FOTCM Logo
Cassiopaea
  • EN
  • FR
  • DE
  • RU
  • TR
  • ES
  • ES

Al Gore and the Monolithic and Ruthless Conspiracy

I’ve been sitting back observing the little rumbles of awakening that seem to be emerging here and there across the land. Little by little, one by one, there are voices being raised against the Fascist jack-boots that have been trampling our world into a bloody mess for the past six years. Of course, it is difficult for these voices to be heard widely enough because of the control of the media, nevertheless, some of them are managing lately to get a few words in on Prime Time. Al Gore is among the latest to check in with his book “The Assault on Reason”.

It’s an interesting show. It’s like being at the County Fair and watching somebody trying to shoot little ducks that pop up and down as they move along a little conveyor. The Jimmy Carter duck pops up declaiming that Israel is an apartheid state and all the Zionists start shooting at him. Then, Rosie O’Donnel pops up and delights her listeners by saying that 911 was in inside job so her bosses and their bosses start shooting at her. There have been a number of others, and most of them have been taken out by the media ignoring them more than anything else. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the first order of business for any society suffering oppression that seeks to dig their way out of such a mess is to take back the media. The mass media should belong to the people and should answer only to the people. Does that sound Socialistic? Well, yeah. Fact is, Socialism seems to be a heck of a lot more democratic in many respects than the much vaunted American Capitalism which has led the U.S. into the State Corporatism trap of Soviet style Communism.

Anyway, back to Al Gore. I recently read a bit of his book that was being circulated on the net and the main thing that occurred to me as I read the excerpt was “Too bad Gore doesn’t understand psychopathy.” He writes:

Not long before our nation launched the invasion of Iraq, our longest-serving Senator, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, stood on the Senate floor and said: “This chamber is, for the most part, silent – ominously, dreadfully silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing. We stand passively mute in the United States Senate.”

Yes, indeed, Robert Byrd was rather vocal against the War and other things for awhile, but then he rolled over with the rest of the democrats in confirming Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court even against a massive grass-roots letter writing campaign. He’s been rather quiet since. Wonder why. Could it have anything to do with all that illegal wiretapping Bush was doing (while he was also getting rid of prosecutors!)? Over a year ago, on March 12, 2006, I wrote:

First of all, let’s consider some of the headlines. We are now told that Bush’s popularity is at the lowest ever. The latest poll says that Bush’s Approval Rating Falls to New Low – fewer Americans consider Bush likable, honest, strong and dependable. Meanwhile, we read Americans take their ringside seats for the great conservative crack-up.

Sounds pretty exciting, doesn’t it?

But what was Congress doing while all this evidence that their great leader’s capital has gone seriously into the red was being trumpeted? Why, following the Bush/Neocon agenda, of course!First of all, in spite of the fact that there are 30 US Reps for Bush Impeachment Inquiry, which one might assume includes the charge that Bush lied the US into a war, Congress is still Pimping for the Neocons: US congressmen press for Iran sanctions bill. Doesn’t it occur to them that this whole Iran thing is identical to the Iraq lies about WMDs? Or are they really that stupid.

Meanwhile, on the home front, Congress is still following the Neocon agenda of destruction of the U.S. as a democracy in which the people have any rights at all: G.O.P. Senators Say Accord Is Set on Wiretapping and this Illegal Spying, Spineless Congress: Oversight by Capitulation, and then more destruction of citizens rights in this one: House votes to dump state food safety laws.

So yeah, Gore, Byrd was very eloquent in the bit you quoted but it doesn’t make a hill of beans difference. He’s as whipped as the rest of you. Gore continues:

Why was the Senate silent?

In describing the empty chamber the way he did, Byrd invited a specific version of the same general question millions of us have been asking: “Why do reason, logic and truth seem to play a sharply diminished role in the way America now makes important decisions?” The persistent and sustained reliance on falsehoods as the basis of policy, even in the face of massive and well-understood evidence to the contrary, seems to many Americans to have reached levels that were previously unimaginable.

A large and growing number of Americans are asking out loud: “What has happened to our country?” People are trying to figure out what has gone wrong in our democracy, and how we can fix it.

Funny that Gore is only just now speaking up about the fact that everything the U.S. is doing is based on LIES (can we say that word, Mr. Gore?). Funny that he is only NOW talking about “massive and well-understood evidence” that is totally ignored by the Bush Ziocon Reich. Why didn’t he do something before over 600,000 Iraqis were murdered in an illegal war of aggression created by Bush’s handlers? Why didn’t he do what he COULD have done back in 2000 when Bush and his gang illegally stole the election away from him? Why is Gore only now finding that he has cojones or a conscience? After all, I saw what was going on then and wrote about it and so did a lot of other people. But we were all branded “conspiracy theorists” and Gore just faded into the background to emerge only now, when the heat is really being turned up on Bush & Co. Funny that. Gore then writes:

To take another example, for the first time in American history, the Executive Branch of our government has not only condoned but actively promoted the treatment of captives in wartime that clearly involves torture, thus overturning a prohibition established by General George Washington during the Revolutionary War.

Well, duuuh! Where was Gore when all this was going down – in public, even? When I checked the SOTT database, there were 430 articles about torture, and the database only goes back to 2005. The Abu Ghraib scandal broke in April of 2004. Where was Gore then? I mean, really! This is three years later and he’s only now saying something? Back to Gore:

It is too easy – and too partisan – to simply place the blame on the policies of President George W. Bush. We are all responsible for the decisions our country makes. We have a Congress. We have an independent judiciary. We have checks and balances. We are a nation of laws. We have free speech. We have a free press. Have they all failed us? Why has America’s public discourse become less focused and clear, less reasoned? Faith in the power of reason – the belief that free citizens can govern themselves wisely and fairly by resorting to logical debate on the basis of the best evidence available, instead of raw power – remains the central premise of American democracy. This premise is now under assault.

I think I need a sick-bag. We are all to blame for all of this, after all we do still have a Democracy! What a sick joker this guy Gore is!

Yeah, we have a Congress. Nearly every body occupying said hallowed halls is bought and paid for by Israel. Yeah, we have a judiciary, but it is clearly not independent as we have seen recently with the prosecutor’s purge for which no one will be made responsible. Are we really a nation of laws? Sure, the Patriot Act which gives all power to the President and he is “the decider” and decides when to obey them or not. If we are a nation of laws, as Gore says, why hasn’t Bush been arrested for high crimes and treason? What about Rove and Cheney? What about Gore himself and his not so subtle “Global Warming” terror tactics?

American democracy is now in danger – not from any one set of ideas, but from unprecedented changes in the environment within which ideas either live and spread, or wither and die. I do not mean the physical environment; I mean what is called the public sphere, or the marketplace of ideas.

It is simply no longer possible to ignore the strangeness of our public discourse. I know I am not alone in feeling that something has gone fundamentally wrong. In 2001, I had hoped it was an aberration when polls showed that three-quarters of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for attacking us on Sept. 11. More than five years later, however, nearly half of the American public still believes Saddam was connected to the attack.

Oh, he just thought it was an aberration! What about the hundreds – even thousands – of people who have been seeing what Gore only just now claims to be seeing, and were warning everyone about back then? And the only thing people like Gore and his ilk could say was “conspiracy theories!”

Well, just remember what John F. Kennedy said: “For we are opposed, around the world, by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy…” and look what happened to him!

The fact is, the assassination of John F. Kennedy was a form of control of the government of the United States. It is the ultimate form of control of the election process. Understanding this can lead us to understand what has happened to our country since that terrible day in November, 44 years ago. Studied carefully, the assassination of John F. Kennedy can reveal who really controls the United States and its polices, particularly foreign policy.

For we are opposed, around the world, by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence; in infiltration instead of invasion; on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice; on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. Its preparations are concealed not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined, its dissenters are silenced, not praised; no expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the cold war, in short, with a wartime discipline no democracy would ever hope to wish to match. …

He was right; but I think he didn’t realize how far they were willing – and able – to go.

Nowadays, we know how far they are able and willing to go: just look at the events of September 11, 2001, which bear the same unmistakable fingerprints of those who orchestrated the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

Today, we live in a country where the poor and old cannot afford health care, something that John Kennedy was trying to correct. We live in a country where the economy is falling apart; a country where 44 million people live on less than $12,000 dollars a year; a nation where over 2 million people are homeless; a country where the entire media system is owned by only six media mega conglomerates; the country with the highest crime rate in the world (not being at war); a country with the world’s largest prison population; a society where 25% of children under 12 live in poverty; a country that gives Israel billions of dollars a year to kill and maim Palestinians while there are over 2 million homeless on our own streets; a country where the gulf between the rich and poor is wider than it is in most other civilized countries; a nation that supports dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and many other countries around the world; a country that spies on its own citizens, has trashed the Constitution; a country that has undertaken to torture people when it is known that no intelligence that comes from a tortured person is likely to be accurate; a country where the government is full of corruption worse than any Banana Republic; a country where 40 percent of the homeless are military veterans, in a country with the world’s highest teen suicide rates; and all of these were issues that concerned John F. Kennedy, issues that he was working very hard – against a stubborn, oligarchic system – to correct.

And Gore is just now noticing all of this. He writes (disingenuously, in my opinion):

At first I thought the exhaustive, nonstop coverage of the O.J. Simpson trial was just an unfortunate excess – an unwelcome departure from the normal good sense and judgment of our television news media. Now we know that it was merely an early example of a new pattern of serial obsessions that periodically take over the airwaves for weeks at a time: the Michael Jackson trial and the Robert Blake trial, the Laci Peterson tragedy and the Chandra Levy tragedy, Britney and KFed, Lindsay and Paris and Nicole.

No Al, it wasn’t an “early example,” not even close. But it was the seminal event of the overt mind control system in the U.S. Prior to that, it was more covert.

I wrote a couple of years ago about an exchange I had with Robin Ramsay, Editor of Lobster magazine. The context of the exchange was related to his recent “Konspiracy Korner” piece published in Fortean Times, one of my favorite magazines (though I am now wondering just what is going on over there at FT?)

After writing a rather long post to him that included a lot of chunks of material from our research and the research of others, compelling evidence of JFK’s global “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy,” Mr. Ramsay opined:

“Ultimately it comes down to how you see the world. The kind of conspiracy you are describing, or implying, is inconceivable to me: too big, too complex, too likely to go wrong or be discovered, ever to be mounted. What you are describing … is vastly much bigger – and more complex and more dangerous – than any known mind control/psy ops project. And there is no evidence for it. […]

“Those – like you – who argue for a U.S. state conspiracy are proposing a massive, multi-agency conspiracy of a kind which has never been seen before. All the U.S. state agencies hate each other and barely co-operate, engage in endless turf wars. The kind of inter-agency operation you are proposing simply has never existed in peace time. It is inconceivable to me that such a group could be got together. And this is probably the main reason that the official U.S. state organisations and politicians have never taken the conspiracy theories seriously. They know how the U.S. state operates and thus dismiss this idea at the outset. (And the official inquiry into 9-11 is full of examples of the hostility between state agencies.) In reality, when the planes hit the towers a large slice of the U.S. military and intelligence bodies immediately thought of Bin Laden. And they have never had a good reason to change their minds – not least because Bin Laden and his various cohorts have admitted – boasted of – doing it.”

And there is the rub: undoubtedly, Robin Ramsay’s remarks are “on target” in many respects. And yet, there is the mountain of evidence – much of it circumstantial but so compelling that it would be accepted in a court of law – that there IS such a gigantic conspiracy, and that the “power elite” – individuals who may be completely unknown to us since the highest level politicians and bankers may only be their “pawns” – are somehow, at the top of the heap, controlling everything beneath them including the governments of various countries. And that is what Al Gore simply isn’t grokking. He writes:

While American television watchers were collectively devoting 100 million hours of their lives each week to these and other similar stories, our nation was in the process of more quietly making what future historians will certainly describe as a series of catastrophically mistaken decisions on issues of war and peace, the global climate and human survival, freedom and barbarity, justice and fairness. For example, hardly anyone now disagrees that the choice to invade Iraq was a grievous mistake. Yet, incredibly, all of the evidence and arguments necessary to have made the right decision were available at the time and in hindsight are glaringly obvious.

The evidence and arguments necessary to make the right decisions were glaringly obvious to SOME people at the time, Mr. Gore. But you and your ilk continue to refer to them as “conspiracy theorists.”

Those of us who have served in the U.S. Senate and watched it change over time could volunteer a response to Senator Byrd’s incisive description of the Senate prior to the invasion: The chamber was empty because the Senators were somewhere else. Many of them were at fund-raising events they now feel compelled to attend almost constantly in order to collect money – much of it from special interests – to buy 30-second TV commercials for their next re-election campaign. The Senate was silent because Senators don’t feel that what they say on the floor of the Senate really matters that much anymore – not to the other Senators, who are almost never present when their colleagues speak, and certainly not to the voters, because the news media seldom report on Senate speeches anymore.

Oh, horse hockey, Gore! You’re not gonna fly that old canard! You know very well why the chamber was empty and who the “special interests” were that give the money. The Zionist occupiers of Palestine wanted the war and they long ago bought and paid for the U.S. Congress.

Our Founders’ faith in the viability of representative democracy rested on their trust in the wisdom of a well-informed citizenry, their ingenious design for checks and balances, and their belief that the rule of reason is the natural sovereign of a free people. The Founders took great care to protect the openness of the marketplace of ideas so that knowledge could flow freely. Thus they not only protected freedom of assembly, they made a special point – in the First Amendment – of protecting the freedom of the printing press. And yet today, almost 45 years have passed since the majority of Americans received their news and information from the printed word. Newspapers are hemorrhaging readers. Reading itself is in decline. The Republic of Letters has been invaded and occupied by the empire of television.

Can’t you tell the truth, fer Gawd’s sake? The “Republic of Letters” has been invaded and occupied by psychopaths!

Radio, the Internet, movies, cell phones, iPods, computers, instant messaging, video games and personal digital assistants all now vie for our attention – but it is television that still dominates the flow of information. According to an authoritative global study, Americans now watch television an average of 4 hours and 35 minutes every day – 90 minutes more than the world average. When you assume eight hours of work a day, six to eight hours of sleep and a couple of hours to bathe, dress, eat and commute, that is almost three-quarters of all the discretionary time the average American has.

Indeed. And the “mind programming” efforts to bring about this state of affairs have been in operation for many, many years now, Mr. Gore! But that’s just a “conspiracy theory,” right? Well, if it is really true that you are just now waking up to reality, Mr. Gore, and realizing that almost everything that the so-called Conspiracy Theorists have been writing and predicting for the past 25 to 50 years is now coming to pass exactly as they described it, let me help you out a bit on understanding just what IS going on here.

Richard M. Dolan studied at Alfred University and Oxford University before completing his graduate work in history at the University of Rochester, where he was a finalist for a Rhodes scholarship. Dolan studied U.S. Cold War strategy, Soviet history and culture, and international diplomacy. He has written about “conspiracy” in the following way:

The very label [conspiracy] serves as an automatic dismissal, as though no one ever acts in secret. Let us bring some perspective and common sense to this issue.

The United States comprises large organizations – corporations, bureaucracies, “interest groups,” and the like – which are conspiratorial by nature. That is, they are hierarchical, their important decisions are made in secret by a few key decision-makers, and they are not above lying about their activities. Such is the nature of organizational behavior. “Conspiracy,” in this key sense, is a way of life around the globe.

Within the world’s military and intelligence apparatuses, this tendency is magnified to the greatest extreme. During the 1940s, […] the military and its scientists developed the world’s most awesome weapons in complete secrecy… […]

Anyone who has lived in a repressive society knows that official manipulation of the truth occurs daily. But societies have their many and their few. In all times and all places, it is the few who rule, and the few who exert dominant influence over what we may call official culture. – All elites take care to manipulate public information to maintain existing structures of power. It’s an old game.

America is nominally a republic and free society, but in reality an empire and oligarchy, vaguely aware of its own oppression, within and without. I have used the term “national security state” to describe its structures of power. It is a convenient way to express the military and intelligence communities, as well as the worlds that feed upon them, such as defense contractors and other underground, nebulous entities. Its fundamental traits are secrecy, wealth, independence, power, and duplicity.

Nearly everything of significance undertaken by America’s military and intelligence community in the past half-century has occurred in secrecy. The undertaking to build an atomic weapon, better known as the Manhattan Project, remains the great model for all subsequent activities. For more than two years, not a single member of Congress even knew about it although its final cost exceeded two billion dollars.

During and after the Second World War, other important projects, such as the development of biological weapons, the importation of Nazi scientists, terminal mind-control experiments, nationwide interception of mail and cable transmissions of an unwitting populace, infiltration of the media and universities, secret coups, secret wars, and assassinations all took place far removed not only from the American public, but from most members of Congress and a few presidents. Indeed, several of the most powerful intelligence agencies were themselves established in secrecy, unknown by the public or Congress for many years.

Since the 1940s, the U.S. Defense and Intelligence establishment has had more money at its disposal than most nations. In addition to official dollars, much of the money is undocumented. From its beginning, the C.I.A. was engaged in a variety of off-the-record “business” activities that generated large sums of cash. The connections of the C.I.A. with global organized crime (and thus de facto with the international narcotics trade) has been well established and documented for many years. – Much of the original money to run the American intelligence community came from very wealthy and established American families, who have long maintained an interest in funding national security operations important to their interests.

In theory, civilian oversight exists over the US national security establishment. The president is the military commander-in-chief. Congress has official oversight over the C.I.A.. The F.B.I. must answer to the Justice Department. In practice, little of this applies. One reason has to do with secrecy. […]

A chilling example of such independence occurred during the 1950s, when President Eisenhower effectively lost control of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The situation deteriorated so much that during his final two years in office, Eisenhower asked repeatedly for an audience with the head of Strategic Air Command to learn what America’s nuclear retaliatory plan was. What he finally learned in 1960, his final year in office, horrified him: half of the Northern Hemisphere would be obliterated.

If a revered military hero such as Eisenhower could not control America’s nuclear arsenal, nor get a straight answer from the Pentagon, how on earth could Presidents Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, or Nixon regarding comparable matters?

Secrecy, wealth and independence add up to power. Through the years, the national security state has gained access to the world’s most sophisticated technology sealed off millions of acres of land from public access or scrutiny, acquired unlimited snooping ability within U.S. borders and beyond, conducted overt or clandestine actions against other nations, and prosecuted wars without serious media scrutiny. Domestically, it maintains influence over elected officials and communities hoping for some of the billions of defense dollars. [including scientists, universities, etc.]

Deception is the key element of warfare, and when winning is all that matters, the conventional morality held by ordinary people becomes an impediment. When taken together, the examples of official duplicity form a nearly single totality. They include such choice morsels as the phony war crisis of 1948, the fabricated missile gap claimed by the air force during the 1950s, the carefully managed events leading to the Gulf of Tonkin resolution… […]

The secrecy stems from a pervasive and fundamental element of life in our world, that those who are at the top of the heap will always take whatever steps are necessary to maintain the status quo.

[S]keptics often ask, “Do you really think the government could hide [anything] for so long?” The question itself reflects ignorance of the reality that secrecy is a way of life in the National Security State. Actually though, the answer is yes, and no.

Yes, in that cover-ups are standard operating procedure, frequently unknown to the public for decades, becoming public knowledge by a mere roll of the dice. But also no, in that … information has leaked out from the very beginning. It is impossible to shut the lid completely. The key lies in neutralizing and discrediting unwelcomed information, sometimes through official denial, other times through proxies in the media.

[E]vidence [of conspiracy] derived from a grass roots level is unlikely to survive its inevitable conflict with official culture. And acknowledgement about the reality of [conspiracies] will only occur when the official culture deems it worthwhile or necessary to make it. Don’t hold your breath.

This is a widespread phenomenon affecting many people, generating high levels of interest, taking place in near-complete secrecy, for purposes unknown, by agencies unknown, with access to incredible resources and technology. A sobering thought and cause for reflection.” [Richard Dolan]

Consider this: even if Dolan is writing specifically about America, in a world dominated by the United States, it must be considered that pressures are applied elsewhere from within this “national security state” to comply with the demands of the U.S..

Now, think about the word “conspiracy” one more time, Mr. Gore, and allow me to emphasize the key point: From a historical point of view, the ONLY reality is that of conspiracy. Secrecy, wealth and independence add up to power. …Deception is the key element of warfare, (the tool of power elites), and when winning is all that matters, the conventional morality held by ordinary people becomes an impediment. Secrecy stems from a pervasive and fundamental element of life in our world, that those who are at the top of the heap will always take whatever steps are necessary to maintain the status quo. And frankly, since you run in those circles, my conspiracy theory is that there is something sinister behind you suddenly “waking up and smelling the coffee!” Gore writes:

In the world of television, the massive flows of information are largely in only one direction, which makes it virtually impossible for individuals to take part in what passes for a national conversation. Individuals receive, but they cannot send. They hear, but they do not speak. The “well-informed citizenry” is in danger of becoming the “well-amused audience.” Moreover, the high capital investment required for the ownership and operation of a television station and the centralized nature of broadcast, cable and satellite networks have led to the increasing concentration of ownership by an ever smaller number of larger corporations that now effectively control the majority of television programming in America.

And who are these owners of the mass media in America, Mr. Gore? Can we say it out loud, or is it too “conspiratorial”? Have you heard of Prof. Kevin MacDonald and his documented research on the subject entitled “The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements” ? MacDonald writes:

JEWS AND THE MEDIA: SHAPING ‘WAYS OF SEEING’

…Jewish movements opposing European domination of the U.S. focused on three critical areas of power: The academic world of information in the social sciences and humanities, the political world where public policy on immigration and other ethnic issues are decided, and the mass media where ‘ways of seeing’ are presented to the public. CofC focused on the first two of these sources of power, but little attention was given to the mass media except where it served to promote Jewish intellectual or political movements, as in the case of psychoanalysis. This lack of attention to the cultural influence of the mass media is a major gap. The following represents only a partial and preliminary discussion.

By all accounts, ethnic Jews have a powerful influence in the American media — far larger than any other identifiable group. The extent of Jewish ownership and influence on the popular media in the United States is remarkable given the relatively small proportion of the population that is Jewish.28 In a survey performed in the 1980s, 60 percent of a representative sample of the movie elite were of Jewish background (Powers et al. 1996, 79n13). Michael Medved (1996, 37) notes that ‘it makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names. This prominent Jewish role is obvious to anyone who follows news reports from Tinsel Town or even bothers to read the credits on major movies or television shows.’

Media ownership is always in flux, but the following is a reasonably accurate portrait of current media ownership in the United States by ethnic Jews:

The largest media company in the world was recently formed by the merger of America On Line and Time Warner. Gerald M. Levin, formerly the head of Time Warner, is the Chief Executive Officer of the new corporation. AOL-Time Warner has holdings in television (e.g., Home Box Office, CNN, Turner Broadcasting), music (Warner Music), movies (Warner Brothers Studio, Castle Rock Entertainment, and New Line Cinema), and publishing (Time, Sports Illustrated, People, Fortune).

The second largest media company is the Walt Disney Company, headed by Michael Eisner. Disney has holdings in movies (Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group, under Walt Disney Studios, includes Walt Disney Pictures, Touchstone Pictures, Hollywood Pictures, Caravan Pictures, Miramax Films); television (Capital Cities/ABC [owner of the ABC television network], Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Television, Buena Vista Television, ESPN, Lifetime, A&E Television networks) and cable networks with more than 100 million subscribers; radio (ABC Radio Network with over 3,400 affiliates and ownership of 26 stations in major cities); publishing (seven daily newspapers, Fairchild Publications [Women’s Wear Daily], and the Diversified Publishing Group).

The third largest media company is Viacom, Inc., headed by Sumner Redstone, who is also Jewish. Viacom has holdings in movies (Paramount Pictures); broadcasting (the CBS TV network; MTV [a particular focus of criticism by cultural conservatives], VH-1, Nickelodeon, Showtime, the National Network, Black Entertainment Television, 13 television stations; programming for the three television networks); publishing (Simon & Schuster, Scribner, The Free Press, and Pocket Books), video rentals (Blockbuster); it is also involved in satellite broadcasting, theme parks, and video games.

Another major media player is Edgar Bronfman, Jr., the son of Edgar Bronfman, Sr., president of the World Jewish Congress and heir to the Seagram distillery fortune. Until its merger with Vivendi, a French Company, in December 2000, Bronfman headed Universal Studios, a major movie production company, and the Universal Music Group, the world’s largest music company (including Polygram, Interscope Records, Island/Def Jam, Motown, Geffen/DGC Records). After the merger, Bronfman became the Executive Vice-Chairman of the new company, Vivendi Universal, and the Bronfman family and related entities became the largest shareholders in the company.29 Edgar Bronfman, Sr. is on the Board of Directors of the new company.

Other major television companies owned by Jews include New World Entertainment (owned by Ronald Perelman who also owns Revlon cosmetics), and DreamWorks SKG (owned by film director Steven Spielberg, former Disney Pictures chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg, and recording industry mogul David Geffen). DreamWorks SKG produces movies, animated films, television programs, and recorded music. Spielberg is also a Jewish ethnic activist. After making Schindler’s List, Spielberg established Survivors of the Shoah Foundation with the aid of a grant from the U.S. Congress. He also helped fund Professor Deborah Lipstadt’s defense against a libel suit brought by British military historian and Holocaust revisionist David Irving.

In the world of print media, the Newhouse media empire owns 26 daily newspapers, including several large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the country’s largest cable networks; the Sunday supplement Parade, with a circulation of more than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen major magazines, including the New Yorker, Vogue, Mademoiselle, Glamour, Vanity Fair, Bride’s, Gentlemen’s Quarterly, Self, House & Garden, and all the other magazines of the wholly owned Conde Nast group.

The newsmagazine, U.S. News & World Report, with a weekly circulation of 2.3 million, is owned and published by Mortimer B. Zuckerman. Zuckerman also owns New York’s tabloid newspaper, the Daily News, the sixth-largest paper in the country, and is the former owner of the Atlantic Monthly. Zuckerman is a Jewish ethnic activist. Recently he was named head of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, an umbrella organization for major Jewish organizations in the U.S.30 Zuckerman’s column in U.S. News and World Report regularly defends Israel and has helped to rejuvenate the America-Israeli Friendship League, of which he is president.31

Another Jewish activist with a prominent position in the U.S. media is Martin Peretz, owner of The New Republic (TNR) since 1974. Throughout his career Peretz has been devoted to Jewish causes, particularly Israel. During the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, he told Henry Kissinger that his ‘dovishness stopped at the delicatessen door,’ and many among his staff feared that all issues would be decided on the basis of what was ‘good for the Jews’ (Alterman 1992, 185, 186). Indeed, one editor was instructed to obtain material from the Israeli embassy for use in TNR editorials. ‘It is not enough to say that TNR’s owner is merely obsessed with Israel; he says so himself. But more importantly, Peretz is obsessed with Israel’s critics, Israel’s would-be critics, and people who never heard of Israel, but might one day know someone who might someday become a critic’ (Alterman 1992, 195).

The Wall Street Journal is the largest-circulation daily newspaper in the U.S. It is owned by Dow Jones & Company, Inc., a New York corporation that also publishes 24 other daily newspapers and the weekly financial paper Barron’s. The chairman and CEO of Dow Jones is Peter R. Kann. Kann also holds the posts of chairman and publisher of the Wall Street Journal.

The Sulzberger family owns the New York Times Co., which owns 33 other newspapers, including the Boston Globe. It also owns twelve magazines (including McCall’s and Family Circle, each with a circulation of more than 5 million), seven radio and TV broadcasting stations; a cable-TV system; and three book publishing companies. The New York Times News Service transmits news stories, features, and photographs from the New York Times by wire to 506 other newspapers, news agencies, and magazines.

Jewish ownership of the New York Times is particularly interesting because it has been the most influential newspaper in the U.S. since the start of the 20th century. As noted in a recent book on the Sulzberger family (Tifft & Jones 1999), even at that time, there were several Jewish-owned newspapers, including the New York World (controlled by Joseph Pulitzer), the Chicago Times-Herald and Evening Post (controlled by H. H. Kohlsaat), and the New York Post (controlled by the family of Jacob Schiff). In 1896 Adolph Ochs purchased the New York Times with the critical backing of several Jewish businessmen, including Isidor Straus (co-owner of Macy’s department stores) and Jacob Schiff (a successful investment banker who was also a Jewish ethnic activist). ‘Schiff and other prominent Jews like … Straus had made it clear they wanted Adolph to succeed because they believed he ‘could be of great service to the Jews generally’ — (Tifft & Jones 1999, 37-38). Ochs’s father-in-law was the Rabbi Isaac Mayer Wise, the founder of Reform Judaism in the United States.

There are some exceptions to this pattern of media ownership, but even in such cases ethnic Jews have a major managerial role.32 For example, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation owns Fox Television Network, 20th Century Fox Films, Fox 2000, and the New York Post. However, Peter Chernin is president and CEO of Fox Group, which includes all of News Corporation’s film, television, and publishing operations in the United States. Murdoch is deeply philosemitic and deeply committed to Israel, at least partly from a close relationship he developed early in his career with Leonard Goldenson, who founded the American Broadcasting Company. (Goldenson was a major figure in New York’s Jewish establishment and an outspoken supporter of Israel.) Murdoch’s publications have taken a strongly pro-Israel line, including The Weekly Standard, the premier neo-conservative magazine, edited by William Kristol.

Murdoch … as publisher and editor-in-chief of the New York Post, had a large Jewish constituency, as he did to a lesser degree with New York magazine and The Village Voice. Not only had the pre-Murdoch Post readership been heavily Jewish, so, too, were the present Post advertisers. Most of Murdoch’s closest friends and business advisers were wealthy, influential New York Jews intensely active in pro-Israel causes. And he himself still retained a strong independent sympathy for Israel, a personal identification with the Jewish state that went back to his Oxford days. (Kiernan 1986, 261)

Murdoch also developed close relationships with several other prominent Jewish figures in the New York establishment, including attorney Howard Squadron, who was president of the AJCongress and head of the Council of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, and investment banker Stanley Schuman.

Another exception is NBC which is owned by General Electric. However, the President of NBC is Andrew Lack and the President of NBC News is Neal Shapiro, both of whom are Jewish. In addition, the Bertelsmann publishing group is a Germany-based company that is the largest publisher of trade books in the world and also owns magazines, newspapers, and music. Most of Bertelsmann’s influence is outside the United States, although it recently purchased the Random House Publishing Company.

Even granting the exceptions, it is clear that Jews enjoy a very powerful position in U.S. media, a position that is far more powerful than any other racial/ethnic group. The phenomenal concentration of media power in Jewish hands becomes all the more extraordinary when one notes that Jews constitute approximately 2.5% of the U.S. population. If the Jewish percentage of the American media elite is estimated at 59% (Lichter et al. 1983, 55) — probably an underestimate at the present time, the degree of disproportionate representation may be calculated as greater than 2000%. The likelihood that such an extraordinary disparity could arise by chance is virtually nil. Ben Stein, noting that about 60% of the top positions in Hollywood are held by Jews, says ‘Do Jews run Hollywood? You bet they do — and what of it?’33 Does Jewish ownership and control of the media have any effect on the product?

You bet it does. And the above brief discussion indicates clearly where the media bias comes from and who it is intended to benefit.

Does this mean I’m pushing a “Jewish Conspiracy”?

No, as a matter of fact, it doesn’t. It just happens that Judaism and it’s daughter religions, Christianity and Islam, are particularly suited to the machinations of psychopathy. You might even say that Judaism is the ultimate tool of psychopathy – a psychopathic God and a psychopathic religion – and that its social effect for the past two thousand years has been to concentrate genetic deviants into a specific ethnic group so that psychopathy exists at a much higher rate in this group than any other at this point in history. Even so, it is still a minority. The majority of Jews are just like the majority of any other group: manipulated and used by elitists who don’t really believe in any religion except that of power and control.

There exists in our world today a powerful and dangerous secret cult.

So wrote Victor Marchetti, a former high-ranking C.I.A. official, in his book The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence. This is the first book the U.S. Government ever went to court to censor before publication. In this book, Marchetti tells us that there IS a “Cabal” that rules the world and that its holy men are the clandestine professionals of the Central Intelligence Agency. I don’t think that’s necessarily the case, though certainly the C.I.A. would attract a whole lot of pathological deviants. I think that the C.I.A. is but one “arm” of the cult, just as Benedictines were but one order of the Catholic Church. To borrow from, and paraphrasing, Marchetti:

“This cult is patronized and protected by the highest level government officials in the world. It’s membership is composed of those in the power centers of government, industry, commerce, finance, and labor. It manipulates individuals in areas of important public influence – including the academic world and the mass media. The Secret Cult is a global fraternity of a political aristocracy whose purpose is to further the political policies of persons or agencies unknown. It acts covertly and illegally.”

A lot of them are Jews – probably a majority – but not all of them. Jim Keith, wrote in his book, Mass Control:

“Although the lust for control can be discerned since the beginning of recorded history, a nexus of particular importance arose in Germany in the latter half of the 19th century. As the country increased in military and industrial might, becoming the strongest power in Europe, a revolution simultaneously took place in German philosophic and scientific thought that paradoxically would spread through the world to create positive technological change as well as to birth innumerable toxic children. According to one source:

The spread of materialistic philosophy of life was world-wide in this age, and the idolatry of power was not confined to Germany, but its corrosive effect was particularly strong in a country that was not inured to power. [Germany, History Since 1850, Encyclopedia Americana, New York: Americana Corporation, 1963]

One aspect of this transformation, this “idolatry of power,” was a negative transformation of the psychological sciences. In the late 19th century, earlier more humanistic approaches to understanding mankind were replaced by a scientific philosophy that would be employed less as a measure for the understanding of man than as a justification for a new feudalism and a mechanism of pure control.

The materialist overhauling of psychology was in great part ushered in by the work of the German psychologist Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt. Wundt was a professor of philosophy at the University of Leipzig, and in 1875 established the worlds first psychological laboratory there, a move that would eventually turn the world of more humanistic-oriented psychology on its head. Interesting, but Wundt’s grandfather is documented as having been a member of the Illuminati secret society, making it not unreasonable to imagine that herr professor may also have been a member of that group.

Wundt, in reflection of a powerful materialistic groundswell in German thought that began with Schopenhauer at the beginning of the 19th century and that was to be later epitomized by Karl Marx, rejected in cavalier fashion the notion that man might have a soul or deeper significance than the merely physical, that he was in fact anything more than an animal. Following this line of reasoning, an approach that came to be known in psychology as Structuralism, Wundt insisted that all psychological studies should depend entirely on the study of body reactions. The truth of man, Wundt insisted, could be determined solely through mechanistic means: measurement, analysis, and dissection of bodies. After Wundt had thoroughly infused the psychological sciences with his materialist approach, many scientists – and the members of the ruling class that employed them – believed that they were justified in treating human beings as if they were pieces of meat, and as an overall plan of action, proceeded to do so.

The materialist psychological doctrine spread rapidly with at least twenty-four laboratories established by Wundt’s students between the years 1883 and 1893, with more of the German’s acolytes fanning out to infiltrate related fields, such as education. Wundt’s materialistic approach would infect the thinking of most of the influential psychologists, psychiatrists, educators, and social planners who would follow in the 20th century.

One man who marched to Wundt’s dirge was the Russian, Ivan Petrovich Pavlov. Pavlov conducted a wide-ranging research into techniques of control, primarily using dogs for his experimentation. In the now-famous experiment, Pavlov fed his dogs, stimulating salivation, while at the same time ringing a bell. After doing this many times, Pavlov was able to stimulate salivation in reaction to the sound of the bell alone. Other of Pavlov’s experiments involved rewarding dogs with petting, or punishing them with pain. Using these kinds of approaches, Pavlov developed his theory of the conditioned reflex, demonstrating that animals are motivated by patterns of conditioned response, and that conditioning can be artificially induced. The results of Pavlov’s experiments did not escape the social planners of his day, nor those who would follow.” [Jim Keith, Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness]

In recorded history, we find that the Elite, in their drive for power, have developed many means of controlling the minds of the masses. The earliest recorded such event was the appearance of Yahweh/Jehovah on the World Stage, and things went downhill (or became easier, depending on your point of view) from there.

With the above mentioned development of Structuralism, “many scientists – and the members of the ruling class that employed them – believed that they were justified in treating human beings as if they were pieces of meat, and as an overall plan of action, proceeded to do so.” These ideas were taken up by the Nazis in their great experiment in trying to take over the world. After observing Nazi Germany, it seems that the Soviet Union, Great Britain, and the United States mounted their own large-scale research programs designed to develop techniques for psychological control of the masses. It has been suggested that the U.S. was a latecomer to this activity, but our Timeline suggests that this is, in fact, not true.

In practice, what television’s dominance has come to mean is that the inherent value of political propositions put forward by candidates is now largely irrelevant compared with the image-based ad campaigns they use to shape the perceptions of voters. The high cost of these commercials has radically increased the role of money in politics – and the influence of those who contribute it. That is why campaign finance reform, however well drafted, often misses the main point: so long as the dominant means of engaging in political dialogue is through purchasing expensive television advertising, money will continue in one way or another to dominate American politics. And as a result, ideas will continue to play a diminished role. That is also why the House and Senate campaign committees in both parties now search for candidates who are multimillionaires and can buy the ads with their own personal resources.[Gore]

And that is why the system needs to be changed from the bottom up. What we need is a system whereby qualified candidates for any given public service position should be placed in a pool and the “winner” selected by lottery.

When I first ran for Congress in 1976, I never took a poll during the entire campaign. Eight years later, however, when I ran statewide for the U.S. Senate, I did take polls and like most statewide candidates relied more heavily on electronic advertising to deliver my message. I vividly remember a turning point in that Senate campaign when my opponent, a fine public servant named Victor Ashe who has since become a close friend, was narrowing the lead I had in the polls. After a detailed review of all the polling information and careful testing of potential TV commercials, the anticipated response from my opponent’s campaign and the planned response to the response, my advisers made a recommendation and prediction that surprised me with its specificity: “If you run this ad at this many ‘points’ [a measure of the size of the advertising buy], and if Ashe responds as we anticipate, and then we purchase this many points to air our response to his response, the net result after three weeks will be an increase of 8.5% in your lead in the polls.”

I authorized the plan and was astonished when three weeks later my lead had increased by exactly 8.5%. Though pleased, of course, for my own campaign, I had a sense of foreboding for what this revealed about our democracy. Clearly, at least to some degree, the “consent of the governed” was becoming a commodity to be purchased by the highest bidder. To the extent that money and the clever use of electronic mass media could be used to manipulate the outcome of elections, the role of reason began to diminish.

As a college student, I wrote my senior thesis on the impact of television on the balance of power among the three branches of government. In the study, I pointed out the growing importance of visual rhetoric and body language over logic and reason. There are countless examples of this, but perhaps understandably, the first one that comes to mind is from the 2000 campaign, long before the Supreme Court decision and the hanging chads, when the controversy over my sighs in the first debate with George W. Bush created an impression on television that for many viewers outweighed whatever positive benefits I might have otherwise gained in the verbal combat of ideas and substance. A lot of good that senior thesis did me.

The potential for manipulating mass opinions and feelings initially discovered by commercial advertisers is now being even more aggressively exploited by a new generation of media Machiavellis. The combination of ever more sophisticated public opinion sampling techniques and the increasing use of powerful computers to parse and subdivide the American people according to “psychographic” categories that identify their susceptibility to individually tailored appeals has further magnified the power of propagandistic electronic messaging that has created a harsh new reality for the functioning of our democracy. [Gore]

I’ve got news for ya: this has been going on a lot longer than you think – or than you let on that you think

Convinced that German scientists could help America’s postwar efforts, President Harry Truman agreed in September 1946 to authorize “Project Paperclip,” a program to bring selected German scientists to work on America’s behalf during the “Cold War”. However, Truman expressly excluded anyone found “to have been a member of the Nazi party and more than a nominal participant in its activities, or an active supporter of Nazism or militarism.”

The War Department’s Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency (J.I.O.A.) conducted background investigations of the scientists. In February 1947, J.I.O.A. Director Bosquet Wev submitted the first set of scientists’ dossiers to the State and Justice Departments for review. The Dossiers were damning. Samuel Klaus, the State Departments representative on the J.I.O.A. board, claimed that all the scientists in this first batch were “ardent Nazis.” Their visa requests were denied.

A memo was written saying that “the best interests of the United States have been subjugated to the efforts expended in ‘beating a dead Nazi horse.'” Nazi Intelligence leader Reinhard Gehlen met with the C.I.A. director Allen Dulles. Gehlen was a master spy for the Nazis and had infiltrated Russia with his vast Nazi Intelligence network. Dulles promised Gehlen that his Intelligence unit was safe in the C.I.A.. Dulles had the scientists dossier’s re-written to eliminate incriminating evidence. And so, Allen Dulles delivered the Nazi Intelligence unit to the C.I.A., which later opened many umbrella projects stemming from Nazi research. (MK-ULTRA / ARTICHOKE, OPERATION MIDNIGHT CLIMAX).

By 1955, more than 760 German scientists had been granted citizenship in the U.S. and given prominent positions in the American scientific community. Many had been longtime members of the Nazi party and the Gestapo, had conducted experiments on humans at concentration camps, had used slave labor, and had committed other war crimes. In a 1985 expose in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Linda Hunt wrote that she had examined more than 130 reports on Project Paperclip subjects–and every one “had been changed to eliminate the security threat classification.”

President Truman, who had explicitly ordered no committed Nazis to be admitted under Project Paperclip, was evidently never aware that his directive had been violated.

So it was that the Office of Strategic Services – forerunner to the Central Intelligence Agency – enlisted the Nazi Scientists for “specialized problem solving.” Foremost among these was solving the problem of agent recruitment. That is to say, getting agents that were not only not on the payroll, but who were literally impervious to being “broken.” A second problem they wanted to solve immediately was gathering intelligence from the agents of other governments who, they already suspected, had been made “impervious” to detection, as well as making sure their own recruits had not been compromised. That is to say, they wanted a “truth serum.” Senior O.S.S. officers turned to the behavioralists for a scientific solutions.

The story we are told about this goes as follows:

“Despite frantic efforts, the O.S.S. failed to find an effective interrogative drug. Yet the lure was so enormous that even after the war the newly created C.I.A. continued the effort undeterred. But it was not until the 1949 trial of Cardinal Josef Mindszentry by the Soviet-installed Hungarian communist regime that the C.I.A. realized that drugs held other promises as well. In the course of Mindszentry’s trial, his deportment, demeanor and speech led C.I.A. analysts to the conclusion that he had been successfully subjected to an extraordinary form of psychological manipulation. Although the technique was unknown to C.I.A. psychologists, it was clearly of such efficacy and power as to cause him to confess to crimes he did not commit and could not have committed; and they were quite certain that drugs were somehow involved. The Soviets had clearly mastered a new form of totalitarian control; and discovering its secrets became an urgent intelligence priority. On April 20, 1950, C.I.A. Director Roscoe Hillenkoetter approved the United States’ government’s first research and development program expressly designed to develop techniques for the control of the human mind. It was known through successive incarnations as Projects BLUEBIRD, ARTICHOKE, MKULTRA and MKSEARCH; and eventually came to encompass 149 distinct behavioral science research programs and 33 related non-behavioral projects over the course of twenty-three years.

The open-ended research program that Hillenkoetter approved was given sudden impetus by two dramatic developments. The first was the outbreak of war in Korea sixty-six days later; the second was the public breakdown of the U. S. ambassador to the Soviet Union some two years thereafter. During the Korean conflict American forces often performed poorly in the field against enemy armies that had no prior experience in mechanized warfare; and in one particularly shameful incident, an entire U.S. army division fled the field.

Moreover, the conduct of American servicemen in captivity was shocking. Fifteen per cent of American prisoners of war held by the Chinese Communists actively collaborated with their captors, and a full seventy per cent signed fraudulent confessions to war crimes or written denunciations of the United States government. More alarming still, large numbers of those that signed confessions or denunciations refused to recant after their repatriation. Many were suspected of having returned to the United States as willing spies for the enemy; and some were later proven to be. Of similar concern was the bizarre behavior of Ambassador George F. Kennan at Templehof airport while en route to London from Moscow. There Kennan exploded in anger at a naïve question posed by an inexperienced reporter; and as a result of his ill-advised response was declared persona non grata by the Soviet regime. Such were the times that many senior American officials were convinced that this incident provided strong evidence that Kennan had fallen victim to Soviet mind control.

The general outline of the C.I.A.’s behavioral science research program – commonly, but incorrectly referred to as MKULTRA – was inadvertently revealed by the Rockefeller Commission in 1975. Established by President Ford to investigate allegations of C.I.A. illegality, the Commission’s Final Report contained a one-line reference to a federal employee who had killed himself after having been unwittingly drugged by a C.I.A. officer as part of an MKULTRA experiment. This sparked a press furor that eventually resulted in more extensive congressional investigations chaired by Sen. Edward F. Kennedy. Not surprisingly, both the press and the Sen. Kennedy focused their investigations upon the more lurid aspects of MKULTRA, which included the kidnapping, drugging and torturing of American citizens on American soil for research purposes and the effort to develop “programmed assassins.” Overlooked in the process were the C.I.A.’s efforts to determine the effects of electromagnetism upon the psyche, electromechanical stimulation of the brain, a form of technologically-based E.S.P., remote viewing, precognition, psychokinesis and, especially, nonaural voice communications with radio and microwave transmissions. This was unfortunate, for their researchers made gains in most of these areas and scored dramatic breakthroughs in others.

According to declassified financial records and the testimony of retired C.I.A. officers, the C.I.A. had by 1961 developed implant devices for dogs, making it possible for their handlers to guide them through various courses by remote control. During this same time frame they also developed techniques for disrupting bodily functions with radio waves. By the mid-1960’s they had successfully developed and field-tested nonaural voice communications with both radio and micro waves; and by 1977 they had developed and field-tested a rudimentary form of electromechanical “mind reading.” But despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, they have steadfastly maintained that they failed entirely in their quest to control the human mind.

There are perhaps three reasons for the C.I.A.’s implausible denials. The first is legal responsibility. For as the Kennedy hearings established, C.I.A. officers wildly exceeded their authority in the course of MKULTRA. Innocent citizens were kidnapped off the streets and drugged, hypnotized and subjected to physical torture. These actions were and remain felonous; and had the criminal justice system taken its proper course, scores of C.I.A. officers would have faced capital charges. The second reason is the explosive nature of the data they developed in the course of their experiments. For contrary to common belief, the human psyche lacks systemic integrity. Rather than the tightly integrated system that has been historically assumed, it is in fact a loosely related collage of drives, inhibitions, orientations, functions, desires and beliefs – all of which are subject to external manipulation. The third and final reason is the extraordinary ease of reengineering the human mind. With the ARTICHOKE technique, a psyche may be broken apart, restructured and reassembled almost to specification in approximately four hours – all without the victim’s consent, or even his conscious awareness.

As declassified C.I.A. documents make clear, a principal objective of MKULTRA was to develop techniques that would allow the Agency to exert control over an individual to such an extent that he would do their bidding “against his will and even against such fundamental laws of nature such as self-preservation.” Technically, they failed; but only because a parallel project run by the Department of Defense achieved success first. The C.I.A. research and development program was reportedly shut down in 1973, and the ARTICHOKE techniques perfected by the military were adopted wholesale.” [MKULTRA and the weaponization of the human psyche by Charles S. Viar]

Now, the question is: have the C.I.A. or the U.S. military – and their chief ally, Israel, operationalized ARTICHOKE?

On 6 April 1994, a 19-year-old Palestinian driving a stolen vehicle packed with explosives pulled up to a crowded bus stop in the northern Israeli town of Afula. Before the vehicle could come to a complete stop, it exploded with enormous force, killing the driver and eight Israelis and wounding 50 more. Although few Western analysts have made the connection, the Afula attack was a turning point in the Middle East conflict. For it was the first time that so-called Islamic terrorists – clearly victims of operation ARTICHOKE – were used to mount suicide attacks as False Flag operations. Since then, it is clear that project ARTICHOKE – or its successor – has been behind almost a hundred additional suicide attacks against Israel, and the United States, and now, Great Britain.

The results have been devastating to Arabs, Islamics, the Palestinians, and VERY good for the business of Israel and the United States. In Israel, suicide bombers have killed approximately 1000 Israelis and wounded almost five times as many. However, for each Israeli killed by suicide bombers, Israel has been able to kill three Palestinians and to further effect its plan of genocide of the Palestiinian people.

Furthermore, the results of the so-called suicide bomber attacks have served only to make Arabs and Muslims targets of xenophobia around the globe.

In recent times, Israel has pointed to the economic damages it has suffered as “proof” that Israel is NOT running “false flag,” or “ARTICHOKE” operations. They cite the facts that, in Israel, economic growth has ground to a standstill and that Israel is now suffering a net population loss from emigration, as young Israelis leave for Europe and America in search of employment and, perhaps, security. You can bet that there will be a new wave of “anti-Semitism” launched in order to drive the Jews back to Israel.

The 9-11 attacks against New York and Washington are prime examples of ARTICHOKE technologies. We are constantly reminded that “19 Arab terrorists dunnit,” and the mainstream press has failed to adequately address the issue that many of the “hijackers” named by the F.B.I. are alive and well. Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal told the Arabic Press after meeting with President George W. Bush on Sept. 20: “It was proved that five of the names included in the F.B.I. list had nothing to do with what happened.”

But certainly, SOMEBODY did.

“As of this writing, there has been no public discussion of ARTICHOKE-assisted suicide bombings. Indeed, all official discussions of suicide attacks have carefully omitted any reference to ARTICHOKE as an element of the suicide attack strategy. They have instead focused upon the supposed religious fanaticism of the bombers. […]

[R]eligious fanaticism fails to explain the remarkably low failure rate of suicide bombings. To date, not a single recruit is known to have defected to either Israel or the United States; and only one is known to have refused to carry out his assigned mission. On the basis of current public source reports, the failure rate of suicide bombers appears to be about 1 in 80; and such an extraordinary figure is only attributable to scientific technique.” […] [MKULTRA and the weaponization of the human psyche by Charles S. Viar]

The modern intell view of the problem of suicide bombers goes as follows:

For more than a century and a half, Hasan bin Sabah and his followers terrorized the Muslim world by systematically murdering anyone who stood in their way. In this, their principal weapon was the programmed assassin, psychologically weaponized with a technique strikingly similar to ARTICHOKE. In terms of strategy, tactics and technique, the Assassini were the historical predecessors of today’s suicide bombers; and for that reason they are instructive. The Medieval Islamic elite failed to devise an effective strategy against suicide assassins, and for that they paid a fearsome price.

It was not until the Mongol Conquest that the Assassini were finally suppressed, and then only by sheer brutality. Lacking modern sensibilities, the Mongols laid waste their strongholds and surrounding areas; and all known, suspected, and potential supporters of the Assassini were summarily put to the sword. The number of people killed by the Mongol’s in their campaign against the Assassini has been lost to history, but it was surely in the hundreds of thousands and it may have numbered in the millions.

Contemporary suicide bombers pose an almost identical challenge to the political structures of the contemporary world.” […] [MKULTRA and the weaponization of the human psyche by Charles S. Viar]

Re-read the last two paragraphs above: We see in this the justification for nuclear war being brought forward, a war that can “lay waste” the lands of the Muslims, as well as “all known, suspected, and potential supporters…”

Remember: those who are at the top of the heap will always take whatever steps are necessary to maintain the status quo. It is obvious that they cannot completely control the propagation of the information. So, how do they “keep secrets?” They don’t. Everything is right out there in the public domain. Anybody who wants to can do the research we have done and come to the realizations we have in this process. BUT, not everyone is able to withstand the OTHER weapon of Mass Control: the fear of being labeled a “suspected or potential supporter” in a world where the Grand Inquisitor has total control over life and death.

But Gore is only just now catching on. He writes (no doubt with crocodile tears in his eyes):

As a result, our democracy is in danger of being hollowed out. In order to reclaim our birthright, we Americans must resolve to repair the systemic decay of the public forum. We must create new ways to engage in a genuine and not manipulative conversation about our future. We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the purpose of intentionally clouding the public’s ability to discern the truth. Americans in both parties should insist on the re-establishment of respect for the rule of reason.

And what if an individual citizen or group of citizens wants to enter the public debate by expressing their views on television? Since they cannot simply join the conversation, some of them have resorted to raising money in order to buy 30 seconds in which to express their opinion. But too often they are not allowed to do even that. MoveOn.org tried to buy an ad for the 2004 Super Bowl broadcast to express opposition to Bush’s economic policy, which was then being debated by Congress. CBS told MoveOn that “issue advocacy” was not permissible. Then, CBS, having refused the MoveOn ad, began running advertisements by the White House in favor of the president’s controversial proposal. So MoveOn complained, and the White House ad was temporarily removed. By temporarily, I mean it was removed until the White House complained, and CBS immediately put the ad back on, yet still refused to present the MoveOn ad.

To understand the final reason why the news marketplace of ideas dominated by television is so different from the one that emerged in the world dominated by the printing press, it is important to distinguish the quality of vividness experienced by television viewers from the “vividness” experienced by readers. Marshall McLuhan’s description of television as a “cool” medium – as opposed to the “hot” medium of print – was hard for me to understand when I read it 40 years ago, because the source of “heat” in his metaphor is the mental work required in the alchemy of reading. But McLuhan was almost alone in recognizing that the passivity associated with watching television is at the expense of activity in parts of the brain associated with abstract thought, logic, and the reasoning process. Any new dominant communications medium leads to a new information ecology in society that inevitably changes the way ideas, feelings, wealth, power and influence are distributed and the way collective decisions are made.

As a young lawyer giving his first significant public speech at the age of 28, Abraham Lincoln warned that a persistent period of dysfunction and unresponsiveness by government could alienate the American people and that “the strongest bulwark of any government, and particularly of those constituted like ours, may effectively be broken down and destroyed – I mean the attachment of the people.” Many Americans now feel that our government is unresponsive and that no one in power listens to or cares what they think. They feel disconnected from democracy. They feel that one vote makes no difference, and that they, as individuals, have no practical means of participating in America’s self-government. Unfortunately, they are not entirely wrong. Voters are often viewed mainly as targets for easy manipulation by those seeking their “consent” to exercise power. By using focus groups and elaborate polling techniques, those who design these messages are able to derive the only information they’re interested in receiving from citizens – feedback useful in fine-tuning their efforts at manipulation. Over time, the lack of authenticity becomes obvious and takes its toll in the form of cynicism and alienation. And the more Americans disconnect from the democratic process, the less legitimate it becomes.

Many young Americans now seem to feel that the jury is out on whether American democracy actually works or not. We have created a wealthy society with tens of millions of talented, resourceful individuals who play virtually no role whatsoever as citizens. Bringing these people in – with their networks of influence, their knowledge, and their resources – is the key to creating the capacity for shared intelligence that we need to solve our problems.

Unfortunately, the legacy of the 20th century’s ideologically driven bloodbaths has included a new cynicism about reason itself – because reason was so easily used by propagandists to disguise their impulse to power by cloaking it in clever and seductive intellectual formulations. When people don’t have an opportunity to interact on equal terms and test the validity of what they’re being “taught” in the light of their own experience and robust, shared dialogue, they naturally begin to resist the assumption that the experts know best.

So the remedy for what ails our democracy is not simply better education (as important as that is) or civic education (as important as that can be), but the re-establishment of a genuine democratic discourse in which individuals can participate in a meaningful way – a conversation of democracy in which meritorious ideas and opinions from individuals do, in fact, evoke a meaningful response.

Fortunately, the Internet has the potential to revitalize the role played by the people in our constitutional framework. It has extremely low entry barriers for individuals. It is the most interactive medium in history and the one with the greatest potential for connecting individuals to one another and to a universe of knowledge. It’s a platform for pursuing the truth, and the decentralized creation and distribution of ideas, in the same way that markets are a decentralized mechanism for the creation and distribution of goods and services. It’s a platform, in other words, for reason. But the Internet must be developed and protected, in the same way we develop and protect markets – through the establishment of fair rules of engagement and the exercise of the rule of law. The same ferocity that our Founders devoted to protect the freedom and independence of the press is now appropriate for our defense of the freedom of the Internet. The stakes are the same: the survival of our Republic. We must ensure that the Internet remains open and accessible to all citizens without any limitation on the ability of individuals to choose the content they wish regardless of the Internet service provider they use to connect to the Web. We cannot take this future for granted. We must be prepared to fight for it, because of the threat of corporate consolidation and control over the Internet marketplace of ideas. [Gore]

Apparently Mr. Gore is not aware of the fact that the internet is already controlled to a very great extent, that Google itself is an instrument of this control.

The danger arises because there is, in most markets, a very small number of broadband network operators. These operators have the structural capacity to determine the way in which information is transmitted over the Internet and the speed with which it is delivered.

Exactly. Google is a prime example.

And the present Internet network operators – principally large telephone and cable companies – have an economic incentive to extend their control over the physical infrastructure of the network to leverage control of Internet content. If they went about it in the wrong way, these companies could institute changes that have the effect of limiting the free flow of information over the Internet in a number of troubling ways.

And who controls the phone systems in the U.S.? Take your time…

The democratization of knowledge by the print medium brought the Enlightenment. Now, broadband interconnection is supporting decentralized processes that reinvigorate democracy. We can see it happening before our eyes: As a society, we are getting smarter. Networked democracy is taking hold. You can feel it. We the people – as Lincoln put it, “even we here” – are collectively still the key to the survival of America’s democracy.

But not if we don’t educate ourselves about what really matters – what the real problems are – and how to go about fixing them. Here is where we come back to the context. If we take it as an operating hypothesis that there does exist a powerful elite whose interests are served by the current state of affairs, who are they?

The main threat to Democracy comes not from the extreme left but from the extreme right, which is able to buy huge sections of the press and radio, and wages a constant campaign to smear and discredit every progressive and humanitarian measure.” – George Seldes

“There exists a shadowy Government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.” Daniel K. Inouye U.S. Senator

But who is behind it all? Ah! that is the question! We find, with this brief review, that those individuals who simply can’t grasp what the governments of the planet are doing – that they are servicing the agenda of those who want absolute power – simply don’t understand the nature of belief, of hypnosis, of mind control, of propaganda, of being fooled, and how easy it is for a small core group to do all of the above.

The problem is that of pathological deviants present in the human population. These are human looking beings with no souls, no conscience, and which are simply part of the natural environment. In a very real sense they are useful to the rest of us because we have the opportunity to learn about good and evil through them and their activities. Maybe even Al Gore is learning a thing or two; only time will tell.

Psychopaths are born in all places and in all classes of society and the standard percentage is about 4 to 6 % of the various types. We might even think that it is higher in the U.S. where Western style capitalism selects for psychopathy It is the various psychopathies in the human population that exert their control over the 94% of the rest of us. They do this because they exert their influence through lies and deception and tactics.

A really good example of how this psychopathic agenda to rule the world can move from one ideology to another is described in Douglas Reed’s opus, “The Controversy of Zion” where he talks about the evidence for the global monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that was revealed in 1787:

“This proof was given when the papers of Adam Weishaupt’s secret society of “Illuminati” were seized by the Bavarian Government in 1786 and published in 1787. The original blueprint of world-revolution, and the existence of a powerful organization with members in the highest places, were then revealed. From that moment on no doubt remained that all countries and classes of society contained men who were leagued together to destroy all legitimate government and all religion. The conspiratorial organization burrowed underground again after its exposure, but survived and pursued its plan, bursting into full public view in 1917. Since then, as Communism, it has openly pursued the aims disclosed by the Bavarian Government’s coup of 1786, by the methods then also revealed.”

You might ask “How is it that psychopaths, in spite of their inhumanity, can obtain the support of large populations. Does not everyone have a perverse/pathological basis, periods when they pass through a perverse/pathological life as Gore (and others) suggest?”

The fact is, the populations do not support psychopaths directly, they support the original ideology which the psychopaths have adopted as their cover. Again, Reed describes this process (without knowledge of genetic pathological deviants and how they affect society) in the following:

“[Weishaupt] had been brought up by the Jesuits, whom he came to hate, and he borrowed from them, and perverted to the opposite purpose, their secret of organization: the method which (as his associate Mirabeau said) “under one head, made men dispersed over the universe tend towards the same goal”. This idea, of leagueing men together in secret conspiracy and using them to achieve an aim which they do not comprehend, pervades the entire mass of letters and other Illuminist documents seized by the Bavarian Government.

“The idea is presented with ardent fondness and the many ways of realizing it are of high ingenuity. The accumulated experience of ages, in conspiracy, must have been drawn on…. to enlist “partisans in all places and in all classes of society” in the attempt to destroy their professed faith and government…. to unite in the form of a vast secret society with many degrees of initiation freethinkers, [read deviants] who regarded religion only as a curb for the people, and bigots of all sects… by means such as these the extraordinary result was brought about that a multitude of men of divers beliefs were all working together for an object known only to a few of them.”

“The Weishaupt documents are incontestably authentic; the Bavarian Government unwittingly forestalled any attempt to cry “Forgery” (in the manner made familiar in our century) by inviting any who were interested to inspect the original documents in the Archives at Munich. … The basic idea, made abundantly clear in the correspondence between “Spartacus” and his pseudonymous fellow-conspirators, was to destroy all established authority, nationhood and religion, and thus to clear the way for the rise of a new ruling class, that of the Illuminates. [Read soulless psychopaths.]
[…]
“This is confirmed by Weishaupt; “Princes and nations will disappear . . . Reason will be the only code of man”. In all his writings he completely eliminated any idea of divine power outside Man.

“Weishaupt’s attack on religion was the most distinctive feature of his doctrine. His ideas about “the god of Reason” and “the god of Nature” bring his thought very close to Judaic thought, in its relation to the Gentiles, and as Illuminism became Communism, and Communism came under Jewish leadership, this might be significant. The Judaic Law also lays down that the Gentiles (who as such are excluded from the world to come) are entitled only to the religion of nature and of reason which Weishaupt taught.”

What is important to remember is that pathological deviants think without soul, without conscience and so their thought processes are far cleaner and more efficient than the thinking of human beings with emotions and conscience and that is a weakness in us that they exploit mercilessly. You must never forget the rules by which they operate: behind a Mask of Sanity.

“This device of advancing “under cover” was the guiding principle: [Weishaupt wrote] “If only the aim is achieved, it does not matter under what cover it takes place; and a cover is always necessary. For in concealment lies a great part of our strength. For this reason we must always cover ourselves with the name of another society. The lodges that are under Freemasonry are in the meantime the most suitable cloak for our high purpose . . . a society concealed in this manner cannot be worked against. . . In case of a prosecution or of treason the superiors cannot be discovered. . . We shall be shrouded in impenetrable darkness from spies and emissaries of other societies”.”

In other words, it is their method to capture parties, associations, societies, religions, etc and use the external ideology to attract followers, all the while the REAL intention is known only to the insiders. Reed again:

“Count Mirabeau, the later revolutionary leader in France, was privy both to Weishaupt’s intention to join [the Freemasons] and to the secret reason for it, for his Memoirs included a paper, dated 1776, which set out a programme identical with that of the Illuminati, and in his History of the Prussian Monarchy he refers to Weishaupt and to the Illuminati by name and says:

“The Lodge Theodore de Bon Conseil at Munich, where there were a few men with brains and hearts, was tired of being tossed about by the vain promises and quarrels of Masonry. The heads resolved to graft on to their branch another secret association to which they gave the name of the Order of the Illuminés. They modeled it on the Society of Jesus, whilst proposing to themselves views diametrically opposed”.

This is the exact intention and method described by Weishaupt in his own correspondence, and this is the proof that Mirabeau, the later revolutionary leader, knew of it at the time, that is in 1776. Moreover, his words suggest that the secret society of the Illuminati was founded with the express intention of gaining control of Freemasonry and of instigating and directing revolution through it.”

The same thing has been done with Judaism, Christianity and Islam. They are just ideological fronts for psychopaths. You might even notice that the goals and methods of the Illuminati are exemplified in the so-called Protocols of Zion. It could even be said that the Protocols themselves are not really a Jewish thing, but more precisely a psychopathic ideology that has co-opted Judaism, Christianity and Islam for its own purposes.

As Gore mentions, it is the dumbing down of America that has brought it to this impasse. But what is needed more than anything is accurate psychological knowledge. Notice above that Kevin MacDonald mentions the fact that psychology has been overtaken by the “elites” also. This is a serious problem. Psychologist Andrew Lobaczewski writes in Political Ponerology:

During good times, people progressively lose sight of the need for profound reflection, introspection, knowledge of others, and an understanding of life’s complicated laws. Is it worth pondering the properties of human nature and man’s flawed personality, whether one’s own or someone else’s? Can we understand the creative meaning of suffering we have not undergone ourselves, instead of taking the easy way out and blaming the victim? Any excess mental effort seems like pointless labor if life’s joys appear to be available for the taking. A clever, liberal, and merry individual is a good sport; a more farsighted person predicting dire results becomes a wet-blanket killjoy.

Perception of the truth about the real environment, especially an understanding of the human personality and its values, ceases to be a virtue during the so-called “happy” times; thoughtful doubters are decried as meddlers who cannot leave well enough alone. This leads to an impoverishment of psychological knowledge, the capacity of differentiating the properties of human nature and personality, and the ability to mold minds creatively. The cult of power thus supplants those mental values so essential for maintaining law and order by peaceful means. A nation’s enrichment or involution regarding its psychological world-view could be considered an indicator of whether its future will be good or bad.

During “good” times, the search for truth becomes uncomfortable because it reveals inconvenient factors. It is better to think about easier and more pleasant things. Unconscious elimination of data which are or appear to be inexpedient gradually turns to habit, then becomes a custom accepted by society at large. Any thought process based on such truncated information cannot possibly give rise to correct conclusions; it further leads to subconscious substitution of inconvenient premises by more convenient ones, thereby approaching the boundaries of phenomena which should be viewed as psychopathological.

Such contented periods, which are often rooted in some injustice to other people or nations, start to strangle the capacity for individual and societal consciousness; subconscious factors take over a decisive role in life. Such a society, already infected by the hysteroidal state, considers any perception of uncomfortable truth to be a sign of “ill-breeding”. … Catastrophe waits in the wings. In such times, the capacity for logical and disciplined thought, born of necessity during difficult times, begins to fade. When communities lose the capacity for psychological reason and moral criticism, the processes of the generation of evil are intensified at every social scale, whether individual or macrosocial, until they revert to “bad” times. […]

When a few generations’ worth of “good-time” insouciance results in societal deficit regarding psychological skill and moral criticism, this paves the way for pathological plotters, snake-charmers, and even more primitive impostors to act and merge into the processes of the origination of evil. They are essential factors in its synthesis. In the next chapter I shall attempt to persuade my readers that the participation of pathological factors, so underrated by the social sciences, is a common phenomenon in the processes of the origin of evil.

Those times which many people later recall as the “good old days” thus provide fertile soil for future tragedy because of the progressive devolution of moral, intellectual, and personality values which give rise to Rasputin-like eras. […]

When bad times arrive and people are overwhelmed by an excess of evil, they must gather all their physical and mental strength to fight for existence and protect human reason. The search for some way out of the difficulties and dangers rekindles long-buried powers of discretion. Such people have the initial tendency to rely on force in order to counteract the threat; they may, for instance, become “trigger-happy” or dependent upon armies. Slowly and laboriously, however, they discover the advantages conferred by mental effort; improved understanding of the psychological situation in particular, better differentiation of human characters and personalities, and, finally, comprehension of one’s adversaries. During such times, virtues which former generations relegated to literary motifs regain their real and useful substance and become prized for their value. A wise person capable of furnishing sound advice is highly respected. […]

This cycle of happy, peaceful times favors a narrowing of the world-view and an increase in egotism; societies become subject to progressive hysteria and to that final stage, descriptively known to historians, which finally produces times of despondency and confusion, that have lasted for millennia and continue to do so. The recession of mind and personality which is a feature of ostensibly happy times varies from one nation to another; thus some countries manage to survive the results of such crises with minor losses, whereas others lose nations and empires. Geopolitical factors have also played a decisive role.

The psychological features of such crises doubtless bear the stamp of the time and of the civilization in question, but one common denominator must have been an exacerbation of society’s hysterical condition. This deviation or, better yet, formative deficiency of character, is a perennial sickness of societies, especially the privileged elites. The existence of exaggerated individual cases, especially such characterized as clinical, is an offshoot of the level of social hysteria, quite frequently correlated with some additional causes such as carriers of minor lesions of brain tissue. […]

In spite of above-mentioned qualitative differences, the duration of these time-cycles tends to be similar. If we assume that the extreme of European hysteria occurred around 1900 and returns not quite every two centuries, we find similar conditions. Such cyclical isochronicity may embrace a civilization and cross into neighboring countries, but it would not swim oceans or penetrate into faraway and far different civilizations. […]

When the First World War broke out, young officers danced and sang on the streets of Vienna: “Krieg, Krieg, Krieg! Es wird ein schoener Krieg …”. While visiting Upper Austria in 1978, I decided to drop in on the local parson, who was in his seventies by then. When I told him about myself, I suddenly realized he thought I was lying and inventing pretty stories. He subjected my statements to psychological analysis, based on this unassailable assumption and attempted to convince me that his morals were lofty. When I complained to a friend of mine about this, he was amused: “As a psychologist, you were extremely lucky to catch the survival of authentic Austrian talk (die oesterreichische Rede). We young ones have been incapable of demonstrating it to you even if we wanted to simulate it.”

In the European languages, “Austrian talk” has become the common descriptive term for paralogistic discourse. Many people using this term nowadays are unaware of its origin. Within the context of maximum hysterical intensity in Europe at the time, the authentic article represented a typical product of conversive thinking: subconscious selection and substitution of data lead to chronic avoidance of the crux of the matter. In the same manner, the reflex assumption that every speaker is lying is an indication of the hysterical anti-culture of mendacity, within which telling the truth becomes “immoral”.

That era of hysterical regression gave birth to the great war and the great revolution which extended into Fascism, Hitlerism, and the tragedy of the Second World War. It also produced the macrosocial phenomenon whose deviant character became superimposed upon this cycle, screening and destroying its nature. Contemporary Europe is heading for the opposite extreme of this historical sine curve. We could thus assume that the beginning of the next century will produce an era of optimal capability and correctness of reason, thus leading to many new values in all realms of human discovery and creativity. We can also foresee that realistic psychological understanding and spiritual enrichment will be features of this era.

At the same time, America, especially the U.S.A., has reached a nadir for the first time in its short history. […]

Europeans living in the U.S. today are struck by the similarity between these phenomena and the ones dominating Europe at the times of their youth. The emotionalism dominating individual, collective and political life, as well as the subconscious selection and substitution of data in reasoning, are impoverishing the development of a psychological world-view and leading to individual and national egotism. The mania for taking offense at the drop of a hat provokes constant retaliation, taking advantage of hyper-irritability and hypo-criticality on the part of others. This can be considered analogous to the European dueling mania of those times. People fortunate enough to achieve a position higher than someone else are contemptuous of their supposed inferiors in a way highly reminiscent of czarist Russian customs. Turn-of-the-century Freudian psychology finds fertile soil in this country because of the similarity in social and psychological conditions.

America’s psychological recession drags in its wake an impaired socio-professional adaptation of this country’s people, leading to a waste of human talent and an involution of societal structure. If we were to calculate this country’s adaptation correlation index, as suggested in the prior chapter, it would probably be lower than the great majority of the free and civilized nations of this world, and possibly lower than some countries which have lost their freedom. A highly talented individual in this country finds it ever more difficult to fight his way through to his right to self-realization and a socially creative position. Universities, politics, and even some business areas ever more frequently demonstrate an united front of relatively untalented persons. The word “overeducated” is heard more and more often. Such “overqualified” individuals finally hide out in some foundation laboratory where they are allowed to earn the Nobel prize. In the meantime, the country as whole suffers due to a deficit in the inspirational role of highly gifted individuals.

As a result, America is stifling progress in all areas of life, from culture to technology and economics, not excluding political incompetence. When linked to other deficiencies, an egotist’s incapability of understanding other people and nations leads to political error and the scapegoating of outsiders. Slamming the brakes on the evolution of political structures and social institutions increases both administrative inertia and discontent on the part of its victims.

We should realize that the most dramatic social difficulties and tensions occur at least ten years after the first observable indications of having emerged from a psychological crisis. Being a sequel, they also constitute a delayed reaction to the cause or are stimulated by the same psychological activation process. The time span for effective countermeasures is thus rather limited. […]

The question suggests itself: Will the time ever come when this eternal cycle rendering the nations almost helpless can be conquered? Can countries permanently maintain their creative and critical activities at a consistently high level? Our era contains many exceptional moments; our contemporary Macbeth witches’ cauldron holds not only poisonous ingredients, but also progress and understanding such as humanity has not seen in millennia. […]

One accomplishment of modern science, contributing to the destruction of these eternal cycles, is the development of communication, which has linked our globe into one huge system. The time cycles sketched herein used to run their course almost independently in various civilizations on different mainlands. Their phases neither were, nor are, in synchronicity. We can assume that the American phase lags 80 years behind the European. When the world becomes an inter-related structure from the viewpoint of communicating both information and news, different social contents and opinions caused by unlike phases of said cycles, inter alia, will overflow all boundaries and information security systems. This will give rise to pressures which can change the causative dependencies herein. A more plastic psychological situation thus emerges, which increases the possibilities for pinpointed action based on an understanding of the phenomena. […]

In order to overcome something whose origin is shrouded in the mists of time immemorial, we often feel we must battle the ever-turning windmills of history. However, the end goal of such effort must be the possibility that an objective understanding of human nature and its eternal weaknesses, plus the resulting transformation of societal psychology, may enable us effectively to counteract or prevent the destructive and tragic results sometime in the not too distant future.

Our times are exceptional, and suffering now gives rise to better comprehension than it did centuries ago. This understanding and knowledge fit better into the total picture, since they are based on objective data. Such a view therefore becomes realistic, and people and problems mature in action. Such action should not be limited to theoretical contemplations, but rather, acquire organization and form.

None of us will be able to do anything against this monster seeking to devour our world until we are fully educated about pathological human beings and how they operate like a pathogen in society, spreading their death and destruction like a cancer. And that is the understanding that Gore seems to lack: that it is pathological deviance that has taken over our world and none of the rules of normal human behavior even apply anymore.

Allow me to recall to mind something that Justin Raimondo wrote back in 2004:

Ron Suskind, former Wall Street Journal reporter and author of The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O’Neill, has a piece in last Sunday’s New York Times Magazine that is the talk of the internet, and with good reason: it is a devastating portrait of this “faith-based” presidency, with its religio-cultural idiosyncrasies and foibles. But it is not only that. Suskind manages to capture, in a series of vivid anecdotes, the political psychopathology that motivates this administration and shapes its perception. Here is the money quote:

“In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn’t like about Bush’s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House’s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn’t fully comprehend – but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

“The aide said that guys like me were ‘in what we call the reality-based community,’ which he defined as people who ‘believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.’ I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ‘That’s not the way the world really works anymore,’ he continued. ‘We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'”

Conceit, as I have pointed out before, has always been the defining characteristic of the imperialistic personality, but the sort of hubris exhibited above – “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality” – goes beyond anything the world has yet seen. The maddest of Roman emperors took care to propitiate the gods, even as they accorded themselves divine status. But none dared venture their own creation myth. This is not just a new kind of American, as Professor Ryn would have it, but a new species of madmen.

The epistemology of modern-day imperialism gives us a glimpse into minds afflicted with a novel form of mental illness, one made possible not only by the concentration of centralized power in the American metropolis, but also by advanced technology and the evolution of the military arts. The savage thug who believes he can control reality by the use of his club – Ayn Rand called this archetype “Attila,” after the infamous Hun – has been supplanted by the Gucci-suited technocrat who believes he can create reality by simply pushing a button or issuing an order. By commanding black-winged jet fighters to blast his enemies out of existence, the modern Attila believes he is constructing a new reality, one where his whims, his prejudices, his prissy little orthodoxies have the force of natural law.

In short, the neocons are just plain crazy, albeit in a historically unique fashion. This explains a lot. It explains the peculiar stubbornness that refuses to acknowledge error, even as Iraq implodes. It explains our rulers’ utter indifference to being caught in so many lies – the disappearing “weapons of mass destruction,” the illusory “links” between Saddam and 9/11, the brazen “cherry-picking” of sexed-up intelligence, and the outright forgeries.

They aren’t lying – they’re creating “new realities.”

The militant craziness of this sort of mindset also explains the casual cruelty involved in implementing the neoconservatives’ vision of empire. It explains Abu Ghraib, not as an aberration but as the new norm. It’s okay to bomb cities filled with civilians, to lock up and torture anyone who gets in your way, all the while proclaiming that you come as a “liberator.” You always hurt the one you love – if you’re a sadist, that is.

But it’s not a “new species of madmen,” it is the same old problem of humanity: psychopaths.

Amos M. Gunsberg, a psychotherapist and trainer of psychotherapists in New York City, writes:

We used to call them psychopaths — these creatures that appear on our planet physically in human form, but are not human beings.

We noted they are amoral. That should have given us a clue.

We noted they do not FEEL feelings. That should have instructed us.

We noted they are heartless. That should have set off the alarm.

These creatures lack elements which distinguish the human being. They exhibit no connection with, no understanding of what we call “morality,” “honesty,” “decency,” “fair play,” etc. They lack the faculty we call empathy. They lack the faculty we call introspection.

Mankind has spent centuries trying to make sense of these creatures as some form of human being. All in vain. Not only in vain, but at enormous on-going cost to our civilization. These creatures are not human beings gone wrong. They are a different species . . . dedicated to the murder of human values . . . as a prelude to the murder of human beings . . . e.g., the tactics used by Nazis, past and present.

They laugh at us. They say: “No one understands us. People can’t put themselves in the minds of men who act without a conscience. They try to understand, but they can’t.”

These creatures do not THINK human. They do not SPEAK human. They do not know what it is to BE human.

We classify them as “humanoid.”

Yes, they have human form. If we manage to resist their onslaught long enough, we will eventually develop technical scanning equipment which will measure how different they are from human beings, despite their similarity of form.

In the meantime, the quality of our lives . . . and often our very lives . . . depends on our recognizing these creatures for what they are, and taking steps to neutralize their attempts to destroy us.

EVIDENCE OF HUMANOID BEHAVIOR

They make pronouncements without substantiation. To them, these pronouncements represent what reality is … pronouncement by pronouncement. The present pronouncement may contradict what they said a moment ago. This means nothing to them. They make no attempt to deal with the contradiction.

They demonstrate a total lack of understanding what we mean by a “fact.” In their writings and in their speech, they do not use that word.

We humans find this hard to believe. The use of facts is such a basic part of our lives. We base our conclusions and our actions on them. We go on from there to test things and establish more facts. When we debate, we present facts, and show how we derive our observations and our positions from them.

Without facts, all we have is what we call “fantasy.”

Since these creatures have a human appearance, we assume they must think like us . . . be aware of what we are aware. We think they MUST know what facts are. When they don’t address the facts, we say they are playing a game. We think they do know what the facts are, but don’t want to admit it.

Not so! They DON’T know what a fact is. When we speak of facts and ask them to address the facts, they look at us with vacant eyes. They don’t know what we’re talking about.

They study us because their strategy is to pass as human. They hear us use the words — facts, evidence, substantiation. They lack the human capacity to understand what we mean. What they do is ignore our reference to facts, ignore our requests for them to supply facts, and hope we won’t notice it’s due to their lack of comprehension. […]

For them, whatever they “declare” is what’s real. What WE call reality is not real to them. THEY “pronounce” what is to be considered real. …

You might think their refusals to answer constitute an admission . . . an admission what they are saying is totally outlandish and indefensible. Experience has shown you would be wrong. Experience has shown they go right on making the same statements, even after evidence is produced to the contrary.

You see how different these creatures are? You see how far off their thinking and behavior are from human thinking and behavior?

Nothing of what WE call reality is real to THEM.

I repeat.

Nothing of what we call reality is REAL to them. …

We use the phrase “my perception” to mean an appraisal, a measurement of something separate from ourselves. We don’t announce it as “fact.” We are open to consider other views if given facts to consider.

Humanoids use the phrase “my perception” as a buzz word. They imagine what they choose, and tell us it is their “perception” . . . which, in their minds, ESTABLISHES reality. What we call “facts” do not exist for them. That’s why they whine and claim they are being attacked whenever substantiation is requested.

Humanoids claim their statements are valid simply because they make them!!! They elaborate on this: “I honor integrity in this regard. As an egoist, I make statements which are valid to me. Validity to my ‘self’ comes first. I grant other people this same respect assuming they say things valid to themselves.”

Among human beings, for something to be deemed valid it has to be substantiated with facts. Nothing is valid simply because someone says it.

When humanoids are asked how they determine what someone says is valid to that person, and not something made up or imagined, they ignore the question.

Note the strange use of the word “integrity.” Humans define integrity as uprightness of character; probity; honesty. We refer to sticking to the facts, sticking to the truth, not selling out. Humanoids use “integrity” to mean insisting what they imagine is what’s real. No measurement. No evaluation.

When the demand is made for their pronouncements to be evaluated, they claim the confronter is the one who has no integrity . . . meaning the confronter is not upholding THEIR position: what THEY imagine is what’s real.

On what basis do they claim this? Humanoids treat the world as if it were their own private holodeck. They “declare” things into being. Everything is a hologram. They program the holograms. They interact with them in any way they choose. They have them under total control. When they decide to cancel a hologram, it vanishes.

A hologram is a hologram is a hologram. A hologram is not supposed to have the ability to think for itself. A hologram is not supposed to have the ability to measure, evaluate, appraise, etc. Most importantly, a hologram is not supposed to be able to break out of its holographic state and critique its master.

When this does happen, they first chastise it to bring it back into line. If that doesn’t work, they “vanish” it. When that fails, they run for cover by abandoning the program and calling up another one.

Experience has shown no matter what we say, no matter what we point out, no matter how much evidence is given, it has no meaning for these creatures. They have one goal: to fool us into classifying them as human so they can concentrate on murdering our human values. Without human values, the next step is murdering human beings.[…]

Humanoids do not understand the distinction we humans make between good and evil. When they harm us, they do not understand why we call them evil. They do not understand why we have laws against murder. Their approach is to boast, even moralize over their victims.

Since they do not understand the reason for such laws, they argue they cannot be held accountable for their actions.

Not so. While they take the position the law does not apply to them, they do know the law was enacted to apply to everyone. Furthermore, if they try to claim they didn’t know there was such a law, we respond with a firmly established principle: “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.”

When they use those arguments, they make it clear they will continue to operate in accordance with their structure. We may look for remorse (a human capacity). We find none. They do not think of themselves as promulgating evil. They are simply doing what it is in their structure to do. The rattlesnake does not think of itself as evil when it injects poison. It is simply doing what it is in its structure to do.

Experience has shown humanoids continue to behave in the ways of their species . . murdering human values as a prelude to murdering human beings. Nazis demonstrate this graphically.

The issue as to whether to hold them “accountable,” in our human sense of the word, has to be divided into two parts. We do not hold them accountable for BEING what they are. We do hold them accountable for the damage they DO.

When a dog gets rabies, we don’t hold the dog accountable for becoming rabid. What we do, as a matter of self-protection, is put the dog down BEFORE it bites us, BEFORE it infects us.

We do not hold the rattlesnake accountable for HAVING poison fangs. What we do, as a matter of self-protection, is kill the rattlesnake BEFORE it kills us.

So with the humanoid. We need to be on our guard at the first sign of a murder of human values.

Lobaczewski writes:

The pathological authorities are convinced that the appropriate pedagogical, indoctrinational, propaganda, and terrorist means can teach a person with a normal instinctive substratum, range of feelings, and basic intelligence to think and feel according to their own [pathology].. This conviction is only slightly less unrealistic, psychologically speaking, than the belief that people able to see colors normally can be broken of this habit.

Actually, normal people cannot get rid of their characteristics, with which the Homo sapiens species was endowed by its phylogenetic past. Such people will never stop feeling and perceiving psychological and socio-moral phenomena in much the same way their ancestors had been doing for hundreds of generations.

Any attempt to make a society “learn” the pathological experiential world view imposed by pathological egotism is, in principle, fated for failure regardless of how many generations it is tried. It does, however, call forth a series of improper psychological results which may give the pathocrats the appearance of success – temporarily. Eventually, however, it also provokes society to pinpointed, well-thought-out self-defense measures based on its cognitive and creative efforts.

Pathocratic leadership believes that it can achieve a state wherein those “other” people’s minds become dependent by means of the effects of their personality, perfidious pedagogical means, propaganda, and psychological terror; such faith has a basic meaning for them. In their conceptual world, pathocrats consider it virtually self-evident that the “others” should accept their obvious, realistic, and simple way of apprehending reality. For some mysterious reason, though, the “others” wriggle out, slither away, and tell each other jokes about crazy pathocrats. Someone must be made responsible for this – old time dissidents, liberals, leftists, cults, non-patriotic trouble-makers, or some corrupt radio-stations abroad. It thus becomes necessary to improve the methodology of action, find better “soul engineers” with literary talent, increase propaganda, and isolate society from improper literature and any foreign influence. Those experiences and intuitions whispering that this is a Sisyphian labor must be repressed from the field of consciousness of the pathocrats.

The conflict is thus dramatic for both sides. The first feels insulted in its humanity, rendered obtuse, and forced to think a manner contrary to healthy common sense. The other stifles the premonition that if this goal cannot be reached, sooner or later things normal people will overcome the pathocrats with a vengeful lack of understanding of the pathocrats’ personalities. So if it does not work, it is best not to think about the future, just prolong the status quo by means of the above mentioned efforts.

And that seems to be what Al Gore is attempting to do: to prolong the illusion that there is a real possibility for change via the “normal processes. He is doing “Damage Control.” . Lobaczewski describes the outcome precisely:

The following questions thus suggests itself: what happens if … psychopaths achieve power in leadership positions with international exposure? …

Goaded by their character, such people thirst for just that even though it would conflict with their own life interest…. They do not understand that a catastrophe will ensue. Germs are not aware that they will be burned alive or buried deep in the ground along with the human body whose death they are causing.

If, by negative selection, the many managerial positions of government are assumed by individuals deprived of sufficient abilities to feel and understand most other people, and who also betray deficiences as regards technical imagination and practical skills – faculties indispensable for governing economic and political matters – this must result in an exceptionally serious crisis in all areas, both within the country in question and with regard to international relations.

Within, the situation shall become unbearable even for those citizens who were able to feather their nest into a relatively comfortable “modus vivendi”.

Outside, other societies start to feel the pathological quality of the phenomenon quite distinctly.

Such a state of affairs cannot last long. One must than be prepared for ever more rapid changes, and also behave with great circumspection.

And so it is: such a state of affairs cannot last long… and, as Lobaczewski says, the outcome is inevitable. Sooner or later, the reality this psychopathic elite think they create is going to turn around and bite them. In fact, it is already beginning to. And that is due to another psychopathic trait: the inability to remember the past or conceive of the future and the consequences of their actions.

Goaded by their character, psychopaths thirst for global power even though it ultimately condemns them to death along with millions – or billions – of others. Psychopaths do not have the capacity to understand the catastrophes that they repeatedly bring on themselves and the world. Just as germs are not aware that they will be burned alive or buried deep in the ground along with the human body whose death they are causing, so the psychopath does not understand that the only reality he is creating is the reality of his own ultimate destruction.

I hope that Al Gore realizes this before it is too late.

Originally Published 2007_05_19

Related Articles: