thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-05-26--LEFT GATEKEEPERS THROUGH THE NEW LEFT: MONITORED REBELLION PART II

Most pertinent to Left Gatekeeping are the think tanks .
Conservative think tanks include the Rand Group , American Enterprise Institute , the Heritage Foundation , the Cato Institute , the Center for Strategic and International Studies , the Hoover Institute and the Manhattan Project .
A centrist think tank is the Brookings Institute .
Liberal think tanks include the Center for American Progress , the Ford Foundation , the Economic Policy Institute and the Center for Economic and Policy Research .
[ These are all establishment-funded and recognised think tanks , thereby automatically able to inject viewpoints and personnel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tank , the Institute for Policy Studies ( IPS ) , produces important policy papers , but is largely ignored by the media gatekeepers and the political establishment as a whole.—Ed ] While the Congress for Cultural Freedom has supposedly dissolved , the ruling classes have learned quite well the importance of controlling alternative visions to capitalism through think tanks , media and selected personalities .
Their goal is to exclude any serious organizing of a socialist movement independent of the Democratic Party .
But if the Old Left died with the fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I , what do the ruling classes have to worry about ?
The truth is that the Leninist tradition has not died out , especially outside the United States .
It continues to be present in Cuba , in parts of South America , in Europe and in parts of Asia .
The job of the liberal think tanks in the United States is to either censor them or vilify them .
How do they do this ?
By indirectly supporting the Old Left ’ s competition – the social democrats and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Think Tanks , Media , and Left Patron Saints as Left Gatekeepers In his powerful research paper , Left Gatekeepers , Bob Feldman created a flow chart with ruling class powers such as Council of Foreign Relations , Trilateral Commission , the CIA , with the Carlyle Group at the top .
The funding for liberal think tanks comes from the Rockefellers , Carnegie , and Soros .
The Ford and MacArthur Foundations establish grants for left liberal news and media sources such as Mother Jones , the Nation Magazine , Z magazine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pacifica , and Democracy Now .
The funding of any leftist organization depends on the organization ’ s willingness to “ play ball ” if it expects to get regular funding .
In his paper , Feldman asks : The purpose of both the CIA , the upper classes and the entire Left Gatekeeping organizational apparatus is to combat communism , whether at home or abroad .
Left gatekeeping is a practice by the ruling class of setting up organizations , foundations and think tanks which funnel money into leftist organizations that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leninism ( anarchism ) • None To the right of Leninism ( social democracy , and New Deal liberals ) They do this in order to infiltrate independent working-class movements , whether Leninist or not .
This is the job of the CIA and FBI .
The second purpose is to indirectly fund what is perceived as the weaker and less threatening tendencies of the left for the purposes of isolating the Leninists .
This is the job of foundations , think tanks , the policy making discussion groups and the political campaigns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Socialist Alternative and Global Exchange will always find a welcoming ear on the radio waves and journals of the Left Gatekeepers .
Noam Chomsky , proclaimed anarchist , can come onto Democracy Now whenever he wants .
But Michael Parenti , who will defend the Soviet Union or China and who is quite capable of matching Noam Chomsky , rarely gets on the air .
Then , in election years , without too much nudging , DSA , Jacobin and Socialist Alternative will , one way or another , collapse themselves safely inside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Green Party was orchestrated so that they limited themselves to campaigns in “ safe states ” .
This way the Democratic Party will have no competition coming from the Left .
In 2002 Naomi Klein made a wonderful documentary with Avi Lewis called “ The Take ” .
The movie was about workers taking over bankrupt factories and running them without bosses .
This was followed by a well-researched and popular book of hers called The Shock Doctrine .
It described the destruction of economies around the world by a neoliberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boys ” .
A book or so later , she wrote This Changes Everything : Capitalism vs the Climate .
In this book she uses the term “ capitalism ” in a manipulative way .
The word “ capitalism ” is provocative for selling the book .
However , the book does not criticize capitalism as a system , but only the more neoliberalism version of it .
So we are left to wonder , is she a Keynesian or is she a socialist ?
Naomi Klein could have gone all over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and described workers ’ self-management projects .
She could have linked that to the workers ’ councils that were present and operating in Russia from 1917-1921 and in Spain from 1936-1939 .
But this was perhaps not a project that a publisher would be interested in or a think tank or a foundation might support or promote .
So , Naomi Klein swings the gate between sympathy towards anarchism ( worker occupations ) and New Deal liberalism .
Cornel West is another critic who gives his followers mixed messages .
In non- election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ program .
In most election years he bows to the “ lesser of two evils ” scenario and tells his followers to vote for the Democrats .
Whether or not he promotes the Democrats or the Greens depends on who is running as a Democrat .
So , for him , if he likes the person , which party the person is in is not so relevant .
From a structural Marxist viewpoint , it doesn ’ t matter who is running as a Democrat .
The Democratic Party is a ruling class @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is irrelevant .
West also swings the gate between social democracy and New Deal liberalism .
Noam Chomsky swings the gate in a way similar to Naomi Klein .
In election off-years , besides criticizing US foreign policy , he will promote anarchism by writing forewords to anarchist books .
However , during election years his anarchism seems to disappear , and we will be told that the Republican Party is the most dangerous party in history , and we must vote for a Democrat .
Chomsky swings the gate between anarchism and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ War liberals of the 1950s , Chomsky is a dogmatic and relentless critic of any kind of state socialism and does not make a distinction between communists and fascists .
Christopher Hedges also equated Antifa to the Proud Boys as equally dangerous in that both advocate armed conflict .
All these unwitting Left Gatekeepers share the characteristics of the New Left in Table A in Part I of my article .
Who do the Left Gatekeepers Censor and Vilify ?
Any organization that is clearly for the working class .
This doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business unionism of the United States from the 50s onward , union leadership lost all sense of vision , of fighting for workers to manage the workplace .
Union dues were spent by the leadership on promoting voting for the Democratic Party rather than on organizing workers .
Union bureaucrats were much more at home with Democratic politicians than they were with their own members .
One organization that we predict will not ever make the news at either NPR or the Pacifica radio station is Labor Notes .
Labor Notes has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tracks working class struggles around the United States from the point of view of the rank-and-file .
Their goal is to “ put the movement back in the labor movement.
” Another enemy of the Left Gatekeepers is the formation of a working-class party that is independent of both political parties .
In his article on our website , Joe G. Kaye has nicely identified all the reasons a working-class party has not been formed in the United States .
However , he has not included the machinations of the ruling class – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Despite whatever good intentions they may have , DSA , Jacobin , Socialist Alternative on the right , and anarchists Noam Chomsky and Michael Albert on the left , all are colluding in keeping a working-class party from forming when they invite us every four years to vote for the ” lesser of two evils ” .
Whatever their shortcomings , Leninist parties all over the world have had some success in Russia , China and Cuba in organizing socialism at a national level and sustaining it over decades .
Despite their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ upper-class , western-centric notion ) , they have done very well in reducing poverty , raising the literacy rate , and providing inexpensive housing , ( not to mention free higher education and full universal healthcare—Ed ) .
Leninist parties will always be condemned .
The social democratic parties of Denmark , Sweden and Norway have also done well but only because their social democratic movement was a separate party and did not try to influence a ruling class party like the Democrats , as DSA has done here .
While social democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Left Gatekeepers , they are ignored as examples of how to be socialist and also produce a high standard of living .
An independent socialist party terrifies the Left Gatekeepers .
The third group to be disinvited is any New Left group that is anti-Zionist .
US foreign policy is very dependent on having a friendly base in the Middle East and we can rest assured that any group that is pro-Palestinian such as the ANSWER coalition will be attacked as being anti-Semitic .
There is good reason why the scholar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ receive a full-time teaching position because of his defense of the Palestinians .
The entire New Left must get a permit paper from AIPAC , the most powerful lobby for Israel in Yankeedom .
Another group targeted by the Left Gatekeepers are organizations that actively support anti-imperialism .
Any Pan-African movement leaders like Gaddafi in Libya will be condemned as “ authoritarian dictators ” , mouthing CIA positions .
The African People ’ s Socialist Party in Yankeedom would also be dismissed .
Furthermore , on an international level , any organization or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to nations deemed an enemy of the United States will be targeted .
The Left Gatekeepers will have no problem with anarchists who condemn both US foreign policy and the `` authoritarian '' governments of Russia , China and Iran .
But any news source that reports some sympathy for Russia , China , Iran , Cuba or Venezuela are deemed enemies .
It is very important to the Left Gatekeepers ( whether inside or outside the CIA ) that the left in the US toe the party line about its perceived enemies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is impossible to say that that yes , China has an authoritarian government ( by Western definitions ) and yes there is a deep class structure and yes , it is state capitalist .
Nevertheless , the Chinese state has raised the standard of living for [ hundreds of ] millions of people and internationally it is doing what Marx said what was best about capitalism : developing the productive forces through building the New Silk Road .
China is also going off the dollar , as is Russia , and they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think that any nation-states or states that attempt to break the domination of the Yankee empire is worth critically supporting .
But for the Gatekeepers and their new left pawns , this is too much .
News sources that defend countries that challenge Yankees ’ foreign policy will be harassed .
This is the case for New Eastern Outlook , Russian Times , The Greanville Post , TeleSUR , or VenezuelAnalysis .
Lastly any group that suggests the United States has been and is capable of assassinations and false-flag operations at home or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
This is certainly what happened and is happening to the 911 Truth Movement .
Strange Bedfellows : Is the New Left a Pawn of the Left Gatekeepers ?
In this last section I want to show how easily the beliefs of the new left can mesh with the foreign and domestic policies of the Left Gatekeepers .
First , when the New Left uncritically rejects the state socialism of the former Soviet Union or the current state capitalism of China ( or formally known as `` Socialism with Chinese characteristics '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Yankees ’ greatest international rivals and it makes sympathetic collaboration impossible .
Secondly when the New Left championed identity politics at the expense of social class , it lost the most powerful force for stopping the capitalist system—class struggle—the working-class production of surplus value in the workplace .
Organizing around race and gender does not have a concrete site in which surplus value is produced .
As far as gender goes , however real “ patriarchy ” is , a women ’ s revolution against men is very far-fetched since it runs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategies .
When the New Left throws up its hands and says capitalism can go on forever , it deprives itself of understanding the weak points of the system and how it could be overturned .
The Left Gatekeepers are thrilled with the 50-year wild-goose chase dissecting language , psychology , and sexuality , none of which are threats to capitalism .
It would be one thing if the New Left approached political democracy with its own party .
However , the New Left never built its own party and so it has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic Party .
With the possible exception of the anarchists , the New Left ignored democracy , in the economic sense of democracy , in the workplace .
Being trapped inside the Democratic Party is the ultimate aim of the Left Gatekeepers .
When the New Left rebels against social evolutionary visions of progress domestically , it renounces the expectation that capitalism live up to its promises to use science and technology to reduce the work hours while creating a better life for all .
It walks away from the prospect that socialism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on redistributing scarcity more evenly .
With the exception of Murray Bookchin and his followers , when the New Left embraces the ecology movement it treats ecology as separate from political economy , as in the case of Earth First .
Ecological spiritual interventions of the 1980s and 1990s treat nature as separate from capitalism .
It also loses the Promethean spirit of humanity as a higher form of nature .
When New Leftists renounce the nation-state for localism or “ small is beautiful ” , these decentralized movements are much easier for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Or the capitalist state numerous repressive forces . ]
When the Club of Rome tells us that the Earth has a limited carrying capacity , it looks to the size of the population in peripheral countries as a problem .
Instead of understanding that these countries have larger populations because they have a resource base in agriculture , they are seen as irrational .
In reality , like all agricultural societies , they have more children because more children mean free labor .
If peripheral countries were allowed to industrialize , their populations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affluence and feminist advances shrink family size ; this has been seen even in nations such as Italy where familism remains a strong value , and where big family clans have long been a core of the culture from local to regional and national levels Italy 's birth rate is today same as Germany ( 8.6/1000 people ) , well below that of Canada , Switzerland , Denmark , France and the US ) .
By telling these countries they have to do with less , the Left Gatekeepers deny peripheral countries their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Fewer people in the periphery means less competition for wealth .
Internationally , when the New Left becomes anti-western and throws itself into tribal primitivism , eastern mysticism or Wicca , it loses the potential for an organized liberation theology within the major churches .
As this anti-westernism spreads around the globe , it opens the door for the Left Gatekeepers ’ promotion of religious fundamentalism .
This keeps science and engineering from developing in peripheral countries .
That is dangerous for the Left Gatekeepers because these scientists might discover new forms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resource base of western capitalism .
In the arts , the Left Gatekeepers are delighted when the New Left rejects representational art and considers socialist realism too constraining .
Abstract expressionism doesn ’ t depict existing social reality or how social reality could be .
It describes psychological rumination that is cut off from social issues .
The Left Gatekeepers tell abstract expressionists – “ by all means , throw paint on the canvas , you rebel you !
” The same goes for personal appearance .
In my article Is Shocking People @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expression may be psychologically satisfying to some but it also creates distance between the middle class , who might be curious about this , and the 40 % of the working class for whom this seems quirky or weird .
While pot smoking and LSD tripping may be relaxing and mind-transforming in small doses , too much of this is a loss of organizing potential .
I could not organize anyone who was high on pot or in the middle of an acid trip .
The CIA gatekeepers knew exactly what they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard drugs in the early 70s .
The New Left began with an interest in Reich ’ s Mass Psychology of Fascism .
But many disappeared into the rabbit hole of individualist psychology , whether it be primal scream or gestalt psychology .
The feminist cry “ the personal is political ” soon became the belief that the personal is all there is .
For close to a century of psychological manipulation of Gatekeepers , see Adam Curtis documentary Century of the Self , especially Part III .
The purpose of this article @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left is the passive victim of the CIA , foundations , think tanks and lobbying groups .
After all , these organizations did not create the New Left out of nothing .
The New Left created its own politics and culture in reaction to real social struggles of the 1960s .
It is instead to say that once these politics and culture were created , especially in the late 1960s , they were massaged , sculpted , cut , pasted and smoothed over to also meet the needs of the Leftist Gatekeepers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is real documentation in the present and past that shows that most leftist groups were , and are , being monitored and controlled by Left Gatekeepers ; • None that there is an implied profile of the kind of leftist groups that are the enemies of the Left Gatekeepers ; • None that in the light of the current crisis in capitalism and the coronavirus , it is more urgent than ever to embody , organize and spread a political-economic movement along the profile in line with the enemies of the Left @ @

I wrote this article almost four years ago in reaction to the public’s claim to be inconvenienced by Oakland protesters stopping traffic on the freeway of Interstate 880 in Oakland in solidarity with the two black men shot and killed by police in Louisiana and Minnesota. The point of that article was to show that bystanders’ ideas of where violence starts, when it starts and who the perpetrators of violence are betrays an adherence to a liberal social contract theory rooted in Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau. Even those who claim to be “non-violent” are trapped in social contract theory. At the end of the article I argue for a political-economic understanding of where, when and who is responsible for the violence.
Given the recent police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, the subsequent torching of police stations and the shutting down of bus lines, we will surely hear even greater howls from bystanders that they are being inconvenienced, that their rights are being infringed on, they had nothing to do with the violence and that the police are a neutral force. All these claims are rooted in the same social contract theory that becomes increasingly moth-eaten as capitalism continues to disintegrate. —BL


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-05-25--China Derangement Syndrome: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix

riendly reminder that we ’ ve invented weapons which can end all life on earth and we ’ re in steadily increasing danger of setting them all off because some guys in a think tank wrote some words .
Believing cold war is no big deal because nuclear war hasn ’ t happened yet is the same as believing your game of Russian roulette is safe because the gun hasn ’ t gone off yet .
There ’ s no legitimate reason why nations can ’ t just mind their own affairs and care for their own people .
Having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government and its allies scheming to destroy nations which disobey them is severely disordered , and we should oppose it ferociously .
1 .
We are in the middle of a slow-motion third world war between the US power alliance and the remaining nations which have resisted its aggressive attempts to absorb them .
2 .
Propaganda is used to move this world war along .
3 .
Points 1 and 2 explain current anti-China sentiment .
China Derangement Syndrome ( CDS ) is a terrible affliction where someone who has overdosed on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the other side of the planet is a very big problem that “ we ” need to “ do something about ” .
CDS victims often try to justify their hysteria by saying it ’ s about ending their country ’ s economic relationship with China and bringing the jobs and the wealth back home .
Which is absolutely adorable .
You think that ’ s where the money will go ?
To you ?
That ’ s precious .
Trump supporters are exactly as moronic , brainwashed and hysterical about China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve forever forfeited all legitimacy in criticizing Russiagate .
Every single time the narrative managers shift to a new imperialism target I start writing about it using the same exact logic and understanding that I use to write about all their other propaganda campaigns , and every single time I get a deluge of people saying “ Oh my God I can ’ t believe Caitlin loves that horrible government now !
Usually I agree with her but now she ’ s gone right off the rails !
” Every single time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this Official Bad Guy is completely different from all the others !
” Syria , Russia , North Korea , Iran , Venezuela , China , over and over again .
It gets really tedious .
Yes , you ’ ve lived in an echo chamber that opposes some imperialist agendas but supports others .
That ’ s how propaganda works .
“ China is just as imperialist as America , Caitlin.
” Yes , yes exerting regional power and making deals is exactly the same as dominating the whole planet with hundreds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mass murder , because all things are exactly the same as all other things.~ “ Caitlin you need to understand that the CCP are not the good guys.
” It will never stop being weird to me how many grown adults respond to mature geopolitical analysis by babbling about “ good guys ” and “ bad guys ” like children watching a cartoon show .
Hollywood is brain poison .
“ What are you saying Caitlin ?
We can ’ t criticize China ?
” You can criticize whoever you want .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coincidence how you all became very very interested in “ criticizing ” that nation at the exact same time the mass media started shrieking about it constantly .
Before accusing someone of being an apologist for a foreign government , first contemplate whether it ’ s possible that they ’ re just being neutral and you ’ ve been propagandized into believing everyone needs to hate that foreign government .
Beginning sincere research into what ’ s really going on with our world behind the veils of propaganda and government secrecy reveals many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actual circumstances .
Further research reveals that no , actually they ’ re all mostly faking it .
The neoconservative ideology of maintaining unipolar US world domination at all cost has become so mainstream over the last two decades that “ neoconservative ” is a mostly meaningless term now .
Murder a thousand people and make a fortune selling their organs : You ’ re a monster .
Murder the same number of people for the same amount of money by selling the weapons used to murder them after lobbying for needless military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump could have run as a Democrat in 2016 with a liberal-sounding platform , enacted the exact same policies he ’ s enacted as president , and , as long as he kept saying nice-sounding things , Democrats would think he ’ s awesome right now .
Ecocide will be a problem as long as ecocide remains profitable .
War will be a problem as long as war remains profitable .
Politicians will cater to profit-seeking sociopaths as long as profit determines what drives human behavior .
You ’ ve probably heard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find love if you don ’ t love yourself , but have you ever thought about why it ’ s true ?
It ’ s true because if you don ’ t love yourself , someone loving you instantly puts you at odds with them .
Like that old Groucho Marx quote , “ I refuse to join any club that would have me for a member.
” You can ’ t build on that kind of foundation .
For love to work , you have to love yourself , and you also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and more .
Your lover will always be finding new parts of you to love , many of them parts you dislike , so you ’ ve got to learn to love those parts too to avoid shutting them out .
This is the main reason why women go for ‘ bad boys ’ and fall prey to negging .
If you don ’ t love yourself and someone falls for you , then they appear pathetic because they fell in love with you , so wow .
Yuck .
You know you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disgusting to fall for you .
If you truly love yourself , you ’ ll welcome someone who truly loves you .
When they show up they ’ ll slide right in , with no rejection and no bouncer at the door , just a smooth “ Oh it ’ s you !
I ’ ve got a place here all ready for you.
” You can learn to love yourself by making a practice of continually bringing an intimate , enthusiastic “ yes ” to whatever feels like the core of your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an article on how to do this a while back if you ’ re interested .

F
riendly reminder that we’ve invented weapons which can end all life on earth and we’re in steadily increasing danger of setting them all off because some guys in a think tank wrote some words.
Believing cold war is no big deal because nuclear war hasn’t happened yet is the same as believing your game of Russian roulette is safe because the gun hasn’t gone off yet.
There’s no legitimate reason why nations can’t just mind their own affairs and care for their own people. Having to read news every day about our government and its allies scheming to destroy nations which disobey them is severely disordered, and we should oppose it ferociously.
1. We are in the middle of a slow-motion third world war between the US power alliance and the remaining nations which have resisted its aggressive attempts to absorb them.
2. Propaganda is used to move this world war along.
3. Points 1 and 2 explain current anti-China sentiment.
China Derangement Syndrome (CDS) is a terrible affliction where someone who has overdosed on mainstream narratives suddenly starts believing a nation on the other side of the planet is a very big problem that “we” need to “do something about”.
CDS victims often try to justify their hysteria by saying it’s about ending their country’s economic relationship with China and bringing the jobs and the wealth back home. Which is absolutely adorable. You think that’s where the money will go? To you? That’s precious.
Trump supporters are exactly as moronic, brainwashed and hysterical about China as Democrats are about Russia. They’ve forever forfeited all legitimacy in criticizing Russiagate.
Every single time the narrative managers shift to a new imperialism target I start writing about it using the same exact logic and understanding that I use to write about all their other propaganda campaigns, and every single time I get a deluge of people saying “Oh my God I can’t believe Caitlin loves that horrible government now! Usually I agree with her but now she’s gone right off the rails!”
Every single time, without exception. “Caitlin, this Official Bad Guy is completely different from all the others!” Syria, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, China, over and over again. It gets really tedious. Yes, you’ve lived in an echo chamber that opposes some imperialist agendas but supports others. That’s how propaganda works.
“China is just as imperialist as America, Caitlin.”
Yes, yes exerting regional power and making deals is exactly the same as dominating the whole planet with hundreds of military bases and endless acts of mass murder, because all things are exactly the same as all other things.~
“Caitlin you need to understand that the CCP are not the good guys.”
It will never stop being weird to me how many grown adults respond to mature geopolitical analysis by babbling about “good guys” and “bad guys” like children watching a cartoon show. Hollywood is brain poison.
“What are you saying Caitlin? We can’t criticize China?”
You can criticize whoever you want. I just think it’s an amazing coincidence how you all became very very interested in “criticizing” that nation at the exact same time the mass media started shrieking about it constantly.
Before accusing someone of being an apologist for a foreign government, first contemplate whether it’s possible that they’re just being neutral and you’ve been propagandized into believing everyone needs to hate that foreign government.
Beginning sincere research into what’s really going on with our world behind the veils of propaganda and government secrecy reveals many experts with a profound understanding of our actual circumstances. Further research reveals that no, actually they’re all mostly faking it.
The neoconservative ideology of maintaining unipolar US world domination at all cost has become so mainstream over the last two decades that “neoconservative” is a mostly meaningless term now.
Murder a thousand people and make a fortune selling their organs: You’re a monster. Murder the same number of people for the same amount of money by selling the weapons used to murder them after lobbying for needless military interventionism: You’re a businessman.
Trump could have run as a Democrat in 2016 with a liberal-sounding platform, enacted the exact same policies he’s enacted as president, and, as long as he kept saying nice-sounding things, Democrats would think he’s awesome right now.
Ecocide will be a problem as long as ecocide remains profitable. War will be a problem as long as war remains profitable. Politicians will cater to profit-seeking sociopaths as long as profit determines what drives human behavior.
You’ve probably heard it said that you’ll never find love if you don’t love yourself, but have you ever thought about why it’s true? It’s true because if you don’t love yourself, someone loving you instantly puts you at odds with them. Like that old Groucho Marx quote, “I refuse to join any club that would have me for a member.” You can’t build on that kind of foundation.
For love to work, you have to love yourself, and you also have to commit to loving yourself more and more. Your lover will always be finding new parts of you to love, many of them parts you dislike, so you’ve got to learn to love those parts too to avoid shutting them out.
This is the main reason why women go for ‘bad boys’ and fall prey to negging. If you don’t love yourself and someone falls for you, then they appear pathetic because they fell in love with you, so wow. Yuck. You know you’re disgusting so they must be disgusting to fall for you.
If you truly love yourself, you’ll welcome someone who truly loves you. When they show up they’ll slide right in, with no rejection and no bouncer at the door, just a smooth “Oh it’s you! I’ve got a place here all ready for you.”
You can learn to love yourself by making a practice of continually bringing an intimate, enthusiastic “yes” to whatever feels like the core of your being in each moment. I wrote an article on how to do this a while back if you’re interested.


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-05-25--The Hong Kong crucible: New security law is a masterstroke

Hong Kong can now be depoliticised and get back to reviving its economy and improving people ’ s lives In one masterstroke , Beijing is set to resolve long-standing challenges to its legitimate interests , power and prestige in Hong Kong .
Forget all the noises coming out of Britain , Canada and Australia , or the usual meaningless threats from Washington .
Hong Kong IS China ’ s .
It is simply a rightful assertion of Chinese sovereignty after being challenged and undermined by pro-independence elements – who dare not speak their name – within the protest movement and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exams authority can ask as a question whether the security law has brought more benefits than harm to Hong Kong .
The new national security law will finally resolve the inability of the Hong Kong government to legislate Article 23 in the Basic Law for almost two decades .
It will neuter the anti-government/anti-China protest movement and compel potential pan-democratic candidates to adopt a more moderate platform in running for the Legislative Council elections in September .
It will put an end to the impunity of opposition politicians and protest leaders to fly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politicians to plot against their own governments , including providing a black list with the names of Hong Kong and mainland officials to target for US sanctions .
US Republican congressman Scott Perry has just proposed the Hong Kong Freedom Act – which “ authorises the President of the United States to recognise Hong Kong as a separate , independent country ” .
Thank you , Mr Perry , you just prove why Hong Kong needs a national security law .
No one had expected Beijing to make such a bold move .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , didn ’ t think inserting the law into Annex III of the Basic Law would work .
Shiu Yeuk-yuen , the self-styled yellow-ribbon philosopher , predicted Beijing would only act sneakily to avoid American attention .
In retrospect , though , it seems obvious .
It is Beijing ’ s patiently delayed response to the unprecedented social unrest of last year .
And it practically announced it by banging a giant gong – at the start of the long-awaited “ two sessions ” .
The Sino-British Joint Declaration has enshrined such fundamental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hong Kong , and to ensure the peace , stability and prosperity of the city over 50 years of no change .
The social unrest and violent protests since last June have threatened to undermine all those basic guarantees .
Beijing is simply trying to fulfil its treaty obligations under the Joint Declaration .
* * * Feel free to distribute ( Plus on est de fous ... )

by Alex Lo
South China Morning Post
Hong Kong can now be depoliticised and get back to reviving its economy and improving people’s lives
In one masterstroke, Beijing is set to resolve long-standing challenges to its legitimate interests, power and prestige in Hong Kong. Forget all the noises coming out of Britain, Canada and Australia, or the usual meaningless threats from Washington.
Hong Kong IS China’s. It is simply a rightful assertion of Chinese sovereignty after being challenged and undermined by pro-independence elements – who dare not speak their name – within the protest movement and opposition.
Perhaps in future, the exams authority can ask as a question whether the security law has brought more benefits than harm to Hong Kong.
The new national security law will finally resolve the inability of the Hong Kong government to legislate Article 23 in the Basic Law for almost two decades. It will neuter the anti-government/anti-China protest movement and compel potential pan-democratic candidates to adopt a more moderate platform in running for the Legislative Council elections in September.
It will put an end to the impunity of opposition politicians and protest leaders to fly to Washington and consort with top American politicians to plot against their own governments, including providing a black list with the names of Hong Kong and mainland officials to target for US sanctions.
US Republican congressman Scott Perry has just proposed the Hong Kong Freedom Act – which “authorises the President of the United States to recognise Hong Kong as a separate, independent country”. Thank you, Mr Perry, you just prove why Hong Kong needs a national security law.
No one had expected Beijing to make such a bold move. Tsang Yok-sing, the former Legco president, didn’t think inserting the law into Annex III of the Basic Law would work. Shiu Yeuk-yuen, the self-styled yellow-ribbon philosopher, predicted Beijing would only act sneakily to avoid American attention.
In retrospect, though, it seems obvious. It is Beijing’s patiently delayed response to the unprecedented social unrest of last year. And it practically announced it by banging a giant gong – at the start of the long-awaited “two sessions”.
The Sino-British Joint Declaration has enshrined such fundamental principles as China’s sovereignty over Hong Kong, and to ensure the peace, stability and prosperity of the city over 50 years of no change. The social unrest and violent protests since last June have threatened to undermine all those basic guarantees. Beijing is simply trying to fulfil its treaty obligations under the Joint Declaration.
* * *
Feel free to distribute (Plus on est de fous...)


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-05-25--What Google and Facebook Are Hiding

What Google and Facebook Are Hiding

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible .
Share with kin , friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise .
After several months of record-breaking traffic our alternative media webzine suffered a sharp blow when it was suddenly purged by Facebook at the end of April .
Not only was our rudimentary Facebook page eliminated , but all subsequent attempts by readers to post our articles the world ’ s largest social network produced an error message describing the content as “ abusive.
” Our entire website had been banned .
Facebook publishes a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ improper content , ” and although our publication was probably one of the largest and most popular ever so proscribed , the explanation provided was remarkably cursory , with our name mentioned in only two scattered sentences across the 47 page document .
Our investigation linked this network to VDARE , a website known for posting anti-immigration content , and individuals associated with a similar website The Unz Review .
Although the people behind this operation attempted to conceal their coordination , our investigation linked this network to VDARE , a website @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to individuals associated with a similar website The Unz Review .
As I ’ ve previously discussed , characterizing our alternative media publication as an “ anti-immigration ” website “ similar ” to VDare seemed utterly bizarre considering that only about 0.2 % of our 2020 content was republished from that source and many months had elapsed since we had last featured a piece on immigration .
So I strongly suspected that the claim merely served as an excuse .
I don ’ t use Facebook or other social networks myself , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ following that purge , seeming to demonstrate our lack of reliance upon social media .
But a week later , this abruptly changed , and our regular daily readership dropped by a significant 15-20 % , hardly a crippling blow but quite distressing , setting us back many months of previous growth .
This puzzled me .
Why would the Facebook ban have had such limited initial impact but then suddenly become so much more serious ?
Eventually I discovered that a second , even more powerful Internet giant had also banned us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our entire website and all its many millions of pages of serious content had been silently deranked by Google , thus eliminating nearly all our incoming traffic from search results .
A few quick checks confirmed this unfortunate situation , best illustrated by a particularly striking example .
Just over a decade ago , I had published an important article entitled The Myth of Hispanic Crime , and for ten years it had always placed extremely high in Google searches , generally being ranked # 2 across the 52,000,000 results for “ Hispanic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 139,000,000 results for “ Latino crime.
” The impact of my analysis on the heated public debate had also been quite considerable , and a few years ago a leading academic specialist even asked me to blurb his book on that subject .
But my article had now vanished from all such Google searches .
Although Google holds an overwhelming monopoly for web searches across the Western world , comparable products such as Bing and DuckDuckGo using similar technology do exist , and these still list my article among their results , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for “ Hispanic crime ” and “ Latino crime , ” while DuckDuckGo places it # 4 in each .
But no one would ever find it using Google .
All the other pages of our website have been similarly blacklisted , effectively eliminated from all web searches courtesy of Google ’ s information monopoly .
This even included the periodical content library that I had built during the 2000s , containing the near-complete archives of hundreds of America ’ s most influential publications of the last 150 years .
Millions of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and their disappearance representing a tremendous loss to academic scholarship .
Google still does contains all these pages , and if the additional specifier “ unz ” is added to the search , the results do come up , but for anyone not knowing where to look , our entire website and all its content has completely disappeared .
This explained our sudden 15-20 % reduction in regular traffic .
Internet law is obviously quite murky , but it seems a great shame if Google has decided to use its software monopoly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hide important information .
The notion of Google “ disappearing ” an entire website and all its material is surely fraught with peril .
Should Google ’ s executives be allowed to “ disappear ” whichever politicians or candidates they dislike ?
Should wealthy individuals or powerful groups be able to pay or lobby Google to have their critics removed from all search results ?
During 2018 Google employees themselves took a very strong public stance on exactly this issue , protesting their own company ’ s willingness to produce a “ censored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use in China , a controversy that reached the national headlines , and soon forced executives to abandon the project .
But although Google censorship of content within China still remains an inflammatory topic , Google censorship of American content is now apparently so routine and acceptable that it took me more than a week to discover that our entire website had been thrown down the Orwellian “ memory hole.
” I ’ d always taken great pride that my Hispanic Crime article spent a decade ranked # 2 among nearly 200,000,000 Google @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was dismayed that Google “ disappeared ” it .
But in fairness , I ’ d have to admit that individuals who make themselves disagreeable to ruling political elites have sometimes suffered far more worse retaliation .
For example , my Saturday morning newspapers carried the latest episode in the unfortunate story of Jamal Khashoggi , the dissenting Saudi journalist whose critical writings in the Washington Post so irritated his government that they had him killed and his body dismembered with a bone-saw .
Compared to that , having my article deranked by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For years our website has published a great deal of extremely controversial material , and many readers are probably much more surprised that Google and Facebook took so long to purge us rather than they finally did so .
Consider , for example , my own American Pravda series , which together with related articles runs 280,000 words and has drawn about 3 million pageviews , while attracting over 25,000 comments totaling another 3.5 million words .
Many of these articles candidly address some of the most controversial aspects of the JFK Assassination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history of World War II , topics so touchy that a couple of years ago the redoubtable Israel Shamir described me as the “ Kamikazi from California , ” and suggested along with numerous other observers that our website might soon be annihilated as a consequence .
But aside from a rather lackluster rebuke from the usually ferocious ADL , absolutely nothing untoward happened .
Yet now we have been almost simultaneously banned by both Google and Facebook , America ’ s leading gatekeepers to the Internet , concerted action that hardly seems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coming after years of apparent equanimity .
So what had prompted this sudden purge ?
I think the obvious answer was my most recent American Pravda installment , which attracted more early readership and social media interest than anything I had previously written , and which appeared just eight days before Facebook ’ s ban .
My article noted some important facts that are less widely known that they should be , and are quite embarrassing both to our own government and its overly subservient mainstream journalists .
For decades , the American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for its notorious 1989 slaughter of the student protesters at Tiananmen and shamed its leadership for continuing to flatly deny that historical reality , with China ’ s demands for censorship of the massacre being a leading source of conflict with Google .
However , I pointed out that more than twenty years ago the former Beijing bureau chief of the Washington Post , who had personally covered the events , published a long article in our most prestigious journalism review admitting that the infamous “ Tiananmen Square Massacre ” had never actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of incompetent journalists and dishonest propagandists .
Yet for decades the promotion of that debunked hoax by our elite media has continued unabated .
As another example , I noted that back in 1999 our warplanes had bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade , killing or wounding dozens of Chinese diplomats .
At the time , our media uniformly reported the attack as a tragic accident , while ridiculing China ’ s government for alleging otherwise .
However , just a few months later , many of the leading newspapers in Britain and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bombing had indeed been deliberate , quoting numerous NATO intelligence sources to that effect .
But since the American media completely boycotted this major international story , very few Americans ever discovered that the Chinese had been telling the truth all along and our own government lying .
Although these historical items were important , they merely set the stage for a far more explosive analysis .
The bulk of my 7,400 word article presented the very considerable circumstantial evidence that our current Coronavirus national disaster was entirely self-inflicted , being the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ biowarfare attack against China ( and Iran ) , presumably organized by the Deep State Neocons or other rogue elements in our national security establishment .
This ongoing disease epidemic has already killed 100,000 Americans and wrecked our economy , so we can easily understand why the guilty parties would do all they could to prevent some of the critical information from getting into general circulation , pressuring Google and Facebook to suppress the crucial evidence .
A few excerpts from my long analysis , now banned by America ’ s Internet giants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As the coronavirus gradually began to spread beyond China ’ s own borders , another development occurred that greatly multiplied my suspicions .
Most of these early cases had occurred exactly where one might expect , among the East Asian countries bordering China .
But by late February Iran had become the second epicenter of the global outbreak .
Even more surprisingly , its political elites had been especially hard-hit , with a full 10 % of the entire Iranian parliament soon infected and at least a dozen of its officials and politicians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who were quite senior .
Indeed , Neocon activists on Twitter began gleefully noting that their hatred Iranian enemies were now dropping like flies .
Let us consider the implications of these facts .
Across the entire world the only political elites that have yet suffered any significant human losses have been those of Iran , and they died at a very early stage , before significant outbreaks had even occurred almost anywhere else in the world outside China .
Thus , we have America assassinating Iran ’ s top military commander on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks later large portions of the Iranian ruling elites became infected by a mysterious and deadly new virus , with many of them soon dying as a consequence .
Could any rational individual possibly regard this as a mere coincidence ?
For obvious reasons , the Trump Administration has become very eager to emphasize the early missteps and delays in the Chinese reaction to the viral outbreak in Wuhan , and has presumably encouraged our media outlets to direct their focus in that direction .
As an example of this , the Associated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ detailed analysis of those early events purportedly based upon confidential Chinese documents .
Provocatively entitled “ China Didn ’ t Warn Public of Likely Pandemic for 6 Key Days ” , the piece was widely distributed , running in abridged formin the NYT and elsewhere .
According to this reconstruction , the Chinese government first became aware of the seriousness of this public health crisis on Jan. 14th , but delayed taking any major action until Jan. 20th , a period of time during which the number of infections greatly multiplied .
Last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporters produced a very detailed and thorough 4,400 word analysis of the same period , and the NYT has published a helpful timeline of those early events as well .
Although there may be some differences of emphasis or minor disagreements , all these American media sources agree that Chinese officials first became aware of the serious viral outbreak in Wuhan in early to mid-January , with the first known death occurring on Jan. 11th , and finally implemented major new public health measures later that same month .
No one has apparently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the horrific consequences of our own later governmental inaction being obvious , elements within our intelligence agencies have sought to demonstrate that they were not the ones asleep at the switch .
Earlier this month , an ABC News story cited four separate government sources to reveal that as far back as late November , a special medical intelligence unit within our Defense Intelligence Agency had produced a report warning that an out-of-control disease epidemic was occurring in the Wuhan area of China , and widely distributed that document throughout the top ranks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be taken to protect US forces based in Asia .
After the story aired , a Pentagon spokesman officially denied the existence of that November report , while various other top level government and intelligence officials refused to comment .
But a few days later , Israeli television mentioned that in November American intelligence had indeed shared such a report on the Wuhan disease outbreak with its NATO and Israeli allies , thus seeming to independently confirm the complete accuracy of the original ABC News story and its several government sources .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Defense Intelligence Agency were aware of the deadly viral outbreak in Wuhan more than a month before any officials in the Chinese government itself .
Unless our intelligence agencies have pioneered the technology of precognition , I think this may have happened for the same reason that arsonists have the earliest knowledge of future fires .
Although criticism of the mainstream media has been the central theme of my American Pravda series , I always spend at least a couple of hours every morning carefully reading our leading newspapers , which I regard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long as their articles are treated with proper caution and rigor .
As an example , I would note that most of the crucial evidence suggesting an American biowarfare attack was hidden in plain sight in such eminently respectable news sources as the NYT , the WSJ , and ABC News .
As our global confrontation with China has grown hotter , my morning New York Times has continued to provide invaluable information for anyone who is willing to read it carefully .
For example , Secretary of State Mike Pompeo probably ranks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Trump Administration , and is a leading architect of our confrontation with China .
Last week he broke quarantine to take a trip to Israel and hold important talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu , as reported in a 1,600 word NYT article .
Although the majority of their discussion concerned American support for the proposed annexation of the Palestinian West Bank , a serious disagreement came with regard to Israel ’ s growing economic ties with China , with the piece noting that the Jewish State had “ antagonized ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major infrastructure investments , some of them in sensitive locations .
According to the three Times journalists , Netanyahu firmly stood his ground , determined to “ push back ” against Pompeo ’ s repeated warnings and refused to reconsider his government ’ s China policy .
But just a couple of days later , the Times then reported that Du Wei , the Chinese ambassador to Israel , age 57 , had been found dead at his home , having suddenly fallen victim to “ unspecified health problems.
” The piece emphasized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ critic of America ’ s current policies toward China , and the juxtaposition of these two consecutive NYT articles raised all sorts of obvious questions in my mind .
According to standard mortality tables , an American male age 57 has less than a 1 % chance of dying in a particular year , and given the similarity in overall life expectancy , the same must surely true of Chinese males .
Recently appointed Chinese ambassadors are likely to be in reasonably good health rather than suffering the last stages of terminal cancer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , visible injuries account for more than half of all fatalities at around that age .
Thus , the likelihood that the 57-year-old Chinese diplomat died naturally within that two day window was probably far less than 1 in 50,000 .
Lightning does sometimes strike under the most unlikely of circumstances , but not very often ; and I think that the unexplained deaths of ambassadors during international confrontations probably fall into the same category .
It therefore seems exceptionally unlikely that the sudden demise of Ambassador Du was not somehow directly connected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Netanyahu over Israel ’ s China ties that had occurred two days earlier .
The exact details and circumstances are entirely obscure , and we can merely speculate .
But since speculation has not yet been outlawed by government edict , an interesting possibility comes to mind .
In sharp constrast to the elected leaders of America ’ s vassal-states throughout Europe and Asia , Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu hardly regards himself as beholden to the American government .
He is a powerful , arrogant individual who remembers the endless standing ovations that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House and Senate , receiving the sort of bipartisan public adulation that would be unimaginable for a Donald Trump , who remains deeply unpopular with half our Congress .
So faced with demands by a Trump envoy that he sacrifice his own nation ’ s interests by cancelling important Chinese economic projects , he apparently disregarded Pompeo ’ s warnings and told him to get lost .
The classic 1972 film The Godfather ranks # 2 in the IMDb Movie Database , and one of its most famous scenes concerns a conflict between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a visiting representative of the Corleone family .
When the polite requests of the latter are casually disregarded , the movie tycoon awakens to discover the bloody head of his prized race-horse in his own bed , thereby demonstrating the serious nature of the warning he had received and indicating that it should not be disregarded .
Pompeo had recently served as CIA Director , and I suspect he called in a few favors with elements of the Israeli Mossad and had them take lethal steps to convince Netanyahu that our demands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were of a serious nature , not to be treated lightly .
I strongly suspect that the controversial Chinese-Israeli economic ventures will soon be abandoned .
I had never heard of the unfortunate Chinese ambassador prior to his sudden demise , and under normal circumstances any such notions of American foul play might be dismissed as absurd .
But consider that just a few months earlier , we had publicly assassinated a top Iranian leader after he was lured to Baghdad for peace negotiations , an act vastly more weighty than the plausible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found dead in his own home of unknown causes .
A few days later , my Wall Street Journal carried an article entitled China ’ s ‘ Wolf Warrior ’ Diplomats Are to Fight , beginning on the front page and running 2,200 words , by far the longest piece appearing in that day ’ s edition .
Yet although the late Ambassador Du had been in the forefront of this ongoing Chinese campaign to challenge American influence , both in Israel and during his previous posting to Ukraine , and the sudden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” was surely known to the journalists , his name appeared nowhere in the text , leading me to wonder whether it had been deliberately excised to avoid raising obvious suspicions in the WSJreadership .
For hundreds of years since the Treaty of Westphalia , the lives of diplomats have been almost always treated as sacrosanct , and a typical response to breaking such international conventions might be tit-for-tat retaliation .
China ’ s leadership tends to be remarkably pragmatic , and recognizes that its national strength is rapidly growing even as our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perhaps they will forego any such reaction , at least for the time being .
But if any American diplomats or other ranking officials begin to suffer strange fatalities , the explanation may be less than mysterious , though Google and Facebook will certainly do their best to keep it so .
• The Myth of Tiananmen by Jay Matthews • Was Coronavirus a Biowarfare Attack Against China ?
by OldMicrobiologist Notes ( 1 ) The Washington Post , which has led the `` fake news '' disinformation campaign against truth-telling/ anti-war sites @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Russiagate hoax , has been , as expected , less than honest about the forces it represents .
This is the way it characterises the clearly shady imperialist hybrid war tool PropOrNot : `` Another group , called PropOrNot , a nonpartisan ( sic ) collection of researchers with foreign policy , military and technology backgrounds , planned to release its own findings Friday showing the startling reach and effectiveness of Russian propaganda campaigns .
Puke if you must

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
Ron Unz
UNZ REVIEW
(1), and the Clintonite Democrat party-led campaign to jawbone social media companies into stifling dissident speech. Social media harassment however has only been a part of the problem. In addition our sites have been the subject of frequent attacks costing us a great deal in time and money we can ill afford. And our emails, too, have become unreliable. Many do not reach their destinations, or are automatically sent to the recipients' spam folders. Other recipients are warned not to open our emails as they might contain malware, etc., all lies, of course. And a growing list of regular contributors are being blocked from reaching us (and vice versa). The purpose of such still anonymous but persistent attacks is obvious. To throw hurdles in our path, demoralise authors and editors, and eventually bankrupt us—easy enough since we lack the type of deep pockets even other alternative sites have. The whole thing is political; this is not a case of some hackers targeting our site for monetary reasons or out of an occasional bout of juvenile malice. Someone out there does not like what we publish. Period. —PG Editors' Note: Much of what Ron Unz details here applies to The Greanville Post, which has seen its circulation shrink more than 30% since early 2016, the sudden drops coinciding with the WaPo publication of PropOrNot's notorious "fake news" purveyors list, and the Clintonite Democrat party-led campaign to jawbone social media companies into stifling dissident speech. Social media harassment however has only been a part of the problem. In addition our sites have been the subject of frequent attacks costing us a great deal in time and money we can ill afford. And our emails, too, have become unreliable. Many do not reach their destinations, or are automatically sent to the recipients' spam folders. Other recipients are warned not to open our emails as they might contain malware, etc., all lies, of course. And a growing list of regular contributors are being blocked from reaching us (and vice versa). The purpose of such still anonymous but persistent attacks is obvious. To throw hurdles in our path, demoralise authors and editors, and eventually bankrupt us—easy enough since we lack the type of deep pockets even other alternative sites have. The whole thing is political; this is not a case of some hackers targeting our site for monetary reasons or out of an occasional bout of juvenile malice. Someone out there does not like what we publish. Period. —PG What Google and Facebook Are Hiding
The American Deep State Strikes Back
After several months of record-breaking traffic our alternative media webzine suffered a sharp blow when it was suddenly purged by Facebook at the end of April. Not only was our rudimentary Facebook page eliminated, but all subsequent attempts by readers to post our articles the world’s largest social network produced an error message describing the content as “abusive.” Our entire website had been banned.
Facebook publishes a monthly report cataloging its actions to eliminate “improper content,” and although our publication was probably one of the largest and most popular ever so proscribed, the explanation provided was remarkably cursory, with our name mentioned in only two scattered sentences across the 47 page document.
Our investigation linked this network to VDARE, a website known for posting anti-immigration content, and individuals associated with a similar website The Unz Review.
Although the people behind this operation attempted to conceal their coordination, our investigation linked this network to VDARE, a website known for posting anti-immigration content, and to individuals associated with a similar website The Unz Review.
As I’ve previously discussed, characterizing our alternative media publication as an “anti-immigration” website “similar” to VDare seemed utterly bizarre considering that only about 0.2% of our 2020 content was republished from that source and many months had elapsed since we had last featured a piece on immigration. So I strongly suspected that the claim merely served as an excuse.
I don’t use Facebook or other social networks myself, and noticed little reduction in our daily traffic following that purge, seeming to demonstrate our lack of reliance upon social media. But a week later, this abruptly changed, and our regular daily readership dropped by a significant 15-20%, hardly a crippling blow but quite distressing, setting us back many months of previous growth.
This puzzled me. Why would the Facebook ban have had such limited initial impact but then suddenly become so much more serious? Eventually I discovered that a second, even more powerful Internet giant had also banned us, which explained the sharp drop. Our entire website and all its many millions of pages of serious content had been silently deranked by Google, thus eliminating nearly all our incoming traffic from search results. A few quick checks confirmed this unfortunate situation, best illustrated by a particularly striking example.
Just over a decade ago, I had published an important article entitled The Myth of Hispanic Crime, and for ten years it had always placed extremely high in Google searches, generally being ranked #2 across the 52,000,000 results for “Hispanic crime” and also #2 among the 139,000,000 results for “Latino crime.” The impact of my analysis on the heated public debate had also been quite considerable, and a few years ago a leading academic specialist even asked me to blurb his book on that subject. But my article had now vanished from all such Google searches.
Although Google holds an overwhelming monopoly for web searches across the Western world, comparable products such as Bing and DuckDuckGo using similar technology do exist, and these still list my article among their results, with Bing ranking it at #2 for “Hispanic crime” and “Latino crime,” while DuckDuckGo places it #4 in each. But no one would ever find it using Google.
All the other pages of our website have been similarly blacklisted, effectively eliminated from all web searches courtesy of Google’s information monopoly. This even included the periodical content library that I had built during the 2000s, containing the near-complete archives of hundreds of America’s most influential publications of the last 150 years. Millions of these important articles were available no where else, and their disappearance representing a tremendous loss to academic scholarship.
Google still does contains all these pages, and if the additional specifier “unz” is added to the search, the results do come up, but for anyone not knowing where to look, our entire website and all its content has completely disappeared. This explained our sudden 15-20% reduction in regular traffic.
Internet law is obviously quite murky, but it seems a great shame if Google has decided to use its software monopoly to severely manipulate search results and deliberately hide important information. The notion of Google “disappearing” an entire website and all its material is surely fraught with peril. Should Google’s executives be allowed to “disappear” whichever politicians or candidates they dislike? Should wealthy individuals or powerful groups be able to pay or lobby Google to have their critics removed from all search results?
During 2018 Google employees themselves took a very strong public stance on exactly this issue, protesting their own company’s willingness to produce a “censored” version of their search engine for use in China, a controversy that reached the national headlines, and soon forced executives to abandon the project. But although Google censorship of content within China still remains an inflammatory topic, Google censorship of American content is now apparently so routine and acceptable that it took me more than a week to discover that our entire website had been thrown down the Orwellian “memory hole.”
I’d always taken great pride that my Hispanic Crime article spent a decade ranked #2 among nearly 200,000,000 Google results for that important topic, and was dismayed that Google “disappeared” it. But in fairness, I’d have to admit that individuals who make themselves disagreeable to ruling political elites have sometimes suffered far more worse retaliation. For example, my Saturday morning newspapers carried the latest episode in the unfortunate story of Jamal Khashoggi, the dissenting Saudi journalist whose critical writings in the Washington Post so irritated his government that they had him killed and his body dismembered with a bone-saw. Compared to that, having my article deranked by Google hardly seems a major complaint.
For years our website has published a great deal of extremely controversial material, and many readers are probably much more surprised that Google and Facebook took so long to purge us rather than they finally did so.
Consider, for example, my own American Pravda series, which together with related articles runs 280,000 words and has drawn about 3 million pageviews, while attracting over 25,000 comments totaling another 3.5 million words. Many of these articles candidly address some of the most controversial aspects of the JFK Assassination, the 9/11 Attacks, and the history of World War II, topics so touchy that a couple of years ago the redoubtable Israel Shamir described me as the “Kamikazi from California,” and suggested along with numerous other observers that our website might soon be annihilated as a consequence. But aside from a rather lackluster rebuke from the usually ferocious ADL, absolutely nothing untoward happened.
Yet now we have been almost simultaneously banned by both Google and Facebook, America’s leading gatekeepers to the Internet, concerted action that hardly seems likely to have been coincidental, especially coming after years of apparent equanimity. So what had prompted this sudden purge?
I think the obvious answer was my most recent American Pravda installment, which attracted more early readership and social media interest than anything I had previously written, and which appeared just eight days before Facebook’s ban.
My article noted some important facts that are less widely known that they should be, and are quite embarrassing both to our own government and its overly subservient mainstream journalists.
For decades, the American media had regularly denounced the Chinese government for its notorious 1989 slaughter of the student protesters at Tiananmen and shamed its leadership for continuing to flatly deny that historical reality, with China’s demands for censorship of the massacre being a leading source of conflict with Google. However, I pointed out that more than twenty years ago the former Beijing bureau chief of the Washington Post, who had personally covered the events, published a long article in our most prestigious journalism review admitting that the infamous “Tiananmen Square Massacre” had never actually happened, and was just a concoction of incompetent journalists and dishonest propagandists. Yet for decades the promotion of that debunked hoax by our elite media has continued unabated.
As another example, I noted that back in 1999 our warplanes had bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, killing or wounding dozens of Chinese diplomats. At the time, our media uniformly reported the attack as a tragic accident, while ridiculing China’s government for alleging otherwise. However, just a few months later, many of the leading newspapers in Britain and the rest of the world revealed that the bombing had indeed been deliberate, quoting numerous NATO intelligence sources to that effect. But since the American media completely boycotted this major international story, very few Americans ever discovered that the Chinese had been telling the truth all along and our own government lying.
Although these historical items were important, they merely set the stage for a far more explosive analysis. The bulk of my 7,400 word article presented the very considerable circumstantial evidence that our current Coronavirus national disaster was entirely self-inflicted, being the unintended blowback from an extremely reckless American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran), presumably organized by the Deep State Neocons or other rogue elements in our national security establishment.
This ongoing disease epidemic has already killed 100,000 Americans and wrecked our economy, so we can easily understand why the guilty parties would do all they could to prevent some of the critical information from getting into general circulation, pressuring Google and Facebook to suppress the crucial evidence. A few excerpts from my long analysis, now banned by America’s Internet giants, are worth once again repeating:
As the coronavirus gradually began to spread beyond China’s own borders, another development occurred that greatly multiplied my suspicions. Most of these early cases had occurred exactly where one might expect, among the East Asian countries bordering China. But by late February Iran had become the second epicenter of the global outbreak. Even more surprisingly, its political elites had been especially hard-hit, with a full 10% of the entire Iranian parliament soon infected and at least a dozen of its officials and politicians dying of the disease, including some who were quite senior. Indeed, Neocon activists on Twitter began gleefully noting that their hatred Iranian enemies were now dropping like flies.
Let us consider the implications of these facts. Across the entire world the only political elites that have yet suffered any significant human losses have been those of Iran, and they died at a very early stage, before significant outbreaks had even occurred almost anywhere else in the world outside China. Thus, we have America assassinating Iran’s top military commander on Jan. 2nd and then just a few weeks later large portions of the Iranian ruling elites became infected by a mysterious and deadly new virus, with many of them soon dying as a consequence. Could any rational individual possibly regard this as a mere coincidence?
For obvious reasons, the Trump Administration has become very eager to emphasize the early missteps and delays in the Chinese reaction to the viral outbreak in Wuhan, and has presumably encouraged our media outlets to direct their focus in that direction.
As an example of this, the Associated Press Investigative Unit recently published a rather detailed analysis of those early events purportedly based upon confidential Chinese documents. Provocatively entitled “China Didn’t Warn Public of Likely Pandemic for 6 Key Days”, the piece was widely distributed, running in abridged formin the NYT and elsewhere. According to this reconstruction, the Chinese government first became aware of the seriousness of this public health crisis on Jan. 14th, but delayed taking any major action until Jan. 20th, a period of time during which the number of infections greatly multiplied.
Last month, a team of five WSJ reporters produced a very detailed and thorough 4,400 word analysis of the same period, and the NYT has published a helpful timeline of those early events as well. Although there may be some differences of emphasis or minor disagreements, all these American media sources agree that Chinese officials first became aware of the serious viral outbreak in Wuhan in early to mid-January, with the first known death occurring on Jan. 11th, and finally implemented major new public health measures later that same month. No one has apparently disputed these basic facts.
But with the horrific consequences of our own later governmental inaction being obvious, elements within our intelligence agencies have sought to demonstrate that they were not the ones asleep at the switch. Earlier this month, an ABC News story cited four separate government sources to reveal that as far back as late November, a special medical intelligence unit within our Defense Intelligence Agency had produced a report warning that an out-of-control disease epidemic was occurring in the Wuhan area of China, and widely distributed that document throughout the top ranks of our government, warning that steps should be taken to protect US forces based in Asia. After the story aired, a Pentagon spokesman officially denied the existence of that November report, while various other top level government and intelligence officials refused to comment. But a few days later, Israeli television mentioned that in November American intelligence had indeed shared such a report on the Wuhan disease outbreak with its NATO and Israeli allies, thus seeming to independently confirm the complete accuracy of the original ABC News story and its several government sources.
It therefore appears that elements of the Defense Intelligence Agency were aware of the deadly viral outbreak in Wuhan more than a month before any officials in the Chinese government itself. Unless our intelligence agencies have pioneered the technology of precognition, I think this may have happened for the same reason that arsonists have the earliest knowledge of future fires.
Although criticism of the mainstream media has been the central theme of my American Pravda series, I always spend at least a couple of hours every morning carefully reading our leading newspapers, which I regard as unmatched sources of important information so long as their articles are treated with proper caution and rigor. As an example, I would note that most of the crucial evidence suggesting an American biowarfare attack was hidden in plain sight in such eminently respectable news sources as the NYT, the WSJ, and ABC News.
As our global confrontation with China has grown hotter, my morning New York Times has continued to provide invaluable information for anyone who is willing to read it carefully.
For example, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo probably ranks as the most prominent Deep State Neocon in the Trump Administration, and is a leading architect of our confrontation with China. Last week he broke quarantine to take a trip to Israel and hold important talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as reported in a 1,600 word NYT article. Although the majority of their discussion concerned American support for the proposed annexation of the Palestinian West Bank, a serious disagreement came with regard to Israel’s growing economic ties with China, with the piece noting that the Jewish State had “antagonized” Washington by allowing Chinese companies to make major infrastructure investments, some of them in sensitive locations. According to the three Times journalists, Netanyahu firmly stood his ground, determined to “push back” against Pompeo’s repeated warnings and refused to reconsider his government’s China policy.
But just a couple of days later, the Times then reported that Du Wei, the Chinese ambassador to Israel, age 57, had been found dead at his home, having suddenly fallen victim to “unspecified health problems.” The piece emphasized that he had become a leading public critic of America’s current policies toward China, and the juxtaposition of these two consecutive NYT articles raised all sorts of obvious questions in my mind.
According to standard mortality tables, an American male age 57 has less than a 1% chance of dying in a particular year, and given the similarity in overall life expectancy, the same must surely true of Chinese males. Recently appointed Chinese ambassadors are likely to be in reasonably good health rather than suffering the last stages of terminal cancer, and such causes together with obvious, visible injuries account for more than half of all fatalities at around that age. Thus, the likelihood that the 57-year-old Chinese diplomat died naturally within that two day window was probably far less than 1 in 50,000. Lightning does sometimes strike under the most unlikely of circumstances, but not very often; and I think that the unexplained deaths of ambassadors during international confrontations probably fall into the same category.
It therefore seems exceptionally unlikely that the sudden demise of Ambassador Du was not somehow directly connected with the heated dispute between Pompeo and Netanyahu over Israel’s China ties that had occurred two days earlier. The exact details and circumstances are entirely obscure, and we can merely speculate. But since speculation has not yet been outlawed by government edict, an interesting possibility comes to mind.
In sharp constrast to the elected leaders of America’s vassal-states throughout Europe and Asia, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu hardly regards himself as beholden to the American government. He is a powerful, arrogant individual who remembers the endless standing ovations that he enjoyed when he addressed our own House and Senate, receiving the sort of bipartisan public adulation that would be unimaginable for a Donald Trump, who remains deeply unpopular with half our Congress. So faced with demands by a Trump envoy that he sacrifice his own nation’s interests by cancelling important Chinese economic projects, he apparently disregarded Pompeo’s warnings and told him to get lost.
The classic 1972 film The Godfather ranks #2 in the IMDb Movie Database, and one of its most famous scenes concerns a conflict between a powerful and arrogant Hollywood film mogul and a visiting representative of the Corleone family. When the polite requests of the latter are casually disregarded, the movie tycoon awakens to discover the bloody head of his prized race-horse in his own bed, thereby demonstrating the serious nature of the warning he had received and indicating that it should not be disregarded. Pompeo had recently served as CIA Director, and I suspect he called in a few favors with elements of the Israeli Mossad and had them take lethal steps to convince Netanyahu that our demands that he reassess his ties with China were of a serious nature, not to be treated lightly. I strongly suspect that the controversial Chinese-Israeli economic ventures will soon be abandoned.
I had never heard of the unfortunate Chinese ambassador prior to his sudden demise, and under normal circumstances any such notions of American foul play might be dismissed as absurd. But consider that just a few months earlier, we had publicly assassinated a top Iranian leader after he was lured to Baghdad for peace negotiations, an act vastly more weighty than the plausible deniability of of a middle-aged diplomat being found dead in his own home of unknown causes.
A few days later, my Wall Street Journal carried an article entitled China’s ‘Wolf Warrior’ Diplomats Are to Fight, beginning on the front page and running 2,200 words, by far the longest piece appearing in that day’s edition. Yet although the late Ambassador Du had been in the forefront of this ongoing Chinese campaign to challenge American influence, both in Israel and during his previous posting to Ukraine, and the sudden demise of this particular “wolf warrior” was surely known to the journalists, his name appeared nowhere in the text, leading me to wonder whether it had been deliberately excised to avoid raising obvious suspicions in the WSJreadership.
For hundreds of years since the Treaty of Westphalia, the lives of diplomats have been almost always treated as sacrosanct, and a typical response to breaking such international conventions might be tit-for-tat retaliation. China’s leadership tends to be remarkably pragmatic, and recognizes that its national strength is rapidly growing even as our own society decays and declines, so perhaps they will forego any such reaction, at least for the time being. But if any American diplomats or other ranking officials begin to suffer strange fatalities, the explanation may be less than mysterious, though Google and Facebook will certainly do their best to keep it so.
Related Reading:
Notes
(1) The Washington Post, which has led the "fake news" disinformation campaign against truth-telling/ anti-war sites,, and given huge coverage to the Russiagate hoax, has been, as expected, less than honest about the forces it represents. This is the way it characterises the clearly shady imperialist hybrid war tool PropOrNot: "Another group, called PropOrNot, a nonpartisan (sic) collection of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology backgrounds, planned to release its own findings Friday showing the startling reach and effectiveness of Russian propaganda campaigns.
A NOTE ON THE AUTHOR [22] In 2012, in an essay written for The American Conservative, Unz accused Harvard and other Ivy League schools of a biased admissions policy favoring Jewish applicants and excluding better-qualified Asian and non-Jewish white students. Ron UNZ is the founding editor and publisher of the Unz Review, an ideologically diverse website giving editorial refuge to unpopular opinions and facts ranging from the true left to the far right. In good measure, The Unz Review mirrors its founder's own complex political makeup, consistently unafraid of rocking the establishment boat and espousing opinions that, while often anchored in libertarian memes, also defend authentic leftist positions (not what passes for left in "the West"—the claptrap endorsed by centrist/liberals, or Democrats). A scholarship recipient to Harvard himself, Unz showed his character in the Harvard University Board of Overseers controversy. During 2016 Unz led and ran a slate of candidates seeking to take control of Harvard University’s governing board that included left-leaning political activist Ralph Nader . The central platform of the unsuccessful effort was to make Harvard a tuition-free university, with Unz and his slate arguing the school’s $38 billion endowment and relatively small student body provided more than enough investment income for it to comfortably function without charging tuition. Unz and his fellow insurgents believed a success would influence other schools with healthy endowments to follow the example.In 2012, in an essay written for The American Conservative, Unz accused Harvard and other Ivy League schools of a biased admissions policy favoring Jewish applicants and excluding better-qualified Asian and non-Jewish white students.
Puke if you must
This bloodsoaked monster is probably the most evil person on planet earth https://t.co/nGq2H1EPHt — Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) April 9, 2020