<![CDATA[Deep Politics Forum - Organizations and Cults]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/ Sat, 20 Jun 2026 02:22:50 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[Artistic MK Ultra Agents]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=16456 Sat, 04 Oct 2025 18:35:35 +0000 Lauren Johnson]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=16456 ]]> ]]> <![CDATA[Discussing **Possible** Resources for Ritual Abuse Survivors]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=16227 Sat, 05 Dec 2020 23:41:34 +0000 George Williams]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=16227 **Surviveandheal15 Lives On!!**
"Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, sot that we may fear less." - Marie Curie

(*Author's Note: This is NOT a QAnon Article. The author does not believe in QAnon AT ALL)

I though it would be useful to ask what I think is both an extremely difficult, yet absolutely critical, question right now: what are (if any??) therapeutic resources available to survivors of ritual abuse and mind control programming?? I believe this is a topic that is very directly relevant to the current Pedogate investigation. Information that has come out in previous investigations of elite pedophilia/ritual abuse cases, suggests very strongly that many victims of this kind of abuse have been put through a very intensive and pre-planned mental conditioning process, commonly known as trauma-based mind control. The purpose of this appears to be to use various kinds of trauma on a child, such as extreme physical and sexual abuse starting at a very early age, to force the child to mental disassociate from these horrific experiences. Disassociation, or mentally escaping "from reality, " is a natural defense mechanism for dealing with extreme abuse, especially in children.

Apparently, the effect of repeated disassociation, due to repeated extreme abuse, is that the child's own mind becomes fragmented into multiple personalities. There are reports that the people inflicting this abuse, often the child's own parents or those close to them (who are often known as "programmers"), are skilled enough in inflicting trauma on the child in a systematic way, that they can literally "program" certain alter personalities of their own design into the child. What is being described, is essentially a technique to turn children into mental "robots," who have lost free will and act according to the scripted personalities that have been "programmed" into them through this abuse-based mind control process. Once these child victims become adults, its anybodies guess how these poor people are used by and manipulated by their controllers in the larger society.

The best documentation that I have found that substantiates this kind of horrific abuse, is Dr. Corydon Hammond's infamous "Greenbaum Speech." Dr. Hammond is a clinical psychologist at the University of Utah School of Medicine (LINK to his website page). Dr. Hammond delivered the "Greenbaum Speech" in 1992, as a spoken speech to a professional conference of therapists, at a conference known as the "Eastern Regional Conference on Abuse and Multiple Personality Disorder" in Alexandria, Virginia. Here is a link to a transcript of the full speech Greenbaum Speech, and here is a youtube audio recording of the Greenbaum speech Audio SpeechYouTube.

It is critical to read or watch the full speech to get what Dr. Hammond is saying, but the gist of it is this: Dr. Hammond used hypnotherapy on victims of ritual abuse who had multiple personalities. Hypnotherapy is a process where the therapist helps their patients relax enough where they basically go into a sub-conscious state, similar to meditation. Once the patient is in this sub-conscious state, the therapist can calmly talk to the patients and help subconsciously "guide" them back to parts of the patients lives that are troubling them. In this sub-conscious state, patients can often access memories that they cannot access in their fully conscious life. This process is known as "hypnotic regression." Dr. Hammond's intent was to use hypnotic regression to help ritual abuse patients "mentally" go back in time to recover their memories of ritual abuse, so that the patients could recover these horrific memories and "re-integrate" their multiple personalities, which had been created through the abuse, back into their real, true self.

In the process of doing this, Dr. Hammond kept finding that many of his patients had been the victim of the same type of mind control conditioning process, where their personalities had been split by abuse into multiple alter personalities. Each of these alter personalities were labelled and identified by a letter of the Greek Alphabet (alpha, beta, delta, gamma etc). Dr. Hammond talked to other therapists in other parts of the country. These therapists also said they had ritual abuse patients who were the victim of the same type of mind control, where their personalities were split into personalities that were then identified by greek alphabet letters. For instance, a victim in Florida would have an alter personality identified by the greek letter "beta," and another victim in say, Oregon, would also have an alter personality labelled "beta." The "beta" personality of the Florida victim would have the same characteristics as the "beta" personality in the Oregon victim.

The only conclusion I can draw from this type of information, is that Dr. Hammond seemed to have uncovered the outer edges of a very large, national in scale (or very possibly international is scale), mind control program that was very deliberately and systematically programming large numbers of children all over the country, into having multiple personalities. Here is a brief rundown of the descriptions of the differently kinds of alter personalities (again, identified by letters of the greek alphabet) that him and other therapists all over the country kept finding in ritual abuse patients:
""Alpha" personality: the first alter personality put into people through the abuse process, apparently kind of like the "ground floor" level of the mind control programming
"Beta" personality: personality apparently used for sexual activities. Used for performing in and producing child pornography, for sexual activity in satanic rituals, sexual blackmail activities of politicians/businessmen/ powerful political and economic figures. Seems to be an all-around sexual personality brought out in a victim by the programmer.
"Delta" Personality: Personality associated with performing covert paramilitary-type operations. Think spying, espionage, assassination, "black ops" type activities. This personality apparently goes through a really intensive military training process.
"Omega" personality: "Self-destruct" programming. Very scary, apparently the victim is conditioned to go into a suicidal, self-destructive "omega" personality if they start to recover memories or start to recover from the mind control programming. Omega is the end letter of the greek alphabet, beginning and end , "alpha and omega" Included this to emphasize the risk that is inherently, clearly involved in any process undertaken to treat these victims of this kind of abuse.
Again, please read the full "Greenbaum speech" to get the full details of the mind control process that Dr. Hammond thoroughly describes.

Very important point: Please do not contact Dr. Hammond personally regarding any of this.  There are very serious reports that after he delivered this speech, Dr. Hammond's life and his family's life were very seriously threatened. I am not mentioning this to scare anyone, just to emphasize the importance of respecting his privacy and safety as a mental health professional.

It also cannot be emphasized enough that the "foundation" (for lack of any better term) of all this highly-complicated "splitting" of personality along highly "occult" terms, is the extreme sexual and physical abuse of children, most often beginning at a very very young age. As horrific as it is to say, this information from Dr. Hammond's speech cannot be emphasized enough.

I wanted to put this information out there, only in the hope that this information, or even only a part of it, may actually be helpful to actual victims. It is not my intention to lead anyone down any "rabbit holes" of false claims, or to misinform anyone with this kind of information. I only included Dr. Hammond's name to give credibility to this very important information. Some of the most significant parts of Dr. Hammond's speech are toward the end of his "Greenbaum Speech", where he goes into extensive detail about the different techniques a trained hypnotherapist can use, to effectively "de-program" a mind control/ritual abuse victim. This appears to be a very complicated process, and it is definitely not something anyone should attempt to do if they are not both a trained mental health professional, and a trained hypnotherapist. As Dr. Hammond emphasizes, if this process is not carried out effectively, the patient/abuse survivor could become self-destructive or even suicidal. Also, undeniably there is a very very significant degree of personal risk to the therapist treating these kind of survivors. Dr. Hammond points out that in some cases, he found out that the ritual abuse patient was secretly "reporting back" details of his or her de-programming treatment to his abusers, through an alter personality the therapist had not yet discovered. Again, I am not saying any of this to cause undue fear, I am just trying to be as truthful as I can be about the actual risks of this kind of "de-programming process."

**Possible** steps towards treating ritual abuse/ mind control survivors
1. If you or someone you know is the victim of this kind of abuse, try to find a mental health professional (clinical psychologist, registered therapist, etc.) who has experience in using hypnotherapy to treat patients. Nowadays, many therapists have their own websites or pages on websites like Psychology Today, where they list their treatment specialities. Try to find a psychologist who is a certified hypnotherapist, and ideally try to find a psychologist who specializes in child abuse issues. Some psychologists even specialize in treating multiple personality disorder (now known clinically as dissociative identity disorder (DID)), but these are a lot harder to find. I think most importantly though, is to find a therapist who has extensive experience in hypnotherapy.

2. If you can find a therapist you can trust, once treatment has begun, calmly bring up some topics related to the ritual abuse issue, and quietly get them a copy of Dr. Hammond's "Greenbaum Speech," which you can easily find online. Don't talk about it with anyone besides the therapist, there in no need for unnecessary risk. If the therapist can find ways to incorporate Dr. Hammond's suggested techniques for de-programming ritual abuse victims, into his or her own hypnotherapy, this could be a real path towards setting people free from this kind of horrible abuse. Take care everyone, and stay safe.

"If there are computers, societies, and ecosystems that exist, 
this is not merely because new properties emerge (or, as 
reductionists would have it, seem to emerge) from atoms, 
but also because God has placed within each monad all of 
the possibilities of its individual development. In fact, God 
has harmonized all of the possible developmental paths of
all monads through his predeterminations, though He does
not coerce but rather "inclines" each monad towards its
telos."

    -from James L. Kelley "Anatomizing Divinity: Studies in Science, Esotericism and Political Theology"]]> **Surviveandheal15 Lives On!!**
"Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, sot that we may fear less." - Marie Curie

(*Author's Note: This is NOT a QAnon Article. The author does not believe in QAnon AT ALL)

I though it would be useful to ask what I think is both an extremely difficult, yet absolutely critical, question right now: what are (if any??) therapeutic resources available to survivors of ritual abuse and mind control programming?? I believe this is a topic that is very directly relevant to the current Pedogate investigation. Information that has come out in previous investigations of elite pedophilia/ritual abuse cases, suggests very strongly that many victims of this kind of abuse have been put through a very intensive and pre-planned mental conditioning process, commonly known as trauma-based mind control. The purpose of this appears to be to use various kinds of trauma on a child, such as extreme physical and sexual abuse starting at a very early age, to force the child to mental disassociate from these horrific experiences. Disassociation, or mentally escaping "from reality, " is a natural defense mechanism for dealing with extreme abuse, especially in children.

Apparently, the effect of repeated disassociation, due to repeated extreme abuse, is that the child's own mind becomes fragmented into multiple personalities. There are reports that the people inflicting this abuse, often the child's own parents or those close to them (who are often known as "programmers"), are skilled enough in inflicting trauma on the child in a systematic way, that they can literally "program" certain alter personalities of their own design into the child. What is being described, is essentially a technique to turn children into mental "robots," who have lost free will and act according to the scripted personalities that have been "programmed" into them through this abuse-based mind control process. Once these child victims become adults, its anybodies guess how these poor people are used by and manipulated by their controllers in the larger society.

The best documentation that I have found that substantiates this kind of horrific abuse, is Dr. Corydon Hammond's infamous "Greenbaum Speech." Dr. Hammond is a clinical psychologist at the University of Utah School of Medicine (LINK to his website page). Dr. Hammond delivered the "Greenbaum Speech" in 1992, as a spoken speech to a professional conference of therapists, at a conference known as the "Eastern Regional Conference on Abuse and Multiple Personality Disorder" in Alexandria, Virginia. Here is a link to a transcript of the full speech Greenbaum Speech, and here is a youtube audio recording of the Greenbaum speech Audio SpeechYouTube.

It is critical to read or watch the full speech to get what Dr. Hammond is saying, but the gist of it is this: Dr. Hammond used hypnotherapy on victims of ritual abuse who had multiple personalities. Hypnotherapy is a process where the therapist helps their patients relax enough where they basically go into a sub-conscious state, similar to meditation. Once the patient is in this sub-conscious state, the therapist can calmly talk to the patients and help subconsciously "guide" them back to parts of the patients lives that are troubling them. In this sub-conscious state, patients can often access memories that they cannot access in their fully conscious life. This process is known as "hypnotic regression." Dr. Hammond's intent was to use hypnotic regression to help ritual abuse patients "mentally" go back in time to recover their memories of ritual abuse, so that the patients could recover these horrific memories and "re-integrate" their multiple personalities, which had been created through the abuse, back into their real, true self.

In the process of doing this, Dr. Hammond kept finding that many of his patients had been the victim of the same type of mind control conditioning process, where their personalities had been split by abuse into multiple alter personalities. Each of these alter personalities were labelled and identified by a letter of the Greek Alphabet (alpha, beta, delta, gamma etc). Dr. Hammond talked to other therapists in other parts of the country. These therapists also said they had ritual abuse patients who were the victim of the same type of mind control, where their personalities were split into personalities that were then identified by greek alphabet letters. For instance, a victim in Florida would have an alter personality identified by the greek letter "beta," and another victim in say, Oregon, would also have an alter personality labelled "beta." The "beta" personality of the Florida victim would have the same characteristics as the "beta" personality in the Oregon victim.

The only conclusion I can draw from this type of information, is that Dr. Hammond seemed to have uncovered the outer edges of a very large, national in scale (or very possibly international is scale), mind control program that was very deliberately and systematically programming large numbers of children all over the country, into having multiple personalities. Here is a brief rundown of the descriptions of the differently kinds of alter personalities (again, identified by letters of the greek alphabet) that him and other therapists all over the country kept finding in ritual abuse patients:
""Alpha" personality: the first alter personality put into people through the abuse process, apparently kind of like the "ground floor" level of the mind control programming
"Beta" personality: personality apparently used for sexual activities. Used for performing in and producing child pornography, for sexual activity in satanic rituals, sexual blackmail activities of politicians/businessmen/ powerful political and economic figures. Seems to be an all-around sexual personality brought out in a victim by the programmer.
"Delta" Personality: Personality associated with performing covert paramilitary-type operations. Think spying, espionage, assassination, "black ops" type activities. This personality apparently goes through a really intensive military training process.
"Omega" personality: "Self-destruct" programming. Very scary, apparently the victim is conditioned to go into a suicidal, self-destructive "omega" personality if they start to recover memories or start to recover from the mind control programming. Omega is the end letter of the greek alphabet, beginning and end , "alpha and omega" Included this to emphasize the risk that is inherently, clearly involved in any process undertaken to treat these victims of this kind of abuse.
Again, please read the full "Greenbaum speech" to get the full details of the mind control process that Dr. Hammond thoroughly describes.

Very important point: Please do not contact Dr. Hammond personally regarding any of this.  There are very serious reports that after he delivered this speech, Dr. Hammond's life and his family's life were very seriously threatened. I am not mentioning this to scare anyone, just to emphasize the importance of respecting his privacy and safety as a mental health professional.

It also cannot be emphasized enough that the "foundation" (for lack of any better term) of all this highly-complicated "splitting" of personality along highly "occult" terms, is the extreme sexual and physical abuse of children, most often beginning at a very very young age. As horrific as it is to say, this information from Dr. Hammond's speech cannot be emphasized enough.

I wanted to put this information out there, only in the hope that this information, or even only a part of it, may actually be helpful to actual victims. It is not my intention to lead anyone down any "rabbit holes" of false claims, or to misinform anyone with this kind of information. I only included Dr. Hammond's name to give credibility to this very important information. Some of the most significant parts of Dr. Hammond's speech are toward the end of his "Greenbaum Speech", where he goes into extensive detail about the different techniques a trained hypnotherapist can use, to effectively "de-program" a mind control/ritual abuse victim. This appears to be a very complicated process, and it is definitely not something anyone should attempt to do if they are not both a trained mental health professional, and a trained hypnotherapist. As Dr. Hammond emphasizes, if this process is not carried out effectively, the patient/abuse survivor could become self-destructive or even suicidal. Also, undeniably there is a very very significant degree of personal risk to the therapist treating these kind of survivors. Dr. Hammond points out that in some cases, he found out that the ritual abuse patient was secretly "reporting back" details of his or her de-programming treatment to his abusers, through an alter personality the therapist had not yet discovered. Again, I am not saying any of this to cause undue fear, I am just trying to be as truthful as I can be about the actual risks of this kind of "de-programming process."

**Possible** steps towards treating ritual abuse/ mind control survivors
1. If you or someone you know is the victim of this kind of abuse, try to find a mental health professional (clinical psychologist, registered therapist, etc.) who has experience in using hypnotherapy to treat patients. Nowadays, many therapists have their own websites or pages on websites like Psychology Today, where they list their treatment specialities. Try to find a psychologist who is a certified hypnotherapist, and ideally try to find a psychologist who specializes in child abuse issues. Some psychologists even specialize in treating multiple personality disorder (now known clinically as dissociative identity disorder (DID)), but these are a lot harder to find. I think most importantly though, is to find a therapist who has extensive experience in hypnotherapy.

2. If you can find a therapist you can trust, once treatment has begun, calmly bring up some topics related to the ritual abuse issue, and quietly get them a copy of Dr. Hammond's "Greenbaum Speech," which you can easily find online. Don't talk about it with anyone besides the therapist, there in no need for unnecessary risk. If the therapist can find ways to incorporate Dr. Hammond's suggested techniques for de-programming ritual abuse victims, into his or her own hypnotherapy, this could be a real path towards setting people free from this kind of horrible abuse. Take care everyone, and stay safe.

"If there are computers, societies, and ecosystems that exist, 
this is not merely because new properties emerge (or, as 
reductionists would have it, seem to emerge) from atoms, 
but also because God has placed within each monad all of 
the possibilities of its individual development. In fact, God 
has harmonized all of the possible developmental paths of
all monads through his predeterminations, though He does
not coerce but rather "inclines" each monad towards its
telos."

    -from James L. Kelley "Anatomizing Divinity: Studies in Science, Esotericism and Political Theology"]]> <![CDATA[The LaRouche Braintrust: Tarpley, Steinberg, Chaitkin]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=16033 Mon, 04 Mar 2019 21:34:06 +0000 Lauren Johnson]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=16033






]]>






]]> <![CDATA[PropOrNot]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=15165 Sun, 27 Nov 2016 13:49:03 +0000 Magda Hassan]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=15165 Who is the secretive, shadow group PropOrNot, that is now pushing to lynch "Russian controlled fake news" sites [Image: Screen-Shot-2016-06-27-at-12.41.40-PM-150x150.png]Alex Christoforou22 hours ago 7 1418
Maybe they are Soros backed. We can sense that Hillary Clinton has her fingerprints all over this one.
They sprung up out of nowhere. A group of "scientists" who cracked the code and exposed 200 sites as being controlled by the evil Russian deep state.
American patriots, going by the name PropOrNot, figured out that Trump's election victory, and Hillary's election defeat, was part of an elaborate Kremlin plan.
It was a plan that oversaw anti-Hillary "fake news" stories distributed across computer screens and Facebook feeds of unsuspecting American voters, via news sites that are under the mind control of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
PropOrNot exposed it all, and they now have the list of sites that are fully owned and operated by The Kremlin, published on their website as a warning to all innocent American citizens to beware of the sinister plot to take away Hillary Clinton's God given right to rule over the land.
Who are these people who risked everything to expose the Russian deep state mind control power in media…
PropOrNot is an independent team of computer scientists, statisticians, national security professionals, journalists, and political activists dedicated to identifying propaganda particularly Russian propaganda targeting a US audience. We collect public-record information connecting propaganda outlets to each other and their coordinators abroad, analyze what we find, act as a central repository and point of reference for related information, and organize efforts to oppose it.
We work to shine a light on propaganda in order to prevent it from distorting political and policy discussions, to strengthen our cultural immune systems against hostile influence, and to improve public discourse generally.
Many of our contributors wish to stay anonymous, in light of possible Russian retaliation, as has happened in Finland and elsewhere.
The anonymous "good guys" calling out the not-so-anonymous Russian propagandists.
Maybe the "good guys" from PropOrNot are funded by the CIA. Maybe they are Soros backed. We can sense that Hillary Clinton has her fingerprints all over this one. The "fake news" coupled with Russian intrigue and Jill Stein voter recounts…the perfect storm to try and wrestle the White House out of Trump's hands, and into safer, globalist arms.
Perhaps Zerohedge can help us identify the men and women behind the PropOrNot movement..
In its attempt to redirect the public's attention from its historic failure to deliver unbiased, objective, factual reporting in the context of the presidential election in which virtually every single mainstream media outlet was revealed (courtesy of the hacked Podesta emails) and acted as a Public Relations arm for the Clinton campaign, said media has opened a new can of worms by ushering in the topic of "fake news" a purposefully vague, undefined term meant to deflect and scapegoat by "exposing" propaganda websites, which in the latest incarnation of the narrative, are now allegedly serving to further Russian propaganda in the US.
As we reported earlier, none other than the Washington Post a company owned by Jeff Bezos, who for the past year has been involved in a famous media spat with president-elect Donald Trump pounced on a list created by a website that was created (according to its whois profile) on August 21 using godaddy.com as registrar and had its first tweet on November 2, and which among others, lists Drudge Report and Zero Hedge as representatives of "Russian propaganda."
This is how the "scientists" at the Goebbels-esque "PropOrNot" describe their qualifications in determining and recommending which websites are fit to be burned (starting with a plea for investigations by the Obama administration) in a post "fake news" world.
*****
In other words, while attacking the anonymity of so-called "Russian propaganda" websites (websites which chose to remain anonymous knowing this kind of retaliation was inevitable), the public servants and experts devoted to rooting out Russian propaganda in the US opt, themselves, to remain anonymous.
To be sure, we have no interest in uncovering who may be behind this particular organization (which conveniently stepped in after a similar list was floated last week by a discredited liberal professor, who likewise defined Zero Hedge as "fake news"). We do, want, however to warn readers about who the real source of documented fake news in the US traditionally has been. The US government itself, through its vast espionage and counterespionage apparatus.

http://theduran.com/who-is-the-secretive...ews-sites/

]]> Who is the secretive, shadow group PropOrNot, that is now pushing to lynch "Russian controlled fake news" sites [Image: Screen-Shot-2016-06-27-at-12.41.40-PM-150x150.png]Alex Christoforou22 hours ago 7 1418
Maybe they are Soros backed. We can sense that Hillary Clinton has her fingerprints all over this one.
They sprung up out of nowhere. A group of "scientists" who cracked the code and exposed 200 sites as being controlled by the evil Russian deep state.
American patriots, going by the name PropOrNot, figured out that Trump's election victory, and Hillary's election defeat, was part of an elaborate Kremlin plan.
It was a plan that oversaw anti-Hillary "fake news" stories distributed across computer screens and Facebook feeds of unsuspecting American voters, via news sites that are under the mind control of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
PropOrNot exposed it all, and they now have the list of sites that are fully owned and operated by The Kremlin, published on their website as a warning to all innocent American citizens to beware of the sinister plot to take away Hillary Clinton's God given right to rule over the land.
Who are these people who risked everything to expose the Russian deep state mind control power in media…
PropOrNot is an independent team of computer scientists, statisticians, national security professionals, journalists, and political activists dedicated to identifying propaganda particularly Russian propaganda targeting a US audience. We collect public-record information connecting propaganda outlets to each other and their coordinators abroad, analyze what we find, act as a central repository and point of reference for related information, and organize efforts to oppose it.
We work to shine a light on propaganda in order to prevent it from distorting political and policy discussions, to strengthen our cultural immune systems against hostile influence, and to improve public discourse generally.
Many of our contributors wish to stay anonymous, in light of possible Russian retaliation, as has happened in Finland and elsewhere.
The anonymous "good guys" calling out the not-so-anonymous Russian propagandists.
Maybe the "good guys" from PropOrNot are funded by the CIA. Maybe they are Soros backed. We can sense that Hillary Clinton has her fingerprints all over this one. The "fake news" coupled with Russian intrigue and Jill Stein voter recounts…the perfect storm to try and wrestle the White House out of Trump's hands, and into safer, globalist arms.
Perhaps Zerohedge can help us identify the men and women behind the PropOrNot movement..
In its attempt to redirect the public's attention from its historic failure to deliver unbiased, objective, factual reporting in the context of the presidential election in which virtually every single mainstream media outlet was revealed (courtesy of the hacked Podesta emails) and acted as a Public Relations arm for the Clinton campaign, said media has opened a new can of worms by ushering in the topic of "fake news" a purposefully vague, undefined term meant to deflect and scapegoat by "exposing" propaganda websites, which in the latest incarnation of the narrative, are now allegedly serving to further Russian propaganda in the US.
As we reported earlier, none other than the Washington Post a company owned by Jeff Bezos, who for the past year has been involved in a famous media spat with president-elect Donald Trump pounced on a list created by a website that was created (according to its whois profile) on August 21 using godaddy.com as registrar and had its first tweet on November 2, and which among others, lists Drudge Report and Zero Hedge as representatives of "Russian propaganda."
This is how the "scientists" at the Goebbels-esque "PropOrNot" describe their qualifications in determining and recommending which websites are fit to be burned (starting with a plea for investigations by the Obama administration) in a post "fake news" world.
*****
In other words, while attacking the anonymity of so-called "Russian propaganda" websites (websites which chose to remain anonymous knowing this kind of retaliation was inevitable), the public servants and experts devoted to rooting out Russian propaganda in the US opt, themselves, to remain anonymous.
To be sure, we have no interest in uncovering who may be behind this particular organization (which conveniently stepped in after a similar list was floated last week by a discredited liberal professor, who likewise defined Zero Hedge as "fake news"). We do, want, however to warn readers about who the real source of documented fake news in the US traditionally has been. The US government itself, through its vast espionage and counterespionage apparatus.

http://theduran.com/who-is-the-secretive...ews-sites/

]]> <![CDATA[Spirit Cooking]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=15091 Mon, 07 Nov 2016 17:43:35 +0000 Michael Barwell]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=15091 Wtf..

The Clinton Cult: The Sick and Twisted World of Spirit Cooking'ADAM GARRIE6 hours ago 7Nov2016
Hillary Clinton's friends apparently engage in highly bizarre and sick behaviour. They cannot be trusted to be in charge of a nuclear superpower. - http://theduran.com/clinton-cult-sick-tw...t-cooking/

Infowars recently brought public attitude to a story originally broken by Wikileaks. Put simply, John Podesta Tony Podesta (John's brother) and one of Hillary Clinton's friends, a woman called Marina Abramović, engage in perverse, satanic rituals called Spirit Cooking'.
Before going into the disgusting details, it is important to first of all ask some fundamental questions. Would you want a nuclear superpower run by individuals who find occultism entertaining? Would you trust the sound leadership of people fixated by superstition and no, I'm not talking about innocent folkloric superstitions like not conversing in a doorway, or drinking off the edge of a bar if unmarried. I'm talking about Hillary Clinton's mad attempts to channel the dead' from inside the White House and the Podesta brothers penchant for going to spirit cooking' evenings with Maria Abramović. Does this strike one as normal let along dignified?
Leaders, their confidants and advisors must be of sound mind, cool under pressure, assured in their beliefs and rational in their decision making processes. If one can agree on these basic tenets of leadership, than I would simply ask if the following scenario describes individuals who meet this criteria?
Marina Abramović is a best described as a talentless artist' whose exhibitions include creating works with blood, urine, semen and breast milk. The symbolism is overtly satanic and highly crude. Thanks to Wikileaks we know that Abramović isn't just in it for the money', she takes her show' home with her and invites the Podesta brothers along for the ride.
Apart from accusations we now know to be false and which have always been denied by Trump with a promise to pursue legal actions against false accusers, Trump is a man whose known vices include too much fast food and too much golf. That's about it.
By contrast no one in the Hillary Clinton campaign have denied rumours about involvement in spirit cooking' evenings. Now of course, The Guardian, have run with a piece attempting to do damage control on the spirit cooking' scandal. The Guardian released a statement by Abramović, saying that the whole thing had been taken out of context', though she nor anyone else can explain just how. Myself and others would be happy to hear an actual explanation for this bizarre and disturbing behaviour, but none seem forthcoming.
This contrasts sharply with Donald Trump who apologised for saying pussy' in a childish context. Frankly, I've heard many men speak in ways that Trump once did, though I have to say I have never attended any event where Devil worshippers conjure some weird spirit thing using blood, urine and semen. Frankly if I ever encountered such things, hearing some silly drunk bloke in a pub talk about pussy' would be something of a relief.
Not only do these activities point to the fact that Team Clinton are not sound individuals, it points moreover to the fact that they are totally out of touch with ordinary people and with any sense of normality.
A dinner typically involves normal overcook food, normal drinks (although often times the quality of wine, vodka or whisky leaves much to be desired) and occasionally people thinking they can sing and dance when they ought to be prohibited from doing either, by treaty if necessary. It also occasionally involves banal political conversation from holier than though idiots who think watching CNN makes them clever or mean spirited sarcastic quips about who ought to lose weight and whose shoes are ugly. Little else of interest generally happens and if you find any of the aforementioned activities amusing; congratulations, you have a higher boredom threshold than I, Gunga Din.
The Clinton brigade are out of touch with reality and yet they want to be able to touch the little red button?
Give me a break!

ENDE



Wicca, huh? - 'Ben', masquerading I think as a fella called 'Kalbintion Dier Kier', Iowa, was a self 'confessed 'Wiccan'; 'Ben' drank Sippo Khazi's (Kahmi) blood, so he'd led me to believe & is now big on ref-front. A curious thing this, the 'hard-to-mind' gubbins. Seems to me, some tools going to a shitload of effcort to cover that hard-to-mind tech.



]]> Wtf..

The Clinton Cult: The Sick and Twisted World of Spirit Cooking'ADAM GARRIE6 hours ago 7Nov2016
Hillary Clinton's friends apparently engage in highly bizarre and sick behaviour. They cannot be trusted to be in charge of a nuclear superpower. - http://theduran.com/clinton-cult-sick-tw...t-cooking/

Infowars recently brought public attitude to a story originally broken by Wikileaks. Put simply, John Podesta Tony Podesta (John's brother) and one of Hillary Clinton's friends, a woman called Marina Abramović, engage in perverse, satanic rituals called Spirit Cooking'.
Before going into the disgusting details, it is important to first of all ask some fundamental questions. Would you want a nuclear superpower run by individuals who find occultism entertaining? Would you trust the sound leadership of people fixated by superstition and no, I'm not talking about innocent folkloric superstitions like not conversing in a doorway, or drinking off the edge of a bar if unmarried. I'm talking about Hillary Clinton's mad attempts to channel the dead' from inside the White House and the Podesta brothers penchant for going to spirit cooking' evenings with Maria Abramović. Does this strike one as normal let along dignified?
Leaders, their confidants and advisors must be of sound mind, cool under pressure, assured in their beliefs and rational in their decision making processes. If one can agree on these basic tenets of leadership, than I would simply ask if the following scenario describes individuals who meet this criteria?
Marina Abramović is a best described as a talentless artist' whose exhibitions include creating works with blood, urine, semen and breast milk. The symbolism is overtly satanic and highly crude. Thanks to Wikileaks we know that Abramović isn't just in it for the money', she takes her show' home with her and invites the Podesta brothers along for the ride.
Apart from accusations we now know to be false and which have always been denied by Trump with a promise to pursue legal actions against false accusers, Trump is a man whose known vices include too much fast food and too much golf. That's about it.
By contrast no one in the Hillary Clinton campaign have denied rumours about involvement in spirit cooking' evenings. Now of course, The Guardian, have run with a piece attempting to do damage control on the spirit cooking' scandal. The Guardian released a statement by Abramović, saying that the whole thing had been taken out of context', though she nor anyone else can explain just how. Myself and others would be happy to hear an actual explanation for this bizarre and disturbing behaviour, but none seem forthcoming.
This contrasts sharply with Donald Trump who apologised for saying pussy' in a childish context. Frankly, I've heard many men speak in ways that Trump once did, though I have to say I have never attended any event where Devil worshippers conjure some weird spirit thing using blood, urine and semen. Frankly if I ever encountered such things, hearing some silly drunk bloke in a pub talk about pussy' would be something of a relief.
Not only do these activities point to the fact that Team Clinton are not sound individuals, it points moreover to the fact that they are totally out of touch with ordinary people and with any sense of normality.
A dinner typically involves normal overcook food, normal drinks (although often times the quality of wine, vodka or whisky leaves much to be desired) and occasionally people thinking they can sing and dance when they ought to be prohibited from doing either, by treaty if necessary. It also occasionally involves banal political conversation from holier than though idiots who think watching CNN makes them clever or mean spirited sarcastic quips about who ought to lose weight and whose shoes are ugly. Little else of interest generally happens and if you find any of the aforementioned activities amusing; congratulations, you have a higher boredom threshold than I, Gunga Din.
The Clinton brigade are out of touch with reality and yet they want to be able to touch the little red button?
Give me a break!

ENDE



Wicca, huh? - 'Ben', masquerading I think as a fella called 'Kalbintion Dier Kier', Iowa, was a self 'confessed 'Wiccan'; 'Ben' drank Sippo Khazi's (Kahmi) blood, so he'd led me to believe & is now big on ref-front. A curious thing this, the 'hard-to-mind' gubbins. Seems to me, some tools going to a shitload of effcort to cover that hard-to-mind tech.



]]> <![CDATA[Human sacrifice (simulated?) at CERN]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=14911 Fri, 19 Aug 2016 01:08:27 +0000 Lauren Johnson]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=14911

Interpretation. It's all a big joke? Who's playing the joke on whom? Serious? Real?

Don't forget this occult ceremony.

]]>

Interpretation. It's all a big joke? Who's playing the joke on whom? Serious? Real?

Don't forget this occult ceremony.

]]> <![CDATA[Scientology and the CIA]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=14583 Mon, 14 Mar 2016 20:55:41 +0000 Kara Dellacioppa]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=14583 Scientology & the CIA February 27, 2016 Mark Hackard 6 Comments
This presentation was read by Aleksandr Leonidovich Dvorkin, president of the Irinaeus of Lyons Center for Religious Research Studies, on January 26th, 2016, at a conference run by the Orthodox St. Tikhon University for the Humanities. (Translator's note: While we wouldn't claim that the Church of Scientology is an integral element of the US Intelligence Community, Dvorkin's lecture is an excellent expose of the nexus between the Western power structure, its intelligence apparatus and dangerous cults).
The topic of Scientology's connection to the CIA became commonplace long ago. It's mentioned in a mass of articles, interviews, and television programs. But when I referred to this in passing during a conversation with one journalist several months ago, he took interest: do I have irrefutable evidence of or clues to this connection? Could I, so to say, point to a "smoking gun?"
The question interested me, and I decided to try and collect materials on this topic. So can we bring irrefutable evidence?
[Image: scientology-l-ron-hubbard.jpg?w=474]L. Ron Hubbard. It's understandable that if I could point to a "smoking gun," my name would be Edward Snowden, and I would be hunted by US intelligence services, who (like any intelligence services) never disclose the names of organizations that cooperate with them, and for obvious reasons. However, open information on when the US government began to openly and publicly lobby the interests of Scientology (this occurred in 1993) could compose an entire arsenal of smoking guns. It knew full well about the cult's activity in legally and illegally collecting information on various people and organizations.
From documents published today, we know that already in 1957 the CIA began investigating the activities of L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology. But the collated data that was the result of the investigation has still not been published up to this time. I don't think we should expect the publication of these materials in the near future.
All his life, Hubbard himself was quite actively and constantly fascinated with two things: occultism and intelligence activities. For example, as a still wholly young man he entered the Rosicrucian order, undertook occult seances, and experienced certain otherworldly meetings.
[Image: aleister-crowley.jpg?w=474]Aleister Crowley, head of the Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO) and the most well-known Satanist of the twentieth century. Crowley was also a British intelligence asset. Already as head of the Scientology cult, with pride he called Aleister Crowley, the most famous Satanist of the twentieth century, his "very good friend." We can bring a multitude of other facts, but that wouldn't fit into the parameters of the current presentation. I'll remind you that John Atack's excellent article "Hubbard and Occultism" was published in my Russian translation. [1]
Scientology's official biography of the cult's founder furiously denies Hubbard's ties to occultism, but then it exaggerates his special relationship with the intelligence services on a cosmic scale. And so with pride the Scientologists inform us that during the war Hubbard worked in the US Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), where he heroically proved himself in "catching foreign spies and rendering aid to US forces surrounded by the enemy on the island of Bataan." As a matter of fact, we know that while working in ONI, Hubbard was just a rank-and-file clerk in the mail department, where he mainly censored the correspondence of servicemen there's certainly nothing heroic in that. Not once during the entire war did he take part in combat action.
Scientologists also invented the legend justifying Hubbard's postwar time in the Pasadena lodge of the Satanic Ordo Templi Orientis (the "Order of the Eastern Temple" headed by Crowley) and his fascination with sex magic rituals, which he conducted together with lodge head Jack Parsons. According to the cult's legend, Hubbard, you see, was sent into the Satanic cult by a certain intelligence agency as a mole and destroyed it from within. There is no need to speak about this version not withstanding factual criticism.
Hubbard's enthusiasm for occultism also left its mark in the symbols of Scientology he and his followers developed.
Here, for example, is a Scientology flyer published during Hubbard's life, called "The Golden Dawn" (so was called the occult lodge whence came Aleister Crowley).
[Image: scientology-golden-dawn.jpg?w=474]"An invitation to freedom? Sign me up!!" Here is a contemporary audio and video publication of Hubbard's works, also called "The Golden Dawn."
[Image: scientology-golden-dawn-ii.jpg?w=474]Be ready to surrender all your gold to listen to Golden Dawn. And here's what a speech by the current head of Scientology, David Miscavige, looks like. The occult symbology of a previously thought-out stage interior doesn't need any clarification. Temple columns, the theme of "Golden Dawn and the Moon (an extremely widespread occult symbol) over the "high priest."
[Image: scientology-stage.jpg?w=474]
Here is the Scientology cross well-known to all, borrowed from the deck of Taro cards developed by Crowley. I'll remind you that this is in fact a crossed-out cross. Also pay attention to another detail: the eight-pointed star, on which is set the image of the cross. We'll come back to it again.
[Image: scientology-moscow.jpg?w=474]
[Image: scientology-aleister-crowley-tarot-card.jpg?w=474]The rose-and-cross Tarot card developed by Satanist Aleister Crowley. Note the likeness with the Scientology cross. Now we will note that there is something in common between Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard and the US Intelligence Community a passion for occultism.
For a start, here are a few facts:
In 1989 in London former CIA officer Miles Copeland's memoirs, The Game Player, were released, in which he told of a scheme set into action during the early-mid 1950s by his colleague Bob Mandelstam. The scheme was called "Occultism in High Places." Its idea was simple: since some leaders and heads of governments had the habit of consulting with astrologers and other occult advisors, American intelligence officers were to "work with" these occultists and make them conduits of their agency's influence.
This scheme worked, for example, when a "clairvoyant" sent by the agents convinced Ghana's President Kwame Nkrumah to make a visit to China, during which a coup inspired by the CIA overthrew the absent leader. In Copeland's words, the US intelligence community influenced Indonesian President Sukarno "quite solidly" through occult "seers" and "fortune tellers."
Mandelstam also used the spiritual-political movement "Moral Rearmament," which, according to Copeland, gave agents the opportunity to influence not only African and Asian political figures through secret channels, but also European leaders. It is there that Copeland also mentions a special agreement, which, in his words, the CIA concluded with Scientology, although he is silent about what was contained therein. Inasmuch as I was able to find out, no one aside from the chatty Copeland mentions this agreement (clearly established in the 1960's) in open sources.
Copeland tells of another interesting case:
We sent into the Scientology cult our agent, who under the direction of Ron Hubbard himself became "clear," but then he demanded and started to receive ever more "monetary compensation for operational expenditures," which together with his savings he gave over to Dianetics.
So we will hardly find out who was ultimately manipulating whom: the CIA Scientology, or Scientology the CIA.
In the same way the work of US intelligence officers with a variety of occultists hasn't gone unnoticed: we can presume that influence disseminated to both sides, and someone among the intelligence officers began practicing occultism. The set of images used by the secret services gives certain bases for making such presumptions concrete.
Here is the emblem of the United States Intelligence Community:
[Image: us-intelligence-community.jpg?w=474]
We see the same eight-pointed star, just like the one placed on the Scientology cross. Let's return to the image of the Scientology cross. Its crossing out can also be viewed as the union of four daggers. And so the daggers cross out the symbol of Christianity. But the dagger is a famous symbol of intelligence, and precisely the star of the Intelligence Community is composed of them.
In the center of the Intelligence Community's star is a rose with five petals. But this the five-petaled rose is the symbol of the Rosicrucian order. Is that a coincidence? Hardly: after all, even the image of the sharp leaflets between the petals is repeated.
And then there's the most interesting thing: we'll read the description of the seal that is found on the official site of the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The eight points of the polar star symbolize the six departments and two independent agencies of the Intelligence Community. They are combined with the 15 stars around the circumference [sic] represent the elements of other agencies that are also part of the Intelligence Community [3].
The problem is that there aren't 15 stars. There are 16. Count them yourself. So what then is the unnamed sixteenth organization, an element of which is part of the US Intelligence Community? Can we build suppositions?
Now we will finally bring some circumstantial evidence that can easily be found in open sources.
At the beginning of the 1990's, the Greek police executed raids in the Athens Scientology office and confiscated a multitude of the cult's internal documents, a part of which were published. In some of them are contained references to assistance that the CIA rendered to Scientology's foreign branches.
[Image: scientology-greece-document.jpg?w=474]Scientology internal document on CIA cooperation, confiscated by Greek police. Already in 2001 in the magazine Le Monde Diplomatique was published an article by the famous journalist Bruno Fuscero "Cults: a US Trojan Horse for Europe" [4], in which he quite reasonably wrote on the use of a whole set of cults, including Scientology, by US intelligence and diplomacy. Despite the sensational character of the article, no lawsuits followed after it.
Hardly anyone can deny that the US State Department lobbies the interests of Scientology in various countries: France; Germany; Italy; Greece; Russia; Hungary, etc. Even among the published Wikileaks documents, a report slipped by that after US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's arrival in Germany, German Scientologists were invited to the US Embassy for a briefing. Inasmuch as I know, no other cult enjoys such attention and such privileges from the United States government. I also understand that nothing is given for free in this world. So what can Scientology offer the US government that the latter would so actively lobby the interests of a comparatively not large cult with far from the most spotless reputation, and whose secret doctrine the whole world laughs at?
One of Scientology's main objectives is the collection and storage of a large mass of information, so that with its help it can compromise and establish control over whomever: from a simple member of the cult who has gone astray to the powerful of this world, control of whom would give unlimited possibilities. 25 years ago the former head of the FBI's Los Angeles Field Office said that Scientology "has one of the most effective intelligence services, which can even compete with the FBI." From that time the cult's capital has increased several times over, if not exponentially. It can afford to hire many more lawyers and private detectives, which significantly raises the cult's potential for carrying out complex special operations.
Now a little history. In 1993, after a 25-year war it waged against Scientology, the US Internal Revenue Service de facto surrendered: having conducted secret negotiations with cult head David Miscavige, it signed an agreement with the group, according to which it recognized Scientology and all related organizations a religion and totally freed them from taxes. Namely after this agreement the State Department began to lobby Scientology's interests in all the world's countries. Moreover, a secret protocol was attached to the agreement (a new one, not the one mentioned by Copeland), and it hasn't been published to this day. What could the content be?
Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk (who many years ago, as director of Aval Bank in Kiev, possibly underwent several Scientology courses) is an example of a man about whom personal information would be extremely interesting not only to Scientology, but also to the US Intelligence Community. I think that we could continue a list of people occupying high posts in various countries, people who are of interest to US intelligence, for a sufficiently long time. And if Scientology has such information and is ready to share it, then why wouldn't an intelligence service use such an opportunity?
Yet in what way can the cult obtain such data? Scientology's information collection is generated through several methods.
[Image: scientology-e-meter.jpg?w=474]Are we having fun yet? Tell all your most intimate secrets to the E-Meter; it's strictly confidential! Author William S. Burroughs, pedophile, occultist and suspected CIA asset had plenty of blackmail material handy. The first of them is auditing, presented by the cult as a kind of confession. But during this "confession," everything that a person in a state of light hypnotic trance might report over a three-to-four hour session is picked up on audio and video and kept forever (I'll remind you that this is conducted with the help of the so-called "E-Meter," i.e. a primitive lie detector). Those who conduct the auditing are not obliged to keep the secrets of this "confession." Rather, they collect the most intimate information about a person in order to turn him into an obedient slave. Let's recall that during a raid of the Taganskaya Scientology "Ideal Org" by Moscow law enforcement, spy equipment for audio and video recording was found built into the walls of the auditing room. By the standards of the cult, such equipment should be present in all auditing facilities.
The second method is the "targeted" collection of information on a person who interests the cult. Specialists are hired for this, and specially instructed cult members help them. Either compromising materials are found, or they are fabricated. Among those who interest the cult could be famous personalities; figures in show business; law enforcement; officers of the security services; political figures; and of course, enemies of the cult.
We can and must emphasize that both methods of collecting and using information are flagrantly amoral. The cult uses the obtained data for self-advancement and self-expansion. I wonder, has it ever crossed the minds of American intelligence officers that receiving such information from the cult and using it is deeply amoral? Scientologists themselves think that the opportunity to control people in such a way serves a higher goal that brings the cult's victory closer, meaning the victory of "good" in all the world. But if US intelligence, in no way believing in Scientology's good and progressivism, finds it necessary and permissible to use this information, then we need to honestly admit that it considers getting information acquired by a quite dubious organization through deceit, bribery, theft, torture, and confidential confessions normal.
Finally, even if we believe that Scientology has absolutely no ties with any of the agencies of the US Intelligence Community, it could still absolutely and unmistakably be called a foreign intelligence organization active in the Russian Federation. And this intelligence organization sends personal and deeply confidential data on Russian citizens to its headquarters in the United States. That means we must approach such an organization in corresponding fashion.
But of course, it seems to me that we can claim with an enormous degree of confidence that Scientology has a multitude of connections with the US Intelligence Community. The evidence I've brought forth in this presentation, quite weighty if circumstantial, indicates precisely that. Almost two years ago, US President Barack Obama publicly announced that international religious freedom (read: its American version) is a vital factor of US national security [5]. I this that this announcement, striking in its cynical frankness, just admitted what had been an obvious fact for years. And we can probably suppose which organization hides behind the unnamed sixteenth star on the US Intelligence Community's coat of arms.
P.S. Thank you to my friend Gerry Armstrong for help in gathering materials for this article.
[SUP][1][/SUP] http://iriney.ru/knigi/kapkan-bezgranich...ltizm.html
[SUP][2][/SUP] Miles Copeland. Confessions of the CIA Original Political Operative, London, 1989.
[SUP][3][/SUP] http://www.dni.gov/index.php/intelligenc...unity/seal
[SUP][4][/SUP] Русский перевод см. тут: http://www.entheta.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?id=2780. Мой сокращенный перевод: http://iriney.ru/sektyi-i-kultyi/sektove...ektam.html
[SUP][5][/SUP] http://www.voanews.com/content/president...45717.html
Translated by Mark Hackard.

Share this:

]]> Scientology & the CIA February 27, 2016 Mark Hackard 6 Comments
This presentation was read by Aleksandr Leonidovich Dvorkin, president of the Irinaeus of Lyons Center for Religious Research Studies, on January 26th, 2016, at a conference run by the Orthodox St. Tikhon University for the Humanities. (Translator's note: While we wouldn't claim that the Church of Scientology is an integral element of the US Intelligence Community, Dvorkin's lecture is an excellent expose of the nexus between the Western power structure, its intelligence apparatus and dangerous cults).
The topic of Scientology's connection to the CIA became commonplace long ago. It's mentioned in a mass of articles, interviews, and television programs. But when I referred to this in passing during a conversation with one journalist several months ago, he took interest: do I have irrefutable evidence of or clues to this connection? Could I, so to say, point to a "smoking gun?"
The question interested me, and I decided to try and collect materials on this topic. So can we bring irrefutable evidence?
[Image: scientology-l-ron-hubbard.jpg?w=474]L. Ron Hubbard. It's understandable that if I could point to a "smoking gun," my name would be Edward Snowden, and I would be hunted by US intelligence services, who (like any intelligence services) never disclose the names of organizations that cooperate with them, and for obvious reasons. However, open information on when the US government began to openly and publicly lobby the interests of Scientology (this occurred in 1993) could compose an entire arsenal of smoking guns. It knew full well about the cult's activity in legally and illegally collecting information on various people and organizations.
From documents published today, we know that already in 1957 the CIA began investigating the activities of L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology. But the collated data that was the result of the investigation has still not been published up to this time. I don't think we should expect the publication of these materials in the near future.
All his life, Hubbard himself was quite actively and constantly fascinated with two things: occultism and intelligence activities. For example, as a still wholly young man he entered the Rosicrucian order, undertook occult seances, and experienced certain otherworldly meetings.
[Image: aleister-crowley.jpg?w=474]Aleister Crowley, head of the Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO) and the most well-known Satanist of the twentieth century. Crowley was also a British intelligence asset. Already as head of the Scientology cult, with pride he called Aleister Crowley, the most famous Satanist of the twentieth century, his "very good friend." We can bring a multitude of other facts, but that wouldn't fit into the parameters of the current presentation. I'll remind you that John Atack's excellent article "Hubbard and Occultism" was published in my Russian translation. [1]
Scientology's official biography of the cult's founder furiously denies Hubbard's ties to occultism, but then it exaggerates his special relationship with the intelligence services on a cosmic scale. And so with pride the Scientologists inform us that during the war Hubbard worked in the US Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), where he heroically proved himself in "catching foreign spies and rendering aid to US forces surrounded by the enemy on the island of Bataan." As a matter of fact, we know that while working in ONI, Hubbard was just a rank-and-file clerk in the mail department, where he mainly censored the correspondence of servicemen there's certainly nothing heroic in that. Not once during the entire war did he take part in combat action.
Scientologists also invented the legend justifying Hubbard's postwar time in the Pasadena lodge of the Satanic Ordo Templi Orientis (the "Order of the Eastern Temple" headed by Crowley) and his fascination with sex magic rituals, which he conducted together with lodge head Jack Parsons. According to the cult's legend, Hubbard, you see, was sent into the Satanic cult by a certain intelligence agency as a mole and destroyed it from within. There is no need to speak about this version not withstanding factual criticism.
Hubbard's enthusiasm for occultism also left its mark in the symbols of Scientology he and his followers developed.
Here, for example, is a Scientology flyer published during Hubbard's life, called "The Golden Dawn" (so was called the occult lodge whence came Aleister Crowley).
[Image: scientology-golden-dawn.jpg?w=474]"An invitation to freedom? Sign me up!!" Here is a contemporary audio and video publication of Hubbard's works, also called "The Golden Dawn."
[Image: scientology-golden-dawn-ii.jpg?w=474]Be ready to surrender all your gold to listen to Golden Dawn. And here's what a speech by the current head of Scientology, David Miscavige, looks like. The occult symbology of a previously thought-out stage interior doesn't need any clarification. Temple columns, the theme of "Golden Dawn and the Moon (an extremely widespread occult symbol) over the "high priest."
[Image: scientology-stage.jpg?w=474]
Here is the Scientology cross well-known to all, borrowed from the deck of Taro cards developed by Crowley. I'll remind you that this is in fact a crossed-out cross. Also pay attention to another detail: the eight-pointed star, on which is set the image of the cross. We'll come back to it again.
[Image: scientology-moscow.jpg?w=474]
[Image: scientology-aleister-crowley-tarot-card.jpg?w=474]The rose-and-cross Tarot card developed by Satanist Aleister Crowley. Note the likeness with the Scientology cross. Now we will note that there is something in common between Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard and the US Intelligence Community a passion for occultism.
For a start, here are a few facts:
In 1989 in London former CIA officer Miles Copeland's memoirs, The Game Player, were released, in which he told of a scheme set into action during the early-mid 1950s by his colleague Bob Mandelstam. The scheme was called "Occultism in High Places." Its idea was simple: since some leaders and heads of governments had the habit of consulting with astrologers and other occult advisors, American intelligence officers were to "work with" these occultists and make them conduits of their agency's influence.
This scheme worked, for example, when a "clairvoyant" sent by the agents convinced Ghana's President Kwame Nkrumah to make a visit to China, during which a coup inspired by the CIA overthrew the absent leader. In Copeland's words, the US intelligence community influenced Indonesian President Sukarno "quite solidly" through occult "seers" and "fortune tellers."
Mandelstam also used the spiritual-political movement "Moral Rearmament," which, according to Copeland, gave agents the opportunity to influence not only African and Asian political figures through secret channels, but also European leaders. It is there that Copeland also mentions a special agreement, which, in his words, the CIA concluded with Scientology, although he is silent about what was contained therein. Inasmuch as I was able to find out, no one aside from the chatty Copeland mentions this agreement (clearly established in the 1960's) in open sources.
Copeland tells of another interesting case:
We sent into the Scientology cult our agent, who under the direction of Ron Hubbard himself became "clear," but then he demanded and started to receive ever more "monetary compensation for operational expenditures," which together with his savings he gave over to Dianetics.
So we will hardly find out who was ultimately manipulating whom: the CIA Scientology, or Scientology the CIA.
In the same way the work of US intelligence officers with a variety of occultists hasn't gone unnoticed: we can presume that influence disseminated to both sides, and someone among the intelligence officers began practicing occultism. The set of images used by the secret services gives certain bases for making such presumptions concrete.
Here is the emblem of the United States Intelligence Community:
[Image: us-intelligence-community.jpg?w=474]
We see the same eight-pointed star, just like the one placed on the Scientology cross. Let's return to the image of the Scientology cross. Its crossing out can also be viewed as the union of four daggers. And so the daggers cross out the symbol of Christianity. But the dagger is a famous symbol of intelligence, and precisely the star of the Intelligence Community is composed of them.
In the center of the Intelligence Community's star is a rose with five petals. But this the five-petaled rose is the symbol of the Rosicrucian order. Is that a coincidence? Hardly: after all, even the image of the sharp leaflets between the petals is repeated.
And then there's the most interesting thing: we'll read the description of the seal that is found on the official site of the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The eight points of the polar star symbolize the six departments and two independent agencies of the Intelligence Community. They are combined with the 15 stars around the circumference [sic] represent the elements of other agencies that are also part of the Intelligence Community [3].
The problem is that there aren't 15 stars. There are 16. Count them yourself. So what then is the unnamed sixteenth organization, an element of which is part of the US Intelligence Community? Can we build suppositions?
Now we will finally bring some circumstantial evidence that can easily be found in open sources.
At the beginning of the 1990's, the Greek police executed raids in the Athens Scientology office and confiscated a multitude of the cult's internal documents, a part of which were published. In some of them are contained references to assistance that the CIA rendered to Scientology's foreign branches.
[Image: scientology-greece-document.jpg?w=474]Scientology internal document on CIA cooperation, confiscated by Greek police. Already in 2001 in the magazine Le Monde Diplomatique was published an article by the famous journalist Bruno Fuscero "Cults: a US Trojan Horse for Europe" [4], in which he quite reasonably wrote on the use of a whole set of cults, including Scientology, by US intelligence and diplomacy. Despite the sensational character of the article, no lawsuits followed after it.
Hardly anyone can deny that the US State Department lobbies the interests of Scientology in various countries: France; Germany; Italy; Greece; Russia; Hungary, etc. Even among the published Wikileaks documents, a report slipped by that after US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's arrival in Germany, German Scientologists were invited to the US Embassy for a briefing. Inasmuch as I know, no other cult enjoys such attention and such privileges from the United States government. I also understand that nothing is given for free in this world. So what can Scientology offer the US government that the latter would so actively lobby the interests of a comparatively not large cult with far from the most spotless reputation, and whose secret doctrine the whole world laughs at?
One of Scientology's main objectives is the collection and storage of a large mass of information, so that with its help it can compromise and establish control over whomever: from a simple member of the cult who has gone astray to the powerful of this world, control of whom would give unlimited possibilities. 25 years ago the former head of the FBI's Los Angeles Field Office said that Scientology "has one of the most effective intelligence services, which can even compete with the FBI." From that time the cult's capital has increased several times over, if not exponentially. It can afford to hire many more lawyers and private detectives, which significantly raises the cult's potential for carrying out complex special operations.
Now a little history. In 1993, after a 25-year war it waged against Scientology, the US Internal Revenue Service de facto surrendered: having conducted secret negotiations with cult head David Miscavige, it signed an agreement with the group, according to which it recognized Scientology and all related organizations a religion and totally freed them from taxes. Namely after this agreement the State Department began to lobby Scientology's interests in all the world's countries. Moreover, a secret protocol was attached to the agreement (a new one, not the one mentioned by Copeland), and it hasn't been published to this day. What could the content be?
Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk (who many years ago, as director of Aval Bank in Kiev, possibly underwent several Scientology courses) is an example of a man about whom personal information would be extremely interesting not only to Scientology, but also to the US Intelligence Community. I think that we could continue a list of people occupying high posts in various countries, people who are of interest to US intelligence, for a sufficiently long time. And if Scientology has such information and is ready to share it, then why wouldn't an intelligence service use such an opportunity?
Yet in what way can the cult obtain such data? Scientology's information collection is generated through several methods.
[Image: scientology-e-meter.jpg?w=474]Are we having fun yet? Tell all your most intimate secrets to the E-Meter; it's strictly confidential! Author William S. Burroughs, pedophile, occultist and suspected CIA asset had plenty of blackmail material handy. The first of them is auditing, presented by the cult as a kind of confession. But during this "confession," everything that a person in a state of light hypnotic trance might report over a three-to-four hour session is picked up on audio and video and kept forever (I'll remind you that this is conducted with the help of the so-called "E-Meter," i.e. a primitive lie detector). Those who conduct the auditing are not obliged to keep the secrets of this "confession." Rather, they collect the most intimate information about a person in order to turn him into an obedient slave. Let's recall that during a raid of the Taganskaya Scientology "Ideal Org" by Moscow law enforcement, spy equipment for audio and video recording was found built into the walls of the auditing room. By the standards of the cult, such equipment should be present in all auditing facilities.
The second method is the "targeted" collection of information on a person who interests the cult. Specialists are hired for this, and specially instructed cult members help them. Either compromising materials are found, or they are fabricated. Among those who interest the cult could be famous personalities; figures in show business; law enforcement; officers of the security services; political figures; and of course, enemies of the cult.
We can and must emphasize that both methods of collecting and using information are flagrantly amoral. The cult uses the obtained data for self-advancement and self-expansion. I wonder, has it ever crossed the minds of American intelligence officers that receiving such information from the cult and using it is deeply amoral? Scientologists themselves think that the opportunity to control people in such a way serves a higher goal that brings the cult's victory closer, meaning the victory of "good" in all the world. But if US intelligence, in no way believing in Scientology's good and progressivism, finds it necessary and permissible to use this information, then we need to honestly admit that it considers getting information acquired by a quite dubious organization through deceit, bribery, theft, torture, and confidential confessions normal.
Finally, even if we believe that Scientology has absolutely no ties with any of the agencies of the US Intelligence Community, it could still absolutely and unmistakably be called a foreign intelligence organization active in the Russian Federation. And this intelligence organization sends personal and deeply confidential data on Russian citizens to its headquarters in the United States. That means we must approach such an organization in corresponding fashion.
But of course, it seems to me that we can claim with an enormous degree of confidence that Scientology has a multitude of connections with the US Intelligence Community. The evidence I've brought forth in this presentation, quite weighty if circumstantial, indicates precisely that. Almost two years ago, US President Barack Obama publicly announced that international religious freedom (read: its American version) is a vital factor of US national security [5]. I this that this announcement, striking in its cynical frankness, just admitted what had been an obvious fact for years. And we can probably suppose which organization hides behind the unnamed sixteenth star on the US Intelligence Community's coat of arms.
P.S. Thank you to my friend Gerry Armstrong for help in gathering materials for this article.
[SUP][1][/SUP] http://iriney.ru/knigi/kapkan-bezgranich...ltizm.html
[SUP][2][/SUP] Miles Copeland. Confessions of the CIA Original Political Operative, London, 1989.
[SUP][3][/SUP] http://www.dni.gov/index.php/intelligenc...unity/seal
[SUP][4][/SUP] Русский перевод см. тут: http://www.entheta.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?id=2780. Мой сокращенный перевод: http://iriney.ru/sektyi-i-kultyi/sektove...ektam.html
[SUP][5][/SUP] http://www.voanews.com/content/president...45717.html
Translated by Mark Hackard.

Share this:

]]> <![CDATA[Beacon Global Strategies]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=14377 Mon, 21 Dec 2015 05:34:02 +0000 Magda Hassan]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=14377 Beacon Global Strategies hold the unique privilege of providing high-profile foreign policy guidance to Hillary Clinton, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz, among others.
The bipartisan firm was founded in 2013 by former senior officials from the State Department, Department of Defense, and Central Intelligence Agency, and quickly had more than a dozen clients, primarily defense contractors, according to Defense News.
Philippe Reines and Andrew Shapiro, both considered part of Clinton's inner circle of foreign policy advisers, are founders of the firm. Reines served as a longtime spokesperson for Clinton and Shapiro served as her assistant secretary of state for military affairs.
Eric Edelman, a former Bush administration Defense Department official, is an advisory board member to Beacon Global Strategies and a leading foreign policy adviser to Marco Rubio's presidential campaign. "It's mostly about defense, but I've talked to him about the authorization of military force. I've talked to him about the campaign against ISIS, about Russia and Ukraine. There's not a shortage of issues right now," Edelman told Reuters. The news wire noted that that Edelman "regularly briefs the senator."
The Beacon Global Strategies advisory board, which includes retired Adm. James Stavridis and CNN contributor Fran Townsend, was established to "provide guidance to the BGS team on the full range of the firm's activities, from particular projects to larger strategic initiatives," the firm announced in 2013.
Brian Hooks, another veteran Bush administration official and advisory board member to Beacon Global Strategies, teamed up with Edelman to form a foreign policy prep effort for Republican candidates, called the John Hay Initiative. Hooks and Edelman have reportedly provided private briefings to help shape foreign policy ideas to candidates including Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Lindsey Graham, encouraging them to take on hawkish positions.
Bryan Smith, the former budget director of the House Intelligence Committee who now works at Beacon Global Strategies as a technical adviser, is also helping lead the John Hay Initiative.
Multiple inquiries from The Intercept to Beacon to disclose its clients and what services it specifically provides went unanswered.
Beacon Global Strategies promoted its influence over the 2016 presidential field on its website with an item touting Brian Hook's work to advise Republican candidates.
Though the firm says it does not lobby and is not registered as a lobbying firm, lack of registration is becoming increasingly meaningless in Washington as thousands of lobbyists have simply deregistered while continuing to peddle influence on behalf of clients. Under federal lobbying law, lobby registration is only required under very narrow guidelines that are rarely enforced.
While Beacon Global Strategies' clients and services are a mystery, the firm maintains strong ties to Washington influencers. Politico Playbook headlined the launch of the group: "HOT NEW NATIONAL-SECURITY FIRM."
After the launch, Jeremy Bash, the managing director of the firm, joined the advisory board to Paladin Capital Group, a private equity firm that provides funding for start-ups that serve as contractors to the National Security Agency.
Beacon Global Strategies' seed funding came from Claude Fontheim, a former Clinton adviser who now serves as a lobbyist to the U.S.-China Exchange Foundation, a nonprofit reportedly used by Chinese government officials and Hong Kong tycoons to shape American policy toward China.


https://theintercept.com/2015/12/18/beac...trategies/]]> Beacon Global Strategies hold the unique privilege of providing high-profile foreign policy guidance to Hillary Clinton, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz, among others.
The bipartisan firm was founded in 2013 by former senior officials from the State Department, Department of Defense, and Central Intelligence Agency, and quickly had more than a dozen clients, primarily defense contractors, according to Defense News.
Philippe Reines and Andrew Shapiro, both considered part of Clinton's inner circle of foreign policy advisers, are founders of the firm. Reines served as a longtime spokesperson for Clinton and Shapiro served as her assistant secretary of state for military affairs.
Eric Edelman, a former Bush administration Defense Department official, is an advisory board member to Beacon Global Strategies and a leading foreign policy adviser to Marco Rubio's presidential campaign. "It's mostly about defense, but I've talked to him about the authorization of military force. I've talked to him about the campaign against ISIS, about Russia and Ukraine. There's not a shortage of issues right now," Edelman told Reuters. The news wire noted that that Edelman "regularly briefs the senator."
The Beacon Global Strategies advisory board, which includes retired Adm. James Stavridis and CNN contributor Fran Townsend, was established to "provide guidance to the BGS team on the full range of the firm's activities, from particular projects to larger strategic initiatives," the firm announced in 2013.
Brian Hooks, another veteran Bush administration official and advisory board member to Beacon Global Strategies, teamed up with Edelman to form a foreign policy prep effort for Republican candidates, called the John Hay Initiative. Hooks and Edelman have reportedly provided private briefings to help shape foreign policy ideas to candidates including Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Lindsey Graham, encouraging them to take on hawkish positions.
Bryan Smith, the former budget director of the House Intelligence Committee who now works at Beacon Global Strategies as a technical adviser, is also helping lead the John Hay Initiative.
Multiple inquiries from The Intercept to Beacon to disclose its clients and what services it specifically provides went unanswered.
Beacon Global Strategies promoted its influence over the 2016 presidential field on its website with an item touting Brian Hook's work to advise Republican candidates.
Though the firm says it does not lobby and is not registered as a lobbying firm, lack of registration is becoming increasingly meaningless in Washington as thousands of lobbyists have simply deregistered while continuing to peddle influence on behalf of clients. Under federal lobbying law, lobby registration is only required under very narrow guidelines that are rarely enforced.
While Beacon Global Strategies' clients and services are a mystery, the firm maintains strong ties to Washington influencers. Politico Playbook headlined the launch of the group: "HOT NEW NATIONAL-SECURITY FIRM."
After the launch, Jeremy Bash, the managing director of the firm, joined the advisory board to Paladin Capital Group, a private equity firm that provides funding for start-ups that serve as contractors to the National Security Agency.
Beacon Global Strategies' seed funding came from Claude Fontheim, a former Clinton adviser who now serves as a lobbyist to the U.S.-China Exchange Foundation, a nonprofit reportedly used by Chinese government officials and Hong Kong tycoons to shape American policy toward China.


https://theintercept.com/2015/12/18/beac...trategies/]]> <![CDATA[Electoral Integrity Project - Sydney University - Paving the way to regime change for Empire]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13808 Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:21:43 +0000 Magda Hassan]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13808



A multi-million dollar Australian Government funded project at the University of Sydney, linked to spin doctors in Washington, is using a biased and secretive method to help discredit elections in a range of enemy' countries.
[Image: avn-2.jpg_916636689.jpg]
The Electoral Integrity Project (EIP) joins the United States Studies Centre (USSC), established in 2007, as another heavily politicised initiative which compromises the independence of Australia's oldest university (see Anderson 2010).
A key target is socialist Venezuela, which is facing yet another destabilisation campaign, backed by Washington. The recent rounds of violence began in early 2014 and recently led to the arrest of several opposition figures for murder and coup plotting. The pretext for the violence has been that the government of President Nicolas Maduro is somehow democratically illegitimate.
However the radical, popular Bolivarian' governments have won 12 of Venezuela's last 13 elections. Further, 80% of the voting age population participated in the 2013 election, won by Maduro (International IDEA 2015). That is a massive increase on 1990s levels, when the Chavez phenomenon effectively sidelined the old and moribund two party system. And the electoral system is secure. Even the political journalist for anti-government paper El Universal described Venezuela's electoral system as one of the most technologically advanced verifiable voting systems in the world', with protections against fraud and tampering and scrutineered random recount mechanisms (Martinez 2013).
Sydney University's Electoral Integrity Project' tells a very different story. According to their 2015 report, Venezuela's Presidential election in 2013 was one of the worst in the world, ranking 110 out of 127. They corroborate their data with a survey claiming President Maduro only had a 24% popularity rating, with 85% believing that the country was heading in the wrong direction' (Norris et al 2015: 31). The EIP did not mention the Hinterlaces Polls, which have had Maduro's popularity (during the recent crisis) ranging from 39% to 52%; nor do they cite polls showing overwhelming rejection of the opposition's violent attempts to remove the elected president (Dutka 2014).
The EIP produces an impressive forest of data to form its rankings on the legitimacy of elections worldwide; but what is the basis for all these numbers? Though it is not so easy to find, the method involves selecting a range of criteria and then seeking expert opinion', from a group of unnamed people. That is, the numbers and rankings rely on expert opinion', and those experts are anonymous. There is only anecdotal recourse to more standard methods, such as actual opinion polls, or actual participation rates.
Yet popular and expert perceptions are a curious thing. As most mass media remains in the hands of a tiny oligarchy, for whom Venezuela has long been a black sheep', image shaping is often distorted. Surveys by the Chilean-based company LatinoBarómetro (2014: 8-9) illustrate this point very well. The image of Venezuela's democracy fromoutside the country is rather ordinary (seen as 41% and 47% favourable, between 2010 and 2013), whereas within Venezuela it is very different. Venezuelans rate their democracy at 70%, the second highest (after Uruguay) in Latin America.LatinoBarómetro (2014: 9) itself is surprised by these results, saying: The five countries which most appreciate their own democracy are countries governed by the left: Uruguay, Venezuela, Argentina, Ecuador and Nicaragua … the democracy of which citizens speak is clearly not the democracy of which the experts speak'.
Yet surely any democracy is best judged by those who are able (or unable) to participate in it? The opinions of expert outsiders seem of little relevance. That is an elite approach. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Art 25) describes democratic rights this way: the right and the opportunity … to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives'. That refers to the right of citizens in a particular body politic. Gauged against this principle, the method of EIP project, relying on outside expert opinion, seems poorly conceived.
Yet an elitist approach is consistent with the model promoted by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government funded body launched by the Reagan administration in the second cold war of early 1980s. The NED (usually through intermediaries) funds a range of organisations in attempts to shape democracies or civil societies', to make them more friendly to or compliant with Washington. One of the founders and first President of the NED, Allen Weinstein, said in 1991, A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA' (Lefebvre 2013). Indeed, as with the psy-ops' of the CIA, the NED has been implicated in coups and destabilisation plans in a range of Latin American countries, including Nicaragua, Haiti and Venezuela (Kurlantzick 2004; Lefebvre 2013; Golinger 2006). The NED idea of democracy has been described as [a] top-down, elite, constrained (or "polyarchal") democracy … [where] the elites get to decide the candidates or questions suitable to go before the people' (Scipes 2014). French researcher Olivier Guilmain (in Teil 2011) says that the NED finances opposition parties in numerous countries and provides special aid to exiles and opponents of regimes targeted by the US State Department'.
Eva Golinger, whose book The Chavez Code exposed the Bush administration's involvement in the failed coup of 2002, has documented the NED's contribution to destabilisation and coups in Venezuela. In the last year or so the NED has spent many millions on Venezuelan opposition groups including funding for their political campaigns in 2013 and for the current anti-government protests in 2014' (Golinger 2014). She calls this the same old dirty tactics' of a coup in motion (Golinger 2015).
It might not come as a surprise then, to find that there are indeed NED and other US Government links to Sydney's Electoral Integrity Project. Chief investigator Professor Pippa Norris proudly lists her work as a consultant for the NED, and at least six of the project partners (without whose support the EIP would not have been possible') have direct US government funding. The EIP method of relying on expert opinion seems quite consistent with that elite, constrained … democracy'.
Worse, the EIP relies on anonymous opinion. A member of the project clarified this to me in these words: we have to maintain the confidentiality of our sources as part of our legal obligations … revealing the names of the experts could potentially risk putting them in harm's way in several states which do not respect human rights and which suppress critics'. Be that as it may, the opinions of anonymous people provide no way to assess the legitimacy of an independent state. It contradicts the principles of openness and transparency, values the EIP claims to both assess and promote. Who are these anonymous experts? Do they include opposition figures in the countries whose governments are under attack? Do they include the Washington insiders who advise on destabilisation and coup plans? There is little indication the EIP takes seriously the well-established principle of avoiding conflicts of interest.
It is also alarming that the EIP, as an Australian Government (ARC) funded academic project, whose subtitle (Why Elections fail and what we can do about it') suggests a measures of praxis, shares the Washington phrase failed elections [which] raised major red flags', mentioning several states, including Syria. It is well known that a major military intervention in Syria was narrowly averted in September 2013, after false claims that the Syrian Government had used chemical weapons against children (for evidence of the falsity of these claims see: Hersh 2013 & 2014; Lloyd and Postol 2014; ISTEAMS 2013). Does the EIP seek to associate itself with red flag' military interventions, if countries fail to meet its dubious criteria?
The project rated Syria's 2014 presidential elections near the bottom of its chart (125 of 127), on the basis of its anonymous expert opinions (Norris et al 2015: 11). The only rationale for this can be seen in a brief note which observes the election was deeply flawed because some areas of the country were not under government control, so polling did not take place in the regions where insurgents were strongest', and the fact that National Coalition - the main western backed opposition group' boycotted the election (Norris et al 2015: 27). While these are correct statements, they do not tell the whole story. Conflict in other countries did not seem to bother the EIP or its experts quite so much when they ranked the Ukraine election at 78 of 127 (Norris et al 2015: 10). Yet the election monitoring group International IDEA (2015), an EIP partner, puts participation rates in the Ukraine's 2014 presidential election at 50%, while in the Syria's 2014 presidential election it was 73%. Clearly the US foreign policy factor is at play. Washington arms the opposition' in Syria and the government in Ukraine. Similarly the NED has directly funded the Syrian opposition (NED 2006; Teil 2011; IRI 2015) while urging military support for the Ukraine government (Sputnik 2014; see also Parry 2014).
Finally we might observe that Israel's 2013 elections were duly reviewed by the EIP, leading to a very healthy 17/127 ranking (Norris et al 2015: 8). Apparently being a racial state, with several million effectively stateless Palestinian people, held in military-controlled territories and with virtually no civil or political rights, has little impact on the EIP assessment. Yet this is consistent with what the Washington-Tel Aviv axis has long told us about Israel as the only democracy in the region' (e.g. Goldman 2015, etc). The double standards are breath-taking. With the Electoral Integrity Project's US links and its elitist assumptions about democracy it seems the project has little sense of conflict of interest, let alone appropriate research method.
-----------
Sources
Anderson, Tim (2010) Hegemony, big money and academic independence', Australian Universities Review, Vol 53, No 2
Dutka, Z.C. (2014) Polls Reveal Wider Concerns of Venezuelan Public', Venezuelanalysis, 11 May, online:http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/10679
Freedom House (2015) Freedom in the World 2015', interactive map, online:https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-...QSxLY6bXT9
Goldman, Lisa (2015) Bibi Bother: Netanyahu's Strategy in Washington', Foreign Affairs, 1 March, online:http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1...ibi-bother
Golinger, Eva (2006) The Chavez Code: Cracking U.S. Intervention in Venezuela, Olive Branch Press, Northampton, MA
Golinger, Eva (2015) Venezuela: a Coup in Real Time', Counter Punch, 2 February, online:http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/02/v...real-time/
Hersh, Seymour M. (2013) Whose Sarin?', London Review of Books, Vol. 35 No. 24, 19 December, 9-12, online: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-h...hose-sarin
Hersh, Seymour M. (2014) The Red Line and the Rat Line', London Review of Books, 36:8, 17 April, pp 21-24, online: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-h...e-rat-line
International IDEA (2015) Voter Turnout', data by country, online: http://www.idea.int/vt/
IRI (2015) Syria, online: http://www.iri.org/country/syria
ISTEAMS (2013) Independent Investigation of Syria Chemical Attack Videos and Child Abductions', 15 September, online:http://www.globalresearch.ca/STUDY_THE_V...ERSION.pdf
Kurlantzick, Joshua (2004) The Coup Connection', Mother Jones, November, online:http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004...connection
Latinobarometro (2014)' La Imagen de los países y las democracias', informe (report):
http://www.latinobarometro.org/latNewsShow.jsp
Lefebvre, Stephan (2013) Analysis from National Endowment for Democracy Used in The Atlantic, with Significant Errors and Omissions', Center for Economic Policy and Research, 30 July, online:http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-...-omissions
Lloyd, Richard and Theodore A. Postol (2014) Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013', MIT, January 14, Washington DC, online:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...ink=relast
Martinez, Eugenio (2013) Venezuela's Election System Holds Up As A Model For The World', Forbes, 14 may, online: http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleader...the-world/
NED (2006) Syria funding, December, online: http://www.ned.org/publications/annual-r...of-2006-12
Norris, Pippa; Ferran Martínez and Max Grömping (2015) The year in Elections, 2014', Electoral Integrity Project (Why Elections fail and what we can do about it), online:https://sites.google.com/site/electorali...tions-2014
Parry, Robert (2014) New York Times on Syria and Ukraine: How Propaganda Works', Global Research, 3 December, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-york-ti...ks/5417724
Sputnik (2014) National Endowment for Democracy Urges US Military Support for Ukraine', 20 October, online: http://sputniknews.com/world/20141020/19...raine.html
Teil, Julian (2011) Justifying a "humanitarian war" against Syria. The sinister role of the NGOs', Global Research, 16 November, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/justifying-...ngos/27702]]>



A multi-million dollar Australian Government funded project at the University of Sydney, linked to spin doctors in Washington, is using a biased and secretive method to help discredit elections in a range of enemy' countries.
[Image: avn-2.jpg_916636689.jpg]
The Electoral Integrity Project (EIP) joins the United States Studies Centre (USSC), established in 2007, as another heavily politicised initiative which compromises the independence of Australia's oldest university (see Anderson 2010).
A key target is socialist Venezuela, which is facing yet another destabilisation campaign, backed by Washington. The recent rounds of violence began in early 2014 and recently led to the arrest of several opposition figures for murder and coup plotting. The pretext for the violence has been that the government of President Nicolas Maduro is somehow democratically illegitimate.
However the radical, popular Bolivarian' governments have won 12 of Venezuela's last 13 elections. Further, 80% of the voting age population participated in the 2013 election, won by Maduro (International IDEA 2015). That is a massive increase on 1990s levels, when the Chavez phenomenon effectively sidelined the old and moribund two party system. And the electoral system is secure. Even the political journalist for anti-government paper El Universal described Venezuela's electoral system as one of the most technologically advanced verifiable voting systems in the world', with protections against fraud and tampering and scrutineered random recount mechanisms (Martinez 2013).
Sydney University's Electoral Integrity Project' tells a very different story. According to their 2015 report, Venezuela's Presidential election in 2013 was one of the worst in the world, ranking 110 out of 127. They corroborate their data with a survey claiming President Maduro only had a 24% popularity rating, with 85% believing that the country was heading in the wrong direction' (Norris et al 2015: 31). The EIP did not mention the Hinterlaces Polls, which have had Maduro's popularity (during the recent crisis) ranging from 39% to 52%; nor do they cite polls showing overwhelming rejection of the opposition's violent attempts to remove the elected president (Dutka 2014).
The EIP produces an impressive forest of data to form its rankings on the legitimacy of elections worldwide; but what is the basis for all these numbers? Though it is not so easy to find, the method involves selecting a range of criteria and then seeking expert opinion', from a group of unnamed people. That is, the numbers and rankings rely on expert opinion', and those experts are anonymous. There is only anecdotal recourse to more standard methods, such as actual opinion polls, or actual participation rates.
Yet popular and expert perceptions are a curious thing. As most mass media remains in the hands of a tiny oligarchy, for whom Venezuela has long been a black sheep', image shaping is often distorted. Surveys by the Chilean-based company LatinoBarómetro (2014: 8-9) illustrate this point very well. The image of Venezuela's democracy fromoutside the country is rather ordinary (seen as 41% and 47% favourable, between 2010 and 2013), whereas within Venezuela it is very different. Venezuelans rate their democracy at 70%, the second highest (after Uruguay) in Latin America.LatinoBarómetro (2014: 9) itself is surprised by these results, saying: The five countries which most appreciate their own democracy are countries governed by the left: Uruguay, Venezuela, Argentina, Ecuador and Nicaragua … the democracy of which citizens speak is clearly not the democracy of which the experts speak'.
Yet surely any democracy is best judged by those who are able (or unable) to participate in it? The opinions of expert outsiders seem of little relevance. That is an elite approach. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Art 25) describes democratic rights this way: the right and the opportunity … to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives'. That refers to the right of citizens in a particular body politic. Gauged against this principle, the method of EIP project, relying on outside expert opinion, seems poorly conceived.
Yet an elitist approach is consistent with the model promoted by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government funded body launched by the Reagan administration in the second cold war of early 1980s. The NED (usually through intermediaries) funds a range of organisations in attempts to shape democracies or civil societies', to make them more friendly to or compliant with Washington. One of the founders and first President of the NED, Allen Weinstein, said in 1991, A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA' (Lefebvre 2013). Indeed, as with the psy-ops' of the CIA, the NED has been implicated in coups and destabilisation plans in a range of Latin American countries, including Nicaragua, Haiti and Venezuela (Kurlantzick 2004; Lefebvre 2013; Golinger 2006). The NED idea of democracy has been described as [a] top-down, elite, constrained (or "polyarchal") democracy … [where] the elites get to decide the candidates or questions suitable to go before the people' (Scipes 2014). French researcher Olivier Guilmain (in Teil 2011) says that the NED finances opposition parties in numerous countries and provides special aid to exiles and opponents of regimes targeted by the US State Department'.
Eva Golinger, whose book The Chavez Code exposed the Bush administration's involvement in the failed coup of 2002, has documented the NED's contribution to destabilisation and coups in Venezuela. In the last year or so the NED has spent many millions on Venezuelan opposition groups including funding for their political campaigns in 2013 and for the current anti-government protests in 2014' (Golinger 2014). She calls this the same old dirty tactics' of a coup in motion (Golinger 2015).
It might not come as a surprise then, to find that there are indeed NED and other US Government links to Sydney's Electoral Integrity Project. Chief investigator Professor Pippa Norris proudly lists her work as a consultant for the NED, and at least six of the project partners (without whose support the EIP would not have been possible') have direct US government funding. The EIP method of relying on expert opinion seems quite consistent with that elite, constrained … democracy'.
Worse, the EIP relies on anonymous opinion. A member of the project clarified this to me in these words: we have to maintain the confidentiality of our sources as part of our legal obligations … revealing the names of the experts could potentially risk putting them in harm's way in several states which do not respect human rights and which suppress critics'. Be that as it may, the opinions of anonymous people provide no way to assess the legitimacy of an independent state. It contradicts the principles of openness and transparency, values the EIP claims to both assess and promote. Who are these anonymous experts? Do they include opposition figures in the countries whose governments are under attack? Do they include the Washington insiders who advise on destabilisation and coup plans? There is little indication the EIP takes seriously the well-established principle of avoiding conflicts of interest.
It is also alarming that the EIP, as an Australian Government (ARC) funded academic project, whose subtitle (Why Elections fail and what we can do about it') suggests a measures of praxis, shares the Washington phrase failed elections [which] raised major red flags', mentioning several states, including Syria. It is well known that a major military intervention in Syria was narrowly averted in September 2013, after false claims that the Syrian Government had used chemical weapons against children (for evidence of the falsity of these claims see: Hersh 2013 & 2014; Lloyd and Postol 2014; ISTEAMS 2013). Does the EIP seek to associate itself with red flag' military interventions, if countries fail to meet its dubious criteria?
The project rated Syria's 2014 presidential elections near the bottom of its chart (125 of 127), on the basis of its anonymous expert opinions (Norris et al 2015: 11). The only rationale for this can be seen in a brief note which observes the election was deeply flawed because some areas of the country were not under government control, so polling did not take place in the regions where insurgents were strongest', and the fact that National Coalition - the main western backed opposition group' boycotted the election (Norris et al 2015: 27). While these are correct statements, they do not tell the whole story. Conflict in other countries did not seem to bother the EIP or its experts quite so much when they ranked the Ukraine election at 78 of 127 (Norris et al 2015: 10). Yet the election monitoring group International IDEA (2015), an EIP partner, puts participation rates in the Ukraine's 2014 presidential election at 50%, while in the Syria's 2014 presidential election it was 73%. Clearly the US foreign policy factor is at play. Washington arms the opposition' in Syria and the government in Ukraine. Similarly the NED has directly funded the Syrian opposition (NED 2006; Teil 2011; IRI 2015) while urging military support for the Ukraine government (Sputnik 2014; see also Parry 2014).
Finally we might observe that Israel's 2013 elections were duly reviewed by the EIP, leading to a very healthy 17/127 ranking (Norris et al 2015: 8). Apparently being a racial state, with several million effectively stateless Palestinian people, held in military-controlled territories and with virtually no civil or political rights, has little impact on the EIP assessment. Yet this is consistent with what the Washington-Tel Aviv axis has long told us about Israel as the only democracy in the region' (e.g. Goldman 2015, etc). The double standards are breath-taking. With the Electoral Integrity Project's US links and its elitist assumptions about democracy it seems the project has little sense of conflict of interest, let alone appropriate research method.
-----------
Sources
Anderson, Tim (2010) Hegemony, big money and academic independence', Australian Universities Review, Vol 53, No 2
Dutka, Z.C. (2014) Polls Reveal Wider Concerns of Venezuelan Public', Venezuelanalysis, 11 May, online:http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/10679
Freedom House (2015) Freedom in the World 2015', interactive map, online:https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-...QSxLY6bXT9
Goldman, Lisa (2015) Bibi Bother: Netanyahu's Strategy in Washington', Foreign Affairs, 1 March, online:http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1...ibi-bother
Golinger, Eva (2006) The Chavez Code: Cracking U.S. Intervention in Venezuela, Olive Branch Press, Northampton, MA
Golinger, Eva (2015) Venezuela: a Coup in Real Time', Counter Punch, 2 February, online:http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/02/v...real-time/
Hersh, Seymour M. (2013) Whose Sarin?', London Review of Books, Vol. 35 No. 24, 19 December, 9-12, online: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-h...hose-sarin
Hersh, Seymour M. (2014) The Red Line and the Rat Line', London Review of Books, 36:8, 17 April, pp 21-24, online: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-h...e-rat-line
International IDEA (2015) Voter Turnout', data by country, online: http://www.idea.int/vt/
IRI (2015) Syria, online: http://www.iri.org/country/syria
ISTEAMS (2013) Independent Investigation of Syria Chemical Attack Videos and Child Abductions', 15 September, online:http://www.globalresearch.ca/STUDY_THE_V...ERSION.pdf
Kurlantzick, Joshua (2004) The Coup Connection', Mother Jones, November, online:http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004...connection
Latinobarometro (2014)' La Imagen de los países y las democracias', informe (report):
http://www.latinobarometro.org/latNewsShow.jsp
Lefebvre, Stephan (2013) Analysis from National Endowment for Democracy Used in The Atlantic, with Significant Errors and Omissions', Center for Economic Policy and Research, 30 July, online:http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-...-omissions
Lloyd, Richard and Theodore A. Postol (2014) Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013', MIT, January 14, Washington DC, online:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...ink=relast
Martinez, Eugenio (2013) Venezuela's Election System Holds Up As A Model For The World', Forbes, 14 may, online: http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleader...the-world/
NED (2006) Syria funding, December, online: http://www.ned.org/publications/annual-r...of-2006-12
Norris, Pippa; Ferran Martínez and Max Grömping (2015) The year in Elections, 2014', Electoral Integrity Project (Why Elections fail and what we can do about it), online:https://sites.google.com/site/electorali...tions-2014
Parry, Robert (2014) New York Times on Syria and Ukraine: How Propaganda Works', Global Research, 3 December, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-york-ti...ks/5417724
Sputnik (2014) National Endowment for Democracy Urges US Military Support for Ukraine', 20 October, online: http://sputniknews.com/world/20141020/19...raine.html
Teil, Julian (2011) Justifying a "humanitarian war" against Syria. The sinister role of the NGOs', Global Research, 16 November, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/justifying-...ngos/27702]]> <![CDATA[Electoral Integrity Project - Sydney University - Paving the way to regime change for Empire]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13807 Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:21:43 +0000 Magda Hassan]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13807



A multi-million dollar Australian Government funded project at the University of Sydney, linked to spin doctors in Washington, is using a biased and secretive method to help discredit elections in a range of enemy' countries.
[Image: avn-2.jpg_916636689.jpg]
The Electoral Integrity Project (EIP) joins the United States Studies Centre (USSC), established in 2007, as another heavily politicised initiative which compromises the independence of Australia's oldest university (see Anderson 2010).
A key target is socialist Venezuela, which is facing yet another destabilisation campaign, backed by Washington. The recent rounds of violence began in early 2014 and recently led to the arrest of several opposition figures for murder and coup plotting. The pretext for the violence has been that the government of President Nicolas Maduro is somehow democratically illegitimate.
However the radical, popular Bolivarian' governments have won 12 of Venezuela's last 13 elections. Further, 80% of the voting age population participated in the 2013 election, won by Maduro (International IDEA 2015). That is a massive increase on 1990s levels, when the Chavez phenomenon effectively sidelined the old and moribund two party system. And the electoral system is secure. Even the political journalist for anti-government paper El Universal described Venezuela's electoral system as one of the most technologically advanced verifiable voting systems in the world', with protections against fraud and tampering and scrutineered random recount mechanisms (Martinez 2013).
Sydney University's Electoral Integrity Project' tells a very different story. According to their 2015 report, Venezuela's Presidential election in 2013 was one of the worst in the world, ranking 110 out of 127. They corroborate their data with a survey claiming President Maduro only had a 24% popularity rating, with 85% believing that the country was heading in the wrong direction' (Norris et al 2015: 31). The EIP did not mention the Hinterlaces Polls, which have had Maduro's popularity (during the recent crisis) ranging from 39% to 52%; nor do they cite polls showing overwhelming rejection of the opposition's violent attempts to remove the elected president (Dutka 2014).
The EIP produces an impressive forest of data to form its rankings on the legitimacy of elections worldwide; but what is the basis for all these numbers? Though it is not so easy to find, the method involves selecting a range of criteria and then seeking expert opinion', from a group of unnamed people. That is, the numbers and rankings rely on expert opinion', and those experts are anonymous. There is only anecdotal recourse to more standard methods, such as actual opinion polls, or actual participation rates.
Yet popular and expert perceptions are a curious thing. As most mass media remains in the hands of a tiny oligarchy, for whom Venezuela has long been a black sheep', image shaping is often distorted. Surveys by the Chilean-based company LatinoBarómetro (2014: 8-9) illustrate this point very well. The image of Venezuela's democracy fromoutside the country is rather ordinary (seen as 41% and 47% favourable, between 2010 and 2013), whereas within Venezuela it is very different. Venezuelans rate their democracy at 70%, the second highest (after Uruguay) in Latin America.LatinoBarómetro (2014: 9) itself is surprised by these results, saying: The five countries which most appreciate their own democracy are countries governed by the left: Uruguay, Venezuela, Argentina, Ecuador and Nicaragua … the democracy of which citizens speak is clearly not the democracy of which the experts speak'.
Yet surely any democracy is best judged by those who are able (or unable) to participate in it? The opinions of expert outsiders seem of little relevance. That is an elite approach. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Art 25) describes democratic rights this way: the right and the opportunity … to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives'. That refers to the right of citizens in a particular body politic. Gauged against this principle, the method of EIP project, relying on outside expert opinion, seems poorly conceived.
Yet an elitist approach is consistent with the model promoted by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government funded body launched by the Reagan administration in the second cold war of early 1980s. The NED (usually through intermediaries) funds a range of organisations in attempts to shape democracies or civil societies', to make them more friendly to or compliant with Washington. One of the founders and first President of the NED, Allen Weinstein, said in 1991, A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA' (Lefebvre 2013). Indeed, as with the psy-ops' of the CIA, the NED has been implicated in coups and destabilisation plans in a range of Latin American countries, including Nicaragua, Haiti and Venezuela (Kurlantzick 2004; Lefebvre 2013; Golinger 2006). The NED idea of democracy has been described as [a] top-down, elite, constrained (or "polyarchal") democracy … [where] the elites get to decide the candidates or questions suitable to go before the people' (Scipes 2014). French researcher Olivier Guilmain (in Teil 2011) says that the NED finances opposition parties in numerous countries and provides special aid to exiles and opponents of regimes targeted by the US State Department'.
Eva Golinger, whose book The Chavez Code exposed the Bush administration's involvement in the failed coup of 2002, has documented the NED's contribution to destabilisation and coups in Venezuela. In the last year or so the NED has spent many millions on Venezuelan opposition groups including funding for their political campaigns in 2013 and for the current anti-government protests in 2014' (Golinger 2014). She calls this the same old dirty tactics' of a coup in motion (Golinger 2015).
It might not come as a surprise then, to find that there are indeed NED and other US Government links to Sydney's Electoral Integrity Project. Chief investigator Professor Pippa Norris proudly lists her work as a consultant for the NED, and at least six of the project partners (without whose support the EIP would not have been possible') have direct US government funding. The EIP method of relying on expert opinion seems quite consistent with that elite, constrained … democracy'.
Worse, the EIP relies on anonymous opinion. A member of the project clarified this to me in these words: we have to maintain the confidentiality of our sources as part of our legal obligations … revealing the names of the experts could potentially risk putting them in harm's way in several states which do not respect human rights and which suppress critics'. Be that as it may, the opinions of anonymous people provide no way to assess the legitimacy of an independent state. It contradicts the principles of openness and transparency, values the EIP claims to both assess and promote. Who are these anonymous experts? Do they include opposition figures in the countries whose governments are under attack? Do they include the Washington insiders who advise on destabilisation and coup plans? There is little indication the EIP takes seriously the well-established principle of avoiding conflicts of interest.
It is also alarming that the EIP, as an Australian Government (ARC) funded academic project, whose subtitle (Why Elections fail and what we can do about it') suggests a measures of praxis, shares the Washington phrase failed elections [which] raised major red flags', mentioning several states, including Syria. It is well known that a major military intervention in Syria was narrowly averted in September 2013, after false claims that the Syrian Government had used chemical weapons against children (for evidence of the falsity of these claims see: Hersh 2013 & 2014; Lloyd and Postol 2014; ISTEAMS 2013). Does the EIP seek to associate itself with red flag' military interventions, if countries fail to meet its dubious criteria?
The project rated Syria's 2014 presidential elections near the bottom of its chart (125 of 127), on the basis of its anonymous expert opinions (Norris et al 2015: 11). The only rationale for this can be seen in a brief note which observes the election was deeply flawed because some areas of the country were not under government control, so polling did not take place in the regions where insurgents were strongest', and the fact that National Coalition - the main western backed opposition group' boycotted the election (Norris et al 2015: 27). While these are correct statements, they do not tell the whole story. Conflict in other countries did not seem to bother the EIP or its experts quite so much when they ranked the Ukraine election at 78 of 127 (Norris et al 2015: 10). Yet the election monitoring group International IDEA (2015), an EIP partner, puts participation rates in the Ukraine's 2014 presidential election at 50%, while in the Syria's 2014 presidential election it was 73%. Clearly the US foreign policy factor is at play. Washington arms the opposition' in Syria and the government in Ukraine. Similarly the NED has directly funded the Syrian opposition (NED 2006; Teil 2011; IRI 2015) while urging military support for the Ukraine government (Sputnik 2014; see also Parry 2014).
Finally we might observe that Israel's 2013 elections were duly reviewed by the EIP, leading to a very healthy 17/127 ranking (Norris et al 2015: 8). Apparently being a racial state, with several million effectively stateless Palestinian people, held in military-controlled territories and with virtually no civil or political rights, has little impact on the EIP assessment. Yet this is consistent with what the Washington-Tel Aviv axis has long told us about Israel as the only democracy in the region' (e.g. Goldman 2015, etc). The double standards are breath-taking. With the Electoral Integrity Project's US links and its elitist assumptions about democracy it seems the project has little sense of conflict of interest, let alone appropriate research method.
-----------
Sources
Anderson, Tim (2010) Hegemony, big money and academic independence', Australian Universities Review, Vol 53, No 2
Dutka, Z.C. (2014) Polls Reveal Wider Concerns of Venezuelan Public', Venezuelanalysis, 11 May, online:http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/10679
Freedom House (2015) Freedom in the World 2015', interactive map, online:https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-...QSxLY6bXT9
Goldman, Lisa (2015) Bibi Bother: Netanyahu's Strategy in Washington', Foreign Affairs, 1 March, online:http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1...ibi-bother
Golinger, Eva (2006) The Chavez Code: Cracking U.S. Intervention in Venezuela, Olive Branch Press, Northampton, MA
Golinger, Eva (2015) Venezuela: a Coup in Real Time', Counter Punch, 2 February, online:http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/02/v...real-time/
Hersh, Seymour M. (2013) Whose Sarin?', London Review of Books, Vol. 35 No. 24, 19 December, 9-12, online: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-h...hose-sarin
Hersh, Seymour M. (2014) The Red Line and the Rat Line', London Review of Books, 36:8, 17 April, pp 21-24, online: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-h...e-rat-line
International IDEA (2015) Voter Turnout', data by country, online: http://www.idea.int/vt/
IRI (2015) Syria, online: http://www.iri.org/country/syria
ISTEAMS (2013) Independent Investigation of Syria Chemical Attack Videos and Child Abductions', 15 September, online:http://www.globalresearch.ca/STUDY_THE_V...ERSION.pdf
Kurlantzick, Joshua (2004) The Coup Connection', Mother Jones, November, online:http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004...connection
Latinobarometro (2014)' La Imagen de los países y las democracias', informe (report):
http://www.latinobarometro.org/latNewsShow.jsp
Lefebvre, Stephan (2013) Analysis from National Endowment for Democracy Used in The Atlantic, with Significant Errors and Omissions', Center for Economic Policy and Research, 30 July, online:http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-...-omissions
Lloyd, Richard and Theodore A. Postol (2014) Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013', MIT, January 14, Washington DC, online:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...ink=relast
Martinez, Eugenio (2013) Venezuela's Election System Holds Up As A Model For The World', Forbes, 14 may, online: http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleader...the-world/
NED (2006) Syria funding, December, online: http://www.ned.org/publications/annual-r...of-2006-12
Norris, Pippa; Ferran Martínez and Max Grömping (2015) The year in Elections, 2014', Electoral Integrity Project (Why Elections fail and what we can do about it), online:https://sites.google.com/site/electorali...tions-2014
Parry, Robert (2014) New York Times on Syria and Ukraine: How Propaganda Works', Global Research, 3 December, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-york-ti...ks/5417724
Sputnik (2014) National Endowment for Democracy Urges US Military Support for Ukraine', 20 October, online: http://sputniknews.com/world/20141020/19...raine.html
Teil, Julian (2011) Justifying a "humanitarian war" against Syria. The sinister role of the NGOs', Global Research, 16 November, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/justifying-...ngos/27702]]>



A multi-million dollar Australian Government funded project at the University of Sydney, linked to spin doctors in Washington, is using a biased and secretive method to help discredit elections in a range of enemy' countries.
[Image: avn-2.jpg_916636689.jpg]
The Electoral Integrity Project (EIP) joins the United States Studies Centre (USSC), established in 2007, as another heavily politicised initiative which compromises the independence of Australia's oldest university (see Anderson 2010).
A key target is socialist Venezuela, which is facing yet another destabilisation campaign, backed by Washington. The recent rounds of violence began in early 2014 and recently led to the arrest of several opposition figures for murder and coup plotting. The pretext for the violence has been that the government of President Nicolas Maduro is somehow democratically illegitimate.
However the radical, popular Bolivarian' governments have won 12 of Venezuela's last 13 elections. Further, 80% of the voting age population participated in the 2013 election, won by Maduro (International IDEA 2015). That is a massive increase on 1990s levels, when the Chavez phenomenon effectively sidelined the old and moribund two party system. And the electoral system is secure. Even the political journalist for anti-government paper El Universal described Venezuela's electoral system as one of the most technologically advanced verifiable voting systems in the world', with protections against fraud and tampering and scrutineered random recount mechanisms (Martinez 2013).
Sydney University's Electoral Integrity Project' tells a very different story. According to their 2015 report, Venezuela's Presidential election in 2013 was one of the worst in the world, ranking 110 out of 127. They corroborate their data with a survey claiming President Maduro only had a 24% popularity rating, with 85% believing that the country was heading in the wrong direction' (Norris et al 2015: 31). The EIP did not mention the Hinterlaces Polls, which have had Maduro's popularity (during the recent crisis) ranging from 39% to 52%; nor do they cite polls showing overwhelming rejection of the opposition's violent attempts to remove the elected president (Dutka 2014).
The EIP produces an impressive forest of data to form its rankings on the legitimacy of elections worldwide; but what is the basis for all these numbers? Though it is not so easy to find, the method involves selecting a range of criteria and then seeking expert opinion', from a group of unnamed people. That is, the numbers and rankings rely on expert opinion', and those experts are anonymous. There is only anecdotal recourse to more standard methods, such as actual opinion polls, or actual participation rates.
Yet popular and expert perceptions are a curious thing. As most mass media remains in the hands of a tiny oligarchy, for whom Venezuela has long been a black sheep', image shaping is often distorted. Surveys by the Chilean-based company LatinoBarómetro (2014: 8-9) illustrate this point very well. The image of Venezuela's democracy fromoutside the country is rather ordinary (seen as 41% and 47% favourable, between 2010 and 2013), whereas within Venezuela it is very different. Venezuelans rate their democracy at 70%, the second highest (after Uruguay) in Latin America.LatinoBarómetro (2014: 9) itself is surprised by these results, saying: The five countries which most appreciate their own democracy are countries governed by the left: Uruguay, Venezuela, Argentina, Ecuador and Nicaragua … the democracy of which citizens speak is clearly not the democracy of which the experts speak'.
Yet surely any democracy is best judged by those who are able (or unable) to participate in it? The opinions of expert outsiders seem of little relevance. That is an elite approach. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Art 25) describes democratic rights this way: the right and the opportunity … to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives'. That refers to the right of citizens in a particular body politic. Gauged against this principle, the method of EIP project, relying on outside expert opinion, seems poorly conceived.
Yet an elitist approach is consistent with the model promoted by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government funded body launched by the Reagan administration in the second cold war of early 1980s. The NED (usually through intermediaries) funds a range of organisations in attempts to shape democracies or civil societies', to make them more friendly to or compliant with Washington. One of the founders and first President of the NED, Allen Weinstein, said in 1991, A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA' (Lefebvre 2013). Indeed, as with the psy-ops' of the CIA, the NED has been implicated in coups and destabilisation plans in a range of Latin American countries, including Nicaragua, Haiti and Venezuela (Kurlantzick 2004; Lefebvre 2013; Golinger 2006). The NED idea of democracy has been described as [a] top-down, elite, constrained (or "polyarchal") democracy … [where] the elites get to decide the candidates or questions suitable to go before the people' (Scipes 2014). French researcher Olivier Guilmain (in Teil 2011) says that the NED finances opposition parties in numerous countries and provides special aid to exiles and opponents of regimes targeted by the US State Department'.
Eva Golinger, whose book The Chavez Code exposed the Bush administration's involvement in the failed coup of 2002, has documented the NED's contribution to destabilisation and coups in Venezuela. In the last year or so the NED has spent many millions on Venezuelan opposition groups including funding for their political campaigns in 2013 and for the current anti-government protests in 2014' (Golinger 2014). She calls this the same old dirty tactics' of a coup in motion (Golinger 2015).
It might not come as a surprise then, to find that there are indeed NED and other US Government links to Sydney's Electoral Integrity Project. Chief investigator Professor Pippa Norris proudly lists her work as a consultant for the NED, and at least six of the project partners (without whose support the EIP would not have been possible') have direct US government funding. The EIP method of relying on expert opinion seems quite consistent with that elite, constrained … democracy'.
Worse, the EIP relies on anonymous opinion. A member of the project clarified this to me in these words: we have to maintain the confidentiality of our sources as part of our legal obligations … revealing the names of the experts could potentially risk putting them in harm's way in several states which do not respect human rights and which suppress critics'. Be that as it may, the opinions of anonymous people provide no way to assess the legitimacy of an independent state. It contradicts the principles of openness and transparency, values the EIP claims to both assess and promote. Who are these anonymous experts? Do they include opposition figures in the countries whose governments are under attack? Do they include the Washington insiders who advise on destabilisation and coup plans? There is little indication the EIP takes seriously the well-established principle of avoiding conflicts of interest.
It is also alarming that the EIP, as an Australian Government (ARC) funded academic project, whose subtitle (Why Elections fail and what we can do about it') suggests a measures of praxis, shares the Washington phrase failed elections [which] raised major red flags', mentioning several states, including Syria. It is well known that a major military intervention in Syria was narrowly averted in September 2013, after false claims that the Syrian Government had used chemical weapons against children (for evidence of the falsity of these claims see: Hersh 2013 & 2014; Lloyd and Postol 2014; ISTEAMS 2013). Does the EIP seek to associate itself with red flag' military interventions, if countries fail to meet its dubious criteria?
The project rated Syria's 2014 presidential elections near the bottom of its chart (125 of 127), on the basis of its anonymous expert opinions (Norris et al 2015: 11). The only rationale for this can be seen in a brief note which observes the election was deeply flawed because some areas of the country were not under government control, so polling did not take place in the regions where insurgents were strongest', and the fact that National Coalition - the main western backed opposition group' boycotted the election (Norris et al 2015: 27). While these are correct statements, they do not tell the whole story. Conflict in other countries did not seem to bother the EIP or its experts quite so much when they ranked the Ukraine election at 78 of 127 (Norris et al 2015: 10). Yet the election monitoring group International IDEA (2015), an EIP partner, puts participation rates in the Ukraine's 2014 presidential election at 50%, while in the Syria's 2014 presidential election it was 73%. Clearly the US foreign policy factor is at play. Washington arms the opposition' in Syria and the government in Ukraine. Similarly the NED has directly funded the Syrian opposition (NED 2006; Teil 2011; IRI 2015) while urging military support for the Ukraine government (Sputnik 2014; see also Parry 2014).
Finally we might observe that Israel's 2013 elections were duly reviewed by the EIP, leading to a very healthy 17/127 ranking (Norris et al 2015: 8). Apparently being a racial state, with several million effectively stateless Palestinian people, held in military-controlled territories and with virtually no civil or political rights, has little impact on the EIP assessment. Yet this is consistent with what the Washington-Tel Aviv axis has long told us about Israel as the only democracy in the region' (e.g. Goldman 2015, etc). The double standards are breath-taking. With the Electoral Integrity Project's US links and its elitist assumptions about democracy it seems the project has little sense of conflict of interest, let alone appropriate research method.
-----------
Sources
Anderson, Tim (2010) Hegemony, big money and academic independence', Australian Universities Review, Vol 53, No 2
Dutka, Z.C. (2014) Polls Reveal Wider Concerns of Venezuelan Public', Venezuelanalysis, 11 May, online:http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/10679
Freedom House (2015) Freedom in the World 2015', interactive map, online:https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-...QSxLY6bXT9
Goldman, Lisa (2015) Bibi Bother: Netanyahu's Strategy in Washington', Foreign Affairs, 1 March, online:http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1...ibi-bother
Golinger, Eva (2006) The Chavez Code: Cracking U.S. Intervention in Venezuela, Olive Branch Press, Northampton, MA
Golinger, Eva (2015) Venezuela: a Coup in Real Time', Counter Punch, 2 February, online:http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/02/v...real-time/
Hersh, Seymour M. (2013) Whose Sarin?', London Review of Books, Vol. 35 No. 24, 19 December, 9-12, online: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-h...hose-sarin
Hersh, Seymour M. (2014) The Red Line and the Rat Line', London Review of Books, 36:8, 17 April, pp 21-24, online: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-h...e-rat-line
International IDEA (2015) Voter Turnout', data by country, online: http://www.idea.int/vt/
IRI (2015) Syria, online: http://www.iri.org/country/syria
ISTEAMS (2013) Independent Investigation of Syria Chemical Attack Videos and Child Abductions', 15 September, online:http://www.globalresearch.ca/STUDY_THE_V...ERSION.pdf
Kurlantzick, Joshua (2004) The Coup Connection', Mother Jones, November, online:http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004...connection
Latinobarometro (2014)' La Imagen de los países y las democracias', informe (report):
http://www.latinobarometro.org/latNewsShow.jsp
Lefebvre, Stephan (2013) Analysis from National Endowment for Democracy Used in The Atlantic, with Significant Errors and Omissions', Center for Economic Policy and Research, 30 July, online:http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-...-omissions
Lloyd, Richard and Theodore A. Postol (2014) Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013', MIT, January 14, Washington DC, online:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...ink=relast
Martinez, Eugenio (2013) Venezuela's Election System Holds Up As A Model For The World', Forbes, 14 may, online: http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleader...the-world/
NED (2006) Syria funding, December, online: http://www.ned.org/publications/annual-r...of-2006-12
Norris, Pippa; Ferran Martínez and Max Grömping (2015) The year in Elections, 2014', Electoral Integrity Project (Why Elections fail and what we can do about it), online:https://sites.google.com/site/electorali...tions-2014
Parry, Robert (2014) New York Times on Syria and Ukraine: How Propaganda Works', Global Research, 3 December, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-york-ti...ks/5417724
Sputnik (2014) National Endowment for Democracy Urges US Military Support for Ukraine', 20 October, online: http://sputniknews.com/world/20141020/19...raine.html
Teil, Julian (2011) Justifying a "humanitarian war" against Syria. The sinister role of the NGOs', Global Research, 16 November, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/justifying-...ngos/27702]]> <![CDATA[Mission creep : CIA to be restructured to "cover entire universe": Director]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13789 Sat, 14 Mar 2015 15:18:40 +0000 Magda Hassan]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13789 [TR]
[TD="class: f-title"]

CIA to be restructured to "cover entire universe": Director

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="class: sj, width: 43%, align: left"]English.news.cn 2015-03-07 08:04:38[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
WASHINGTON, March 6 (Xinhua) -- The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is planning to create new units in a series of reorganizations, aiming to "cover the entire universe" amid modern threats and crises, CIA Director John Brennan said Friday.
Announcing the restructuring to the 67-years-old agency Friday, Brennan said the move comes after nine outside experts spent three months analyzing the agency's management structure, including what CIA deputy director David Cohen called "pain points", organizational areas where the CIA's bureaucracy does not work efficiently.
Briefing reporters at CIA headquarters earlier this week, Brennan said officers will be reassigned to 10 newly created " mission centers," a move to concentrate the agency's focus on specific challenges or geographic areas, such as weapons proliferation or Africa.
"I know there are seams right now, but what we've tried to do with these mission centers is cover the entire universe, regionally and functionally, and so something that's going on in the world falls into one of those buckets," he told reporters.
"I've never seen a time when we have been confronted with such an array of very challenging, complex and serious threats to our national security, and issues that we have to grapple with," he said.
The CIA chief also noted that he is establishing a new " Directorate of Digital Innovation" to lead the agency's efforts to track and take advantage of advances in cyber technology.
Brennan said the new digital directorate will have equal status within the agency with four other directorates which have existed for years.
"Our ability to carry out our responsibilities for human intelligence and national security responsibilities has become more challenging" in today's digital world, Brennan said. "And so what we need to do as an agency is make sure we're able to understand all of the aspects of that digital environment."
Founded in 1947, the CIA consists of four major directorates. Two - the Directorate of Science and Technology, which among other activities invents spy gadgets, and the Directorate of Support, which handles administrative and logistical tasks - will retain their names.
The Directorate of Intelligence will be renamed "Directorate of Analysis" to reflect its function as the home of agency experts who collate and analyze information from secret and open sources, Brennan said.
The National Clandestine Service, home of front-line agency undercover "case officers", who recruit spies and conduct covert actions, will be renamed Directorate of Operations, which is used to be called in the agency's history.
The 10 new "mission centers" will bring together CIA officers with expertise from across the agency's range of disciplines to concentrate on specific intelligence target areas or subject matter, said the CIA chief.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-0...045736.htm]]> [TR]
[TD="class: f-title"]

CIA to be restructured to "cover entire universe": Director

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="class: sj, width: 43%, align: left"]English.news.cn 2015-03-07 08:04:38[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
WASHINGTON, March 6 (Xinhua) -- The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is planning to create new units in a series of reorganizations, aiming to "cover the entire universe" amid modern threats and crises, CIA Director John Brennan said Friday.
Announcing the restructuring to the 67-years-old agency Friday, Brennan said the move comes after nine outside experts spent three months analyzing the agency's management structure, including what CIA deputy director David Cohen called "pain points", organizational areas where the CIA's bureaucracy does not work efficiently.
Briefing reporters at CIA headquarters earlier this week, Brennan said officers will be reassigned to 10 newly created " mission centers," a move to concentrate the agency's focus on specific challenges or geographic areas, such as weapons proliferation or Africa.
"I know there are seams right now, but what we've tried to do with these mission centers is cover the entire universe, regionally and functionally, and so something that's going on in the world falls into one of those buckets," he told reporters.
"I've never seen a time when we have been confronted with such an array of very challenging, complex and serious threats to our national security, and issues that we have to grapple with," he said.
The CIA chief also noted that he is establishing a new " Directorate of Digital Innovation" to lead the agency's efforts to track and take advantage of advances in cyber technology.
Brennan said the new digital directorate will have equal status within the agency with four other directorates which have existed for years.
"Our ability to carry out our responsibilities for human intelligence and national security responsibilities has become more challenging" in today's digital world, Brennan said. "And so what we need to do as an agency is make sure we're able to understand all of the aspects of that digital environment."
Founded in 1947, the CIA consists of four major directorates. Two - the Directorate of Science and Technology, which among other activities invents spy gadgets, and the Directorate of Support, which handles administrative and logistical tasks - will retain their names.
The Directorate of Intelligence will be renamed "Directorate of Analysis" to reflect its function as the home of agency experts who collate and analyze information from secret and open sources, Brennan said.
The National Clandestine Service, home of front-line agency undercover "case officers", who recruit spies and conduct covert actions, will be renamed Directorate of Operations, which is used to be called in the agency's history.
The 10 new "mission centers" will bring together CIA officers with expertise from across the agency's range of disciplines to concentrate on specific intelligence target areas or subject matter, said the CIA chief.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-0...045736.htm]]> <![CDATA[Revenue Watch]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13676 Mon, 16 Feb 2015 03:51:34 +0000 Magda Hassan]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13676 Corporate-fascist feel-good scam seeks to crush competition & establish global monopoly with army of NGOs.

Called "Revenue Watch" it claims to be "a non-profit policy institute and grantmaking organization that promotes the effective, transparent and accountable management of oil, gas and mineral resources for the public good. Through capacity building, technical assistance, research and advocacy, we help countries realize the development benefits of their natural resource wealth."
In reality, it is a Wall Street-London centric front of monolithic proportions that ensures foreign competitors, including nationalized companies, are prevented from exploiting in many cases their own national resources, so that they may be reserved instead for the West's corporate giants to plunder them. In many cases, this includes funding and organizing opposition groups to take to the streets and physically stop ongoing projects under humanitarian and environmental pretenses.



Video: Thomas Barnett building an army of "system administrators" (aka civil society) to expand into "peace spaces" while US global military conquers "battle spaces." Soros' Revenue Watch along with the National Endowment for Democracy have created just such an army of NGOs. And just as soldiers witlessly promote imperialism believing they are fighting for "freedom," these NGOs expand Wall Street and London's global hegemony, believing they are promoting "human rights."
A look at Revenue Watch's "partners" page reveals what at only a superficial glance appears to be well-intentioned, noble civil endeavors. However, upon closer examination, a different story is told.

Who's Partnered With Soros' Revenue Watch?

What the "partners" page represents is an interconnected, incestuous network leading each time back to George Soros' Open Society Network, the OCED, USAID, British DIFD, Australia Aid, and the UN Development Program, all of which are directly partnered with the largest banking, big oil, defense contractors, and consumer multinationals on earth.

The very first "partner" on Revenue Watch's list, Democratic Republic of Congo's Action Contre l'Impunité pour les Droits Humains (ACIDH), is entirely funded by George Soros' Open Society, OCED Watch, and the European Commission. Other organizations listed, such as "RAID" and Cee Bank Watch Network (itself a Revenue Watch partner), are in turn Soros, Ford Foundation, Sigrid Rausing Trust, Freedom House, Heinrich Boell Foundation, and European Commission-funded fronts.

The African Centre For Media Excellence fails to list who in fact funds them, but they do report that their "Reporting on Oil, Gas and Minerals" training courses are conducted in partnership with Penplusbytes (listed as OSIWA & OSISA respectively and a Revenue Watch partner itself) and Thomson Reuters Foundation (page 42) both of which are Soros-funded, while the latter is also funded by US State Department-funded BBC World Service. One can only wonder why corporate-financier interests would be involved in "training" locals on how to report about their own natural resources, to prevent exploitation, or help facilitate it?

Other partners include the Canadian and Australian government-funded Parliamentary Centre and the Soros-funded "Publish What You Pay," which polices governments of resource-rich nations on how much money they receive from multinational corporations and how they spend it.

Middle East & Asia: The British DFID, UNDP, Soros-funded TIRI, and World Bank-funded, Integrity Watch Afghanistan. The resource management-oriented Indonesian-based Institute for Essential Services Reform, created by USAID, the Asian Development Bank and Germany's KfW "development bank." The Iraqi Institute for Economic Reform (IIER) whose board of trustees includes Dr. Kamal Al-Basri formally of General Electric Capital, Barclays, and Lloyds Bank and Mustafa Al-Shawi a professor of Salford University, UK and a consultant for UN and World Bank projects, and who under a category titled "other activities" claims to be "doing business with World Bank."

The IIER also claims to have "good working relationships with several international ogranizations and NGOs including CIPE, IRI, USIP, and CATO Institute." Of course CIPE is funded by the US State Department, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which also funds the IRI (International Republican Institute), and USAID. The USIP (US Institute of Peace) is also a creation of the US government. In other words the IIER is seeking "economic reform" according to Wall Street and London's interests.

Africa: The African Conservation Foundation funded by British Airways, defense contractor Esri, Microsoft, and the "Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO). The Soros, Ford Foundation, DFID, Australian Aid, USAID, World Bank, Tides, European Commission-funded Agency for Cooperation and Research in Development. The Ford Foundation, EU, US & British government-funded " Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association."

The Improprieties.

While it is clear that despite the myriad of organizations listed within Revenue Watch's "partner" list, with pages of smiling brown children, giraffes, green meadows, and windmills, it all leads back to a handful of government and corporate-funded foundations, and this alone should warrant cautious scrutiny, a tangible impropriety can demonstratively be seen playing out where Soros and the cabal of corporate-financier elite he represents are fighting most desperately.
[Image: 1a.jpg]
Image: CIA's Otpor fist has made its way around the world from Serbia and across the "Arab Spring." It is now "punching" Chinese-Myanmar cooperative development, in particular the "Shwe Gas Project" with funding and support from NED, George Soros' Open Society, and the OCED.
….
Amongst the myriad of organizations listed on Revenue Watch's partnership list, is the Shwe Gas Movement. There are no smiling brown people to be found here, instead the clenched fist of the CIA's Otpor movement can be seen "punching" Chinese-Myanmar oil rigs and pipelines, as well as mobs waving Wall Street-London creation Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy flags in the streets of London.
We see photo galleries where the "Shwe Gas Movement" seems to be attempting to raise international awareness of the "impact" of a pipeline being built from Myanmar's southern coast all the way to the north where it continues on into China. Aside from muddy construction sites. trucks transporting pipe segments, and equipment photographed with a temple in the distant background with the caption "religious area disturbed by project equipment" nothing seems to be taking place that is any more or less extraordinary than one would find surrounding any large scale infrastructure project.
[Image: 1a1.jpg]
Image: Shwe Gas Movement's caption for this photograph reads, "Religious area disturbed by project [equipment]." One must wonder why the photographer picked this angle, when a closer view of the temple and how it was being "disturbed" would have been far more compelling.
….
Ironically, a visit to the website of notorious extraterritorial meddler and Neo-Con, corporate-financier chaired National Endowment for Democracy, reveals money allotted for just this sort of "activity" in Myanmar, still called by its British colonial nomenclature "Burma" by NED:
"To raise awareness, strengthen local net*works, and mobilize activists in resource extraction-affected areas of western Burma. The organization will train local field researchers in information documen*tation and community mobilization methods and raise awareness internationally and within the affected areas about the mili*tary's natural resource extraction projects."
We've already seen the US and British governments through an array of foreign-funded NGOs succeed in shutting down, at least temporarily, the Myitsone Dam. The dam, in addition to raising revenue for Myanmar by selling electricity to China, would have provided a percentage of electricity for Myanmar, along with flood control, river navigation, and irrigation for the surrounding region and eventually would end up under full ownership of the Myanmar government after fulfilling a 50 year contract with China who was financing and building it.

Clearly the Shwe Gas Movement is part of yet another army of foreign-funded NGOs working in tandem with similar organizations around the world, primarily in Africa and Southeast Asia, to prevent the development and exploitation of natural resources under the guise of human rights, environmental protection, and any other narrative imaginable that people may be likely to believe.

Could this really be for the sake of human rights and environmental considerations?

Enter the Multinationals.

Of course, Soros and NED funding projects to shut down the cooperative development of Myanmar with its immediate neighbor to the north, China, alone indicates corporate-financier interests at play. NED's entire board of directors is represented by certified warmongers, Neo-Conservatives who have signed their name to the Hitlerian "Project for a New American Century," declaring their intentions to establish a 100 year reign of American global hegemony, and a mixture of corporate lobbyists and consultants.

It is highly unlikely they stopped the Myitsone Dam or are attempting to stop the Shwe gas project to preserve Myanmar's pristine environment and to savor the smiles on the brown faces their corporations and war machine have been devouring since Marine Corps General Smedley Butler wrote "War is a Racket." Indeed, at the highest levels funding Revenue Watch's activities and the myriad of organizations it is partnered with is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
The OECD was born of the various "international institutions" created by the victors of World War II to rebuild the shattered world in the shape of their choosing. It was the precursor of the European Union and it still exists actively funding the destruction and criminal consolidation of sovereign nation-states today. Composed of an Anglo-American axis including the European Union, it is involved in the UN and the various "aid" organizations of respective member countries, USAID, DFID, and Austrian Aid for example.

OCED's member countries fund its activities, but that doesn't mean OECD is anymore under the reins of democratically elected representatives than the national policy of each member nation. It has been illustrated in depth that corporate-funded think-tanks are indeed the creators and purveyors of Western policy both domestic and foreign. Likewise, corporate-financier interests drive the OECD, the driver's seat being its Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC). In their own words they claim:
"BIAC has contributed much over the past fifty years towards the OECD's work promoting open and competitive markets, level playing fields and sound regulation and governance; fighting against protectionism; and enabling businesses to compete and succeed in an increasingly complex global marketplace."
Clearly OCED's association with Revenue Watch is much like a thief with a crowbar that is to use the organization to pry off the locks of protectionism and national sovereignty. Revenue Watch is creating the "level playing fields" and "fighting against protectionism" in nations that would otherwise develop their indigenous resources without giving OECD's member nations an opportunity to profit in markets that surely would not be considered "open and competitive" from their globalist points of view. Of course, the wealth of OCED's member nations was built not only on protectionism, but in many cases centuries of extraterritorial exploitation, military conquest, and sweeping global empires.

OCED through its OCED Watch organization counts the above mentioned Shwe Gas Movement as a member. Open Society is also counted as a US member, along with "International Rivers" who helped participate in the shutting down of the above mentioned Myitsone Dam. UK members include Amnesty International and the above mentioned RAIDS. As a Zimbabwe member, the above mentioned Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association is listed. Another Revenue Watch member, the Democratic Republic of the Congo's "Action Against Impunity for Human Rights" is listed on the OCED Watch site as a member. And the list goes on.

OCED's BIAC lists as its member organizations the various chambers of commerce in each member nation. This includes the Australian Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the Confederation of British Industries, and the United States Council for International Business (USCIB). These collectively are the largest corporate-financier interests on earth and many of the multinational corporations listed also constitute the boards of directors, trustees, and sponsors of the most influential think-tanks on earth.

These are the very think-tanks that engineered the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, and have laid plans to topple Syria and enact regime change in Iran. They are also the think-tanks that have articulated an agenda of realigning ASEAN against China to encircle and contain the rising superpower,militarily and economically.

When we see Wall Street's George Soros in tandem with the UN and OCED funding NGOs trying to stop Chinese-Myanmar pipelines and dams that benefits both nations, it is clearly being done as part of implementing these documented plans to balk China's rise and prevent the development of nations in the region. It is not that Soros and the OCED want to preserve Myanmar's resources for the people of Myanmar, it is that they want those resources, the wealth and power they represent for themselves while denying any nation the ability to rise and possibly compete with the Wall Street London international order.
[Image: 1a2.jpg]
Image: From SSI's 2006 "String of Pearls" report detailing a strategy of containment for China. The blue arrow represents China's logistical life-line and the nation's it passes. It also represents the target of Wall Street and London regime change efforts, destabilization, and meddling NGOs seeking to cut it. ….
With OCED's BIAC corporate-sponsors including DuPont, ExxonMobil, GlaxoSmithKline, Nestle, Shell, Unilever and others, behind the same think-tanks that destabilized and carried out an armed proxy NATO invasion of Libya, ousting Chinese and Russian interests and rushing in with Western contracts, it is clear what they intend to do in other regions of the world where they direct their feigned humanitarian concerns. In Libya, we even saw the installation of a Petroleum Institute chairman, Abdurrahim el-Keib, as "prime minster." In Uganda, British firms under the cover of fake environmentalism had 20,000 people forcibly evicted from their property to "plant trees" and cash in on the carbon trading pyramid scheme.
Indeed, Revenue Watch is nothing more than a feel-good fraud drawing in countless well-intentioned people from around the world, some of them risking their lives for what is essentially the construction of a 21st century corporate-financier ruled global empire. It is an empire where everyone will lose except those at the very top. And despite Soros' assurances that he is a left-wing liberal and the endless slide shows of smiling Africans playing on his websites, he is indeed amongst one of the most vicious, persistent corporate-fascist facilitators alive.
Ready to Put Down that Pepsi?
While the scale of Revenue Watch and the Soros-OCED-corporate-fascist nexus driving it seems monolithic and indomitable, tracing back to the source of their power we find individual consumers like you and me. By identifying the corporate-financier interests driving this, listed conveniently by the USCIB on their membership directory and in the annual reports of think-tanks across the Western world, we can then begin boycotting and replacing them with local solutions.
While it may seem like doing something as small as not buying Coke or Pepsi is an act of futility, it is exactly everyone buying one or two products a day from these giant, global spanning multinationals that have granted them this unwarranted influence in the first place. In a world where so much is out of our reach and beyond our control, reading this article, being outraged, and immediately doing something about it is most certainly not.
https://www.popularresistance.org/warning-find-out-who-is-behind-civil-society-groups/]]> Corporate-fascist feel-good scam seeks to crush competition & establish global monopoly with army of NGOs.

Called "Revenue Watch" it claims to be "a non-profit policy institute and grantmaking organization that promotes the effective, transparent and accountable management of oil, gas and mineral resources for the public good. Through capacity building, technical assistance, research and advocacy, we help countries realize the development benefits of their natural resource wealth."
In reality, it is a Wall Street-London centric front of monolithic proportions that ensures foreign competitors, including nationalized companies, are prevented from exploiting in many cases their own national resources, so that they may be reserved instead for the West's corporate giants to plunder them. In many cases, this includes funding and organizing opposition groups to take to the streets and physically stop ongoing projects under humanitarian and environmental pretenses.



Video: Thomas Barnett building an army of "system administrators" (aka civil society) to expand into "peace spaces" while US global military conquers "battle spaces." Soros' Revenue Watch along with the National Endowment for Democracy have created just such an army of NGOs. And just as soldiers witlessly promote imperialism believing they are fighting for "freedom," these NGOs expand Wall Street and London's global hegemony, believing they are promoting "human rights."
A look at Revenue Watch's "partners" page reveals what at only a superficial glance appears to be well-intentioned, noble civil endeavors. However, upon closer examination, a different story is told.

Who's Partnered With Soros' Revenue Watch?

What the "partners" page represents is an interconnected, incestuous network leading each time back to George Soros' Open Society Network, the OCED, USAID, British DIFD, Australia Aid, and the UN Development Program, all of which are directly partnered with the largest banking, big oil, defense contractors, and consumer multinationals on earth.

The very first "partner" on Revenue Watch's list, Democratic Republic of Congo's Action Contre l'Impunité pour les Droits Humains (ACIDH), is entirely funded by George Soros' Open Society, OCED Watch, and the European Commission. Other organizations listed, such as "RAID" and Cee Bank Watch Network (itself a Revenue Watch partner), are in turn Soros, Ford Foundation, Sigrid Rausing Trust, Freedom House, Heinrich Boell Foundation, and European Commission-funded fronts.

The African Centre For Media Excellence fails to list who in fact funds them, but they do report that their "Reporting on Oil, Gas and Minerals" training courses are conducted in partnership with Penplusbytes (listed as OSIWA & OSISA respectively and a Revenue Watch partner itself) and Thomson Reuters Foundation (page 42) both of which are Soros-funded, while the latter is also funded by US State Department-funded BBC World Service. One can only wonder why corporate-financier interests would be involved in "training" locals on how to report about their own natural resources, to prevent exploitation, or help facilitate it?

Other partners include the Canadian and Australian government-funded Parliamentary Centre and the Soros-funded "Publish What You Pay," which polices governments of resource-rich nations on how much money they receive from multinational corporations and how they spend it.

Middle East & Asia: The British DFID, UNDP, Soros-funded TIRI, and World Bank-funded, Integrity Watch Afghanistan. The resource management-oriented Indonesian-based Institute for Essential Services Reform, created by USAID, the Asian Development Bank and Germany's KfW "development bank." The Iraqi Institute for Economic Reform (IIER) whose board of trustees includes Dr. Kamal Al-Basri formally of General Electric Capital, Barclays, and Lloyds Bank and Mustafa Al-Shawi a professor of Salford University, UK and a consultant for UN and World Bank projects, and who under a category titled "other activities" claims to be "doing business with World Bank."

The IIER also claims to have "good working relationships with several international ogranizations and NGOs including CIPE, IRI, USIP, and CATO Institute." Of course CIPE is funded by the US State Department, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which also funds the IRI (International Republican Institute), and USAID. The USIP (US Institute of Peace) is also a creation of the US government. In other words the IIER is seeking "economic reform" according to Wall Street and London's interests.

Africa: The African Conservation Foundation funded by British Airways, defense contractor Esri, Microsoft, and the "Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO). The Soros, Ford Foundation, DFID, Australian Aid, USAID, World Bank, Tides, European Commission-funded Agency for Cooperation and Research in Development. The Ford Foundation, EU, US & British government-funded " Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association."

The Improprieties.

While it is clear that despite the myriad of organizations listed within Revenue Watch's "partner" list, with pages of smiling brown children, giraffes, green meadows, and windmills, it all leads back to a handful of government and corporate-funded foundations, and this alone should warrant cautious scrutiny, a tangible impropriety can demonstratively be seen playing out where Soros and the cabal of corporate-financier elite he represents are fighting most desperately.
[Image: 1a.jpg]
Image: CIA's Otpor fist has made its way around the world from Serbia and across the "Arab Spring." It is now "punching" Chinese-Myanmar cooperative development, in particular the "Shwe Gas Project" with funding and support from NED, George Soros' Open Society, and the OCED.
….
Amongst the myriad of organizations listed on Revenue Watch's partnership list, is the Shwe Gas Movement. There are no smiling brown people to be found here, instead the clenched fist of the CIA's Otpor movement can be seen "punching" Chinese-Myanmar oil rigs and pipelines, as well as mobs waving Wall Street-London creation Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy flags in the streets of London.
We see photo galleries where the "Shwe Gas Movement" seems to be attempting to raise international awareness of the "impact" of a pipeline being built from Myanmar's southern coast all the way to the north where it continues on into China. Aside from muddy construction sites. trucks transporting pipe segments, and equipment photographed with a temple in the distant background with the caption "religious area disturbed by project equipment" nothing seems to be taking place that is any more or less extraordinary than one would find surrounding any large scale infrastructure project.
[Image: 1a1.jpg]
Image: Shwe Gas Movement's caption for this photograph reads, "Religious area disturbed by project [equipment]." One must wonder why the photographer picked this angle, when a closer view of the temple and how it was being "disturbed" would have been far more compelling.
….
Ironically, a visit to the website of notorious extraterritorial meddler and Neo-Con, corporate-financier chaired National Endowment for Democracy, reveals money allotted for just this sort of "activity" in Myanmar, still called by its British colonial nomenclature "Burma" by NED:
"To raise awareness, strengthen local net*works, and mobilize activists in resource extraction-affected areas of western Burma. The organization will train local field researchers in information documen*tation and community mobilization methods and raise awareness internationally and within the affected areas about the mili*tary's natural resource extraction projects."
We've already seen the US and British governments through an array of foreign-funded NGOs succeed in shutting down, at least temporarily, the Myitsone Dam. The dam, in addition to raising revenue for Myanmar by selling electricity to China, would have provided a percentage of electricity for Myanmar, along with flood control, river navigation, and irrigation for the surrounding region and eventually would end up under full ownership of the Myanmar government after fulfilling a 50 year contract with China who was financing and building it.

Clearly the Shwe Gas Movement is part of yet another army of foreign-funded NGOs working in tandem with similar organizations around the world, primarily in Africa and Southeast Asia, to prevent the development and exploitation of natural resources under the guise of human rights, environmental protection, and any other narrative imaginable that people may be likely to believe.

Could this really be for the sake of human rights and environmental considerations?

Enter the Multinationals.

Of course, Soros and NED funding projects to shut down the cooperative development of Myanmar with its immediate neighbor to the north, China, alone indicates corporate-financier interests at play. NED's entire board of directors is represented by certified warmongers, Neo-Conservatives who have signed their name to the Hitlerian "Project for a New American Century," declaring their intentions to establish a 100 year reign of American global hegemony, and a mixture of corporate lobbyists and consultants.

It is highly unlikely they stopped the Myitsone Dam or are attempting to stop the Shwe gas project to preserve Myanmar's pristine environment and to savor the smiles on the brown faces their corporations and war machine have been devouring since Marine Corps General Smedley Butler wrote "War is a Racket." Indeed, at the highest levels funding Revenue Watch's activities and the myriad of organizations it is partnered with is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
The OECD was born of the various "international institutions" created by the victors of World War II to rebuild the shattered world in the shape of their choosing. It was the precursor of the European Union and it still exists actively funding the destruction and criminal consolidation of sovereign nation-states today. Composed of an Anglo-American axis including the European Union, it is involved in the UN and the various "aid" organizations of respective member countries, USAID, DFID, and Austrian Aid for example.

OCED's member countries fund its activities, but that doesn't mean OECD is anymore under the reins of democratically elected representatives than the national policy of each member nation. It has been illustrated in depth that corporate-funded think-tanks are indeed the creators and purveyors of Western policy both domestic and foreign. Likewise, corporate-financier interests drive the OECD, the driver's seat being its Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC). In their own words they claim:
"BIAC has contributed much over the past fifty years towards the OECD's work promoting open and competitive markets, level playing fields and sound regulation and governance; fighting against protectionism; and enabling businesses to compete and succeed in an increasingly complex global marketplace."
Clearly OCED's association with Revenue Watch is much like a thief with a crowbar that is to use the organization to pry off the locks of protectionism and national sovereignty. Revenue Watch is creating the "level playing fields" and "fighting against protectionism" in nations that would otherwise develop their indigenous resources without giving OECD's member nations an opportunity to profit in markets that surely would not be considered "open and competitive" from their globalist points of view. Of course, the wealth of OCED's member nations was built not only on protectionism, but in many cases centuries of extraterritorial exploitation, military conquest, and sweeping global empires.

OCED through its OCED Watch organization counts the above mentioned Shwe Gas Movement as a member. Open Society is also counted as a US member, along with "International Rivers" who helped participate in the shutting down of the above mentioned Myitsone Dam. UK members include Amnesty International and the above mentioned RAIDS. As a Zimbabwe member, the above mentioned Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association is listed. Another Revenue Watch member, the Democratic Republic of the Congo's "Action Against Impunity for Human Rights" is listed on the OCED Watch site as a member. And the list goes on.

OCED's BIAC lists as its member organizations the various chambers of commerce in each member nation. This includes the Australian Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the Confederation of British Industries, and the United States Council for International Business (USCIB). These collectively are the largest corporate-financier interests on earth and many of the multinational corporations listed also constitute the boards of directors, trustees, and sponsors of the most influential think-tanks on earth.

These are the very think-tanks that engineered the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, and have laid plans to topple Syria and enact regime change in Iran. They are also the think-tanks that have articulated an agenda of realigning ASEAN against China to encircle and contain the rising superpower,militarily and economically.

When we see Wall Street's George Soros in tandem with the UN and OCED funding NGOs trying to stop Chinese-Myanmar pipelines and dams that benefits both nations, it is clearly being done as part of implementing these documented plans to balk China's rise and prevent the development of nations in the region. It is not that Soros and the OCED want to preserve Myanmar's resources for the people of Myanmar, it is that they want those resources, the wealth and power they represent for themselves while denying any nation the ability to rise and possibly compete with the Wall Street London international order.
[Image: 1a2.jpg]
Image: From SSI's 2006 "String of Pearls" report detailing a strategy of containment for China. The blue arrow represents China's logistical life-line and the nation's it passes. It also represents the target of Wall Street and London regime change efforts, destabilization, and meddling NGOs seeking to cut it. ….
With OCED's BIAC corporate-sponsors including DuPont, ExxonMobil, GlaxoSmithKline, Nestle, Shell, Unilever and others, behind the same think-tanks that destabilized and carried out an armed proxy NATO invasion of Libya, ousting Chinese and Russian interests and rushing in with Western contracts, it is clear what they intend to do in other regions of the world where they direct their feigned humanitarian concerns. In Libya, we even saw the installation of a Petroleum Institute chairman, Abdurrahim el-Keib, as "prime minster." In Uganda, British firms under the cover of fake environmentalism had 20,000 people forcibly evicted from their property to "plant trees" and cash in on the carbon trading pyramid scheme.
Indeed, Revenue Watch is nothing more than a feel-good fraud drawing in countless well-intentioned people from around the world, some of them risking their lives for what is essentially the construction of a 21st century corporate-financier ruled global empire. It is an empire where everyone will lose except those at the very top. And despite Soros' assurances that he is a left-wing liberal and the endless slide shows of smiling Africans playing on his websites, he is indeed amongst one of the most vicious, persistent corporate-fascist facilitators alive.
Ready to Put Down that Pepsi?
While the scale of Revenue Watch and the Soros-OCED-corporate-fascist nexus driving it seems monolithic and indomitable, tracing back to the source of their power we find individual consumers like you and me. By identifying the corporate-financier interests driving this, listed conveniently by the USCIB on their membership directory and in the annual reports of think-tanks across the Western world, we can then begin boycotting and replacing them with local solutions.
While it may seem like doing something as small as not buying Coke or Pepsi is an act of futility, it is exactly everyone buying one or two products a day from these giant, global spanning multinationals that have granted them this unwarranted influence in the first place. In a world where so much is out of our reach and beyond our control, reading this article, being outraged, and immediately doing something about it is most certainly not.
https://www.popularresistance.org/warning-find-out-who-is-behind-civil-society-groups/]]> <![CDATA[Saudi man gets 1000 lashes for wanting freedom of speech]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13553 Tue, 13 Jan 2015 08:30:13 +0000 David Guyatt]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13553
Quote:Global outrage at Saudi Arabia as jailed blogger receives public flogging

Kingdom stays silent as protesters contrast its opposition to Paris attacks on free speech with its own attacks on free speech

 [Image: US-Secratery-of-State-Joh-012.jpg]
US secretary of state John Kerry attends a Gulf Cooperation Council meeting in Jeddah. Saudi Arabia is a strategic ally of the US and UK. Photograph: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

Saudi Arabia is remaining silent in the face of global outrage at the public flogging of the jailed blogger Raif Badawi, who received the first 50 of 1,000 lashes on Friday, part of his punishment for running a liberal website devoted to freedom of speech in the conservative kingdom.
Anger at the flogging carried out as the world watched the bloody denouement of the Charlie Hebdo and Jewish supermarket jihadi killings in Paris focused on a country that is a strategic ally, oil supplier and lucrative market for the US, Britain and other western countries but does not tolerate criticism at home.
Badawi was shown on a YouTube video being beaten in a square outside a mosque in Jeddah, watched by a crowd of several hundred who shouted "Allahu Akbar" (God is great) and clapped and whistled after the flogging ended. Badawi made no sound during the flogging and was able to walk back unaided afterwards.
"Raif was escorted from a bus and placed in the middle of the crowd, guarded by eight or nine officers," a witness told Amnesty International.
"He was handcuffed and shackled but his face was not covered. A security officer approached him from behind with a huge cane and started beating him.
"Raif raised his head towards the sky, closing his eyes and arching his back. He was silent, but you could tell from his face and his body that he was in real pain."
Badawi's wife, Ensaf Haidar, told the Guardian from Montreal on Sunday: "Many governments around the world have protested about my husband's case. I was optimistic until the last minute before the flogging. But the Saudi government is behaving like Daesh [a derogatory Arabic name for Islamic State or Isis]."
Saudi Arabia joined other Arab and Muslim countries in condemning the murder of 12 people at the Paris satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo but angry comments highlighted its double standard in meting out a cruel punishment to a man who was accused of insulting Islam.
One cartoon circulating on social media showed a man resembling Badawi being flogged alongside the words: "Saudi Arabia condemns the terrorist attack on freedom of expression in Paris …" Another image showed a pencil being flayed by whips.
One woman at Sunday's Paris solidarity rally carried a placard declaring: "I am Raif Badawi, the Saudi journalist who was flogged." Others protested at the presence of the Saudi foreign minister.
Badawi was sentenced last May to 10 years' imprisonment and 1,000 lashes 50 at a time over 20 weeks and fined 1m Saudi riyals (£175,000). He has been held since mid-2012, and his Free Saudi Liberals website, established to encourage debate on religious and political matters in Saudi Arabia, is closed.
He is expected to receive another 50 lashes this Friday.
Arabic Twitter users condemned Saudi Arabia for behaving like Isis part of the argument that the fundamental values promoted by the Saudi state do not differ from those that are carried to a brutal extreme by the jihadi group that controls parts of Syria and Iraq.
"Just a reminder," tweeted one Tunisian woman. "Those who criticise Isis, which beheads and flogs people, and lines up children to watch, are the ones who are making excuses for the flogging of a man in Saudi Arabia. They are all Isis."
Saudi Arabia is one of five Arab countries in the US-led coalition fighting Isis. It has arrested hundreds of people for alleged links to terrorism and imposed penalties on those travelling abroad to fight though it still wants the overthrow of the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad.
About 2,500 Saudis have fought with Isis.
The US, EU and others publicly urged Riyadh not to go ahead with the flogging. Britain's Foreign Office said: "The UK condemns the use of cruel and degrading punishment in all circumstances."
A spokesman said on Sunday that concerns about the case continued to be expressed "at all levels". There is no sign that the Saudis' western allies will take any punitive action to back up their protests.
"The Saudis have a policy for inside the country where they want to show that they are pious and protect the faith," said Ali al-Ahmed, of the Washington-based Institute for Gulf Affairs.
"Outside they project the opposite impression, that they are liberals and that it's ordinary people who are savage and conservative.
"That's why the west says: Yes, we need to protect the Saudi royals because the alternative is Osama bin Laden.'
"It's worked for the Saudis and it gives the west an excuse not to support any kind of change or reform."
Badawi's punishment is part of a wider campaign against domestic dissent. His lawyer, Waleed Abu al-Khair, was sentenced to 15 years in prison last July because of criticism of human rights abuses.
His case resumes on Monday, with the government reportedly seeking an even harsher sentence.
Fadhil al-Manasif is facing 14 years in prison on charges stemming from his assistance to journalists covering protests over the treatment of Shia Muslims in the Sunni-dominated country.
]]>
Quote:Global outrage at Saudi Arabia as jailed blogger receives public flogging

Kingdom stays silent as protesters contrast its opposition to Paris attacks on free speech with its own attacks on free speech

 [Image: US-Secratery-of-State-Joh-012.jpg]
US secretary of state John Kerry attends a Gulf Cooperation Council meeting in Jeddah. Saudi Arabia is a strategic ally of the US and UK. Photograph: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

Saudi Arabia is remaining silent in the face of global outrage at the public flogging of the jailed blogger Raif Badawi, who received the first 50 of 1,000 lashes on Friday, part of his punishment for running a liberal website devoted to freedom of speech in the conservative kingdom.
Anger at the flogging carried out as the world watched the bloody denouement of the Charlie Hebdo and Jewish supermarket jihadi killings in Paris focused on a country that is a strategic ally, oil supplier and lucrative market for the US, Britain and other western countries but does not tolerate criticism at home.
Badawi was shown on a YouTube video being beaten in a square outside a mosque in Jeddah, watched by a crowd of several hundred who shouted "Allahu Akbar" (God is great) and clapped and whistled after the flogging ended. Badawi made no sound during the flogging and was able to walk back unaided afterwards.
"Raif was escorted from a bus and placed in the middle of the crowd, guarded by eight or nine officers," a witness told Amnesty International.
"He was handcuffed and shackled but his face was not covered. A security officer approached him from behind with a huge cane and started beating him.
"Raif raised his head towards the sky, closing his eyes and arching his back. He was silent, but you could tell from his face and his body that he was in real pain."
Badawi's wife, Ensaf Haidar, told the Guardian from Montreal on Sunday: "Many governments around the world have protested about my husband's case. I was optimistic until the last minute before the flogging. But the Saudi government is behaving like Daesh [a derogatory Arabic name for Islamic State or Isis]."
Saudi Arabia joined other Arab and Muslim countries in condemning the murder of 12 people at the Paris satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo but angry comments highlighted its double standard in meting out a cruel punishment to a man who was accused of insulting Islam.
One cartoon circulating on social media showed a man resembling Badawi being flogged alongside the words: "Saudi Arabia condemns the terrorist attack on freedom of expression in Paris …" Another image showed a pencil being flayed by whips.
One woman at Sunday's Paris solidarity rally carried a placard declaring: "I am Raif Badawi, the Saudi journalist who was flogged." Others protested at the presence of the Saudi foreign minister.
Badawi was sentenced last May to 10 years' imprisonment and 1,000 lashes 50 at a time over 20 weeks and fined 1m Saudi riyals (£175,000). He has been held since mid-2012, and his Free Saudi Liberals website, established to encourage debate on religious and political matters in Saudi Arabia, is closed.
He is expected to receive another 50 lashes this Friday.
Arabic Twitter users condemned Saudi Arabia for behaving like Isis part of the argument that the fundamental values promoted by the Saudi state do not differ from those that are carried to a brutal extreme by the jihadi group that controls parts of Syria and Iraq.
"Just a reminder," tweeted one Tunisian woman. "Those who criticise Isis, which beheads and flogs people, and lines up children to watch, are the ones who are making excuses for the flogging of a man in Saudi Arabia. They are all Isis."
Saudi Arabia is one of five Arab countries in the US-led coalition fighting Isis. It has arrested hundreds of people for alleged links to terrorism and imposed penalties on those travelling abroad to fight though it still wants the overthrow of the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad.
About 2,500 Saudis have fought with Isis.
The US, EU and others publicly urged Riyadh not to go ahead with the flogging. Britain's Foreign Office said: "The UK condemns the use of cruel and degrading punishment in all circumstances."
A spokesman said on Sunday that concerns about the case continued to be expressed "at all levels". There is no sign that the Saudis' western allies will take any punitive action to back up their protests.
"The Saudis have a policy for inside the country where they want to show that they are pious and protect the faith," said Ali al-Ahmed, of the Washington-based Institute for Gulf Affairs.
"Outside they project the opposite impression, that they are liberals and that it's ordinary people who are savage and conservative.
"That's why the west says: Yes, we need to protect the Saudi royals because the alternative is Osama bin Laden.'
"It's worked for the Saudis and it gives the west an excuse not to support any kind of change or reform."
Badawi's punishment is part of a wider campaign against domestic dissent. His lawyer, Waleed Abu al-Khair, was sentenced to 15 years in prison last July because of criticism of human rights abuses.
His case resumes on Monday, with the government reportedly seeking an even harsher sentence.
Fadhil al-Manasif is facing 14 years in prison on charges stemming from his assistance to journalists covering protests over the treatment of Shia Muslims in the Sunni-dominated country.
]]> <![CDATA[Historic Speech in Damascas Sends Shockwaves Around the World]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13452 Tue, 16 Dec 2014 05:54:01 +0000 Lauren Johnson]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13452


Thesis:
Quote:
Duff explained that what is going on in Iraq and Syria with ISIS is not Terrorism, it is simply CRIME. That is, it is the works of an international Crime Cabal which has gotten control of the American Congress. Yes, this is a large Organized Crime problem that must be understood at its simple root cause.

Duff identified this Crime Cabal as Israeli and pointed out that this is Worldwide Crime on a scale never experienced before.


Full Article]]>


Thesis:
Quote:
Duff explained that what is going on in Iraq and Syria with ISIS is not Terrorism, it is simply CRIME. That is, it is the works of an international Crime Cabal which has gotten control of the American Congress. Yes, this is a large Organized Crime problem that must be understood at its simple root cause.

Duff identified this Crime Cabal as Israeli and pointed out that this is Worldwide Crime on a scale never experienced before.


Full Article]]> <![CDATA[The Eye of Horus?]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13449 Mon, 15 Dec 2014 19:23:39 +0000 Lauren Johnson]]> https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/showthread.php?tid=13449
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...z3LqkRcAGf

EDIT: correct link]]>
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...z3LqkRcAGf

EDIT: correct link]]>