IN SPITE OF GREAT ADVANCES IN FORMAL METHOD IN SOCIAL SCIENCE, MUCH OF THE UNDERSTANDING OF PERSISTING AND GENERAL RELATIONSHIPS DEPENDS UPON A GRASP THAT IS TOTALLY INDEPENDENT OF SOME FORMAL METHOD. IN ADVANCING SOCIAL SCIENCE, WE INVENT AND PRACTICE TECHNIQUE AND CULTIVATE A HUMANISTIC ART. (Robert Redfield)

TOPICS (Number of Posts)

Abuse of Science (24) Adivasi (38) Africa (10) Alien Anthropology (80) America (56) Ancient Civilizations (112) Anthropology (161) Anunnaki (38) Archaeology (73) Atlantis (23) Awareness (73) Ayahuasca (13) Babylon System (29) Belief Systems (20) Biology (30) Black Magic (14) Brainwashing (16) Carlos Castaneda (8) Ceremonies (22) Consciousness (78) Conspiracies (70) Corporation (24) Cosmos (22) Cultural Anthropology (90) Docu Drama (10) Earthlings (42) Education (23) Entertainment Industry (17) Entheogenic Shamanism (39) Ethnographic Film (31) First Contact (10) Freedom to Fascism (37) Freemasonry (16) Global Conspiracy (37) Gods (17) Graham Hancock (7) Haimendorf (6) Hidden History (57) Hidden Universe (42) Homosapiens (38) Hopi Prophecy (12) Human Democracy (24) Human Rights (50) Human Sexes (9) Illuminati (10) India (16) Indigenous People (89) Intelligence (23) Love (17) Magic Mushrooms (6) Malinowski (6) Margaret Mead (7) Matrix of Power (85) Media Control (23) Mind Control (32) Mining (15) MK-Ultra (11) Mother of Mankind (8) Music Videos (10) Native American Prophecy (17) Native Americans (17) Nature (32) New World Order (18) Occultism (12) Origin of Life (11) Passages Of Life (7) Political Anthropology (25) Psychedelics (16) Psychology (38) Reptilian Agenda (50) Rights of Indigenous People (40) Sacrificial Cannibalism (7) Satanism (17) Secret Mysteries (63) Shaman Credo Mutwa (10) Shamanism (56) Sixth Sense (16) Social Evils (18) South America (15) Spiritual Archaeology (17) Subversion (45) The Elder Brothers' Warning (14) Tribal Films (22) Tribes Of India (21) Tribes of the Deccan (8) Visual Anthropology (137) Visual Anthropology Resources (13) Voodoo (8) We Are All One (50)

TRIBES OF INDIA (Video Playlist) ETHNOGRAPHIC FILMS BY SATHYA MOHAN

Showing posts with label Matrix of Power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Matrix of Power. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 17, 2017

Watching Major Media Commit Suicide


Notes on the end of the news businessas we know it. It's personal.

This article goes to many places. I think you'll find a place that works for you.

I've been investigating and reporting on deep medical fraud for 29 years. I've been around the block a few hundred times. I've spoken with scientists who work for the government and universities, and the media operatives who support them. I know the game.

If Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is, indeed, given the green light by President Trump to investigate vaccine safety, he's going to need a truck and a chain and DOJ threats of prosecution to drag key CDC scientists into the light and elicit specific statements from them.

Even then, the odds are these scientists will keep repeating the party line:

-vaccines are overwhelmingly safe

-they have no connection to autism or other neurological damage

-the science is settled

Kennedy could run up against an organized wall of silence - scientists refusing to speak with him, on the basis that he isn't qualified to make judgments in their "field."

In that case, he will need subpoena power, for starters.

Many years ago, I interviewed Jim Warner, a White House policy analyst in the Reagan administration. He had been trying to obtain medical-research information from the federal National Institutes of Health.

He told me he was given the absolute cold shoulder:

"If ever I've been tempted to believe in socialism, science has disabused me of that. These guys [at NIH] assume that it's their show. They just assume it."

Arrogance par excellence. Scientists rebuff the White House with a yawn.

Fortunately, Kennedy is a relentless investigator. He understands how science is corrupted and paid for.

And the ace in the deck is this:

there is already enough evidence in the open record to refute the CDC's claim of vaccine safety.

Trump has blazed a trail of rejecting major media.

As a result of his merciless attacks, press outlets are going mad pushing numerous outlandish fake stories. They're ripe for further incursions on their territory.

In the past, this was the pattern:

-an outsider enters the scene and accuses the government of vast fraud

-media operators assemble their usual cast of sordid characters, who dismiss the charges

-everybody goes home and the story dies

But that's not working anymore. Media pomposity is exposed as fakery. Millions of people see through the ruse.

The media emperor is naked. He can prance around and around, but his fundamental nakedness keeps compounding the joke. Truth be told, as their financial positions sink into dire red ink, press operations are trapped.

Why...?

Because they are partners with the high-level criminals whose activities are the very stories the public wants to know about.

Reporting on these crimes in great depth, day after day, would resuscitate the newspapers and broadcast networks. But that will never happen.

For example, these crimes:

The Federal Reserve / a clandestine private corporation.



Trillions of dollars of missing US government money.

The power of the Trilateral Commission over US government policy.

The covert implementation of the United Nations agenda of destruction in US communities.

And a hundred more issues...

Expose these down to the core, and people would buy newspapers off the rack like they buy coffee and beer and video games and cell phones and gasoline and underwear and toilet paper and lipstick and fast food.

The Times would have to schedule extra press runs just to keep up with the demand. Its financial bottom line would soon look like Christmas.

You could talk to the publisher of the New York Times and present him with an ironclad plan for pulling his paper out of its deep financial hole, based on covering true stories like those above, and you would find no joy, because he would rather go down with the ship than go up against The Matrix.

The Times and other hoary media outlets live by the rule of limited hangout. In intelligence parlance, that means admitting a small piece of the truth in order to hide the rest.

"We'll show you a tree in the forest, but not the forest."

I know how it works, because as a reporter I've been there. I've approached editors of various media outlets with stories that crack the trance, and I've had those stories tossed back at me.

"We're just not interested," they say.

"This isn't our kind of piece."

Or: "Well, we already covered that."

But they didn't cover it...

They did a limited hangout on it. They ran a story that exposed one tiny corner of a whole bloody mess.

I say this - as simple fact - if any intelligent, aggressive, truly independent investigator were the managing editor of the New York Times, and if he were given free rein, he would have that paper back in the black in a year.

He would have it roaring on all cylinders. He would have people fighting each other in the streets to grab the last copy off the newsstand.

Journalism schools all over the country would close down in shame. Because he would be running stories that would crack the whole rotting edifice of cartel-control along many fronts, and he would be filling up a planned vacuum of truth with fire.

A decade ago, here is what a working reporter for a major paper told me:

"We know what stories we can't cover. Nobody needs to prep us. Our editors know, too. Otherwise, they'd never get to be editors."

A player in a non-profit group once told me I could have a job with a paper on the east coast.

In a roundabout way, he hinted at what they were looking for. In five minutes, I saw the handwriting on the wall. Essentially, the editor was searching for a reporter who would cover politics in Central America.

The stories would have to favor the repressive governments in power.

The basic cover was:

these leaders were fighting the good fight against Communism. The death squads they were sending out, in cooperation with the CIA, were freedom fighters.

And of course, any mention of cocaine trafficking as a means for obtaining weapons was off-limits.

None of this was spelled out. But the message was clear. They wanted a propaganda specialist. If I, as an up and coming reporter, decided to play ball, I could advance up the ladder.

Apparently, some travel was necessary. But I knew I could turn out reams of copy without ever leaving my apartment, because I grasped the fundamental angle I was supposed to pursue. Needless to say, I turned down the offer.

It was the first time I fully realized how easy the job of reporting could be. Assemble a list of reliable sources (who would support the mandatory point of view), walk right into a prepared group of corporate and think-tank allies, pull down copy from wire services, and re-write stories in a way that bolstered the idea that American Empire was really "spreading democracy" to the less fortunate.

A walk in the park...

Twenty years later, I saw the same overall pattern in hundreds of major-media stories - but the point of view and the mandate had changed. Now it was all about Globalism.

The covert op was the takedown of America, in order to squash the last vestige of political freedom and integrate the nation in "a new economic order."


However, over the mountains, a new dawn was rising: the Internet. Independent media outlets. The resistance.

It was immediately obvious that, unless someone could shut this new creature down, major media would have no way to challenge the invasion. Independent news sources would gradually wreck MSM financial bottom lines.

Fronting for Globalist princes, Big News would see their bias exposed time and time again. The blowback on them would be enormous.

Trapped and corned like rats, they would attack, but their efforts would only compound their problem.

Then a populist named Donald Trump strolled on to the scene. He knew major media were suffering great losses. He knew online media were in the ascendance.

He had people like Steve Bannon (Breitbart) who were bringing him up to speed. He saw how Matt Drudge was obliterating traditional news sources, even while (selectively) linking to them.

A revolution was in progress...

Trump had the right stuff for this situation, because he didn't care about offending people. He was mercurial, reckless; an opportunist. He could fly by the seat of his pants. He realized where and how, in America, the Globalists were causing great damage.

Trump accelerated the fall of major media from their thrones.

People around the world, untold millions, thought to themselves,

"Trump is finally giving major media what they deserve."

Giving the major media what they deserve is a force to be reckoned with, because there is no effective response to it. Nothing works.

Who can lead the fight to preserve mainstream news? Answer: mainstream news.

That isn't going to go anywhere, because more and more people are rejecting the mainstream wholesale.

Think of major media as a ship. In full view of the passengers, the captain has just steered it into a shore of high rocks. The craft is beginning to tilt, and it's taking on water.

As the passengers scramble to safety on the beach, the captain is yelling,

"Don't leave, come back, everything is all right, I didn't do anything wrong, it's your fault, you're too stupid to understand the correct principles of navigation!"

Translation:

"I'm committing suicide. Go down with me."

As a reporter starting out in the 1980s, one of my first glimpses of trouble involved a few of the papers I was writing for:

they were definitely on the political Left, but at the same time they were businesses. You only had to look at the ads choking the pages to see that.

They were capitalist enterprises. But they would never fully admit that. They were operating under a self-induced, self-serving delusion about fundamental economics.

Eventually, larger publishers bought them out, and a few of the old guard made significant dollars on the deals.

It was an old story about socialists getting rich.

This contradiction plagues every major media outlet today. They claim to serve the public interest, but they want to be rich. Their reporters want very nice salaries. And this is all in the service of Globalism, which aims to bankrupt economies and drive populations into the arms of technocrat planners of societies.

It doesn't add up. It doesn't work.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to be rich and working hard to achieve it. But claiming, at the same time, that you want the government to run the economy is a sick joke. A transparently sick joke, on the order of wealthy celebrities stumping for socialism, while they hire more armed security and dig bunkers on their walled properties.

Suppose you could approach a well-known and well-paid reporter for the New York Times.

And suppose you said this:

"For years, you've been writing about the less fortunate and giving back and more government support for the downtrodden and humanitarianism and so on...

So I want to know, would you be willing to donate two-thirds of your salary, for the sake of equality, to those who need the money? Would you be willing to sell your co-op and give the money to the poor and move into a small apartment?"

The duplicitous and slimy major media are obviously engaged in a long con.

They want their cake, they want to eat it, and they also want to appear as architects of "a more humane planet." They care about a more humane order in the same way an ant cares about space travel.

They care about serving their bosses, and those bosses have other bosses who are engineering a future of poverty for all, as a mechanism of control. That's who's paying reporters their salaries.

Do you know what a tired rich media liberal (fake socialist) looks like? Of course you do.

You can see one every night anchoring the national news. Over the years, I've spoken with a few of these types. In every case, I've gotten the impression they're sitting on a keg of dynamite. They know how precarious their position is. They're surprised they've lasted as long as they have. Their spouting of liberal homilies is transparent.

Where did they go wrong?

Answer: the first day they accepted their first job as a reporter. That's when they sold out. They knew it then, and under cheesy layers of vast pretensions, they still know it now. But they can't turn around. They've made a commitment.

They tell themselves:

"It's business. It's not personal. This is the business I'm in."

But of course, it is personal. Everything is personal. We're talking about lives and minds and souls.

That's what these reporters traded, in the perverse corner of the marketplace. They chose the rackets, the information mafia, the law of omerta, the dishonorable underground that lives in the highest penthouses.

Whatever gloss they lay on, the trap they're in stays in place. And now, they're sinking and sinking.

I could try to work up pity for them, buy why bother?

Damage is damage, and they've done a great deal of it. A full confession would make a start, but that's not going to happen.

They're in a race with themselves. How long can they keep erecting delusions about their work, vs. their growing realization about those delusions?

It's inescapably personal. It always was.

The night is falling on them, and the rain is coming down, too. Their mandate is to be on the Inside, but they're on the Outside now. They're the walking dead. They'll keep walking, but things will never be the same.

As a long addendum, here is a backgrounder, an article I wrote headlined, "Howard Beale, the last sane man on television":

The best film ever made about television's war on the population is Paddy Chayefsky's scorching masterpiece, Network (1976). Yet it stages only a few minutes of on-air television.

The rest of the film is dialogue and monologue about television. Thus you could say that, in this case, word defeats image.

Even when showing what happens on the TV screen, Network bursts forth with lines like these, from newsman Howard Beale, at the end of his rope, on-camera, speaking to his in-studio audience and millions of people in their homes:

"So, you listen to me. Listen to me! Television is not the truth. Television's a god-damned amusement park.

Television is a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers, and football players.

We're in the boredom-killing business… We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true! But you people sit there day after day, night after night, all ages, colors, creeds. We're all you know.

You're beginning to believe the illusions we're spinning here. You're beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you.

You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube. You even think like the tube. This is mass madness. You maniacs.

In God's name, you people are the real thing. We are the illusion."

Beale, coming apart at the seams, is a mad prophet.

And because he shines with brilliance and poetry, he can affect minds. Therefore, the television network can make use of him. It can turn him into a cartoon for the masses.

It is Beale's language and the passion with which he delivers it that constitutes his dangerous weapon. Therefore, the Network transforms him into a cheap religious figure, whose audience slathers him with absurd adoration.

Television's enemy is the word. Its currency is image.

Beale breaks through the image and defiles it. He cracks the egg. He stops the picture-flow. He brings back the sound and rhythm of spoken poetry. That is his true transgression against the medium that employs him.

The modern matrix has everything to do with how knowledge is acquired.

Television, in the main, does not attempt to impart knowledge. It strives to give the viewer the impression that he knows something. There is a difference.

Knowledge, once established, is external to, and independent of, the viewer. Whereas the impression of knowing is a feeling, a conviction, a belief the viewer holds, after he has watched moving images on a screen.

Images… plus, of course, in the case of the news, the narrative voice.

A basic premise of New Age thinking is:

"everything is (connected to) everything."

This fits quite well with the experience of watching film or video flow.

Example:

We see angry crowds on the street of a foreign city. Then young people on their cell phones sitting in an outdoor café.

Then the marble lobby of a government building where men in suits are walking, standing in groups talking to each other. Then at night, rockets exploding in the sky.

Then armored vehicles moving through a gate into the city. Then clouds of smoke on another street and people running, chased by police.

A flow of consecutive images...

The sequence, obviously, has been assembled by a news editor, but most of the viewing audience isn't aware of that. They're watching the "interconnected" images and listening to a news anchor tell a story that colors (infects) every image.

Viewers thus believe they know something. Television has imparted that sensation to them. That's what news is all about: delivering a sensation of knowing to the audience.

There is no convenient place where the ordinary viewing audience can stop the flow of images or the story being told. They are inside it. They don't have the leverage of a crystallized idea or the power of reasoning to get out.

They are inside the story. Knowledge thus becomes story.

The viewer is transfixed by the sensation that he is "inside" watching/experiencing story. This fixation produces a short circuit in his reasoning mind (if he has one). No time to stop, no time to think; just watch the flow.

When you take this pattern out to a whole society, you are talking about a dominant method through which "knowledge" is gained.

"Did you see that fantastic video about the Iraq War? It showed that Saddam actually had bioweapons."

"Really? How did they show that?"

"Well, I don't exactly remember. But watch it. You'll see."

And that's another feature of the modern acquisition of knowledge: amnesia about details.

The viewer can't recall key features of what he saw. Or if he can, he can't describe them, because he was in the flow. He was inside, busy building up his impression of knowing something.

Narrative-visual-television story strips out and discards conceptual references. And lines of reasoning? To the extent they exist, they're wrapped around and inside the image-flow and the narration.

Ideas aren't as interesting as images. That's the premise.

To grasp the diminishment of language, consider the current use of the word "text." Suddenly it's become a verb; it means a process of sending words. It also refers to paragraphs or pages of writing, as opposed to pictures.

"Text" makes "writing" seem like nothing more than one functional (and machine-like) method of delivering information.

And since bone-dry information (e.g., "genetic sequences") these days is practically considered a synonym for life, when a writer infuses his words with passion, they automatically become a "rant."

"Rant" was formerly applied to describe what a person did when he was totally unhinged to the point of making no coherent sense.

Image, not the word, is the now preferred means of acquiring what passes for knowledge.

Retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy (pseudonym), once told me in an interview:

"If you wanted to try a real revolution, you would produce thousands of videos consisting of written words on screens, with someone speaking those words.

You would try to reinstate language as a medium. Poetry, formal arguments and debates, great speeches, dramatic readings.

You would go up against image and try to relegate it to its proper place…"

In the American colonies of the 18th century, several hundred thousand copies of Tom Paine's pamphlet, Common Sense, were distributed among a total population of only 2.5 million people, and the earth shook.

When a technology (television) turns into a method of perception, reality is turned inside out. People watch TV through TV eyes.

Mind control is no longer something merely imposed from the outside. It is a matrix of a self-feeding, self-demanding loop. Willing devotees of the image want images, food stamps of the programmed society.

But now, something is happening. Something different.

It is to be fervently wished that the revolution against major media will also result in a revolution against knowledge as nothing more than image.

by Jon Rappoport
January 21, 2017
from JonRappoport Website

Monday, April 10, 2017

The Real Secrets Hidden in Antarctica


https://youtu.be/237F1_aLXZ8

There may be good reason for your curiosity if you have ever wondered about what is really going on at the southernmost continent… With so many myths and rumors flying around about the place lately, we decided to do a little research of our own into the claims… which turned into a whole lot of research… and what was going to be a 10-minute video turned into this.


About the Authors 

Aaron and Melissa Dykes are the founders of TruthstreamMedia.com, Subscribe to them on YouTube, like on Facebook, follow on Twitter, support on Patreon

Watch their mini-documentary Obsolete here and their new series The Cold Noirhere

Thursday, February 16, 2017

The Era Of Human-Animal Hybrid Chimeras Has Begun

Human-animal mutant creatures make for great material for science fiction writers, but we aren’t supposed to be creating them in the real world. In so many ways, the technological advancements that we have made as a society are outpacing our ability to handle those advancements, and this field is certainly a glaring example of that reality. Just because we can create human-animal hybrid chimeras does not mean that we should. Genetic modification is a particularly dangerous science, because we are literally tinkering with the future of our planet. And when it comes to humans and animals, those are two things that definitely should not mix. Unfortunately, they are being mixed, and this could have enormous implications as our society plunges into a very uncertain future.

During all of the chaos surrounding the 2016 presidential election, a stunning announcement by the National Institutes of Health went unnoticed by almost everyone. The following comes from a Huffington Post article entitled “The Island of Dr. Moreau For Real“…

In August 2016, the National Institutes of Health announced that it was lifting its ban on research that introduces stem cells from humans into animal embryos. Stem cells have the ability to evolve into any human cell and can grow into any human tissue. The goal of this type of research is to grow human tissues and eventually human replacement organs in animals. What an innovative way to improve upon transplantation medicine! But to realize this potential, we would create an organism that is part animal and part human! These hybrids are the stuff of ancient mythology. These mixtures of different animals are called chimeras after the mythical ancient Greek creature that was part lion, snake and goat. One goal of today’s research is to produce tissues and organs for experimentation that will improve our understanding of human disease. An alternative and longer term goal would be to produce organs directly for human transplantation. Imagine an infinite source of human organs – one wears out and you produce a new one as a replacement.

When human stem cells are introduced into an animal embryo, that creature becomes part human.

So does a part-human creature have rights?

If so, how do those rights differ from those of a full human?

These are the kinds of questions that ethicists are starting to wrestle with.

The thought of creating human-animal hybrids just for the purpose of growing organs which will be used for medical transplants is beyond disturbing. But this is what our scientists actually intend to do.

And just this week, the National Academies of Sciences and Medicine has released a brand new report that endorses the genetic modification of humans. The following comes from a Gizmodo article

Today, the National Academies of Sciences and Medicine released a major new report and recommendations to ensure any such research done stateside in the future is performed responsibly and ethically.

The implicit message is that whether we like it or not, a future of gene-edited humans is on its way.

Messing around with the genetic material of humans means that you are literally messing around with the future of the human race.

And once this genetic material starts being passed from generation to generation, it will literally be impossible to put the genie back into the bottle ever again.

Fortunately, there are some experts that are extremely alarmed by this new report

“The recommendations and conclusions of this report are unsettling and disappointing,” said Marcy Darnovsky, PhD, Executive Director of the Center for Genetics and Society. “Although they’re couched in apparently cautionary language, they actually constitute a green light for proceeding with efforts to modify the human germline — that is, to engineer the genes and traits that are passed on to future children and generations.”

Hopefully the scientific community will listen to people like Dr. Darnovsky before things get wildly out of control.

There are some scientists out there that actually want to “enhance” humans by introducing genetic material from animals. The theory is that introducing genetic material from animals could give us “super sight” or “super strength” or other extraordinary powers. This is the kind of thing that researchers such as Steve Quayle and Tom Horn have been warning about for years. In the future we could literally have a creature that is 60 percent human and 40 percent bear for example. How would we treat such a creature?

And as such creatures became more numerous, how would they treat us?

If you think that such a thing could never happen, just consider ten examples of creatures that are already being created by science…











How human does a creature have to be before it has a human soul?

Somebody better start asking questions like this, because we are “playing god” and we are tinkering with things that we do not fully understand.

We have already gone way too far, but scientists all over the globe continue to press on even farther. Even if we were to completely ban this kind of “research” in the United States, it would still progress in other industrialized nations all over the planet.

The genetic modification of humans and animals is part of a larger trend that we are currently witnessing. In the scientific community, there is a tremendous amount of excitement about the fact that humans can finally “take control of their own evolution”. There are many scientists that believe that we can use various forms of technology to give ourselves superhuman powers and radically extend our lifespans. And as technology continues to increase at an exponential rate, these scientists believe that we will be able to ultimately create a “post-human society” where all sickness, disease, poverty and war are eradicated.

So they aren’t concerned about the potential dangers of these new technologies because they believe that we are right on the verge of achieving immortality and transforming this planet into a technological utopia that will be perfect in every way.

In other words, they believe that humanity will no longer need “god” because we will be our own gods.

Unfortunately for all the rest of us, in their relentless pursuit of this very foolish dream they are racing toward genetic Armageddon, and they are opening up a Pandora’s box of horrors that they simply do not understand.


Saturday, December 31, 2016

Earth's Hidden History: Gaints, Hybrids, Fallen Angels and the Bible

Timothy Alberino Discusses New Documentary Research Into Giants and hybrids hidden in our history and covered up by the Vatican and Smithsonian This short video touches on the incredible research being done. This video will open your eyes to the truth about the hidden history of earth and explain how the Bible fits in to Earth's hidden history!

Friday, June 17, 2016

How the CIA Secretly Funded Abstract Expressionism During the Cold War


Considering the possibility of a truly proletarian art, the great English literary criticWilliam Empson once wrote, “the reason an English audience can enjoy Russian propagandist films is that the propaganda is too remote to be annoying.” Perhaps this is why American artists and bohemians have so often taken to the political iconography of far-flung regimes, in ways both romantic and ironic. One nation’s tedious socialist realism is another’s radical exotica.

But do U.S. cultural exports have the same effect? One need only look at the success of our most banal branding overseas to answer in the affirmative. Yet no one would think to add Abstract Expressionist painting to a list that includes fast food and Walt Disney products. Nevertheless, the work of such artists as Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, and Willem de Kooning wound up as part of a secret CIA program during the height of the Cold War, aimed at promoting American ideals abroad.


The artists themselves were completely unaware that their work was being used as propaganda. On what agents called a “long leash,” they participated in several exhibitions secretly organized by the CIA, such as “The New American Painting” (see catalog cover at top), which visited major European cities in 1958-59 and included such modern primitive works as surrealist William Baziotes’ 1947 Dwarf (below) and 1951’s Tournament by Adolph Gottlieb above.


Of course what seems most bizarre about this turn of events is that avant-garde art in America has 
never been much appreciated by the average citizen, to put it mildly. American Main Streets harbor undercurrents of distrust or outright hatred for out-there, art-world experimentation, a trend that filters upward and periodically erupts in controversies over Congressional funding for the arts. A 1995 Independentarticle on the CIA’s role in promoting Abstract Expressionism describes these attitudes during the Cold War period:

In the 1950s and 1960s… the great majority of Americans disliked or even despised modern art—President Truman summed up the popular view when he said: “If that’s art, then I’m a Hottentot.” As for the artists themselves, many were ex- communists barely acceptable in the America of the McCarthyite era, and certainly not the sort of people normally likely to receive US government backing.

Why, then, did they receive such backing? One short answer:

This philistinism, combined with Joseph McCarthy’s hysterical denunciations of all that was avant-garde or unorthodox, was deeply embarrassing. It discredited the idea that America was a sophisticated, culturally rich democracy.

The one-way relationship between modernist painters and the CIA—only recently confirmed by former case officer Donald Jameson—supposedly enabled the agency to make the work of Soviet Socialist Realists appear, in Jameson’s words, “even more stylized and more rigid and confined than it was.” (See Evdokiya Usikova’s 1959 Lenin with Villagers below, for example). For a longer explanation, read the full article at The Independent. It’s the kind of story Don DeLillo would cook up.


William Empson goes on to say that “a Tory audience subjected to Tory propaganda of the same intensity” as Russian imports, “would be extremely bored.” If he is correct, it’s likely that the average true believer socialist in Europe was already bored silly by Soviet-approved art. What surprises in these revelations is that the avant-garde works that so radically altered the American art world and enraged the average congressman and taxpayer were co-opted and collected by suave U.S. intelligence officers like so many Shepard Fairey posters.

via Kottke

Related Content:





Josh Jones is a writer and musician based in Washington, DC. Follow him @jdmagness

Sunday, December 6, 2015

Media Terrorism: The ISIL Partnership

Winner of “Worst Staged Photo of 2015,” ISIS “first responder” aiding victims of purported Damascus terror attack

Big money in beheadings

When you see a video of an ISIS beheading or perhaps a “barrel bombed” Syrian school, you are seeing the results of the media partnership, a multi-million dollar one, between ISIS and her sister terror groups and media organizations like Reuters and AP. Working closely with “sockpuppet” rights groups and NGO’s who have long been a front for that other partnership between ISIS and Turkish/Saudi intelligence services and rogue CIA factions, “stringers” by the dozen serve alongside ISIS terrorists.

It isn’t just ISIS media groups, like the one Russia destroyed yesterday after receiving coordinates from Anonymous through media personality Jeff Rense, it is the major media as well. The money flows in from stories and photos, from beheading videos whose rights are vigorously defended though the funding flows directly into the coffers of the terror groups whose barbarous acts are being depicted.

Worse still are the hoaxes and planted or “seeded” false stories through AP and Reuters, picked up by media like the Washington Post, CNN and the Guardian, staged photos and false stories of gas attacks and “barrel bombings,” always of schools, hospitals, mosques, kindergartens and senior citizens homes.

The stories that come from this partnership, ISIS and the western media, are parroted by President Obama, Britain’s Cameron and others as “gospel.”

When tracing the background of those involved, the western media that live so comfortably among the ISIS “beheaders” with no fear whatsoever, we find a common history. Most are from Radio Liberty or Radio Free Europe, CIA fronts with many others having worked in the Israeli media, particularly the Jerusalem Times.

The other partnership that adds feigned legitimacy to the stories is the channel they are distributed through. ISIS sends all propaganda to the press through the Syrian Human Rights Observatory, a UK based “group” of one person with no background or qualifications but who is able to place stories on the front pages of dozens of major newspapers, stories which are universally unsourced, unconfirmed and almost invariably, only days later, proven to be utterly false.

It has long been a goal of “black propaganda” operations to be self funding. ISIS makes millions in partnership with the Erdogan family selling oil, not just in Turkey, but around the world, as Russian has proven.

What isn’t being noted is the funding for propaganda photos like the one featured above maintain a veritable army of disinformation specialists who exist alongside the most dangerous criminal elements perhaps in world history, living among them with impunity, selling their stories and helping fund their bestiality.

Where innocent aid workers are beheaded, seemingly for amusement, where mass graves of women and children are discovered weekly, “certain members of the press” move without fear at all. No one asks why. It is time that Reuters and their associates are brought before an international tribunal just as Julius Streicher was for publishing Der Sturmer in Nazi Germany.

Streicher was hanged on October 19, 1946.

Related Posts:






Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Everything We Have Been Taught About Our Origins Is A Lie


Graham Pick, Malta Now

In June 1936 Max Hahn and his wife Emma were on a walk beside a waterfall near to London, Texas, when they noticed a rock with wood protruding from its core. They decided to take the oddity home and later cracked it open with a hammer and a chisel. What they found within shocked the archaeological and scientific community. Embedded in the rock was what appeared to be some type of ancient man made hammer.


A team of archaeologists analysed and dated it. The rock encasing the hammer was dated to more than 400 million years old. The hammer itself turned out to be more than 500 million years old. Additionally, a section of the wooden handle had begun the metamorphosis into coal. The hammer’s head, made of more than 96% iron, is far more pure than anything nature could have achieved without assistance from relatively modern smelting methods.

In 1889 near Nampa, Idaho, whilst workers were boring an artesian well, a small figurine made of baked clay was extracted from a depth of 320 feet. To reach this depth the workers had to cut through fifteen feet of basalt lava and many other strata below that. That in itself does not seem remarkable, until one considers that the very top layer of lava has been dated to at least 15 million years old!

It is currently accepted by science and geology that coal is a by-product of decaying vegetation. The vegetation becomes buried over time and is covered with sediment. That sediment eventually fossilises and becomes rock. This natural process of coal formation takes up to 400 million years to accomplish.

Anything that is found in lumps of coal or in coal seams during mining, had to have been placed or dropped into the vegetation before it was buried in sediment.

In 1944, as a ten year old boy, Newton Anderson, dropped a lump of coal in his basement and it broke in half as it hit the floor. What he discovered inside defies explanation based upon current scientific orthodoxy.

Inside the coal was a hand crafted brass alloy bell with an iron clapper and sculptured handle.


When an analysis was carried out it was discovered that the bell was made from an unusual mix of metals, different from any known modern alloy production (including copper, zinc, tin, arsenic, iodine, and selenium).

The seam from whence this lump of coal was mined is estimated to be 300,000,000 years old!

These extraordinary discoveries although bizarre, are not unique or even uncommon. There are literally thousands of them collecting dust, locked away from public scrutiny in the vaults of museums throughout the world.There are many other unusual reported finds including the following:

The Morrisonville, Illinois Times, on June 11, 1891, reported how Mrs. S. W. Culp found a circular shaped eight-carat gold chain, about 10 inches long, embedded in a lump of coal after she broke it apart to put in her scuttle. The chain was described as “antique” and of “quaint workmanship.”

Displayed in a museum at Glen Rose, Texas, is a cast iron pot reportedly found in a large lump of coal in 1912 by a worker feeding coal into the furnace of a power plant. When he split open the coal the worker said the pot fell out, leaving its impression in the coal.

Yet another report found in the Epoch Times told of a Colorado rancher who in the 1800’s broke open a lump of coal, dug from a vein some 300 feet below the surface, and discovered a “strange-looking iron thimble.”


The Salzburg Cube is yet another ancient puzzle found by a worker named Reidl, in an Austrian foundry in 1885. Like the others, this man broke open a block of coal and found a metal cube embedded inside. Recent analysis established the object was of forged iron and obviously hand crafted. The coal it was found in was millions of years old.The list of such items goes on and on and on.

Welcome to the world of Ooparts, or Out of Place Artefacts.

Out of place artefacts (Ooparts) are so named because conventional scientific wisdom (an oxymoron if ever there was one) states that these artefacts shouldn’t exist based upon currently accepted beliefs regarding our origins and history. These discoveries are “out of place” in the orthodox timeline of human history.

The usual methods of the conformist scientific community, when faced with such anomalies is to attempt to debunk their reported age, or perhaps endeavour to discredit the source of the report or even the reporter. If this approach fails then usually the artefacts themselves are banished to the shadowy vaults of museums and warehouses, never to be seen again.

If these unusual artefacts were “one offs” then perhaps one could be forgiven for accepting the view espoused by the mainstream scientific and archaeological community that they are hoaxes or misreported stories. However, when one realises that thousands upon thousands of these anomalous artefacts have been discovered and reported over the years, then one may need to re-evaluate ones acceptance of the integrity of mainstream archaeology and science.

Occasionally an honest archaeologist will attempt to reveal to the public the true age and origin of such anomalous objects. They will question the accepted beliefs of their mainstream peers. They usually find that their career ends quite abruptly.

Unfortunately, the majority just accept what they are taught in school and university without question. That is how our educational system is designed. It does not encourage individuality and originality. It purely indoctrinates one with established beliefs and dogma.

If one requires evidence of this “mainstream” mentality, one need look no further than the realms of psychiatry. Modern psychiatry seeks to demonize and declare mentally ill anyone who deviates from what is regarded as the norm.

These so called “mental health professionals” have even invented a new mental disorder named Oppositional Defiant Disorder, or ODD (love the irony of the abbreviation).

This newly invented condition is listed in the latest installment of the industry’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, which dubs people who do not conform to what those in charge declare to be normal, as mentally insane.

So there you have your proof – I’m obviously an unmitigated nutter and completely insane. At least that is what those in authority would like everyone to believe!

Anyway, I digress.

Read the Rest of the Full Article HERE on maltanow.com