership of both outfits is comprised of high-profile activists at the UN level and leading Rothschild-cartel banks and corporate heads

(See: Safe Horizon Board of Directors and Freedom Network Board Leadership Team)


The Sikh separatist (Khalistani) group, Sikhs For Justice, has aligned itself vehemently with the maid.

Sikhs For Justice is located in Ocean Town, New Jersey, part of greater Metropolitan New York.

350 5th Avenue North NY 10118                       Tel: 212-601-2707

It lists its activities as counseling and psychologists, not mentioning its radical, separatist agenda.

MARCH 2013

Sangeeta Richard tells Khobragade she wants to work outside the household in New York at a second job. As she is on an official passport which prevents her from working outside her present job, Khobragade denies the claim.

APRIL 2013

NEWS REPORT: “Pro-Khalistan Group’s Proximity to US Lawmakers Raises Concerns,” April 29,2013

A Khalistani (Sikh separatist) group black-listed by India has a secret meeting with US Congressmen, while shutting out pro-India Sikh groups.

MAY 2013

JUNE 2013

Sangeeta Richard leaves without notification sometime between June 21and 23 2013.  The Indian government revokes her passport with effect from June 22. K informs the Office of Foreign Missions (June 24) who tells her to file a report with the NYPD, which initially refuses, but on written request files a report on June 25 and then closes it, stating that Sangeeta was missing.

Sangeeta reportedly lives with strangers and a Sikh temple in New York. She later arrives at Safe Horizon, which puts her in touch with the State Dept.

JULY 2013

On July 1 Khobragade receives a threatening call from an anonymous female attorney asking for a change in visa status enabling Sangeeta to work outside the Indian mission and for compensation for 19 hours a week of work.Khobragade refuses to negotiate and asks for the person’s identity, which is refused.

The call is reported to the NY Police Dpt and the Office of Foreign Missions a request is made to trace the call on July 2. On July 5, a complaint is made to the NYPD of aggravated harassment, involving extortion and blackmail.

Indian officials inform the US Embassy in India and the State Dept in DC.

On July 8,  Khobragade and several consular officials meet Sangeeta at the offices of Access Immigration, where Sangeeta asks for $10,0000, for her official passport to be changed to a personal one, and for a change in visa status allowing her to work in the market.  Indian officials tell her compensation will be payed before she leaves, but she has to return to India since her passport has been canceled.

There is an altercation and Access calls the police, which escorts Sangeeta away.

On Jul 19, Sangeeta’s husband Richard, a driver in the Mozambique embassy, files a petition in Delhi court alleging that the Indian govt has held his wife in police custody and that she has been enslaved in New York. He claims that Uttam Khobragade has threatened him with dire consequences should complain.

The petition is withdrawn 4 days later.



The US State Department writes to the Indian Ambassador to investigate the Richard case; asks for proof of minimum wages paid. Sept 4, 2013.

NEWS REPORT: SIKHS FOR JUSTICE files a class-action suit in NY Federal Court against the Congress and Akali Dal, Sept 5, 2013 .

SFJ accuses Congress of protecting those guilty of extra-judicial killings in 1984. A summons is issued to Sonia Gandhi when she lands in NY for medical treatment.

On Sept 10, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs lodges a strong protest at the tone of the US letter.

Khobragade files for anticipatory anti-suit injunction in Delhi HC on Sept 20, 2013

On Sept 21, the Indian Embassy explains to the State Dept that Sangeeta is trying to subvert laws in both countries.



On November 19, 2013, a non-bailable warrant for the arrest of Sangeeta Richard is issued by the Indian High Court in Delhi and notice of the warrant is sent to the US Embassy and to the US State Dept with a request for her arrest.

NEWS REPORT: SIKHS FOR JUSTICE files “Sikh Genocide 1984″ with UN Human Rights Commission, Nov 19, 2013


Warrant forwarded to US Embassy in Delhi, December 6, 2013

NEWS REPORT: SIKHS FOR JUSTICE attends “Genocide and Sovereignty” Conference in Canada and determine to pursue genocide motion before Canada in 2014, Dec 7, 2013

Sangeeta and Philip Richard scheduled to appear in Indian Court on Dec 9, 2013

Philip Richard and his two children are “evacuated” from India to US on December 10, 2013

NEWS REPORT: The Indian Supreme Court reinstates a colonial-era ban that criminalizes homosexuality, although no one has ever been prosecuted under it.

Several members of the US embassy in India have homo-sexual partners.

Under USC Title 28, Sec. 1746, criminal charges of visa fraud (maximum of 10 years in jail) and perjury (maximum of 5 years) are filed against Khobragade by the US State Dept Bureau of Diplomatic Security on Dec 11, 2013 and a US Magistrate judge issues an arrest warrant.

Officers of the Diplomatic Security Services arrest Khobragade on criminal charges on Dec. 12, 2013 at 9.30 AM  after she drops of her children at school in Manhattan. She is taken to the courthouse at noon.

Female agents of the US Marshals conduct a strip-search in private (including cavity inspection but not probe) that is recorded on camera for security.

She was repeatedly DNA swabbed and “held with prostitutes and drug-addicts” according to her account.

She was produced hand-cuffed before a magistrate at 4 PM and released on a $250,000 recognizance bail on the same day, Dec. 12.

On December 20, a number of rights groups protested against the alleged treatment of Sangeeta Richard in front of the Indian Embassy in New York.

The protesters included Safe-Horizon (whose attorney Dana Sussman was representing Richard), the National Domestic Worker’s Alliance, Damayan Migrant Workers Association, the National Guestworker Alliance, and the National Domestic Workers’Alliance. Also present was the Break the Chain campaign.

The Democratic Youth Federation of India, a left-wing group, protested Khobragade’s arrest in Chennai, outside the US consulate on Dec 20.

Communist Party of India members scuffled with police in New Delhi in protest near the American center on the same day.

Earlier in the week Congress party members protested as well.

NOTE: All the protests were by left-wing or communist groups, both in India and in the US, for or against Khobragade.

US-based Sikh rights group to hold Justice Rally supporting Sangeeta Richard,  Dec 29, 2013

Pro-Khalistani group Sikhs For Justice publicly stand with Sangeeta Richard, after DK’s arrest.

US says visa fraud charges against Khobragade will not be dropped. Dec. 30, 2013


On January 8, Khobragade is granted a G1 visa giving her full diplomatic immunity.

On January 9,  a US grand jury indicted her on two counts of visa fraud and perjury. India was requested, and refused, to waive immunity and she left the country.

On Jan. 10, Indian expels Wayne May, the chief of the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (in charge of 424 security officers, marines, police officers, and agents, including CIA) in New Delhi, for conniving in the flight of Philip Richard and his two children from India on a T-3 trafficking visa, in violation of the Indian high court order, and in violation of Indian tax laws. May’s wife, a community officer, has posted racially charged and offensive remarks about India on Facebook.

Sikhs for Justice urges Kerry to suspend India from the domestic visa program, Jan 10, 2014

Sikhs For Justice, a pro-Khalistani group based in NY, wants Indian govt condemned for acting against national sovereignty, January 15, 2014

In response to recent reports about British MI6 and SAS assistance in the Indian raid on the Golden Temple in 1984, Sikhs For Justice wants a public condemnation of the Indian government for its violation of the nation’s sovereignty.

(Lila: You can see where this is going).

NOTE Sangeeta Richard was looked after by a Sikh temple in New York

Quote: “From that moment on, Sangeeta Richard relied on the kindness of strangers within the Indian community in New York City, and even was looked after at one point by a Sikh temple.”

Here is a list of Gurudwaras – Sikh temples – in New York.

Background Information linking Mossad/CIA/ ISI to Sikh terrorism

1.Revived Khalistani movement (behind assassination attempt on General Brar) is strong and well-funded in Anglophone countries

2. Revived Khalistani movement is supported by ISI in Pakistan

3. Mossad/ADL Created Sikh Terrorism

Note:- Mossad also created LTTE and abetted Afro-Dalit movement.

Planned divide-and-conquer strategy?

North and South India  incited to fight in a nuclear war to the advantage of other actors?

There are reports of the creation of a second Israeli state in the areas bordering Myanmar (former Burma) – Mizoram, Manipur, and Nagaland.(Added: Jan. 20, 2014)


“Many people suspect a complicit understanding between Christian missionaries (majority of them are from the US, and most of them are not innocent propagators of Christianity but linked to the worldview of Bush as shown by Vijay Prasad (“Eastward, evangelical soldiers!” Frontline, 12-25 February 2005) and the on-going drive to identify many tribes in Mizoram and Manipur as “Jews” (which has been earlier reported in the Mili Gazette”

The Indian-Jewish community (like Beni Israel) and Mossad act with Parsis, Sikh separatists, Tamil militants, and other disaffected groups.

Added: Jan. 20, 2014 Hillary Clinton has been discussing foreign policy with Chief Minister Jayalalitha of the South Indian state, Tamil Nadu, as though it were a national government.

The Rothschild cartel is using the Tamil Eelam issue to create a foot-hold in Sri Lanka, while demonizing Lankans as genociders of Tamils.

The Tamil Nadu chief minister Jayalalitha is bending over backwards for the Vatican and Mossad/Israel.


1. The illegality of the grant of the T-3 Visa to Sangeeta Richard

A T-3 visa is only granted for trafficking crimes, not for labor exploitation. There were never any trafficking charges brought against Khobragade, despite the media’s hype and propaganda.

2. The evacuation of the Richard family comprised multiple violations and frauds committed on the Indian legal system, US law, and international law.

The “evacuation” of  Sangeeta’s husband, Philip Richard, and their two children from India while there was an outstanding non-bailable warrant for the arrest on extortion and theft charges of both Sangeeta and Philip, was a direct obstruction of justice and in contempt of the Indian court that issued the warrant.

The flight also constituted an act of trafficking under international and US law and an act of visa fraud under US law.  The tickets for the Richard family were purchased fraudulently, under Indian tax law.

3. Under Section 3, Article 41 of the Vienna Convention 1963, the US arrest and strip-search was illegal

“If criminal proceedings are instituted against a consular officer, he must appear before the competent authorities. Nevertheless, the proceedings shall be conducted with the respect due to him by reason of his official position and, except in the case specified in paragraph 1 of this Article, in a manner which will hamper the exercise of consular functions as little as possible.”

4. The strip-search was also in violation of the US Marshals standards for the treatment of foreign diplomats:

IT IS IMPORTANT THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT and judicial authorities of the United States always treat foreign diplomatic and consular personnel with respect and with due regard for the privileges and immunities to which they are entitled under international law. Any failure to do so has the potential of casting doubt on the commitment of the United States to carry out its international obligations or of negatively influencing larger foreign policy interests. As stated above, however, appropriate caution should not become a total “hands off ’ attitude in connection with criminal law enforcement actions involving diplomats (p.16).

5. Under the Vienna Convention the US has no jurisdiction over Khobragade’s labor contract with another Indian citizen in her household on an India government passport:

“Consular officers and consular employees and members of their families forming part of their households shall be exempt from all obligations under the laws and regulations of the receiving State in regard to the registration of aliens and residence permits.”

6. US Bureau of Diplomatic Security agent Mark J. Smith misread the visa application form that is alleged to be fraudulent.

The sum $4500 was not the maid’s intended/required salary, as the major media repeatedly stated. It approximates the diplomat’s salary but is in excess of her official salary.

(Added: Jan 23, 2014)

7. Sangeeta Richard, not Khobragade, filled out and signed the visa application and was party to both written contracts as well as to the oral contract.  She was educated, literate, and had multiple close family ties with the very agent in charge of anti-trafficking (the Bureau of Diplomatic Security Chief Wayne May, who employed her in-laws), so she cannot plead ignorance or coercion.

8. ISAACBROCK SOCIETY: Khobragade Guilty Only of “Form Crime” created by sociopathic bureaucrats (Added: Jan 20, 2014)


1. The US has claimed diplomatic immunity for acts of murder and maiming, with no compensation to the victim

2. The US claimed immunity for sexual abuse, solicitation of a minor, sex tapes, forced abortions, rape, slavery, murder,

3. The US claims international law rules when its diplomats are at fault under local laws.

AN INDIANS VIEW-POINT: Letter to an Indian Nanny in New York from the Do-Gooders Foundation in New York City (Added on 1/20/14)


1. John Kerry admitted to agreeing to the arrest of Khobragade, Dept of State Briefing, Dec. 18, 2013

2. Senior officials kept in loop, January 19, 2014

Reports show that all senior US embassy officials in Delhi were secretly involved in the illegal “evacuation” of Sangeeta Richard and her family.

The purchase of tickets was made by Mrs. May to avoid public perception of direct embassy involvement in the operation.

3.  Richard family flight drawn up by nexus of  US diplomats

Indian intelligence (Intelligence Bureau) has unearthed a huge ring of  US diplomats misusing diplomatic privilege to conspire together and to interfere in the internal matters of the Indian state, a violation of the Vienna Convention, 1963.

Richard was a government employee, like Khobragade, on a government passport.  She was subject to a non-bailable warrant issued by an Indian court for extortion and theft.

Her exfiltration amounted to subversion of the Indian judiciary by the US Embassy.

That would violate both Indian law and the Vienna Convention governing diplomatic relations, 1963.

The conspiracy to spirit out Richard included the following senior US embassy officials who all employed Richard’s immediate family (mother-in-law and father-in-law) over a period of at least 10 years:

1. Timothy Haley (Counsellor,  Regional Security Office) and his wife Joyce Haley (Consular Section) worked in Delhi from 2011 onward

2. Current Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, Uzra Zeya in Washington (former deputy ex secy to former Secy of States Condie Rice and Hillary Clinton, Counselor in Delhi from 2009-11

3. Wayne  May (Chief of Diplomatic Bureau of Security) and Alicia May (community liaison) in Delhi. Wayne May has publicly stated his belief in an over-arching global terror threat called Al Qaeda and on the need for a pro-active response to it. (Added: Jan 21, 2014)

READ wife Alicia May’s anti-Indian/Hindu remarks on Facebook: “Vegetarians are rapists.”

IB (Intelligence Bureau) also found that Richard’s in-laws had worked ten years ago for the following diplomat:

4. Geoffrey R. Pyatt, US Ambassador to Ukraine, when he was posted in Delhi from 2002-2007 as  Minister Counselor.


“According to officials, after her (Lila: Urza Zeya’s) deputation to the US embassy in Delhi, Zeya served as Chief of Staff to Deputy Secretary William Burns. She also worked as Executive Secretary, US State Department’s Accountability Review Board probing the September 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi.

However, a US committee on foreign affairs in a meeting in May 2013 had raised suspicion over Zeya’s role in the Benghazi probe after she allegedly shielded Burns and Hillary Clinton from being summoned by the ARB for questioning about the attack. But, the incident is said to have given her career a major boost and she was appointed acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor on March 2013.

“Zeya allegedly played a major role in converting the entire low wages controversy into a human trafficking issue”


Pyatt advised K.V. Rajan (member of PM Manmohan Singh’s National Security Advisory Board to feed anti-Iran views into Indian Government

When WikiLeaks published State Department cables, Pyatt became embroiled in controversy because of a May 4, 2007, cable he sent recommending that K.V. Rajan, a secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs and a member of the Prime Minister’s National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) visit Washington DC in order to help “feed” U.S. government views on Iran into the Indian system.”



Uzra Zeya’s Bihari roots (Uzra Zeya is a Muslim of Pakistani origin)


Uzra Zeya advised by India’s Consul in Afghanistan:- India’s strategic interest in Afghanistan clash with Pakistan’s interests. (Wikileaks Cable)

Pakistan wants no Indian role in Afghanistan. Zeya apparently supports Pakistan’s position.


India’s Consul in Pakistan was Devyani Khobragade from 2007-2010.


“She didn’t have a problem in Islamabad where you would expect to face challenges. This (the row) happened in a country supposed to be a strategic partner,” the official said.


1. Zeya’s cover-up for Hillary Clinton on the Benghazi Accountability Review Board

2. Benghazi: Background on Hillary Clinton’s Handpicked Accountability Review Board: Unanswered Questions


“Former CIA Officer Clare Lopez has characterized US Activities in Benghazi as “gun running”…

Background: “America’s Great Game: The CIA;’s Secret Arabists and the Shaping of the Modern Middle East,” Hugh Wilford, Basic Books, Dec 3, 2013




2. Billionaire NGO Invests In Human Misery


A political commentator Carry Roberts who exposed several frauds masterminded by US NGOs wrote in ‘Renewamerica’ that “victims of battering are in short supply these days. So when no victim is known to exist, the solution is obvious: fabricate one.”

“Like other abuse shelters, Safe Horizon makes a grand show of being perpetually hard-up for cash…..But how many would-be donors know Safe Horizon resembles Citicorp or Bank of America, far more than a grass-roots organisation dedicated to providing succour to persons down on their luck?” Roberts wrote, adding that Safe Horizon rakes in nearly $56 million every year and pays skyscraper salaries that would put many bail-out bank executives to shame.

NOTE: Anti-trafficking NGO Freedom Network Chief was liaising with media in Assam, Andhra, Bengal and urging purchase of anti-trafficking software to be shared with US intelligence

LETTER: Freedom Network Applauds Arrest of Diplomat To UN Ambassador Samantha Power, Dec. 17, 2013


1. Richard claimed she was underpaid and over-worked and that she worked for less than $1 an hour.

But boarding, travel, food, utilities, electronics, and beauty-parlor bills paid by the Indian diplomat added up to over $2000/mth.

2.  Richard claimed she was forcibly prevented from traveling.

Richard claimed that she asked to go back to India and was denied.


“When I decided to come to the United States, my hope was to work for a few years to support my family and then return to India.

[Lila: The claim is contradicted by her own mother-in-law, as well as by her own extortionist demands made on the premises of the firm, Access International, in the presence of several witnesses.

Richard demanded to have her passport and visa changed so she could stay on and work in the US]

(Added: Jan 23, 2014)

Richard also claimed that she had no time to sleep or eat or relax.

“I never thought that things would get so bad here, that I would work so much that I did not have time to sleep or eat or have time to myself.”

[Lila: This claim is contradicted by her request in March-April to work outside the house-hold of Khobragade to make money. That request is also corroborated by Richard’s later request for a visa/passport change and her subsequent refusal to return to India. The passport/visa change and refusal to return are confirmed by witnesses at Access International.]


“Because of this treatment, I requested that I return to India but that request was denied,” Richard said in a short, cryptic statement that largely served to glorify Safe Horizon’s role in the episode than throw any great light on her differences with the diplomat and how it widened.

[Lila: The govt. of India canceled Richard’s official passport when she absconded from the Khobragade household, so her” request to return” is a bogus claim. Richard was obliged to return. It was because she didn’t want to return to India that she trumped up a trafficking case against her employer. At least, that is how the evidence looks to me.]

From Sangeeta’s own diary:

“The whole family is very nice. I don’t feel that I am their domestic help. The children call me ‘tai’ (aunt). Madam is also quite nice and keeps smiling all the time. Sir is quite sensible. He takes care of things so it gives me a lot of free time.”



Bharara’s bogus charge against Khobragade that she confiscated the maid’s passport

Sangeeta Richard’s BLUE (personal) Indian passport became invalid once she had traded it in for her WHITE (official) passport.

The WHITE (official) passport was revoked by the Indian Government as soon as Sangeeta stopped working for Khobragade.

That was a Government of India action. It was not an action taken by Khobragade.

Meanwhile, Preet Bharara charged 49 Russian diplomats with Medicaid fraud and yet let them go, claiming they had diplomatic immunity. Actually,  some of them only had consular immunity, like Khobragade, and, furthermore, were junior to her.

Still further, Russian President Vladimir Putin banned Bharara from entering Russia for “biased and politically motivated” prosecution of its citizens.

Compare that to the tame response of the Indian government, a response that was nonetheless excoriated and ridiculed in the Indian press.

(Added: Jan 20, 2014)



Draupadi Disrobed: India Strip-Searched By US…..

Draupadi disrobed in the Mahabharat

Credit for image of Draupadi vastraharan to

“When the US tows away a Russian diplomat’ car in Washington for a parking violation, six US diplomatic cars disappear in Moscow. The Russian car then magically appears with apology.

That is the type of diplomacy we need.”

This was a comment I saw posted at the Indian news site,, below an article on the unequal “relationship” between the US and  India, as evidenced in the Devyani Khobragade case.

India is claiming “victory” …….even though a senior female diplomat still faces indictment and a possible 10 year sentence and was strip-searched and cavity-inspected, for an allegation over what amounts to a routine visa issue.

Meanwhile, not even a criminal case was registered against Wayne May (the State Dept Security chief in New Delhi who is behind the whole affair.

May was guilty of subversion of the Indian judiciary, actual trafficking, and tax and visa fraud.

Further clarification of  a canard being circulated that Khobragade was lying.

Devyani Khobragade says she was strip-searched, DNA swabbed, and cavity-searched, multiple times.

The US Marshals deny that she was cavity-searched but admit she underwent a standard procedure strip-search.

So who is telling the truth? Devyani or the Marshals?

BOTH. There is just a confusion of terms.

Under US law today (ratified by Supreme Court in a 2012 case), arrests are accompanied by strip-searches.

1 The standard procedure of a strip-search

This is what the US Marshals admitted happened.

It involves the removal of all clothes and examination of all bodily cavities, including mouth, nose, ears, eyes, genitals and rectum.

It involves “baring of the labia.” That can be done multiple times.

It includes DNA swabbing and recording (for security purposes).

As we now know, the US has a vast espionage and surveillance network and nearly all sensitive nodes of telecom and electronic communication are monitored centrally.


These images can then be transferred to private corporations, working with the United States Government (and Israel.

Israel has complete access via backdoors in the electronic equipment as well as more directly).

Corporation working with the spy agencies and with the USG include Facebook, Microsoft,  Google, Digg, Verizon, Brighthouse and many many more.

There is immense  potential here for black-mail against a political figure like Khobragade, from a political family tied to the Dalit vote-bank (voting power of the lower caste/untouchable community), a prize for both Congress and the BJP.

Indeed, we don’t know that black-mail has not ALREADY occurred behind closed doors.

Extortion of the Khobragade family would mean extortion of the Ministry of External Affairs (foreign office of New Delhi), in which Uttam Khobragade, Devyani’s father, has power.

The MEA and the US Embassy in New Delhi were at logger-heads for some time before this episode

“Jail Strip Searches: The light at the end of the tunnel was not a train,” Gary W. De Land, Directors of Jail Operations, Utah’s Sheriff’s Association gives a detailed history of the litigation over strip-searches as well as the often confused terminology, from the perspective of someone in favor of more wide-spread use of strip-searches.  His description of the standard strip-search, including visual inspection of cavities (which he terms relatively useless since the cavities cannot actually be seen)

“The early strip search cases created a bit of confusion over what a strip search is. Part of that confusion was use of the term “body cavity search” or “visual body cavity search.”

The terms seem to imply searches actually probe or look inside of the rectum or vagina which was not the case.

The body-cavity searches were those where the male was required to lift his genitals for visual inspection to see if contraband was being hidden and bending or squatting to allow visual inspection of the anus (an external inspection). For females, prisoners were required to bend and spread their buttocks and/or squat to permit an visual inspection of the external genitalia and anus.

The Supreme Court commented on the different and confusing meanings that have been applied in various cases to “strip searches.”

The term is imprecise. It may refer simply to the instruction to remove clothing while an officer observes from a distance of, say, five feet or more; it may mean a visual inspection from a closer, more uncomfortable distance; it may include directing detainees to shake their heads or to run their hands through their hair to dislodge what might be hidden there; or it may involve instructions to raise arms, to display foot insteps, to expose the back of the ears, to move or spread the buttocks or genital areas, or to cough in a squatting position.

The impact of the Florence ruling is that the term “strip search” now covers each of the different levels of intrusion listed above. Since the so-called visual body-cavity searches are permitted without reasonable suspicion, then certainly the less intrusive strip searches are also authorized. It is now appropriate for jail officials to simply refer to levels levels of unclothed searches as strip searches.”

B. The procedure called a “cavity search”

Devyani mistakenly used this term, when she should have used the term “cavity inspection.”

That is understandable since in India, BOTH procedures would be considered custodial rape.

Cavity search (probe)  involves digital probing of the cavities (insertion of fingers or fists into rectums or vaginas).

This is literally sodomizing of an innocent person, on mere charges or suspicion.

“Probing” did NOT happen, which is why the US Marshals are denying the story.

Devyani used the wrong term, but she is not lying, just using the wrong terminology.

The standard inspection of the cavities would in fact be brutal and demeaning enough on its own.

The US apparently misjudged how people would react and then tried to muddy the affair by flooding the media with allegations and statements from the US prosecutor and the alleged victim.

In effect, this is a way to try the case in the media and cover up their own outrageous position.

The hoax video that was released on the net, showing the gang-rape of  Devyani, was apparently intended to muddy the story.

Perhaps that was so as to make it appear that the reaction was a misplaced reaction to exaggerated reports.

My first book “Language of Empire” dealt with such “hoaxes” and the problems they create.

Notice, as well, that almost immediately after the Facebook statements of the May surfaced, how another “gang-rape” allegation has surfaced from Delhi, this time by a Danish woman.

Yet, the police did not find any injuries consistent with a gang-rape and she refused to undergo a medical examination in Delhi.

She is using medical evidence from Denmark to press her case.

This is an extraordinary case from the point of view of setting precedents, because it means that the Delhi police might from now on be sued based on evidence cooked up abroad and concocted for political purposes.

Now, we see the political motivation behind the drum-beat about a “rape crisis” in Delhi

even while the rate of rape in the UK, for example, is ten time that in India, and although India is not to be found in the top ten countries for high rape rates, while the US, the UK, New Zealand, Sweden, and Belgium all are.

Read about the 25 signs of the Nazification of the US police-state.

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


Madsen seems to be behind The Rancid Honey Trap on this


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.

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

“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:


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

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

Assange & Anonymous: Sock-Puppet Rebels..

Willy Loman has an impassioned plea to forget the “dissent-chiefs” and official revolutionaries on the left (Greenwald, Ellsberg, Hedges, Cole, Chomsky, Goodman, Assange, Anonymous etc.) and on the right (Ron Paul, Alex Jones, Doug Casey, etc.).

Take what’s good in them, but go beyond.

They are reliable on past conspiracies.  Don’t believe them on present ones, unless confirmed by your own analysis. (Hint: If they support Assange and Anonymous, or keep pointing to the approved activists, think twice).

Light your own fire. Think your own thoughts.

And, follow the facts, not the leader.

Willy Loman::

The rolling psyop known as Julian Assange is not done with us just yet.

After serving as the CIA’s front-man for the distribution of phony intel for a couple years (and getting paid well for it) and then living like a king in an English mansion under “house arrest” for 500 days (while the patsy Bradley Manning is in lock down 24/7), now Julian is getting his very own interview based TV show…….

..Julian Assange lives with a globalist billionaire in the heart of the new imperialist England and he’s going to tell us 99%ers what we should be doing and which “politicians, revolutionaries, intellectuals, artists and visionaries” we should trust and follow.

Anyone else see an inherent problem with that?

With yet another economic collapse just off the horizon and the Occupy Spring taking shape and the entire European continent rioting, you don’t think steering the boiling over dissident movement would be something that the CIA, NSA, and the State Department would be interested in, do you?

If a psyop gets any more obvious than Julian Assange, I haven’t seen it……..

Unfortunately as you know there will be those on the dissident left and right who buy into this shit, believe it or not. Let’s see how our old friend Glenn Greenwald writes about it.

“A WikiLeaks press release states, “‘The World Tomorrow’ is a collection of twelve interviews featuring an eclectic range of guests, who are stamping their mark on the future: politicians, revolutionaries, intellectuals, artists and visionaries. The world’s last five years have been marked by an unrelenting series of economic crises and political upheavals. But they have also given rise to the eruption of revolutionary ferment in the Middle East and to the emergence of new protest movements in the Euro-American world. In Julian’s words, the aim of the show is ‘to capture and present some of this revolutionary spirit to a global audience.’””  RT

[Lila: This is exactly what this Peter Dale Scott article at Lew Rockwell is about. It too lists the activists you should pay attention to.  That’s just what prizes are intended to do – focus your eyes on what the globalists want you to focus on. That is how revolution has been co-opted from the start of scientific state propaganda.]

“Does anyone remember how much we trusted al Jazeera English after their great coverage of the Egyptian protests? Anyone getting the feeling that Russia Today is headed down the same path AJ took right after they earned our trust?

The RT article announcing this weekly psyop is hinting that the proven NSA asset “Anonymous” may be one of his first interviews.

The guest list has not been revealed, but it has been hinted that the first guest will be someone controversial. A tweet from the WikiLeaks account asks provocatively, “Any bets on who The World Tomorrow’s first mystery guest(s) are?” It then adds the hashtag “#ExpectAssange” — a play on the Anonymous slogan, “Expect us.” RT

“For those of you who don’t understand how these games are played, I’ll give you an example. If a law enforcement agency wants to get a new man on the inside of an organization, say a mob organization, what they do is they have someone who is already on the inside vouch for him. Someone with “street cred” so to speak. This is the same thing they do when trying to influence movements of different types.

Take for instance the Truth Movement (or what’s left of it). You have a fake “truther” named Jon Gold. His idea of the “truth” of 9/11 is whatever George Bush and Dick Cheney told us… plus.. “foreknowledge”… well, foreknowledge minus insider trading which he doesn’t think took place. Well, you have that guy (which no real Truth advocate believes for a second) write a book and then you get Sibel Edmunds of Boiling Frogs to stand beside him claiming he is the real deal. Then Gold promotes Sibel’s LIHOPy book and BINGO… you have the APPEARANCE of a consensus in the hijacked movement.

See how that works? One fake vouches for another fake. Jon and Sibel = Julian and “Anonymous”

[Lila: To give Sibel Edmonds credit, she is a lot more credible to me than the others. She is after all a brave person and a whistle-blower who has called out a lot of the lazy activism of another very well-heeled, “comfortable” group, Antiwar. Edmonds seems to be reliable until she gets to 9/11 and she falls silent about Hank Greenberg, as do most Republican activists. But other than that, I don’t feel she belongs in this group. I feel she’s been forced to join them.]

In the world of organized crime, this kind of game can be a bit dangerous. In the world of crime fighting this can be very very dangerous. But in the world of dissident movements, what’s the risk? Remember that guy who was busted infiltrating that movement down in New Orleans? What happened to him? Nothing. He went on after he was exposed to start some new assignment and that was the end of it. What happened to Nurse Nariah (whatever her name was) or that guy who pretended to be the “Gay Girl from Damascus” or “Syrian Danny” once they were all exposed?

This is how they work.

Right now we are on the edge of a massive popular uprising and it just so happens that their two most successful psyops are about to go on one of the most respected news outlets left to us to tell us what to do.

Get it?

Assange himself says in the trailer for the show, “Today we’re on a quest for revolutionary ideas that can change the world tomorrow.” RT

oooooo…. Julian himself tells us what to do…. oh I can’t wait… and “Anonymous” will be there too? And it’s on RT? Well hell, that must be legit.

If you notice though, at the end of the RT article, they seem to be presenting a little disclaimer. Turns out RT didn’t produce this CIA/State Department psyop… some “independent” company out of London produced it. I wonder if it is owned by the same globalist billionaire who is letting Julian live in his mansion while under “house arrest”

“A press release for the show, however, emphasizes that it was put together by an independent UK producer and that RT is merely serving as the initial broadcaster. Negotiations are presently underway with other possible licensees, who might broadcast longer versions of the same interviews.” RT

Seems like RT is already making sure they can distance themselves from this psyop even before it launches it’s first installment……

John Young of Cryptome said years ago that he knew Assange and Wikileaks was a CIA honeypot from the start and he was correct.

Now they are trying to cash in on his “street cred”, street cred that was given (“given”.. not earned) him by the likes of Amy Goodman, Glenn Greenwald, and Daniel Ellsberg.If you still that that is a group of true dissidents, I can’t help you.

[Lila: So what does that make Peter Dale Scott who points to the dissent-chiefs?]

All I can say about this State Department infomercial is: Don’t believe it folks and don’t watch it.

Let them know via their own ratings tools that we can’t be fooled by their Disneyesque smoke and mirrors.

The PR and influence peddling institutions think they’re the real power behind this country and time and time again they’re proven wrong but they just keep plugging away telling themselves they are smarter than all of us. They’re not.

If you don’t take the hint from me, take a cue from the RT article… there’s a REASON they posted the disclaimer in their press announcement and the article about the show. RT is trying to tell you something. The reason is… it’s BULLSHIT.

Don’t watch the show. Tell others its bullshit. Make sure Julian and his NSA handlers get the rotten tomatoes ratings they deserve.

No more Syrian Danny no more Gay Girl no more Julian of the Mansion. We’ve outgrown it. We’re tired of the bullshit. That’s it.

This is going to be our revolution and NOTHING they do is going to hijack it.

Whomever he puts on that fraud of a show of his is suspect. Whoever is on that show of his is just as much of a fraud as he is.

We saw through Invisible Children and Kony 2012 in record time (less than a day I believe) and we will see.. through.. this.. too.

No prepackaged heroes, no ready-made leaders. It’s ham-handed and obvious and we are too tired and angry to fall for this shit.”

Paul-Lehrman Connection Meaningless, Says Daily Bell (Corrections Added)

Update: Subsequent to my posting this, the Agora disinfo agent/troll/paid basher Ryals reposts Amberger’s comments to him (rather than Amberger’s blog posts about Agora), simultaneously discrediting and neutralizing Amberger by an unsubstantiated smear (Nazi Stasi), just as he posts any substantial criticism of Agora, ALWAYS with slurs about the critics and always with OLD NEWS about Agora, usually attributing criminal behavior to the critics, for which he gives not a shred of proof.

His response fails to mention the people who really are responsible for Agora’s marketing and selling today – Myles Norin (CEO), Matthew Turner (counsel), Addison Wiggin (chief of Agora Financial, its flagship subsidiary, and also heavily involved in Oxford Group, Michael Masterson (Mark Ford), Byron King, Alexander Greene, Mike Ward, Julia Guth, and many others, whose border-line promotions were all deconstructed by Christoph Amberger. Instead, Ryals tries to discredit Amberger’s whistle-blowing. No question Ryals has some kind of tie to Agora.

To make things clearer, Agora is not solely Bonner’s company but owned by several people, some of whom no doubt have axes to grind with others. Bonner himself might have enemies within the company, for partisan, financial or personal reasons.

Notice how Ryals only focuses on the Republicans in the group, like Bonner, presumably Casey, and Robert Bauman, who specializes in the admirable field of asset protection. Now, unlike the state-worshipping fraud Ryals,  I would love to believe Bob Bauman is a really good asset protector (aka money-launderer), but, alas, if he is not what he seems (and I haven’t seen anything concrete to suggest that), he is much more likely to be an IRS/DOJ honey-pot, if I know how these things work.

That’s what I believe large parts of the  asset-protection racket really is about, when it’s not about espionage and government-related money-laundering.

That might include the over-hyped Simon Black, who also seems to be a part of the LRC-Agora crew and constantly tells people that Singapore is a great place for financial security, when anyone who even researches the matter in a skimpy way will figure out that Singapore is crawling with Mossad and CIA.

NWO resistance indeed.

Anyone boosting simplistic asset protection, or simplistic encryption like Tor (heavens!) is simply pushing people into US govt supervised encryption. But, then, maybe that’s the idea.


The Daily Bell argues that the Ron Paul-Lewis Lehrman connection is meaningless (links to follow):

“Worse, in our humble opinion, whenever such issues arise these days, the dissemblers come out in force to attack the world’s only apparently honest politician, US Congressman Ron Paul, for working with Lewis Lehrman.

It is true that when Ron Paul and Lewis Lehrman served (with many others) on a US Gold Commission during the Reagan years they wrote a minority report recommending a return to some sort of gold standard.

But Ron Paul certainly didn’t seek Lehrman out to write the report. He wrote it with Lehrman because Lehrman was on the committee. Ron Paul, of course, went on to call for a regime of competing currencies, which is something we’re partial to.”


This would be a whole lot more credible if  The Daily Bell itself didn’t call out people on just as tenuous evidence, in much more black and white terms than I have ever done.

It also doesn’t help that the Bell dismisses critics of Paul as dissemblers.


What’s wrong with criticizing a politician who’s set up as the sole spokesman for libertarian issues?

Why would anti-state capitalists focus on a politician as their spokesman, in the first place?

What sense does that make?

Especially, when just a few days ago, the Bell raised no objection at all, when, in an interview on their site, Gerald Celente claimed Paul was “not a fighter” and had failed because he was not a fighter.

If that is the opinion of Paul’s friends, isn’t it natural that people on the paper-money team or outside the binary altogether (like me) would reach even more devastating conclusions?

I don’t believe most Paul critics are dissembling. I think they are genuinely disappointed and suspicious. I am too.

Three. The Bell loses credibility when it claims Paul is the “only honest politician in the world.”

That’s pure hyperbole.

I’m sure the Daily Bell doesn’t know “all the politicians in the world.” And Paul isn’t perfectly clean. There was rampant nepotism during his campaign. There was the alleged double-billing. There were other mis-steps.

They might all be minor. And the Lehrman connection might be innocuous too, but it’s not the only troubling thing that comes to mind.

Which brings me to my fourth point.

Paul has a long-standing relationship via Murray Rothbard with Agora Inc. and its founder, James Dale Davidson, about which I blogged in July (the first person to pull that little nugget up, I do believe….although, as soon as I say that, I’m sure a dozen quicky sites will pop up with the same information on them).

This is a very troubling connection, in my opinion.

The Agora Inc. network has  ties to Rockefeller-related groups, like the Peterson Institute. I blogged about that in 2009, January.

Now, I myself have once cited research produced by the Peterson.

[It’s in my piece on Krugman, at LRC, and the researcher was Anders Aslund, who was one of the advocates of privatization in the Soviet Union. Aslund was wrong about that,  although not the only one wrong, and certainly not the main one.]

But I post research from all over the place, and that is not an endorsement of the authors’ other works or of the websites carrying the research.

Agora’s ties to the Peterson Institute, however, are a bit more relevant and important than my posting or quoting someone once, casually.

The I.O.U.S.A film (a spin-off from Agora’ “Empire of Debt,” Wiley, 2005) was promoted nationally by the Peterson Institute. Some of the positions Agora supports are consonant with Pete Peterson’s interests, although I do believe most people at Agora are anti-state libertarians, whereas Peterson is no more than a  crony capitalist.

This is what I wrote in my 2009 blog post  about the Peterson connection:

“Assembling this bipartisan group of prominent enablers/theorists of empire over the last twenty years lets IOUSA claim it goes beyond partisanship. In reality it does no such thing. Omitting a context for its arguments, the film actually lends itself to being interpreted in ways quite contradictory to the tenor of the original work. At times it even subverts the book thoroughly.

IOUSA lends itself to a very anti-libertarian, statist moralizing of the debt issue: thus, spendthrift population needs to be forced to save by government. Now that really alarms me. Watch out – forced savings accounts ahead!”

Agora also promotes things like “peak oil,” which I don’t find persuasive, being a long-time believer in the abiotic origin of oil.

These positions are  accompanied by promotions throughout its marketing network from which it stands to gain financially, either directly or indirectly.

That surely calls into question the credibility of the positions of anyone deeply connected to them.

Is Paul connected to them in a serious way?

{Added, August 25: Obviously, Agora has also supported anti-war positions that have not won it popularity, so I should give them credit for that and I do.

But I also recognize that the “anti-war” position has a place in the permissible range of public opinion, as long as on crucial issues and events  antiwar advocates develop laryngitis. This strategy, devised by the intelligence services, ensures that there is “cognitive diversity” among critics of war and the police state that gives the appearance of a “liberal” political culture, while actually permitting them little impact.  It siphons off the energy, time, money, and ambition of perhaps 95% of activists and effectively marginalizes the rest. Zahir Ebrahim has written extensively about this at his depressing but honest website, Project HumanBeingsFirst.]

Besides the tie-in to the establishment via Peterson/Rockefeller and besides the commercial imperative which undermines the sincerity of its positions, there are also Rothschild connections to Agora.

First, Rothschild interests are now directly connected to Rockefeller interests, by a recent merger (which I’ve blogged a couple of times).

Second, there are also direct connections between the Rothschilds and Agora.

I wasn’t sure about some of those, a couple of years ago.

In fact, I thought the allegation that Agora was a Rothschild front was only innuendo concocted at Executive Intelligence Review by ex-Larouchite, Bill Engdahl, who often doesn’t cite his sources and has once picked up leads from me without acknowledgement, likely because I come from the right

That’s why, even though I was disillusioned with Ron Paul by then, I didn’t place much stock in the Engdahl charge, especially when it was picked up on Jennifer Lake’s blog (see this blog post of March 10 2010) and then embellished with a lot of strange errors.  I felt the whole thing had to be some kind of disinformation. I certainly didn’t make any connection to Paul.  I thought it was a ploy to muddy more concrete legal issues. One can’t be prosecuted for being a Rothschild front, after all, but one can discredit one’s detractors by posing as one, since the whole Rothschild conspiracy is beyond the pale for mainstream analysts and writers. In fact, Lake’s silly comments, which I was forced to address because they libeled me, actually damaged the very thing she –  with typical arrogance – thought she was assisting – the public interest. In short, she forced me to state things that tipped off the very people she claimed I was covering for.

That’s why I even thought Agora itself was encouraging the story, a view shared by at least one other credible journalist. For the same reason, I suspect that Tony Ryals, the cyberbully behind all the negative postings about me, isn’t half as insane as he pretends to be. In fact, I think he has indirect ties to Agora himself, since he never mentions the people there who have actual legal responsibility there, like CEO Myles Norin, or their attorney, Matt Turner, or Agora Financial chief, Addison Wiggin, or some of their star traders, like Alan Knuckman.

[Sept 6 – this morning, I checked to find that Ryals’ posts referencing these comments of mine and thus referencing these individuals had been deleted or “disappeared.” Of course, just to make me a liar,  they might pop back. But it’s interesting that it’s impossible to stop Ryals’s libels, when it’s someone like me (or others, who aren’t in charge at Agora or whose crimes, if they committed any, are beyond the statute of limitations, but it’s easy enough to get him to remove comments about the people still there.]

Funnier still, Ryals never mentions a former senior employee, Christoph Amberger, whose blog about the company’s shenanigans (cons would be a better word from what I read) was shut down in 2011. Reportedly, this was after he was paid to keep his silence, that is, hold to a non-disclosure agreement under threat of litigation. All traces of his blog about the company’s marketing deceptions (GreenLaserReviews) were wiped off the net in a matter of days.

Instead of mentioning all this, Ryals, who even corresponded with Amberger (who smacked him down for the troll he is) waffles on about Davidson, who is safely beyond reach of prosecution, and, in any case, seems to have more than paid for any sins by his investigations into the Clinton mafia and his insights into the manipulation of the stock markets; Bonner, who probably has no legal liability, as he’s not an officer of the company, and is too wealthy, too cautious, too smart, and too well-connected to get into trouble anyway; and Stansberry, who is already damaged goods and unlikely to get hurt any worse by innuendo.

But leaving aside intriguing theories about the cyber-underworld in which Ryals and his rants reside, I’m still not sure what the Rothschild connections to Agora really amount to.  The best I can say is I’m much more willing to believe some people there profit from them.

Why did it take me so long to get to that point?

Because it’s only recently (over the last year) that I’ve had the time to dig around and find any kind of credible accounting of how the Rothschild family might be the financial juggernaut they are said to be on conspiracy sites.

[I got there by adding material posted at Project Humanbeingsfirst  to my own research into BCCI (via Engdahl, Skolnik, DeepBlackLies,,, LBMA website and other material.]

Now that I’ve come to think the whole “Rothschild” conspiracy  is something more than fiction, I’ve also begun to look at Ron Paul with a more critical eye.

So that’s where I come from on that.

Now, for my own credibility on the subject, given that I too have a connection to Agora.

This is what I have to say.

Except for the attacks following my pieces on Assange (by an attention-seeking Assange groupie, Tom Usher at RealLiberalChristian) and a legal threat at DailyBell by another fanboy and blatant troll, calling himself Al Kyder, and a couple of other things), one hundred percent of  the negative posts about me on the net stem from this one supposedly crazy person, who seems to have an indirect connection to Agora.

And all the rest of the monitoring/hacking I’ve experienced stem from my fall-out with Agora too.

What was the monitoring/hacking about? Simple.

In 2008, I gave whatever information I had  about certain sensitive issues to responsible journalists and investigators.

There you have it. That’s why their campaign against me didn’t end with the resolution of my IP issues with the company.  In fact,  it’s the reason why the IP issue keeps festering.

Who likes to be joined at the hip to someone who’s outed them? Who likes to know that someone knows what they are capable of?

That is why they are so bent on isolating me, stirring up third parties against me, and minimizing my influence in every way possible.

Since then, I’ve been warned by good people to “leave it alone” or possibly become even more of a target.  And that’s what I’ve tried to do, but it’s not because I’m interested in covering up anything for anyone.

It’s because I see no reason to second-guess the integrity, good faith, and sound judgment of what I’ve been told but take it as solid advice from people who know better than me. And  it’s because I believe more evil than good will come from ignoring that advice.

Especially as there’s another layer of complexity to this story.

Agora Inc. was also the last business association of former CIA director, William Colby, who  seemingly committed suicide some twenty years ago.

I say seemingly, because the suicide theory has been peddled only recently, and only by one of Colby’s sons. No one else believes it and there’s not much evidence for it.

Thus far, the official story has been  that it was an accident.

That sounds just as unlikely to me, as I blogged earlier.

Note: Ryals not only filched the Davidson-Chomsky-Rothbard connection from my blog (posted on July 20), as well as the information about Rees-Mogg’s and Colby’s Le Cercle and Pilgrim connections (which I got by discovering and researching the ISGP.EU site in detail),** he failed to link the post and then tried to pretend that I was covering up something about the Colby killing, when I’d  blogged about it as a murder, long ago, in 2010, and before that, in 2009. In fact, I’d been researching Mockingbird, MKUltra, mind-control, and sex-trauma as early as 2004, for my first book, where I have a couple of chapters on the material.

In 2005 I wrote a piece about former CIA director Stansfield Turner and Operation Gladio. It was around then that I also first heard about about Colby.

The fact that I ended up in the company where Colby once worked is one of those strange coincidences that “intention” pulls out of the universe.

And, far from covering up any of this, I’ve blogged repeatedly about it.

For instance, here’s my comment on an interview of Rees-Mogg there:

Posted by Lila Rajiva on 06/05/10 11:59 AM

Sorry. Colby was Cercle and apparently also Opus Dei …

Posted by Lila Rajiva on 06/05/10 11:55 AM

Rees-Mogg is reportedly a member of Le Cercle and the Pilgrim’s Society, as well as the exclusive Roxburghe club – supposedly a very influential part of the Anglo-American establishment. He was backed by speculator and corporate raider, James Goldsmith, relative and close associate of the Rothschilds.

Allegations are made on the left that Rees-Mogg is closely associated with Richard Mellon Scaife. Rees-Mogg is also closely tied to James Davidson, Bill Bonner, and Agora, through the Strategic Investment newsletter and other publications.

Through SI, he’s also linked to William Colby, ex CIA chief, also a Pilgrim Society member, if I’m not mistaken.

By link, I just mean there exists a relationship. It’s by no means clear how that actually plays out, if at all.

Colby was murdered (?) early 1990s. My best guess is it was related to the opening of CIA files with the Church Committee (much earlier)….and inter departmental fighting that resulted; there’s also a connection to a White House- related paedophilia scandal in Nebraska that got hushed up in a hurry. Some have linked that scandal to CIA mind-control operations but I haven’t seen anything conclusive about it. “

It always seemed plausible to me that Colby’s death was a political assassination, given his involvement in Operation Phoenix and Project Mockingbird, his testimony at the Church Committee hearings, his interest in the Nebraska pedophile ring, and his work for the intelligence-affiliated Nugan Hand bank (which had ties to BCCI).

I learned about Le Cercle and the Pilgrim’s Circle from, and passed that onto the Bell, as well.

I posted the link to at the Bell below a July 8, 2010 article

Posted by Lila Rajiva on 07/09/10 12:28 PM
Sorry. Two careless mistakes.

@John Treichler (not Treicher, as posted before).

The site is the Institute for the Study of Globalization and Covert Politics ( not ISGPU, as I wrote in a hurry). Written from a very left-wing perspective. Meticulously compiled.

[Note: ISGP eu was up when I posted the link, but googling for it today, I find that the domain is for sale and I find a post at Cryptogon, dating back to January of the same year (2010), saying that the site had disappeared, but that the writer at Cryptogon had saved the information from the google cache in the form of a zip file. However the link he had posted didn’t open to the file at all. He claimed he had given it to Wikileaks for safe-keeping. I later found it at wikispooks.]

So, that’s my explanation of why the Bell’s dismissal of the Lehrman link isn’t quite enough; why there are other reasons to worry about Paul, such as his connections to Agora; why I was slow to start looking at Paul critically; what Agora’s ties to the Rothschilds might be; and what my connection to the whole business amounts to.

There’s one other thing. The Bell is also a part of the same Agora network to which Paul seems to have ties.

You won’t hear that from them, though.  It’s one of those little omissions that are troubling,  like the repositioning and revisionism that goes on on the site, at times.

For instance, in the same piece on the Lehrman tie, Wile writes that he knew Assange was disinformation right away.

Not so. He got that from me (see these comments below a piece at

as well as these comments below another piece there.

I was perhaps the only rightist anti-neocon to criticize Assange.

Other debunkers were Wayne Madsen (the first on the case) and Bill Engdahl, both on the left.

Neither of those two, by the way, assembled nearly as comprehensive a critique of Wikileaks as I did.

And I know that research had an impact, because  the Guardian ran a piece derived from it shortly after (picking up on the John Shipton lead) and an Australian academic wrote a paper repositioning the cypherpunk association (deconstructed in my pieces) into a narrative more favorable to their man.

Wile relied on that research, as well as material on Gordon Duff’s site, in changing his opinion. Then he exaggerated and ended up with a kind of parody of my criticism of Assange.

This he tends to do, which allows an opening to people like Fed regulator, William Black, whom Wile once made the mistake of criticizing. Black reacted with a petty and surprisingly  personal attack, but, when you distort people’s positions, you have to expect vehement reactions.

Wile’s subtle perception management has even caught the attention of many contributors to the Bell, including pro-Paulian goldbugs like Bionic Mosquito and Leonardo Pisano, as well as paper-money anti-Paulians like FauxCapitalist and Memehunter.

Why does he do it? Most likely as a way for the site to stay viable on the net, while conspiracy mongering, or perhaps, as a way to manage the reactions of readers and associates. Nothing wrong with that, but, still, it’s unsettling and tends to make people suspicious.

It’s why I stopped posting on their forum, despite my gratitude to them. for providing a useful and unusual venue for discussions.

I also do respect Wile’s courage in tackling material people usually avoid for fear of losing their credibility.

So the Bell does get a lot of props from me for bravery and unique content, yes, but I also see them as compromised by their financial ties. The same goes for some other libertarian sites I still read.

Other pluses: Wile is almost always polite and he is not as Eurocentric in his thinking as some others.

I should add that I’m not one of those who think he’s running a limited hang-out himself.  Or, at least, he is doing it less than most.

Some final thoughts:

First, about Colby and Agora.

Colby had so many enemies that it would be hard to narrow down who murdered him, if he was murdered, without a lot more evidence being uncovered. But no one in officialdom or intelligence is likely to want to do that. And only a fool or a martyr would venture into that territory alone.

About the Agora connection (and, through them, to Paul):

Colby’s name appeared on Agora’s long-running Strategic Investments newsletter, with which the Rothschild-related Rees Mogg is/was affiliated, along with long-time anti-tax advocate, electronic counterfeiting (anti-Naked Short Selling) critic, and Forbes/Scaife protege, James Dale Davidson.

Davidson, Rothbard, and Chomsky all worked together in the 1970s, in antiwar activism, which by itself means little or nothing. Many ideological foes make common cause on single issues.

But, it was not “by itself,” as the evidence shows.

At least one of Paul’s writers (the guy who wrote the race realist pamphlets) is directly tied to Agora.

Paul himself has been incessantly promoted by Agora, until very recently, when affiliates and associates began promoting a few anti-Paul libertarians, like Wendy McElroy, N. Stephen Kinsella, and even Stephan Molyneux, who appeared briefly on the Doug Casey website, and then was pushed out.

It was also from Agora Inc. that I first heard of Ron Paul.

Casey, like Jeff Berwick and what looks like a majority of the hard-money community, is himself closely tied to the Agora network by business affiliation.

So also, as I said earlier,  the Daily Bell, with its multiple banking and gold community associations.

These ties may or may not mean anything nefarious, but they would certainly limit what the Bell, or any other libertarian writer in this circle, would be willing or able to say publicly.

Which means I really can’t trust someone in that circle to be too forthcoming about Paul, since they all share business networks.

That is simply common-sense.

Even I have had a hard time writing about Agora’s network, even though all I did was write and do some research there, and the only person I really worked with was Bill Bonner.

To put it as simply as possible for all the trolls who still can’t read my actual words, let alone between my words:

It is difficult to write critically about people with whom you have had personal and professional relationships; who have accessed your personal and business records (illegally).

It is even more difficult when their employees work and live close to where you work and live and they are native-born, while you are an immigrant.

It becomes impossible when the political and economic context is a multi-front global military and economic war, in which your motherland is also involved, and not always as an ally; when the legal and media environment of your adopted country is totalitarian; when your family lives abroad and you are self-employed and modestly well-off, while they have tens of millions of dollars behind them, are connected to intelligence and financial elites, have thousands, if not millions, of subscribers and friends to whom they can outsource their efforts, and when they are marketing, financial, and political players on a global scale.

If that is true of me, how much more is it true of the hard-money community, which is completely encompassed by the Agora network?

I don’t expect any of them to pipe up with anything but support for Ron Paul. They will alienate their business associates, otherwise.

I hope that explains why I don’t think the Bell’s dismissal of the Lehrman tie is sufficient by itself.

I say this as someone who took a long time to open their eyes about Paul.

Which person likes to think they’ve been had? Or, that establishment critics mightn’t be entirely off-base in their criticism of Paul?

As far back as 2008, I heard some mutterings from loyal fans of Paul but said nothing, hoping it was all minor or a mistake.

I even took the part of the LRC crowd against the WSJ in a lengthy blog post.

[As far as that WSJ incident goes, I still stand by the piece ]

In 2010 I spoke up about my dissatisfaction with Paul’s positions at the Daily Bell forum.

I didn’t want to, because I knew Paul supporters would get annoyed by it, but credibility is very important to anyone writing about politics. It should be more important than pleasing the team.

Then, a few people who’ve wanted to discredit me for supporting libertarian positions(albeit nuanced and rather more conservative ones than that of the anarcho-caps), or for criticizing Assange (albeit in a most circumspect and balanced way than his other detractors), or for deconstructing Ron Paul and his libertarian promoters (albeit factually and with respect), have tried to claim that I’m covering up for this or that person.

The truth is exactly the opposite. I’ve been libeled, monitored, and undermined covertly, almost continuously since 2007.  I’ve also been plagiarized repeatedly and marginalized.

I don’t really believe the government was behind any of that, except maybe at a very low level, in so far as some petty operatives might have been employed by my enemies to do the dirty work.

So, there is no cover up on my part. Or paranoia.  What I say is not a lie. It’s not propaganda. It’s not a smear or anything but the most truth it is possible, helpful, and advisable for anyone in my position to speak.

For the umpteenth time, I’m not RAW, nor CIA, nor Jihadi, nor Hindu fascist. I’m just a writer, with a lot of interests, an eclectic background, and too much curiosity and impetuosity for her own good.

It was a meaningful synchronicity that I got involved in the whole business. I don’t say that to promote myself,  create a mystery, or confuse the situation. I say it because that is really how it happened.

There are mysteries of “intention,” “attraction,” and the cycles of time.  And they have nothing to do with “dissembling”, “disinformation,” or “RAW”.

The innuendos by Jennifer Lake, Tony Ryals, and Tom Usher are simply smears, even if they are understandable smears.

There really are more things in earth and heaven, Horatio…

Totalitarian Games: The London Summer Olympics, Z0iZ

Dahlia Lithwick at The National Post describes the militarization of the creepy, totalitarian London Summer Olympics (July 27, 2012 – August 12, 2012):

“At the London Olympics, we’re seeing unprecedented restrictions on speech having anything to do with, erm, the Olympics. There are creepy new restrictions on journalists, with even nonsportswriters being told they should sign up with authorities……….

…Spectators have been warned they may not “broadcast or publish video and/or sound recordings, including on social networking websites and the Internet,” making uploading your video to your Facebook page a suspect activity. Be careful with your links to the official Olympic website as well.

..Know that wherever you go and whatever you do, you will enjoy, at the Olympics, “the biggest mobilization of military and security forces seen in the U.K. since the Second World War.” According to a report by Stephen Graham in the Guardian, “More troops — around 13,500 — will be deployed than are currently at war in Afghanistan. The growing security force is being estimated at anything between 24,000 and 49,000 in total.

Such is the secrecy that no one seems to know for sure.” There will be an aircraft carrier docked on the Thames, surface-to-air missile systems and a “thousand armed U.S. diplomatic and FBI agents and 55 dog teams will patrol an Olympic zone partitioned off from the wider city by an 11-mile, £80-million, 5,000-volt electric fence.”

Throw in the new scanners, biometric ID cards, number-plate and facial-recognition CCTV systems, and disease-tracking systems that will long outlast the games, and you have a sense of what’s to come in terms of big public events.

Protesters, participants and citizens aren’t parasites or background noise. Addressing threats of terror or real violence is one thing. Treating all speech and protest and media as inherently dangerous and violent is something entirely different. Brandishing the wrong sign in the wrong place isn’t protest, and brandishing the wrong French fry in the right place isn’t dangerous. Corporate cleanliness is just a short hop from corporate godliness, and by then it’s much too late for speech.”

PsyWar: COINTELPRO Infiltration Of Dissidents

From the War at Home Archive:

“False Media Stories: COINTELPRO documents expose frequent collusion between news media personnel and the FBI to publish false and distorted material at the Bureau’s behest. The FBI routinely leaked derogatory information to its collaborators in the news media. It also created newspaper and magazine articles and television “documentaries” which the media knowingly or unknowingly carried as their own. Copies were sent anonymously or under bogus letterhead to activists’ financial backers, employers, business associates, families, neighbors, church officials, school administrators, landlords, and whomever else might cause them trouble.

One FBI media fabrication claimed that Jean Seberg, a white film star active in anti-racist causes, was pregnant by a prominent Black leader. The Bureau leaked the story anonymously to columnist Joyce Haber and also had it passed to her by a “friendly” source in the Los Angeles Times editorial staff. The item appeared without attribution in Haber’s nationally syndicated column of May 19, 1970. Seberg’s husband has sued the FBI as responsible for her resulting stillbirth, nervous breakdown, and suicide.

Bogus Leaflets, Pamphlets, and Other Publications: COINTELPRO documents show that the FBI routinely put out phony leaflets, posters, pamphlets, newspapers, and other publications in the name of movement groups. The purpose was to discredit the groups and turn them against one another.

FBI cartoon leaflets were used to divide and disrupt the main national anti-war coalition of the late 1960s. Similar fliers were circulated in 1968 and 1969 in the name of the Black Panthers and the United Slaves (US), a rival Black nationalist group based in Southern California. The phony Panther/US leaflets, together with other covert operations, were credited with subverting a fragile truce between the two groups and igniting an explosion of internecine violence that left four Panthers dead, many more wounded, and a once-flourishing regional Black movement decimated.

Another major COINTELPRO operation involved a children’s coloring book which the Black Panther Party had rejected as anti-white and gratuitously violent. The FBI revised the coloring book to make it even more offensive. Its field offices then distributed thousands of copies anonymously or under phony organizational letterheads. Many backers of the Party’s program of free breakfasts for children withdrew their support after the FBI conned them into believing that the bogus coloring book was being used in the program.

Forged Correspondence: Former employees have confirmed that the FBI has the capacity to produce state-of-the-art forgery. This capacity was used under COINTELPRO to create snitch jackets and bogus communications that exacerbated differences among activists and disrupted their work.

One such forgery intimidated civil rights worker Muhammed Kenyatta (Donald Jackson), causing him to abandon promising projects in Jackson, Mississippi. Kenyatta had foundation grants to form Black economic cooperatives and open a “Black and Proud School” for dropouts. He was also a student organizer at nearby Tougaloo College. In the winter of 1969, after an extended campaign of FBI and police harassment, Kenyatta received a letter, purportedly from the Tougaloo College Defense Committee, which “directed” that he cease his political activities immediately. If he did not “heed our diplomatic and well-thought-out warning,” the committee would consider taking measures “which would have a more direct effect and which would not be as cordial as this note.” Kenyatta and his wife left. Only years later did they learn it was not Tougaloo students, but FBI covert operators who had driven them out.

Later in 1969, FBI agents fabricated a letter to the mainly white organizers of a proposed Washington, D.C. anti-war rally demanding that they pay the local Black community a $20,000 “security bond.” This attempted extortion was composed in the name of the local Black United Front (BUF) and signed with the forged signature of its leader. FBI informers inside the BUF then tried to get the group to back such a demand, and Bureau contacts in the media made sure the story received wide publicity.

The Senate Intelligence Committee uncovered a series of FBI letters sent to top Panther leaders throughout 1970 in the name of Connie Mathews, an intermediary between the Black Panther Party’s national office and Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver, in exile in Algeria. These exquisite forgeries were prepared on pilfered stationery in Panther vernacular expertly simulated by the FBI’s Washington, D.C. laboratory. Each was forwarded to an FBI Legal Attache at a U.S. Embassy in a foreign country that Mathews was due to travel through and then posted at just the right time “in such a manner that it cannot be traced to the Bureau.” The FBI enhanced the eerie authenticity of these fabrications by lacing them with esoteric personal tidbits culled from electronic surveillance of Panther homes and offices. Combined with other forgeries, anonymous letters and phone calls, and the covert intervention of FBI and police infiltrators, the Mathews correspondence succeeded in inflaming intra-party mistrust and rivalry until it erupted into the bitter public split that shattered the organization in the winter of 1971.

Anonymous Letters and Telephone Calls: During the 1960s, activists received a steady flow of anonymous letters and phone calls which turn out to have been from the FBI. Some were unsigned, while others bore bogus names or purported to come from unidentified activists in phony or actual organizations.

Many of these bogus communications promoted racial divisions and fears, often by exploiting and exacerbating tensions between Jewish and Black activists. One such FBI-concocted letter went to SDS members who had joined Black students protesting New York University’s discharge of a Black teacher in 1969. The supposed author, an unnamed “SDS member,” urged whites to break ranks and abandon the Black students because of alleged anti-Semitic slurs by the fired teacher and his supporters.

Other anonymous letters and phone calls falsely accused movement leaders of collaboration with the authorities, corruption, or sexual affairs with other activists’ mates. The letter on the next page was used to provoke “a lasting distrust” between a Black civil rights leader and his wife. Its FBI authors hoped that his “concern over what to do about it” would “detract from his time spent in the plots and plans of his organization.” As in the Seberg incident, inter-racial sex was a persistent theme. The husband of one white woman active in civil rights and anti-war work filed for divorce soon after receiving the FBI-authored letter reproduced on page 50.

Still other anonymous FBI communications were designed to intimidate dissidents, disrupt coalitions, and provoke violence. Calls to Stokely Carmichael’s mother warning of a fictitious Black Panther murder plot drove him to leave the country in September 1968. Similar anonymous FBI telephone threats to SNCC leader James Forman were instrumental in thwarting efforts to bring the two groups together.

The Chicago FBI made effective use of anonymous letters to sabotage the Panthers efforts to build alliances with previously apolitical Black street gangs. The most extensive of these operations involved the Black P. Stone Nation, or “Blackstone Rangers,” a powerful confederation of several thousand local Black youth. Early in 1969, as FBI and police infiltrators in the Rangers spread rumors of an impending Panther attack, the Bureau sent Ranger chief Jeff Fort an incendiary note signed “a black brother you don’t know.” Fort’s supposed friend warned that “The brothers that run the Panthers blame you for blocking their thing and there’s supposed to be a hit out for you.” Another FBI-concocted anonymous “black man” then informed Chicago Panther leader Fred Hampton of a Ranger plot “to get you out of the way.” These fabrications squelched promising talks between the two groups and enabled Chicago Panther security chief William O’Neal, an FBI-paid provocateur, to instigate a series of armed confrontations from which the Panthers barely managed to escape without serious casualties.

Pressure Through Employers, Landlords, and Others: FBI records reveal repeated maneuvers to generate pressure on dissidents from their parents, children, spouses, landlords, employers, college administrators, church superiors, welfare agencies, credit bureaus, and the like. Anonymous letters and telephone calls were often used to this end. Confidential official communications were effective in bringing to bear the Bureau’s immense power and authority.

Agents’ reports indicate that such FBI intervention denied Martin Luther King, Jr., and other 1960s activists any number of foundation grants and public speaking engagements. It also deprived alternative newspapers of their printers, suppliers, and distributors and cost them crucial advertising revenues when major record companies were persuaded to take their business elsewhere. Similar government manipulation may underlie steps recently taken by some insurance companies to cancel policies held by churches giving sanctuary to refugees from El Salvador and Guatemala.

Tampering With Mail and Telephone Service: The FBI and CIA routinely used mail covers (the recording of names and addresses) and electronic surveillance in order to spy on 1960s movements. The CIA alone admitted to photographing the outside of 2.7 million pieces of first-class mail during the 1960s and to opening almost 215,000. Government agencies also tampered with mail, altering, delaying, or “disappearing” it. Activists were quick to blame one another, and infiltrators easily exploited the situation to exacerbate their tensions.

Dissidents’ telephone communications often were similarly obstructed. The SDS Regional Office in Washington, D.C., for instance, mysteriously lost its phone service the week preceding virtually every national anti-war demonstration in the late 1960s.

Disinformation to Prevent or Disrupt Movement Meetings and Activities: A favorite COINTELPRO tactic uncovered by Senate investigators was to advertise a non-existent political event, or to misinform people of the time and place of an actual one. They reported a variety of disruptive FBI “dirty tricks” designed to cast blame on the organizers of movement events.”


Some of my experiences of internet harassment over the past five years sound a lot like this stuff. But in my case, I’m pretty sure that the people involved were private individuals, who maybe used some of their government connections or authority. At some point, one ex-CIA official [ a guy who had a history of out-of-control behavior and had had run-ins with the law] was actually writing nasty stuff on this blog, and may have been behind a few other things.

But the rest was private. Which suggests that between corporations (correction: criminal corporations) and  government (correction: unconstitutional governments), there’s not much to choose.

Anyway, this kind of history of government infiltration of activist groups  should make people very wary about their communications. The email in your inbox can be forged and your own name could be tacked onto things you never wrote.  With all the powers at their disposal, if the government decided to frame someone, they would be able to get or create all kinds of incriminating stuff.

That’s why I don’t buy the Gupta verdict at all. With five years of investigation by two different outfits, with thousands of wire-taps, they only got him talking to Raj once? And even then, there was nothing illegal in that conversation….

Ron Paul Implosion: End The Fed To Technology Revolution…

The Pauls have lost all credibility with me.

Read their latest missive, blogged at EPJ

And reported here at Forbes: “Ron Paul Takes Up Internet Freedom with New Technology Revolution.”

They’ve abandoned the financial battle.

I guess the financial coup of 2008, completed in 2010, is now sealed and cordoned off from prosecution. Last month, as if to confirm that, the White Queen (the City)  took down the Black Knight (Gupta) that had infiltrated the highest ranks of her court, while the White Bishop (Lloyd Doing-God’s Work Blankfein) was witness for the prosecution.

“End the Fed,” which  Rand Paul converted to” Audit the Fed,” is over.

The Pauls have now skipped forward to their new, new project –  the  “Technology Revolution.”

I  never thought that much of “End the Fed,” because, as I’ve blogged previously, the elites can manufacture money from other places besides the Fed, like the BIS and the reconstituted IMF.

But, apparently,  End the Fed doesn’t even work as a popular slogan any more.

So, what do I think about the new campaign?

I think it will be about as effective as their “End the Fed” campaign, which is to say, not effective at all.

See my comment at The Daily Bell in 2010:

Posted by Lila Rajiva on 11/23/10 11:55 AM
Daily Bell: “But by pursuing his strategy, he has made his opponents look like fools and perhaps altered the course of history.”

Lila: Let’s hope. Personally, I agree with Doug Casey on this:
“As a lone voice, his father was a breath of fresh, more principled air, but he didn’t change anything at all that I can see”

(Doug Casey on Presidents, LRC)

But it will be a great platform for the Pauls to sell books, promote ideas and launch political careers for their family members.

I only hope it won’t be done on the backs of idealistic young people. There were many who put change they could hardly spare in a tough economy into the Paul’s war chest.

The new campaign, which dubs itself  “The Internet Versus The Machine” is obviously a rebranding campaign to move young people away from what Forbes calls “the archaic” (they mean arcane) issues of finance.

Instead, the Pauls will focus on the hip world of the net.


“Young people have been a driving force in the Paul campaign, and the focus on internet freedom should only bolster that support.”

I’m going to call foul on that.

Their new “campaign” is in support of the Technology Revolution on the Internet?

Last I looked the tech revolution has been around for a while, getting on quite well without the Pauls.

One part of  the new project is going to be defending big business from attempts by consumers to scrutinize their data collection.

I kid you not. Here is Buzzfeed on the subject.

“The Pauls also take a stand for the growing industry known (and widely criticized) as “big data.”

They deride the notion that “private sector data collection practices must be scrutinized and tightly regulated in the name of ‘protecting consumers,’ at the same time as government’s warrantless surveillance and collection of private citizens’ Internet data has dramatically increased.”

So does this mean that Ron Paul is going to be fighting to prevent European governments or NGOs  like EFF or Asian governments from scrutinizing Google’s data collection practices?

Remember that I just blogged that Google’s CEO Larry Page should be arrested for privacy violations and espionage against foreign governments?

I was being satirical about US surveillance of foreign CEO’s and money-managers.

For instance, in the Galleon -Gupta cases, the government used wire-taps whose authorization was obtained pre-textually in violation of the defendants’ constitutional rights.

I don’t recall that the Pauls said a word about that, although the Galleon insider case has dominated the financial media for a couple of years now, and is directly tied via Rajaratnam’s funding of Tamil charities to  issues like terrorist money-laundering  with which Paul adviser Bruce Fein – once employed by an alleged front group for the Tamil Tigers –  is intimately connected.

A recent Washington Post article described how the military is outsourcing surveillance in Africa to private contractors (with little accountability, significant cost over-runs, and little to show for the expense).

Densely populated China and India are both locked in battles with the West for access to resources and agricultural lands.  Indian and Chinese companies compete with American and European countries on the African continent.  China and India have also complained about American corporate espionage.  American companies in turn complain about IP theft from the Indians and Chinese.  Meanwhile the US government itself is involved in IP theft through its pervasive global surveillance.  Where does data collection for corporations end and espionage for the state begin, anyway? Where does the government end and the private sector begin, when private companies are outsourced arms of the government and the government is the enforcement arm of the companies?

Ron Paul is not oblivious to the complexities of all this. He is far too shrewd.

Rajat Gupta’s conviction shows evidence in my opinion of being a  set up by the government, with some arm-twisting from Goldman Sachs. Likely it was an important blow in the  covert psy war against India, an ostensible US ally, about which I blogged here (“Coconut Imperialism”and here, “Educating the Gentoos In India”)

The obvious response from foreign governments (such as India) would be to treat American CEO’s the same way and wire-tap them.

So, is it just coincidental that the Pauls suddenly abandon their financial campaign (which never involved a word against Goldman Sachs), and suddenly rush to head off any animosity toward Google?

On their silence on G Sachs, here is a comment I made (one among many) below the same Daily Bell article:

Posted by Lila Rajiva on 11/23/10 11:40 AM


Why would it distract him?
How hard is it to say, unequivocally, “Goldman Sachs and several other banks, are involved in corrupt actions and should be investigated and prosecuted.”

There. Back to “business.”

He certainly had no problem drawing a hard line over relatively trivial things like a monument to Rosa Parks. If he was really afraid of distraction, why would he make a fuss over something like that, and then on something crucial, suddenly go silent?

Why doesn’t he state clearly – “9-11 needs to be investigated. There is credible evidence that there was some kind of conspiracy involving intelligence agencies, US and foreign.”

I like Ron Paul and want to believe the best of him.

But this excuse doesn’t hold water for two seconds.”

This looks like more material to add to the mounting evidence (see  here) that Paul fronts for financial interests.

Perhaps he cannot avoid doing it, as I’ve said.

But there’s no need to be suckered into what could well be a counter-attack against foreign governments who defend themselves against espionage by Google/Facebook/Hotmail/Skype/TOR and the rest of the government-corporate spy sector, by couching the issue as a defense of the private sector.

That explanation also takes care of Paul’s pandering to the left.

The financial world (which controls the media) is left-leaning, in contrast to non-financial businesses.  Paul’s recent moves make quite a bit of sense when understood that way.  He acts to co-opt the brand of libertarianism appropriately called the Marxism of the right by deploying what seem to be ideologically inflexible positions in the service of  larger imperial goals.

So, I have to ask. Will the two Pauls now be collecting money from young people to defend multi-billion dollar multinationals like Google from scrutiny by the governments on which they spy?

I mean, if you phrased that in the appropriately anti-state way, there will be enough libertarian lemmings who’ll rush to defend Google, I’m sure.

This theory might explain why the financial media, usually so vocal in defense of insider-trading, when it’s done by Michael Milken or Ivan Boesky, is suddenly so quiet  about South Asian insider-trading not a tenth as bad.

Does it also explain why large parts of the alternative press  have had nothing but praise for Julian Assange, another front for western financial interests? And why the Pauls have promoted Assange?

Talk about Trojan horses.

Big corporations cannot be analyzed separately from government.

When the state outsources its spying to corporations, for someone to argue that the state should not limit corporate surveillance because it’s engaged in surveillance itself is confused, at best, and downright misleading, at worst.

Especially when it comes from seasoned politicians like the Pauls.

Parts of the government are scrutinizing the private sector. Often they’re right to.

Other parts of government are much worse than the private sector when it comes to privacy violation.

Those parts of the government are often most incestuously allied with corporations. This is the corporate-state or intel-industrial complex that produces programs like Echelon.

So it’s quite bizarre for the Pauls to claim that Microsoft (or Google or Apple) are pure private-sector entities, when they gain market share directly because of concrete government actions on their behalf and because of endemic and pervasive state-created judicial/legal/financial corruption.

One more thing.  Microsoft wasn’t prescient at all about the net, as the Pauls claim in their new manifesto.

It was way behind. Gates himself admitted it.

There is, finally, another reason why the Pauls may have turned their attention to protecting Big Data,

It looks like Big Data is bankrolling him.

Here’s Reason’s Brian Doherty, making the point:

“With Peter Thiel, founder of the controversial “big data” company Panantir, having made a $2.6 million investment in the (somewhat feckless in the end) superPAC “Endorse Liberty” during campaign season, perhaps the Paul machine sees this as a cause that can energize both grassroots and big money.”

And that’s all  I want to say now about this turn of events until I learn a bit more what is really going on.

But, if you were waiting to see Ron Paul libertarianism implode, it happened this week.

Blogging Skirmishes, Donkeys, and Chomsky’s Taxes..

Some weird things have been happening to my blog….minor, but worth recounting.

First. A week or two ago, my blog was suspended because of a huge amount of spam that got sent my way.  That happened just after my first posts questioning the Gupta trial verdict. Not to worry, I told myself, can happen to any blog. Of course, in five years, it’s never before happened to my blog….

Second.  A video that I had posted on my blog was deleted….I didn’t delete it. Then that video shows up posted on a friend’s blog. The exact same thing happened last year, with another video that I didn’t delete either, which someone deleted from my blog.

OK. Petty harassment.

Third.  I opened my admin panel and found someone else added as a user. I didn’t add the person’s email.  So I deleted it. Next day, another user was added. I deleted it again.

Fourth,  I make a habit of searching my name to check blog comments or follow ups.  When I click the tab BLOGS on the side of the search, the top link these days  is to Veterans Today, where an error notice pops up saying an article apparently written by me has been taken down.  I’ve not written anything for VT since February 2011 and only wrote a few pieces for them, anyway. I asked them whether there was anything with my name on it on their site these days, they said no. So this is a google cache that someone is sending to the top of blog comments, for some reason.

Fifth. My blog posts show up in searches of Rajat Gupta, usually in the first two pages, sometimes quite high up.  In the last few days when I clicked on them, I found they were all set to private. I haven’t set any of those posts to private.

It’s possible that when updating the entire blog might have gone to private a few times, but why would individual posts change to private without my doing anything?

The posts that changed to private were all controversial ones:

One about Chomsky being for taxes for other people, but not for himself.

One about gold holdings by different countries, showing that India and China have much less than the developed countries and suggesting neo-colonial motives in manipulation of gold and currencies.

One about Goldman knowing all about Galleon and Gupta being a patsy ( a recent one)

Since I blogged, they’ve all been changed back. But I took screen shots,  so it’s not imagination or paranoia.

And a few other things.

I noticed at least one mainstream paper in India responding almost point for point to concerns about the trial I’d raised in my blog.

And then there was the Tahrir Square video on Gurcharan Das’s blog, which, as I said, was on the home page when I blogged it, and then the next day was hidden.

The internet, friends, is not an unalloyed force for good.

No more than TV was.  It is not instant liberation, as naive people like to say it is.

Heartwarming to say things like that. Not terribly true.

Something is good only in proportion to the motives with which it used.

The many well-intended people who use the internet do  make it a force for good.

Unfortunately, the net is also teeming with intelligence operatives, criminals, sting-operations, fakes, frauds,  and  police-state busybodies, who do not ever let really spontaneous interchange take place. They must have a thumb on the scales and rig the deal. They must manage the outcome so it goes in their favor….

Or supports their agenda.

Part of which is to lull people into a false sense of power and security on the net, so they put all their information out there. This is do-it-yourself surveillance. 24/7 and updated by the second.

Radical transparency is the carrot.  The internet kill-switch is the stick.

Either way, the donkey moves forward.

And when one donkey moves forward, so do all the others.

The net appeals to the herd in us.

Internet herds are no less herds because they are electronic. Think about the electronic trading that stampedes the market this way and that.

The internet may liberate us.

Equally, it may enslave us.

Right now it’s 50-50.

These days  I’d say  all bets are off.

Rajat Gupta: Goldman Footing Legal Bills, Says Anonymous Source

The WTF quotient of this bizarre case shoots up even higher.

Someone from Goldman is leaking anonymously that Gupta’s bills –  to the tune of $30 million and counting – are being footed by Goldman itself. With Procter & Gamble picking up the rest.


Goldman foots bulk of Gupta’s $30M legal bill

For Goldman Sachs, the insider trading case against former board member Rajat Gupta which ended in a conviction Friday, was distracting and embarrassing. It has also been very expensive. Goldman Sachs has paid for the bulk of Gupta’s legal defense, which has cost nearly $30 million, according to two people with direct knowledge of the case who requested anonymity because they were unauthorized to discuss it publicly. Procter & Gamble, on whose board Gupta also served, has picked up the balance of the bill. A jury found Gupta guilty of leaking Goldman’s private boardroom discussions to the former hedge fund titan Raj Rajaratnam. He was acquitted on a count related to divulging secrets about P&G. Gupta plans to appeal.”


[Lila, June 19, 2012. This has since been confirmed as factual and not a rumor or PR]

Hmm. We don’t think too much of anonymous leaking.  Sounds like Goldman PR. The guy is coming off sympathetically, so maybe some one wants to stir up a little bad feeling. Kind of obvious.

They figured they’d axe the guy and everyone would be dancing in the streets and asking for blood. But most people seem to realize that even if Gupta did what he did, insider trading is a small time side-show on Wall Street.  Not the really bad stuff. Most people get that.

And the Indian business world didn’t break down and sob with contrition either, which also flummoxed the ruling class. I mean what good is a psyop, if your target holds up his middle finger back at you?

Reuters ran a piece telling the Indian business community to get a better cause.

The Financial Times (pretty much a mouthpiece for the financial establishment) scolded them for showing support for Gupta.

Then it trotted out various Indian chamchas to pontificate about how corrupt Indian business is, which is true but irrelevant, since Indian business culture has nothing to do with what went on here.

Rajat Gupta lived all his life in the West. He graduated  from Harvard Business School, for pete’s sake. The guy is a product of Western business culture. Go wag a finger at Harvard.

They even had one Gurcharan Das – must be a pretty naive guy – to come out with the proper attitude the wogs are supposed to take about all this. Notice that Gurcharan Das has a website that shows him speechifying at Tahrir Square (US Intel-led revolution)and advising Indians not to let a good crisis go to waste

(this is pure globalist-speak).

[June 19: Further conspiracy note: when I got up today and checked, I noticed that the reference to Tahrir Square etc. had been cut out from my blog post, even though I clearly remember saving it.  I must be confused right? But then, when I checked Gurcharan Das’s website this morning, the video on the home page was no longer about Tahrir Square. It had been switched to something else. The Tahrir Square video had got tucked away inside. Hmm-mmm.]

“It’s the classic problem of status anxiety. It’s what we all suffer from in some form,” said Mr Das, who is the author most recently of The Difficulty of Being Good, a book that draws on the philosophical lessons of the Hindu epic, the Mahabharata.

“As head of McKinsey he was associating with CEOs and billionaires earning very large sums. His job was to advise people with a lot of capital, not to be an owner of capital. He got new ambitions.”

You’ll recognize the  “greed” meme which the establishment pushed heavily to explain what happened.

Fool's Gold: How Unrestrained Greed Corrupted a Dream, Shattered Global Markets and Unleashed a Catastrophe

That’s to distract from the rather obvious origins of the financial crisis in government policy abetted by the criminal actions of connected firms, and not in some generic evil capitalist greed curling around Wall Street like a miasma.

Mr Das also highlighted the “glaring” contrast between an erratic and slow-moving Indian legal system that often protects the well-connected, and the swift and harsh punishment handed out by the powerful US courts. “We sometimes catch [people] but we don’t convict,” he said.

“What the US system is saying is that no one is above the law.”

Poor dear Mr. Das. He must have been struck blind and deaf in the past decade if he believes that “in the US system no one is above the law”.

But I guess, even though Das is doing the talking, he’s really a sock puppet, for his masters.

Like this chap, remember him?

But back to Goldman footing Gupta’s bills. Say it’s not just clever PR from Goldman. Say it’s true.

Why would they do that?

Probably because they really wanted Gupta to get off?  If he’s been a corporate wise man all these years, he’s bound to know where some bodies are buried. Lord knows what he’s going to start saying around sentencing time.

[Or maybe they want to make sure the crowd gets someone to pay for all the excesses of the last few decade.  At Forbes, Richard Levick apparently thinks Gupta deserves the harshest sentence possible just because he didn’t make money on the tip, but wanted to become a bigger player..]

Still, I had no idea that criminal defense teams were part of the severance package at these places. Maybe it has to be.

Given what we know about Wall Street culture,  an individually-wrapped securities lawyer is a non-negotiable perk, like stock options, or something.

Or maybe, I wonder if it doesn’t tell us something else.  May be if they’re footing the bill for Gupta, they’re also picking the lawyer. (Naftalis and Bharara are old friends (I originally wrote Rakoff, but I now read that Bharara is a friend of Naftalis, as well, and I can’t find the place I read the reference to Rakoff, so I’ve deleted it))

And maybe if that’s the case, this is even more of a set-up than I thought.

Fighting Our Pornified Culture

Mercator Net has an interview with one of the authors of the new book, Big Porn Inc.

Melinda Tankard Reist: The aim of Big Porn Inc. was to blow apart the myth that porn is just about ‘naughty’ pictures of consenting sex between adults, that it is just a bit of ‘harmless fun’. We wanted to expose that pornography is a multi-billion global industry profiting from commodifying sexuality and selling it back to us as industrialised, commercialised, plasticised porn sex. We also wanted to demonstrate the way pornography is colonising the public space, how everything has become pornified. We believe pornography is a public health hazard of major proportions and it’s time to address it.

How has this industry been able to grow so big? Who else is profiting from it?

The industry has a lot of power. This power has bought off law makers, regulators and enforcement bodies around the world. They know how to gain new users, how to get men (the primary users of pornography) using their product and wanting more. The internet has been a massive boon for the porn industry, estimated to reach $US100billion by 2013. There are so many who profit from it, from traffickers who sell women who are used to make pornography, to the porn companies who make the porn, to the hotels who profit more from pay-per-view porn that they do selling rooms and the mainstream companies who profit from carrying porn brands, such as Diva, a jewellery store chain for girls 8-13, which is currently pimping Playboy brand products to them.

A review notes the following:

Here are just a few, with the total Web pages for each: teen sex – 82 million pages; animal sex – over 50 million; bondage – nearly 30 million; crush sex (which involves the killing of small animals) – 8 million; vomit sex – 4 million; wired porn (involving electrical shock) – 1.7 million; snuff sex (involving actual death) – 1.3 million.

So much for porn being all-American and indispensable for freedom from that terrifying bogeyman of modernity – repression….

Who Guards The Guardian?

Gate-keeper of the left, The Guardian, has been attacking Gilad Atzmon for the “anti-Semitism” of his book on Jewish identity “The Wandering Who?” which tackles controversial questions about origin myths, race, and religion. It’s not the first time, and Atzmon is not the only one.

Wikileaks and Assange, as well as Chomsky, Hermann, and others, have come in for bashing.

Of course, I, like others, have had my problems with Assange and with Chomsky too. But for altogether different reasons.  Both seemed to me to be engaged in a kind of misdirection. Others whom I respect have agreed with that take.

But The Guardian‘s criticism, especially of Assange, seems to stem from professional rivalry.  I say that because The Guardian supported the intervention in Libya, while Assange, though he has distanced himself from NATO’s bombing, takes credit for inspiring the rebels.

So it is likely not really a difference in ideology that’s split them.

Wikispooks explains:

“The Guardian’s discrediting of the “left” – the left being a concept never defined by the paper’s writers – is far from taking place in a fair battle of ideas. Not least the Guardian is backed by the huge resources of its corporate owners. When it attacks dissident writers, they can rarely, if ever, find a platform of equal prominence to defend themselves. And the Guardian has proved itself more than reluctant to allow a proper right of reply in its pages to those it maligns.

But also, and most noticeably, it almost never engages with these dissident writers’ ideas. In popular terminology, it prefers to play the man, not the ball. Instead it creates labels, from the merely disparaging to the clearly defamatory, that push these writers and thinkers into the territory of the unconscionable.

A typical example of the Guardian’s new strategy was on show this week in an article in the print edition’s comment pages – also available online and a far more prestigious platform than CiF – in which the paper commissioned a socialist writer, Andy Newman, to argue that the Israeli Jewish musician Gilad Atzmon was part of an anti-semitic trend discernible on the left……..

….As is now typical in this new kind of Guardian character assassination, the article makes no effort to prove that Atzmon is anti-semitic or to show that there is any topical or pressing reason to bring up his presumed character flaw. (In passing, the article made a similar accusation of anti-semitism against Alison Weir of If Americans Knew, and against the Counterpunch website for publishing an article on Israel’s role in organ-trafficking by her.)

Atzmon has just published a book on Jewish identity, The Wandering Who?, that has garnered praise from respected figures such as Richard Falk, an emeritus law professor at Princeton, and John Mearsheimer, a distinguished politics professor at Chicago University.

But Newman did not critique the book, nor did he quote from it. In fact, he showed no indication that he had read the book or knew anything about its contents…..

… the Guardian was happy to offer its imprimatur to Newman’s defamation of Atzmon, who was described as a conspiracy theorist “dripping with contempt for Jews”, despite an absence of substantiating evidence. Truly worthy of Pravda in its heyday.

The Atzmon article appeared on the same day the Guardian carried out a similar hatchet job, this time on Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks. The paper published a book review of Assange’s “unauthorised autobiography” by the Guardian’s investigations editor, David Leigh…..

…..The low point in Leigh’s role in this saga is divulging in his own book a complex password Assange had created to protect a digital file containing the original and unedited embassy cables. Each was being carefully redacted before publication by several newspapers, including the Guardian……

….Some of this clearly reflects a clash of personalities and egos, but it also looks suspiciously like the feud derives from a more profound ideological struggle between the Guardian and Wikilieaks about how information should be controlled a generation hence. The implicit philosophy of Wikileaks is to promote an ever-greater opening up and equalisation of access to information, while the Guardian, following its commercial imperatives, wants to ensure the gatekeepers maintain their control.”

OWS-Connected Manifesto Calls For Global Government

From the October 14 Manifesto endorsed, apparently, by Eduardo Galeano (socialist), Naomi Klein (socialist), Noam Chomsky (allegedly left-anarchist) and Vandana Shiva (environmentalist):

“Undemocratic international institutions are our global Mubarak, our global Assad, our global Gaddafi. These include: the IMF, the WTO, global markets, multinational banks, the G8, the G20, the European Central Bank and the UN Security Council. Like Mubarak and Assad, these institutions must not be allowed to run people’s lives without their consent. We are all born equal, rich or poor, woman or man. Every African and Asian is equal to every European and American. Our global institutions must reflect this, or be overturned.

Today, more than ever before, global forces shape people’s lives. Our jobs, health, housing, education and pensions are controlled by global banks, markets, tax havens, corporations and financial crises. Our environment is destroyed by pollution in other continents. Our safety is determined by international wars and international trade in arms, drugs and natural resources. We are losing control over our lives. This must stop. This will stop. The citizens of the world must get control over the decisions that influence them at all levels – from global to local. That is global democracy. That is what we demand today.


If this weren’t so serious, it would be funny.

“Global Mubarak, Assad, and Gaddafi,” eh? All brown-skinned Muslims? No mention of  Barak Obama or George Bush or Bill Clinton? No mention of Paul Wolfowitz?

The Global Wolfowitz Is At The Door has a nice ring…..

Global Netanyahoo? Too polysyllabic for comfort.

And George Soros, many megawatts more powerful than some Middle Eastern dictators? But Global Soros sounds too much like a disease….

Talking about Soros, check back this to post of mine from June 2010, which analyzes a Soros proposal for global democracy, from 2009. This adds weight to what I said about the push-back against the Tea Party starting in 2009.  When he talks about  “demagogues” in the piece, he means the middle-class that rose up against the bail-outs.

Oh dear. A bunch of professional activsts, westerners all (Vandana Shiva notwithstanding), sharing the same old world view (all leftists), speaking for the six billion plus people of this planet, hundreds of nations, hundreds if not thousands of languages and dialects, scores of religions, ethnicities, millions of companies and associations, most of whom are going about their business and have nothing to do with OWS.

How’s that for Global Chutzpah?

Here is Vandana Shiva calling for global democracy and name-checking George Soros and Mikhail Gorbachev (

“And you might remember Gorbachev was a very keen free marketer, and he was speaking with me at the opening plenary of this meeting and said “it’s turned out to be very different from what I had imagined. I thought it would bring democracy; it brought mafia rule.”

And then the person who’s really won out in this game of globalisation — George Soros — he was there too, and this is what he said. (my italics and emphases throughout)

He said: “free markets were supposed to have created open societies, free societies, but we cannot speak of the triumph of democracy. Capitalism and political freedom do not go hand in hand. We cannot leave freedom and democracy to market forces. We need to create our own institutions and different institutions from those that serve capitalism to take care of it.

And anyone,” this is not my words, it’s not your words, it’s George Soros’, “who thinks they can leave freedom to free markets is a market fundamentalist, that’s not how societies work”.

Ms. Shiva, we love your work.  But don’t be taken in by this Hegelian dialectic, this Mighty Wurlitzer of media manufactured global consensus between faux free-marketers (Soros) and faux -anarchists (Chomsky). The missing term from both adjectives is “state”. Soros is a state capitalist and Chomsky is a state socialist. It is the capitalist-communist convergence.

State-capitalists fund the think-tank circuit and foundation activism. The corrosive effects of this on democracy have been established many times by serious analysts.  In what sense then can foundation activists call for democracy? A polarised dialectic is created by the state-capitalists to co-opt reform, and people like Ms. Siva are there to put a diverse face on the resolution of the dialectic and make it acceptable to the non-western world.

Step back and think about the invisible hand here.

Who is this George Soros?

Even Magasaysay Award-winning Medha Patkar, according to renowned anti-globalization activist Arundhati Roy, has allowed herself to be bamboozled by the Wikileaks-blessed Anna Hazare circus.

Now, it is becoming clear to many that behind the attractive “anti-corruption” agenda, which is dear to many, many ordinary Indians, the globalists are showing their hand, by trying to hustle through legislation favorable to them (the Janlok Pal Bill) in the hubbub of the cynically named so-called “Second Indian Independence.”  The government must be “transparent,” but foreign-funded non-governmental organizations promoting chauvinism and wedge-issues, mixing legitimate grievances with bogus accusations, must be exempt from transparency requirements.

False Dissent: Gatekeepers From Ron Paul To Noam Chomsky

Zahir Ebrahim:

“Virtually one hundred percent of what is deemed respectable Western dissent espouses this foundational axiom. It works well because it draws upon selective empiricism couched in omissions to demonstrate its veracity. But a half-truth is still only a full lie. That full lie works like this:

‘The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr. Churchill calls an “iron curtain” between the masses and such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable, totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals. But silence is not enough. If persecution, liquidation and the other symptoms of social friction are to be avoided, the positive sides of propaganda must be made as effective as the negative.’

— Aldous Huxley, Preface (circa 1946) to Brave New World, 1931, Harper, pg. 11

Both sides of propaganda are thus put into effect. The mainstream chiefs enact the big lie and repeat it endlessly for the positive side of propaganda. The dissent-chief enact the negative side of propaganda by calculated omission of certain subjects, and by omitting to draw logical conclusions from them because they no longer have to — the facts have been omitted from the “respectable” discourse space altogether. It is wonderful how this is used to provide the illusion of the free press and free society by both the mainstream press and the so called alternate press:

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum – even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”

— Noam Chomsky

This is exactly the same controlled-dissent genre of lauded pontiffs of dissentstream spanning the gamut from Messrs. Ron Paul ( ) to Noam Chomsky himself ( ) et. al. on the Left-Liberal-Libertarian nexus, to Foxnews-Right-wing-Religion-Intelligence-State-worship-Patriotism nexus.

I am not sure which compartment Francis Boyle ( ) falls into but it is just as systemic there as elsewhere.

I invite Truthdig to publish the examination referenced below written by a Muslim, yours truly, belonging to the ‘untermensch’ civilization bearing the full brunt of Chris Hedges’ admission that “We became terrorists too,” and “We Are What We Loathe”.

Such banal statements can perhaps win Mr. Hedges multiple Pulitzer prizes for their profundity — precisely because these neither inform nor educate to the degree necessary for unraveling the entire Hegelian Dialectic, lest it spawn a real resistance movement with teeth singularly focused on the puppetmasters orchestrating the “clash of civilizations”.

This style of dissent-lite only enables introducing and sustaining beneficial cognitive diversity for the purpose of defocusing the energies of conscionable peoples – its primary objective – until fait accompli.”

The Case Against Wikileaks – I

Posted at Veterans Today:

Let me first say that harassing Julian Assange for having published leaked government documents is completely wrong. There’s no evidence so far that anyone has been injured directly because of the leaks. National
security (even as understood by mainstream statists) hasn’t been damaged.
As for the embarrassment some officials might be feeling, tough. Governments routinely subject their citizens to much worse for no valid reason.  As for diplomacy, there’s none worth the name.  All we have is blackmailers, bullies, and outright bandits in high places. Some outing and shaming of their public actions is in order. Exposing the crimes and blunders of the state is not only a right of citizens, but a

As enough people have argued, Assange is obviously not guilty of treason, since he’s not a citizen of the US. And, although some people think he’s guilty of espionage, that’s doesn’t seem true either.  He didn’t hack any state computer or blow any agent’s cover to get his information. It was mostly given to him voluntarily by whistle-blowers and leakers.  All he did was publish it. And, since New York Times Co. v. United States (1971), US law has protected the right of publishers to publish politically sensitive information without “prior restraints,” as long as it doesn’t cause “grave and irreparable damage”
to the public.

Having said that, though, I must admit that for almost a year now, as I’ve
I’ve found the whole Wikileaks operation strange, if not a bit fishy. Let me recount the ways.

1. Most of the documents seems to cover material already fairly well-known to informed people.  The new material is mostly embarrassing stuff, nothing truly revelatory, say dozens of critics. Now, mainstream critics might just be trying to do damage control, but why would
respected alternative investigators who are outspoken critics of war and the police state, people like Wayne Madsen or co-founder John Young or Chris Floyd, among many others, also come to that conclusion? [Floyd seems to have “gone
since then].

By Assange’s own account in the  Australian, here are the most important revelations from Wikileaks:

“The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet
passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties. Presumably Australian UN diplomats may be targeted, too.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia asked the US Officials in Jordan and
Bahrain want Iran ‘s nuclear program stopped by any means available.

Britain’s Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect “US interests”.

Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept
from parliament.

The US is playing hardball to get other countries to take freed detainees from Guantanamo Bay. Barack Obama agreed to meet the Slovenian President only if Slovenia took a prisoner. Our Pacific
neighbour Kiribati was offered millions of dollars to accept detainees.”

Now, these disclosures would be nothing to scoff about on any activist’s resume.  But is Assange telling us anything  we didn’t already know? What has really been added so far except specifics and
details? Then why are the revelations being called a
new 9-11

2. An overblown media story is not the only difficulty with Wikileaks.Consider that in all this welter of damaging information, whatever you think of it, there’s nothing that really damages Israel.

Justin Raimondo, a right-wing libertarian, has tried to suggest there is. He says there’s material in Wikileaks that reveals the sinister activities of the Israeli mafia. Big deal. Everyone knows the
Israeli mafia is everywhere, not just in Israel. The Russian mafia is a euphemism for the Russian and Ukrainian Jewish mafia, which has strong ties to Israel. The Colombian drug trade is run by this mafia. So is the Eastern European sex trade. According to Mark Mitchell, Wall Street is run by it. A leak about the
world’s most dangerous mafia, that everyone already knows about, doesn’t really damage Israeli foreign policy, does it? It even carries a good guy flavor about it.

That means what we really have in Wikileaks is a document dump slanted a particular way. So says at least one establishment figure, Zbigniew Brzezinski,  former Secretary of State under President Carter.

Say what you will about him, Brzezinski, master-mind of the policy of luring the Soviet Union to its destruction in Afghanistan, is nobody’s fool. He spots the hand of an intelligence agency in all this.

Could this be a calculated subliminal “prepping” of the collective pysche by a state intelligence outfit, masquerading as an expose of states?

3. Now comes a
report that Julian Assange cut a deal
with Israeli officials to keep anything damaging to Israel out of  the revelations. I don’t know how well-sourced or credible this report is. But then there’s also Assange’s citation of  Benjamin Netanyahu, the hawkish Israeli prime minister who’s praised Wikileaks. And there’s Assange’s statement in the Australian crediting Rupert Murdoch, a hard-line
Zionist and one of the biggest promoters of war with Iraq, as his inspiration. That alone should make people think twice . It’s not just that Israeli isn’t damaged by Wikileaks. A lot of the material on the site actually helps Israel’s global objectives.  We now know that neighboring Arab states are alarmed by the idea of a nuclear Iran. We learn that the Saudi rulers are in bed with the Israeli government and are thoroughly corrupt. Pakistan is treacherous and a threat. There’s a hornet’s nest of terror in South India. This is news? And even if you think it is, who benefits?

Doesn’t all this simply amplify Israel’s hardline attitude to the Islamic world and justify the recent introduction of the biometric ID into India, Afghanistan, and the Af-Pak border? Don’t the revelations reflect most poorly on the Arab states and on America, but not on Israel? Don’t they channel global attention and anger away from the global economic collapse master-minded by Zionist financiers and their supremo, the Federal Reserve? Don’t they redirect anger at Israel for the slaughter in Gaza, for the massacre
on the Mavi Marmara
, and for the AIPAC espionage case, as Gordon Duff, at Veterans Today points out? Even
liberal commentator Juan Cole writes
that Assange is being tarred and feathered for giving to the public what AIPAC routinely gives to Israel.

And what is the ultimate result? Israel now claims that the US is too distracted to broker a deal on settlements.

Again, who benefits from that? Israeli hard-liners, of course.

4.  But maybe all this is just the price Assange has to pay to get wide coverage in the Western mainstream, largely dominated by Zionist editors, writers, and publishers?


Is it also part of the price that he has to bash the 9-11 movement? If you’re against empire and exploitation, as Assange says he is, then shouldn’t you be interested in uncovering the truth about the attack that was the explicit trigger for the unjust
war on Iraq, the global war on terror, Homeland Security, and every police state measure since?

And if you’re not, what’s your excuse?

It’s not just that Assange is not interested in 9-11. He’s gone out of his way to mock people who’ve devoted countless unpaid hours of work to investigate it, with none of the media attention that follows every step Assange takes.

5. And that brings me to my fifth point. The fate of whistle-blowers and tellers of dangerous truth is rarely rock-star celebrity. Count them. Mordechai Vanunu, who exposed Israel’s nuclear program – imprisoned for nearly 20 years. Gary Webb, who exposed the CIA connection to the distribution of crack cocaine in the US –  probably murdered. Russian journalist, Anna Politkovskaya, who criticized Putin’s policies in Chechnya -assassinated. Lebanese journalists Samir Qassir and Gebran Tueni, who criticized the Syrian government –
killed in car bombings. In 90% of such cases, says the Committee to Protect Journalists, the killers are never brought to justice. Yet, Assange, “the
most dangerous man in Cyberspace,”
according to the faux-alternative
magazine Rolling Stone, lives to tell the tale of his persecution from the cover of Time magazine and the podium of TED conferences, weighted down with awards and honors from such establishment worthies as  Economist, New Statesman, and Amnesty International.

And now he is the center of an international man-hunt. Here too, the claims are bizarre. If Wikileaks hasn’t put lives at risk or seriously damaged “national security,” by even the government’s own account, what to make of all these feverish cries for prosecution under the espionage act, for imprisonment
and torture
, even for execution?

Are they for real, or does any one else detect an element of theater?
The Wikileaks disclosures have been called cyber-terrorism by many. When before have we seen an international man-hunt for a rag-tag band of terrorists headed up by a charismatic mystery man with a striking appearance and a personal life shrouded in mystery? Now we have Osama-bin-Assange and Al-Wikileaks at war with Joe Lieberman and Sarah Palin, on one hand, and cheered on by David Frum, on the other. Notice that Frum points out that the disclosures actually support George Bush’s rationale for invading Iraq.

This is box-office gold. As some wide-awake journalist has noted, the big winner in all this is the establishment media. Before, it had one foot in the grave. Deservedly. Now it is a  “truth-teller.” Readership is up, resurrected by proxy. And the major alternative press, the foundation activists, are bolstering the conclusions of the New York Times. How convenient.

I dearly wish Julian Assange were exactly as he seems – a brilliant iconoclast delivering the death blow to imperialism. But my memory is not so dim.  I remember another media circus besides the one around
Osama. I recall the mass adulation of  a man who exuded brilliance, youth, hope, and salvation. That was in 2008, and he was a young law professor from Chicago. How did that turn out?

6.  Then again, if Assange’s message is so subversive to the state, why are the state’s most reliable mouthpieces plastering his message everywhere? Why did Assange himself choose the New York Times, the Guardian, and Der Spiegel for his initial exposes?

These are left-center outlets, statist to the core.  And Assange, the self-proclaimed libertarian chooses them? Perhaps, one could argue, the left-center is where the most powerful and influential media organs are located. Assange is just being a savvy marketer in picking those outlets.


But perhaps not.

Perhaps, instead, he could have thrown in one libertarian or conservative newspaper, at least, to show even- handedness? How hard would it have been to send material to, say, the Independent?

7. But he didn’t, so again I ask you,  how libertarian can he really be? And if he isn’t a libertarian, why does he go out of his way to proclaim he is? There’s nothing wrong, after all, with  being a
socialist or even a communist, at least in most places outside the US.

Why doesn’t Assange just declare himself a left-wing peacenik and leave
it at that?

Ah, now things get even more interesting. Dig into Assange’s writings -  most of it very engaging and thoughtful –  and contradictions emerge.

On June 18, 2006, he writes:

“Rights are freedoms of action that are known to be enforceable. Consequently there are no rights without beliefs about the future effects of behavior. Unenforcable general rights exist only insofar as they are argumentation that may one day yield enforcement. Hence the Divine Right of Kings, the right of way, mining rights, conjugal rights, property rights, and copyright. The decision as to what should be enforced and what may be ignored is political. This does not mean that rights are unimportant, but rather, that politics (the societal control of freedom) is so important as to subsume rights.”

I will repeat that. Assange places societal control above the exercise of rights.

This is not libertarian. And it’s not an isolated statement. It’s repeated elsewhere.

“Technical people, good at stacking houses of abstract cards often look at the law and see rules, but this is a shadow, for law hangs from the boughs of politics, that branch of behavior involved with the societal control of freedom of action. Always consider the real politik
of law; who will push for change and who will resist.”

And then about global warming (Assange seems to believe in anthropogenic global warming), he says this:

“The bottom line is, as Benford notes, “we’re going to have to run this planet.”

Some libertarianism. One critic has pointed out that at the core of Assange’s philosophy is not openness and freedom so much as a left-leaning concern with “justice.” Nothing wrong with that. So why the dress-up in American-style libertarianism? At whom is the repackaging, if it is that, directed?

Authoritarianism emerges also in Assange’s work at Wikileaks, where he is technically the chief editor and spokesman. His associates complain of egotistic, autocratic behavior, much different from his anarchist professions.

Some have left to start their own sites. Others complain about the secrecy he maintains about his own work, also at odds with the transparency he advocates for others.

This secrecy might, at first, seem justified. Wikileaks, after all, is a private, not a public outfit. Maybe so. But that distinction hasn’t stopped the site from publishing the secrets of other private organizations, like the Christian Scientists and the Mormons. It’s also published the hacked private emails of Sarah Palin and the financial information of private clients of the Swiss bank, Julius Baer.

Wayne Madsen has argued that this ultimately benefits Democrat financier George Soros.

This is a performance that seems not only hypocritical but curiously partisan and parochial, especially when set against the generous intellectual sweep of Assange’s theoretical writing.

And that’s exactly the taste left in your mouth after a sampling of Wikileaks‘revelations.

After all the hype about “scientific journalism,” the conclusions Wikileaks
supports are downright provincial: our government lied us into war in Iraq; Hillary Clinton’s a bitch; Arab regimes are corrupt and deserve regime change; private contractors are bilking tax-payers; corporate corruption is the real conspiracy, not 9-11.

This is stuff that could have come out of the computer of any
government propagandist.

More to the point, some of us are wondering if it really did.

(To be continued)

The Extremists Who Founded America….

Right Wing Extremists: Saving America Since 1776

With the 233rd Independence Day celebration on it’s way in America, we thought it would be a good idea to honor the radical extremists that founded this country.
Now, it might be true that calling Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin “right wing” is a bit historically questionable within the original context of the old Left-Right paradigm laid out in the French Assembly in the late 18th Century. We understand that technically the founders had more in common with what would historically be deemed the “left” than anything. ……”

Edward Bernays On Self Interest And Propaganda

It’s a mistake to think propaganda is solely something “they” (the power elites) do to us (passive viewers). It’s just not so.

While propaganda can often be so subtle that the viewer cannot recognize he’s being manipulated, it isn’t true that the viewer is completely helpless to resist it.

The reason for this is that contemporary propaganda is rarely a direct command. Instead, it’s couched in language that appeals to viewers’ self-interests. So, anything that flatters our self-perception or claims to fulfill our desires should alert us to the fact that manipulation might be going on.

The father of modern propaganda, Edward Bernays, described this process at length:

“The leaders who lend their authority to any propaganda campaign will do so only if it can be made to touch their own interests. There must be a disinterested aspect of the propagandist’s activities. In other words, it is one of the functions of the public relations counsel to discover at what points his client’s interests coincide with those of other individuals or groups.
In the case of the soap sculpture competition, the distinguished artists and educators who sponsored the idea were glad to lend their services and their names because the competitions really promoted an interest which they had at heart—the cultivation of the esthetic impulse among the younger generation.
Such coincidence and overlapping of interests is as infinite as the interlacing of group formations themselves. For example, a railway wishes to develop its business. The counsel on public relations makes a survey to discover at what points its interests coincide with those of its prospective customers. The company then establishes relations with chambers of commerce along its right of way and assists them in developing their communities. It helps them to secure new plants and industries for the town. It facilitates business through the dissemination of technical information. It is not merely a case of bestowing favors in the hope of receiving favors; these activities of the railroad, besides creating good will, actually promote growth on its right of way. The interests of the railroad and the communities through which it passes mutually interact and feed one another.
In the same way, a bank institutes an investment service for the benefit of its customers in order that the latter may have more money to deposit with the bank. Or a jewelry concern develops an insurance department to insure the jewels it sells, in order to make the purchaser feel greater security in buying jewels. Or a baking company establishes an information service suggesting recipes for bread to encourage new uses for bread in the home. The ideas of the new propaganda are predicated on sound psychology based on enlightened selfinterest.”

—    Edward Bernays in Propaganda (1928)

13 Strategies Of Mass Psychic Control

Bill Ross at

I do not share the stated opinion (lie) of the Powers That Be (PTB´s), that mankind is inherently irrational and incapable of rational behavior. The past accomplishments of mankind, in the areas of law, international agreements and limits on organized power (which are currently being destroyed) argue otherwise. There are simple, provable causes of why people do not make rational choices and stand up for what is right, or even their own personal survival:

1. People are overly taxed, directly and indirectly by the time and energy it takes to survive and deal with pervasive government and law to achieve anything, resulting in little time or energy to consider the larger picture of their own lives or where trends are leading.

2. People have been wrongly convinced that their personal opinion is irrelevant and critical issues pertaining to survival and their own lives are therefore best left to self-proclaimed “experts”, who claim, but are unable to prove that they know best as evidenced by the results of their enforced opinions being social/economic failure and war.

3. People have been wrongly convinced that they have no control in their own lives, let alone the direction of their societies.

4. People have been wrongly convinced (manipulated and mis-educated) that “something from nothing” and therefore “causeless effects” are possible and that “shit happens” or “Gods will – predestination” is a valid explanation for what is not understood. It is believed that some things in the real world have no factual, rational explanation and it is pointless to try to understand. This was the whole point of the Renaissance (birth of western civilization), the rejection of mysticism and those who used it as a pretext for slavery. The Renaissance was social and legal acceptance of the fact that proven fact, knowledge and thus objective reality are supreme and will prevail, independent of contrary opinions. The truth is that everything that happens in the real world, including human actions, can be rationally explained in terms of causes and provable relationships to observed effects.

5. People have been mis-educated to believe that large events such as war are a indivisible thing rather than the large sum of many small, easily addressed causes. As a consequence, solving such problems is assumed to require blunt force as opposed to intelligently addressing the causes.

6. To accept and live according to fact and reason is a difficult path, resulting in conflict with those who believe you are judging them, when, in reality, you are defending yourself from others imposing their opinions on you or trying to bully, use and manipulate you.

7. Because we cannot read each others minds and life appears so complex, confusing and overwhelming, people are not sure what is right or wrong. Taking a position on issues leads to disagreement which has the potential of conflict requiring time and energy to deal with, detracting from life. To be left alone in peace (basic human need) is believed to require following the herd and conformance, since the alternative is taking a position and engaging in conflict with all who claim to disagree, including those who claim the right to exercise force in support of their position and do not acknowledge fact, reason or law.

8. If you choose to live according to fact and reason, you will inevitably be proven wrong on some points. You must possess enough humility to admit this and the ability to adapt your entire reality and belief system to accommodate the newly proven facts. In other words, you must be adaptable enough to handle life´s changes and not seek boring comfort and security, since it is an illusionary trap, leading to stagnation.

9. People are trapped in the perceptual paradigm of their functionand social class (environment) and are unable to see or acknowledge the possibility of other realities or the validity of other opinions from other environments.

10. People have been subverted into believing that the problems of the human condition are intractable and are caused by inherent flaws in humanity, requiring coercive force to be exerted by those who claim moral superiority or control the apparatus of state.

11. People have been mis-educated to believe that mankind and civilization is not a part of the natural order of things and therefore, we are special, not subject to the immutable laws of action and consequence, as enforced by the laws of nature. Neglecting the role of those who have subverted education, this requires people to be stupid enough to not question their education and the opinion of the “experts”. It also requires people to be stupid enough to continue trusting these expert opinions, despite overwhelming contrary evidence. We therefore believe we are immune to facing the consequences of our actions or that government or the law will protect us. They cannot and thus will not, for the simple reason that they are also subject to the laws of nature. Hurricane Katrina and New Orleans has shown the folly of this. Government was actually an impediment to those who tried to help.

12. As a consequence of the arbitrary exercise of force, unchecked by objective law or democratic will by states and other organized powers, the best personal survival strategy is assumed to be to keep a low profile and hope you are not noticed or targeted. This strategy may be able to delay when you are targeted, but will not change the fact you are on the target list. The more you have to take or the more you interfere with power´s whims and methodology, the higher you are on the list. Those who insist that the equality provisions of the “rule of law” be honored and manage to have an effect on social awareness, such as Martin Luther King Jr. are at the top of the list

13. Knowledge regarding mankind appears to have been destroyed (not really, just made to appear ineffective) by those who exercise power enforcing different relationships between action and consequence than natural forces and un-coerced people would choose. This results in people being unwilling to choose, since to act according to the knowledge of objective reality is invariably in conflict with what those in power demand (your servitude). If people make a firm choice, on the one hand the laws of nature will dictate consequences and on the other organized force will dictate different consequences. The obvious rational choice under these contradictory conditions is to not or appear not to make any choice, or to make choices which are consistent with both the laws of nature and the will of our self proclaimed masters. The laws of nature say you should make pro-survival choices, the will of our masters says you should make choices consistent with their short term survival agenda under penalty of non-survival should you fail to comply. The result is that people are in contradictory environments, constantly trying to balance between the contradictory demands of power and personal survival.

It is psychological warfare against the people, placing them in artificially created environments where correct choices are dangerous to immediate survival at the hands of arbitrary power. In other words, people are terrified of the fact that acknowledging and acting according to fact and reason puts them on a direct collision course with very dangerous powers who do not acknowledge any fact, knowledge or reason, only the circular logic of their claimed right to keep people in servitude and to possess and use the wealth and power of nature and civilization for purposes of their own.”

    Which “Bastards”? More Discrepancies In Wikileaks “Revelations”

    Maximilien Forte at Zero Anthropology:

    “Which Bastards?

    When asked by Larry King on Monday, 26 July, who he meant to call “bastards” when he told Der Spiegel “I enjoy crushing bastards,” Assange specified he meant U.S. forces. Assange must also believe that those studying these documents will not focus as much on the atrocities committed by the Taleban, such as the devastating carnage caused by their IEDs and suicide bombers, and their apparent disregard for the scores of civilians that are killed as a result of going after one target with a massive bomb–The Guardian, with what is arguably the best coverage of the three newspapers to have obtained the documents a month in advance of their public release, has already covered this aspect quite quickly. In these same reports, the Taleban appear to be using hammers to kill mosquitoes. Left at that level of discussion, we have data, but not much understanding–for example, of why the Taleban have nonetheless gained strength and support, or why we may view their deadly attacks as something for which the U.S. and NATO share partial responsibility, for having overthrown and persecuted the Taleban after invading and occupying their country, thereby provoking a hostile and asymmetric reaction. It would be a silly or wicked person who would argue that Afghans have no right to fight back.

    While I generally agree with Assange’s sentiments, to the extent that they are knowable, I do not share his optimism about the impact of these documents. Information is not power, and it is not meaning. To make sense of these documents requires interpretation and argumentation that goes beyond and outside the limits of what are, after all, reports reflective of an American optic, produced by combatants. Source criticism and cross checking will be paramount, and to the extent that is not done, Wikileaks may witness members of the public using the same documents to not only bolster the arguments to support continuation of this war, but even an escalation to direct hostilities with Iran (see The Guardian, and see the justified alarm expressed by Marc Lynch at Foreign Policy). There is also debate between The Guardian and The New York Times over the extent to which the reports can be trusted when it comes to Pakistan’s supposed role in aiding the Taleban and conducting covert operations against the government of Afghanistan and western forces–that dispute happened within the first day of reporting on the documents, and disagreement over their credibility did not stop the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan from verbally thrashing each other in public, again within 24 hours of the documents’ release. These reports overall contain enough to hurt those who are critics of U.S. foreign policy, as much as they will hurt those who support it. They contain as much potential for escalating and expanding conflict, as they contain for mobilizing popular support to stop it. I also understand that my commentary here may well be premature, but then so are all the current commentaries.
    What Should Matter to Social Scientists?

    To bring this discussion closer to the concerns of anthropologists and social scientists generally, there are a few points that I feel need to be made. One concerns the extent to which these records are only a partial selection of all records produced by the U.S. military. That is a significant problem, because we cannot know if the items excluded would in some way modify any conclusions we reach about the records we have. Wikileaks received a total of about 110,000 records, and released about 92,000. It is hard to believe that a period covering six years of war could have produced only this amount. To my knowledge, Julian Assange has not been asked any questions about this issue. We therefore also do not know why these records were included and others excluded. This issue will come up again when I speak about what the records reveal about the workings of the Human Terrain System.

    A second problem, and it is a major one, concerns Assange’s assertions that the items were redacted to minimize the risk of harm to the sources indicated in the records. From what we have seen already, just with reference to Human Terrain Teams alone and their sources, that is completely untrue. There is no evidence whatsoever of any kind of redaction. Moreover, when one deletes information for a record, one is supposed to mark the text in some way to say either “name deleted” or “sentence deleted,” etc., and I see no evidence of that. In addition, who comprises Wikileaks’ team of redactors, and on the basis of what knowledge and expertise, as either war fighters, or people with experience and knowledge of Afghanistan, could they make calls about what was “harmless” versus “harmful” information? Which specialists did they consult, and for how long did they have the records to study? Not a word about this, merely bland and general assurances.

    Indeed, Assange’s statements about Wikileaks’ “harm minimization process” seem to only focus on the safety of his “bastards,” noting that the documents “do not generally cover top-secret operations” and that they “delayed the release of some 15,000 reports” as “demanded by our source” (source). This is an exchange Assange had with Der Spiegel on this issue:

    SPIEGEL: The material contains military secrets and names of sources. By publishing it, aren’t you endangering the lives of international troops and their informants in Afghanistan?

    Assange: The Kabul files contain no information related to current troop movements. The source went through their own harm-minimization process and instructed us to conduct our usual review to make sure there was not a significant chance of innocents being negatively affected. We understand the importance of protecting confidential sources, and we understand why it is important to protect certain US and ISAF sources [emphasis added].

    SPIEGEL: So what, specifically, did you do to minimize any possible harm?

    Assange: We identified cases where there may be a reasonable chance of harm occurring to the innocent. Those records were identified and edited accordingly.

    A third problem has to do with source criticism, source confirmation, and Assange’s call for crowdsourcing. Anthropologists should relate to this issue personally. Imagine that someone gets hold of your fieldnotes, and releases a part of them. No analysis, no contextualization, no doubts about the veracity of what an informant told you is in those notes. They are released, and then members of a broad public take hold of their interpretation, and take what is reported as the truth of a situation. Wouldn’t this make you freak out? Are any of our books and journal articles a mere transcription of our fieldnotes? So who is this “crowd” that will make solid arguments from these notes? How will they check their veracity? Do they know who wrote these reports, under what conditions, under what limitations, and with what motivations? Will they travel to Afghanistan and cover the ground covered by these military units? What other documents will they use to confirm these reports, or will they trust them blindly? These are already some of the issues being raised about the alleged Iran-Al Qaeda connection, and Pakistan’s role in supporting the Taleban.”

    UK Mind-Reading Surveillance System Monitors Anti-Social Behavior

    Along the lines of Google Suggest, which replaces your own thoughts with intrusive suggestions, the cheery little police state in Britain is exploring some anticipatory thought control of its own:

    “The technology, called Sigard, monitors movements and speech to detect signs of threatening behaviour.

    Its designers claim the system can anticipate anti-social behaviour and violence by analysing the information picked up its sensors. Continue reading

    Echelon: The Global Spy System

    An article by Nicky Hager at from Covert Action Quarterly (1998) about Echelon. Hager’s book on the subject, “Secret Power: New Zealand’s Role In the International Spy Network,” is dated 1996, so I’m a little confused by the dating of the article. Echelon is/was a global espionage and interception system coordinated by the US/UK with the aid of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. In NZ, writes Hager, it was implemented without the assent of the public and most public officials.

    Here’s a timeline for the development of the system. Per Cryptome, the earliest public report on Echelon is in 1972.

    The first reporter to write on it is British intelligence reporter, Duncan Campbell: “They’ve Got It Taped,” New Statesman, August 12, 1988 (republished at Campbell testified before Congress on the subject in 1999 and prepared a report for the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) that was refused by EPIC’s director Marc Rotenberg, on the grounds that much of the information hadn’t been substantiated (see this correspondence between Rotenberg and Young). After that, there was debate between Campbell and Bamford over what the main focus of the espionage was. I will expand on that and link it later…


    Google: The CIA’s Spy-Buddy

    From Eric Sommer at via Market Oracle, January 14, 2010:

    “The western media is currently full of articles on Google’s ‘threat to quit China’ over internet censorship issues, and the company’s ‘suspicion’ that the Chinese government was behind attempts to ‘break-in’ to several Google email accounts used by ‘Chinese dissidents’.

    However, the media has almost completely failed to report that Google’s surface concern over ‘human rights’ in China is belied by its their deep involvement with some of the worst human rights abuses on the planet: Continue reading