Tag Archives: surveillance

pressing matters

pressing matters

Hannah Arendt (October 14, 1906–December 4, 1975) examined those peculiar parallel dimensions of loneliness as a profoundly personal anguish and an indispensable currency of our political life in her intellectual debut, the incisive and astonishingly timely 1951 classic The Origins of Totalitarianism (public library).

Arendt paints loneliness as “the common ground for terror” and explores its function as both the chief weapon and the chief damage of oppressive political regimes. Exactly twenty years before her piercing treatise on lying in politics, she writes:

Just as terror, even in its pre-total, merely tyrannical form ruins all relationships between men, so the self-compulsion of ideological thinking ruins all relationships with reality. The preparation has succeeded when people have lost contact with their fellow men* as well as the reality around them; for together with these contacts, [they] lose the capacity of both experience and thought. The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.

What perpetuates such tyrannical regimes, Arendt argues, is manipulation by isolation — something most effectively accomplished by the divisiveness of “us vs. them” narratives. She writes:

Terror can rule absolutely only over men who are isolated against each other… Therefore, one of the primary concerns of all tyrannical government is to bring this isolation about. Isolation may be the beginning of terror; it certainly is its most fertile ground; it always is its result. This isolation is, as it were, pretotalitarian; its hallmark is impotence insofar as power always comes from men acting together…; isolated men are powerless by definition.

Although isolation is not necessarily the same as loneliness, Arendt notes that loneliness can become both the seedbed and the perilous consequence of the isolation effected by tyrannical regimes:

In isolation, man remains in contact with the world as the human artifice; only when the most elementary form of human creativity, which is the capacity to add something of one’s own to the common world, is destroyed, isolation becomes altogether unbearable… Isolation then becomes loneliness.


While isolation concerns only the political realm of life, loneliness concerns human life as a whole. Totalitarian government, like all tyrannies, certainly could not exist without destroying the public realm of life, that is, without destroying, by isolating men, their political capacities. But totalitarian domination as a form of government is new in that it is not content with this isolation and destroys private life as well. It bases itself on loneliness, on the experience of not belonging to the world at all, which is among the most radical and desperate experiences of man.

This is why our insistence on belonging, community, and human connection is one of the greatest acts of courage and resistance in the face of oppression….”



Vice Joins Trend Of Killing News Comments Because Giving A Damn About Your Site’s Community Is Just Too Hard

from the i-love-you.-here’s-your-new-muzzle. dept

We’ve talked a lot about how the trend du jour in online media is to ditch the news comment section, then condescendingly pretend this is because the website just really values user relationships…. napalming your on-site community because you’re too lazy to weed the garden certainly is a slight against those users. And as we saw with NPR, these users are well aware of this fact, and are more than happy to spend their time on websites that actually value conversation and user interaction, instead of just paying empty lip service to the concept.








Maternal genealogy is unknown beyond my mother except for the presence of a Scots-Irish (Presbyterian) family in Western Pennsylvania. The paternal genealogy includes DNA that is apparently (but confusedly) of Normal or Saxon origin which moved from the Iberian peninsula after the last Ice Age up into Norman or perhaps Breton turf until, apparently as mercenaries or in followership, the Norman conquest of England. My father’s mother was of Prussian heritage. Ancestral history in my family from before the crossing of the English Channel is very clouded.   

More precise records extend from the summer of 1638 when two brothers caught a ride aboard a ship out of Hull, England to cross the Atlantic to come to England in search of religious freedom. “They were men of respectability, ‘of good estate,’ and could probably have no hopes of improving their worldly condition by emigration. They were lovers of liberty, and men of distinct and well-marked religious views. They were non-conformists. They had too sturdy an independence, as well as too strong a sense of duty, to abandon what they held as truth even in the midst of the bitterest persecution. For this reason they left their homes and sought in the wilds of America a resting place from oppression, a spot where they and their children might enjoy freedom to worship God. They were men of thought and character….”  In 1639, they settled on land north of Ipswich with which to raise and breed sheep and establish the first wool clothier’s trade. The ship’s cargo included “the first printing press, later to be set up in Cambridge, the only printing press in the country until 1685”.


That familial reference to the first printing press in colonial New England seems uncertain but is confirmed by other references and sources. 

“… The first printing press came to British North America two years after the founding of Harvard College. The press was brought by Reverend Joseph Glover, who, when deprived of his position in the Church of England, shipped his family, his possessions, and his printing press to the colonies. Glover also paid for the passage of the man in charge of running his press, Stephen Daye, a locksmith by profession. Daye was under financial contract to work in Glover’s home in Cambridge in order to repay the cost of passage for himself, his wife, and his household—a total of around £51. Rev. Glover, however, did not survive the passage to the New World. When Daye and the press arrived, his debt was transferred to Glover’s widow, Elizabeth, now owner of the printing press.

Daye set to work almost immediately along with his son Matthew, an apprentice printer, and perhaps more skilled than his father. Within the first year in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, they printed The Freeman’s Oath, a broadside, which is generally believed to be the first tract printed in British North America. This was completed around the same time as “an almanac made for New England by Mr. William Pierce.” 1 By virtue of exploiting a loophole in colonial legislation, Daye printed the first book in the New World, The Bay Psalm Book, in 1640. This book became extremely popular and influential throughout the colony for the remainder of the 17th century.  It was only three years later that the first Bible published in the New World was also published in Cambridge.

Elizabeth Glover (born Harris), as an unmarried woman, was a rarity in colonial New England. Especially unique was that she was not only an eligible woman of property but also the owner of the only printing press in the British colonies. Her attractiveness as a mate was clear to the President of Harvard, Henry Dunster. On June 21, 1641 they were married, transferring all of her property to his home on the now-named Dunster Street. Elizabeth died in 1643, and her land and property, including the printing press, was passed on to Dunster and subsequently to Harvard College. During the same year Matthew Daye replaced his father as official operator of the press after the elder Daye was briefly jailed for fraud.

As Harvard grew in size and reputation, it became a logical center of printing in the American colonies. Cambridge was the location of not just the first printing press, but also the second when in 1659 a press was sent to the colonies from the British firm “The Company for the Propagation of the Gospel Amongst the Heathen Natives of New England and parts Adjacent in America.” Matthew Daye’s successor Samuel Green was in charge of printing at this point, but the British firm also sent over the America’s first professional printer, Marmaduke Johnson, to assist Green. The new press was set up in Harvard Yard, in a building called the Indian College, to print Reverend John Eliot’s “Indian Bible.”

Marmaduke Johnson acquired his own press in England in 1665, and planned to bring it to Boston in order to establish his own business. However, Harvard wanted a replacement for Glover’s original press, having become fragile over the years, and the Harvard leadership successfully lobbied for a state law stating that no printing could be done outside of Cambridge. Forced into staying in Cambridge, Johnson instead, without any affiliation to Harvard, opened the first independent printing press in the colonies and went on to publish 20 books between 1665 and 1674…..”



Facsimile of the first and only issue of the English-American colonies’ first newspaper, published in Boston 1690.

Early American Newspapering

by James Breig

We are here at the end of the World, and Europe may

bee turned topsy turvy ere wee can hear a word of it.

-Virginia planter William Byrd, 1690

In seventeenth-century America, colonial governments had rather do without newspapers than brook their annoyance. In 1671, Governor William Berkeley of Virginia wrote: “I thank God, there are no free schools nor printing and I hope we shall not have, these hundred years, for learning has brought disobedience, and heresy, and sects into the world, and printing has divulged them, and libels against the best government. God keep us from both.” As the British government once told the governors of Massachusetts, “Great inconvenience may arise by the liberty of printing.”

Not until 1690 did the first English-American news sheet debut—Boston’s Publick Occurrences Both Forreign and Domestick, published by Benjamin Harris. The authorities, in “high Resentment” that Harris dared to report that English military forces had allied themselves with “miserable” savages, put him out of business four days later.

By the end of the eighteenth century, however, scores of homegrown broadsheets and tabloids satisfied the information appetites of Americans hungry for intelligence of the Old World, for news about the Revolution, and for the political polemics of the infant United States. The history of newspapering in that century digests the beginnings of much of what is served on newsstands in this one.

As the century began, the fledgling colonial press tested its wings. A bolder journalism opened on the eve of the Revolution. And, as the century closed with the birth of the United States, a rancorously partisan and rambunctious press emerged.

The eras can be traced in the history of the family of Benjamin Franklin—the preeminent journalist of his time. But it best begins with another Boston newspaperman, postmaster John Campbell. In 1704, Campbell served up The Boston News-Letter, the nation’s second paper. It was a publication the powers-that-be could stomach. The News-Letter lasted seventy-two years, succeeding in an increasingly competitive industry, supported by the growth of communication and of commerce.

Campbell’s fellow postmasters often became newspaper publishers, too; they had ready access to information to put on their pages. Through their offices came letters, government documents, and newspapers from Europe. Gazettes were also started by printers, who had paper, ink, and presses at hand. Franklin was a postmaster and a printer.


Eighteenth-century editors filled their columns with items lifted from other newspapers—”the exchanges,” as they are called still—and from letters, said Mitchell Stephens, a New York University journalism professor and the author of A History of News. European news, taken from newspapers that arrived in ports like New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston, got good play. The November 8, 1797, issue of the Pennsylvania Gazette, for example, carried this item from New York: “Yesterday arrived here the ship Mary. . . . By this arrival we are furnished with London Papers . . . from which the most important intelligence is extracted.” David Sloan, a University of Alabama journalism professor, lists the sources of stories as “European newspapers, primarily English ones; correspondence sent in by readers; other newspapers in the colonies; and individuals who would drop by the print shop and talk.”

Julie K. Williams, a history instructor at Alabama’s Samford University, said publishers had such altruistic motives as improving communication and educating the public, but profit was their primary purpose. Maurine Beasley, a University of Maryland journalism professor, puts it plainly. The purpose of newspapers was “to make money.”

Williams said, “Newspapers brought in ad revenue and circulation revenue.” That income supplemented receipts from books, government printing jobs, merchant invoices, forms, and other ephemera.

Making money is still what keeps newspapers in business, and that is but one similarity between eighteenth-century papers and the twenty-first’s. As Sloan said, “Newspapers are still printed with ink on paper.” But more than that, newspapers then and now “still have opinions and letters. There was a sense then that newspapers should publish both sides of an issue, even during the Revolution and factional periods.”

Williams ticks off the surface differences in the newspapers of the two centuries—there were no headlines and few illustrations then, for example—as well as cosmetic similarities. “You can look at an eighteenth-century newspaper and recognize the column layout and the general news-ads look of a paper today,” she said. “It is interesting that the ‘look’ is still basically there.

“But the biggest similarity is what news is. We decided in the eighteenth century that newspapers were about ‘occurrences,’ and basically we have stuck to that. I think ‘departments’ are clearly an idea in the eighteenth century. The colonial printer had a standing format that he followed religiously that involved dividing the news by type. These sections were often labeled ‘foreign reports’ and so on.”

To Carol Humphrey, an Oklahoma Baptist University journalism professor and secretary of the American Journalism Historians Association, “The primary legacy of the eighteenth century for modern journalism is the right to comment on political events. The modern-day editorial has its beginnings in that era.”

The DNA of modern newspapers is found in the eighteenth century, Stephens said. “The look is the same,” and “the sense of what news is, is basic to human beings.”

Most colonial newspapers were weeklies, had four pages, and printed most of their advertisements in back. With little space, printers kept many stories brief, encapsulating even significant information into “one short paragraph, even a sentence,” Sloan said.

Newspapers also contained “essays, poems and humorous material, some of which they wrote themselves, like Ben Franklin,” Beasley said. “Sometimes, items that had a sensational or religious aspect appeared, such as a report of a strange creature being sighted or some unusual event occurring attributed to ‘divine providence.’”

Readers wondered about the course of wars in Europe and were curious about happenings in other towns and colonies—especially events that could affect their lives. But they were as interested as readers of today in the ordinary events of the life of their times. When they got their newspaper, subscribers perused such advertisements and news as:

Run away . . . a small yellow Negro wench named Hannah, about 35 years of age, had on when she went away a green plain petticoat and sundry other clothes, but what sort I do not know.—from a 1767 issue of Williamsburg’s Virginia Gazette

For Sale—The spars, anchors, rigging, and hull, of a brig, sixty four feet keel, twenty four and a half feet beam, and ten feet hold.—from a 1782 issue of the Virginia Gazette and Weekly Advertiser

The noted High Bred Horse Old Mark Anthony, now in high perfection, and as vigorous as ever, stands at my stable this season in order to cover mares, at £3. the leap.—also from a 1782 issue of the Virginia Gazette and Weekly Advertiser

Last Friday, the fatal and ever memorable Day of the Martyrdom of King Charles the First, a most extraordinary Misfortune befell this Place, by the Destruction of our fine Capitol. . . . The Cupola was soon burnt, the two Bells that were in it were melted, and, together with the Clock, fell down, and were destroyed.—from a 1747 issue of the Pennsylvania Gazette, but datelined Williamsburg, Feb. 5.


When, as the century began, Campbell and his colleagues set up their forms, they entered a risky business. Printers were licensed by the government, and they could be unlicensed swiftly, and imprisoned. That happened to Benjamin Franklin’s older brother James, publisher of the New-England Courant.

James Franklin inspired his sibling’s interest in printing. “In 1717,” the younger Franklin wrote, “James returned from England with a press and letters to set up his business in Boston. . . . My father was impatient to have me bound to my brother.” The boy was at length “persuaded, and signed the indentures when I was yet but twelve years old.” But like the publisher of Publick Occurrences, James Franklin ran afoul of the authorities. “One of the pieces in our newspaper gave offense to the Assembly,” Benjamin Franklin said. His brother “was taken up, censur’d, and imprison’d for a month. . . . During my brother’s confinement . . . I had the management of the paper.”

When the government freed the older Franklin, it forbade him to print the Courant any longer. The brothers circumvented the order by putting Benjamin Franklin’s name on it.

John Peter Zenger, editor of the New-York Weekly Journal, was arrested in 1734 and charged with seditious libel for criticisms of Governor William Cosby. The facts were against Zenger, but a jury more sympathetic to free speech than to authority acquitted him. Franklin, who had moved to Philadelphia, where he founded Poor Richard’s Almanac and the Pennsylvania Gazette, endorsed the verdict in a couplet:

While free from Force the Press remains,

Virtue and Freedom cheer our Plains.

Typical for Franklin and his colleagues, the lines are lifted from a poem by Mathew Green, “The Spleen,” published in 1737.

As happy as editors were to see Zenger vindicated, they noticed that he had spent ten months in jail awaiting trial. His wife had carried on the Journal, but clearly a newspaperman’s livelihood and liberty depended on the forbearance of the government.

At mid-century, the press began to alter its stance and became more outspoken. In 1754, during the French and Indian War, Franklin published America’s first newspaper cartoon, a picture showing a snake cut into sections, each part representing a colony, with the caption: “Join or Die.”

Franklin became a wealthy publisher and editor. He linked print shops and post offices in a coastal chain, and spread newspapering up and down the seaboard. Newspapers founded under his aegis prospered and, as troubles with Great Britain mounted, became precisely the “great inconvenience” England feared.

Stephens said the purpose of newspapers “changed to the political and polemical after 1765—around the time of the Stamp Act-as tensions snowballed.” Sloan said, “During the Revolution, the main goal was to support the American cause.”


“Prior to the Revolution, newspapers existed primarily to inform people of what was going on in the rest of the world,” Humphrey said. “The Revolution changed the focus to events in the other colonies.”

Daily publication began in the 1780s, just as the new American republic emerged. There were about 100 newspapers by 1790, many of them were spirited, and some were great annoyances to men in high positions. It was a time of enormous press freedom, a freedom exercised frequently in behalf of the Federalist or Republican parties, which subsidized their own publications. Humphrey said, “Many newspapers in the 1790s were intended to accept a particular political party.” Two examples are the Gazette of the United States for the Hamiltonian Federalists; the National Gazette for the Jeffersonian Republicans. “Their editors believed that they should support their particular party in all that they did,” she noted, “so they wrote essays in support of their party and included editorial comments in the news pieces that either supported their party or attacked the opposition.”

This was the era of Philip Freneau, John Fenno, and James Callendar, sharp-penned scribes who used their journalistic skills to laud their friends and denigrate their enemies. This was the era when government officials and political figures—Alexander Hamilton and James Madison among them—adopted pseudonyms to promote their politics in the public prints anonymously.

Many of the founding fathers were enthusiastic about a free press. Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1787 that “were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” Samuel Adams said in 1768 that “there is nothing so fretting and vexatious, nothing so justly terrible to tyrants . . . as a free press.”

But newspaper partisanship had evolved from the Revolution. “Newspapers that were used to denouncing Tories and the King,” Stephens said, “slid easily into denouncing opposition parties, even the President of the United States.”

George Washington declared a lack of interest in newspapers before he was president, writing in 1786 that “my avocations are so numerous that I very rarely find time to look into Gazettes after they come to me.” But while in office, he sometimes was incensed at what he saw in print. In notes about a 1793 cabinet meeting, Secretary of State Jefferson recorded how the president went on in such “a high tone” about the paper of “that rascal” Freneau that the cabinet officers were momentarily stunned into silence.

Benjamin Franklin’s grandson and namesake, Benjamin Franklin Bache—also known as “Lightning Rod Junior”—edited the Aurora. Bache delighted in harassing President Washington, once labeling him “the source of all the misfortunes of our country” and declaring him “utterly incapable.”

When John Adams wrote “A Constitution or Form of Government for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts” in 1779, he included a guarantee of liberty of the press. But as president, Adams endorsed the Alien and Sedition Acts, aimed at muzzling the opposition by jailing editors who dared criticize the chief executive.

Sloan said Bache was “a really ardent, zealous partisan. He epitomizes the intensely partisan editor.” Bache was indicted under the Alien and Sedition Acts but died before his case came to trial. Adams’s successor, Jefferson, released imprisoned journalists and allowed the law to lapse.

Stephens said that the free—and free-wheeling—press of the federal period helped to create the United States: “It is hard to imagine the United States arriving when it did without a free press. It was a wild, unruly press, but democracy was a great experiment and an aggressive press was part of it.”

Much has changed in the centuries since Benjamin Harris set up his type. Among other things, the web press, the linotype, and, eventually, offset printing came to the business. The telegraph and news services supplanted the exchanges. The First Amendment, written originally to protect the press only from the federal Congress, was interpreted to apply to the governments of the states. Illustrations and photographs became as important as words. Journalism emerged as a diplomaed, white-collar profession. And the role of the press as a “great inconvenience” to government is a hallmark of democratic government.

“How,” asks Stephens, “can you run a country without a free press?”

Jim Breig, an Albany, New York, writer and weekly newspaper editor, contributed “Out, Damn’d Proverbs: Eighteenth-Century Axioms, Maxims, and Bywords” to the winter 2002-2003 journal.



In 1638, the first printing press arrived in Boston.

By 1700, Boston became the second largest publishing center of the English Empire. The Puritans were the first to write books for children, and to discuss the difficulties in communicating with them. At a time when other Americans were physically blazing trails through the forests, the Puritans efforts in areas of study were advancing the country intellectually.

The Bible stimulated their intellect by promoting discussions of literature. Greek classics, Cicero, Virgil, Terence and Ovid were taught, as well as some poetry and Latin verse. The Puritans also encouraged themselves to create their own poetry, always religious in content.

Anyway, three English diversions were banned in the Puritans’ New England colonies: drama, religious music and erotic poetry. The first and last of these because they led to immorality. Music in worship, instead, created a “dreamy” state which was not conducive in listening to God.

The first newspaper was issued in Boston in 1704.


[Ed.: Today, of course, there is a growth industry involving audio forms of meditation, the neuro-cognitive research done to examine the concept of spiritual perception, in essence a merger between neuroscience and New Age approaches.]


In 1754, four newspapers only were printed in New England, these were all published in Boston, and, usually, on a small sheet.; They were published weekly, and the average number of copies did not exceed six hundred from each press. No paper had then been issued in Connecticut, or New Hampshire. Some years before, one was printed for a short time in Rhode Island, but had been discontinued for want of encouragement. Vermont as a state did not exist, and the country which now composes it was then a wilderness. In 1775, a period of only twenty-one years, more copies of a newspaper were issued weekly from the village press at Worcester, Massachusetts, than were printed in all New England, in 1755; and one paper now published contains as much matter as did all the four published in Boston, in the last year mentioned.

At the beginning of 1775, there were five newspapers published in Boston, one at Salem, and one at Newburyport, making seven in Massachusetts. There was, at that time, one published at Portsmouth; and no other in New Hampshire. One was printed at Newport, and one at Providence, making two in Rhode Island. At New London there was one, at New Haven one, one at Hartford and one in Norwich; in all four I Connecticut;and fourteen in New England. In the province of New York, four papers were then published; three in the city and one in Albany. In Pennsylvania there were, on the first of January, 1775, six; three in English and one in German, in Philadelphia, one in German, at Germantown; and one in English and German, at Lancaster. Before the end of January, 1775, three newspapers, in English, were added to the number from the presses I Philadelphia, making nine in Pennsylvania. In Maryland, two; one at Annapolis, and one at Baltimore. In Virginia, there were but two, and both of these at Williamsburg. One was printed at Wilmington, and one in Newbern, in North Carolina; three at Charleston, South Carolina; and one at Savannah, in Georgia. Making thirty-seen newspapers in all the British colonies, which are now comprised in the United States. To these may be added one at Halifax, in Nova Scotia; and one in Canada, at Quebec.

In 1800, there were at least one hundred and fifty publications of this kind printed in the United States of America, and since that time, the number has increased to three hundred and sixty. Those published before 1775 were weekly papers. Soon after the close of the Revolutionary war, daily papers were printed at Philadelphia, New York, &c., and there are now, 1810, more than twenty published, daily, in the United States.

It was common for printers of newspapers to subjoin to their titles ‘Containing the freshest Advices both Foreign and Domestick;’ but gazettes and journals are now chiefly filled with political essays. News do not appear to be always the first object of editors, and, of course, ‘containing the freshest advices,’ &c., is too often out of the question.

For many years after the establishment of newspapers on this continent, very few advertisements appeared in them. This was the case with those that were early printed in Europe. In the first newspapers, advertisements were not separated by lines from the news, &c., and were not even begun with a two line letter; when two line letters were introduced, it was some time before one advertisement was separated from another by a line, or rule as it is termed by printers. After it became usual to separate advertisements, some printers used lines of metal rules; others lines of flowers irregularly placed. I have seen in some New York papers, great primer flowers between advertisements. At length, it became customary to ‘set off advertisements,’ and from using types not larger than those with which the news were printed, types of the size of French canon have often been used for names, especially of those who advertised English goods.

In the troublesome times, occasioned by the stamp act in 1765, some of the more opulent and cautious printers, when the act was to take place, put their papers in mourning, and, for a few weeks, omitted to publish them; others not so timid, but doubtful of the consequence of publishing newspapers without stamps, omitted the titles, or altered them, as an evasion; for instance the Pennsylvania Gazette, and some other papers, were headed ‘Remarkable Occurrences, &c.’ -other printers, particularly those in Boston, continued their papers without any alteration in title or imprint.

From the foregoing it appears that, from the time when the first public journal was published in the country, viz. in April, 1704, to April 1775, comprising a period of seventy-one years, seventy-eight different newspapers were printed in the British American continental colonies; that during this period, thirty-nine, exactly one-half of that number, had been, occasionally, discontinued; and that thirty-nine continued to be issued by the several establishments at the commencement of the revolution. The papers published in the West Indies are not included in this computation.

In the course of thirty-five years, newspaper establishments were, as previously remarked, multiplied in a surprising degree; insomuch, that the number of those printed in the United States in June, 1810, amounted to upwards of three hundred and sixty.

A large proportion of the public papers at that date were established, and supported, by the two great contending political parties, into which the people of these states are usually divided; and whose numbers produce an equipollence; consequently, a great augmentation of vehicles for carrying on the political warfare have been found necessary.

I cannot conclude what I have written on the subject of publike journals, better than by extracting the following pertinent observations on newspapers, from the Rev. Dr. Miller’s Retrospect of the Eighteenth Century.

‘It is worthy of remark that newspapers have almost entirely changed their form and character within the period under review* (*the eighteenth century) For a long time after they were first adopted as a medium of communication to the public, they were confined, in general, to the mere statement of facts. But they have gradually assumed an office more extensive, and risen to a more important station in society. They have become vehicles of discussion, in which the principles of government, the interests of nations, the spirit and tendency of public measures, and the public and private characters of individuals, are all arraigned, tried, and decided. Instead, therefore, of being considered now, as they once were, of small moment in society, they have become immense oral and political engines, closely connected with the welfare of the state, and deeply involving both its peace and prosperity.

‘Newspapers have also become important in a literary view. There are few of them, within the last twenty years, which have not added to their political details some curious and useful information, on the various subjects of literature, science, and art. They have thus become the means of conveying, to every class in society, innumerable scraps of knowledge, which have at once increased the public intelligence, and extended the taste for perusing periodical publications. The advertisements, moreover, which they daily contain, respecting new books, projects, inventions, discoveries and improvements, are well calculated to enlarge and enlighten the public mind, and are worth of being enumerated among the many methods of awakening and maintaining the popular attention, with which more modern times, beyond all preceeding example, abound. . . . “

Index to This Section:

Would there have been an American Revolution Without Newspapers and Mail? The Role of Communications in the American Revolution 

Getting the Word Out: Franklin’s Communications Revolutions

The Dangerous Lives of Printers:

The Evolution of Freedom of the Press

Newspapers in America Before the Era of the Revolution

Newspapers in Revolutionary-Era America and the Problems of Patriot and Loyalist Printers

A Patriot Printer and His “Forge of Sedition”: 

The Story of Isaiah Thomas

The Role of Newspapers in the Revolution:

Isaiah Thomas’s The History of Printing in America

Not Just the News: 

A War of Letters, Pamphlets, Broadsides, and Sermons




“But I thank God, there are no free schools nor printing, and I hope we shall not have these hundred years, for learning has brought disobedience, and heresy, and sects into the world, and printing has divulged them, and libels against the best government. God keep us from both!” 

Governor Sir William Berkeley, 1671


The Germination of a Free Press: A Dissident Print Culture and the Stamp Act in Colonial Virginia


Roger P. Mellen


42 pp.






“The editor objected to the use of Native auxiliaries in the invation of Canada during King William’s War after he heard reports of them torturing and killing captured French troops.”

“… The first newspaper ever printed in this country met the same fate dealt the first gesture towards press censorship and the first attempt to set up a commercial printing shop: “Publick Occurrances both Foreign and Domestick,” appeared on September 26, 1690, and was immediately forbidden from the Colonies. The Governor and council gave expression to “high resentment and disallowance” to this paper printed by Richard Pierce for Benjamin Harris of Boston, and forbade anyone “for the future to set forth anything in print without license first obtained.”




“… The most intriguing objects found in the Harvard Yard excavations were pieces of lead printing type dating back to the 17th century. At first glance, these lead alloy bars may not impress, but they are small pieces of an important story. Each bears the mold of a single letter. When arranged in rows, coated with thick ink, and pressed onto paper, they created the first books printed in North America. The fonts, or particular shapes, of some of these letters have been matched to surviving 17th-century products of Harvard’s early press…..”




“… Ezekiel and his followers pooled their money to organise their New England passage. They left Rowley in the summer of 1638 and travelled down into Hull where they joined the ship John of London, lying in the Old Harbour on the River Hull. After sailing out of the Humber, their ship called into London en route and there picked up the Reverend Joseph Glover, a wealthy nonconformist minister, who brought with him Stephen Daye, a printer, and also what is believed to be North America’s first printing press. Glover is thought to have first visited New England earlier in the 1630s and supported the foundation of Harvard College – which eventually became Harvard University, the oldest institute of higher education in the United States.

Unfortunately, on the long and tortuous journey across the Atlantic, the Reverend Glover died before the vessel reached Salem Bay, Massachusetts in the December of 1638. The migrants probably spent a long first winter in Salem but in spring 1639 Ezekiel Rogers and his followers moved on to land some six miles outside of Ipswich, Massachusetts. House lots and properties were laid out along the township’s brook, allowing each family access to fresh water. Here the new arrivals built many houses and, bringing spinning and weaving skills with them from the East Riding of Yorkshire, they were amongst the first to establish a clothing industry in New England. They called their little township, Rowley after their East Riding village….

Elizabeth Glover, continued with her late husband’s mission and supervised Daye in the setting up of the Press in Cambridge, Massachusetts. In January 1639, the Freeman’s Oath was the first piece printed. The following year, 1640, the press produced The Bay Psalm Book, the first book printed in the English colonies. This may also have been the first book to have been written in North America and is an important part of the history of print; it seems that only five original copies still exist.

The small town of Rowley prospered and Ezekiel Rogers bequeathed his library to Harvard when he died in 1660 and other benefactions from him also eventually went to this learned institution. Early settlers in Rowley played an important part in the establishment of this new country. Elizabeth Glover married Henry Dunster, Harvard’s First President, who had taken interest in the Press. Stephen Daye died in 1668. His son Matthew became an accomplished printer and indeed may have actually done much of the printing with that first press. Printing and publishing in the United States has certainly come a long way since Stephen Daye first sailed with the Rowley settlers back in the summer of 1638.”

Robb Robinson, December 2008



This past Christmas weekend has been an opportunity for long-range thinking, planning, learning, observing and more planning. Numerous things have been poking me in my ribs, tapping me on my collar-bone, and crackling synaptically inside my skull.                               

We are advised that rumination is unhealthy and should be stopped. 

We are told to return to the source of our creative fire. 

First among the various stimuli is a slowly-emerging intent to focus on writing. Winter has driven me indoors into a little gem of a house with my office, bookcases, coffee pot, pellet stove and functional iMac; in the summertime, I can sit on the deck overlooking the man-made pond and waterfall and the women-tended garden working on a MacAir.

A small bookcase filled with little gems about the art and practice of writing awaits my more complete attention. 

A desktop folder filled with writing ideas and my own stash of “prompts” is now popping fresh new green sprigs. 

Awaiting my investment of time is the half-finished two-hour lecture course on DVD on the craft of writing world-class prose by a distinguished scholar of contemporary literature; there is a similar but not yet started six-hour course in creative non-fiction

I bought myself a copy of The Trickster’s Hat. It’s a “mischievous apprenticeship in creativity”.

I just discovered a new resource when I went looking for background on the popular writer Michael Crichton whose book “Timeline” generated some thoughts; his simple method uses 3×5 cards to plot out storyline

(Note that that web site has a number of great resources for writers. See this year-ending compendium of the top posts from the past year at Writers Helping Writers.

My wife bought me a book of prompts for uncovering the gems in my life’s stories, as well as the fourth edition of “The Craft of Research”. It is “a fundamental and accessible text that explains how to build an argument that engages and persuades readers, how to effectively anticipate and respond to the reservations of readers, and how to find and evaluate sources and integrate them into an argument.” It ends with a 30-page appendix crammed with bibliographic resources in 26 topical categories, starting with a significant two-page compendium of online databases. At $15, it’s the gift of the decade. It may take me ten years to harvest it. 


Obama has signed legislation enabling criminal charges for exercising freedom of speech. 

And Social Security has been weaponized by the State as a means of punishment and intimidation for those arrested arrested while exercising their right to assemble in protest. 

Recently the Internet has become a war zone and people have begun to discuss and debate, from both technological and other perspectives, how they will maintain and exercise the right to create, express and thrive independent of political control. 

I’m re-reading a book about “timing, tactics and strategy in narrative-driven decision-making” called Tempo which surely has some value in deciding what direction I am going to take in the future. 


Four from http://www.strike-the-root.com: 








Alexa: Who dunnit?

SAN FRANCISCO – In what may be a first, police in Arkansas asked Amazon for recordings potentially made by an Echo device in connection with a murder investigation.






Obama Quietly Signs The “Countering Disinformation And Propaganda Act” Into Law

December 27th, 2016 by Kevin

Via: ZeroHedge:

Long before the “fake news” meme became a daily topic of extensive conversation on such discredited mainstream portals as CNN and WaPo, H.R. 5181 would task the Secretary of State with coordinating the Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Broadcasting Board of Governors to “establish a Center for Information Analysis and Response,” which will pinpoint sources of disinformation, analyze data, and — in true dystopic manner — ‘develop and disseminate’ “fact-based narratives” to counter effrontery propaganda.

In short, long before “fake news” became a major media topic, the US government was already planning its legally-backed crackdown on anything it would eventually label “fake news.”

Posted in Dictatorship, Perception Management |

explaining news to kids

explaining news to kids

I woke up this morning clutching desperately for something that would stem the sinus drainage that I developed in the middle of the night, jotted down a shopping list for more nose-related sundries, and opened up my window into the world to find this enticing article on how to explan the news to our kids.

I’m still trying to find the best ways to explain the news to grown adults but the idea of tender and vulnerable minds watching what gets put on the telly is intriguing. (WGN offers up a logo that suggests its eager to put more violent garbage in front of you, to say nothing of the other pablum and lies that abound in that medium.)  My own thoughts and reactions will follow, but here’s the article:



Explaining the News to Our Kids

Caroline Knorr, Common Sense Media 

Fri Aug 8, 4:45 PM UTC 

Kids get their news from many sources—and they’re not always correct. How to talk about the news—and listen, too.

Shootings, terrorist attacks, natural disasters, end-of-the-world predictions—even local news reports of missing kids and area shootings—all of this can be upsetting news even for adults, much less kids. In our 24/7 news world, it’s become nearly impossible to shield kids from distressing current events.

Today, kids get news from everywhere. This constant stream of information shows up in sharable videos, posts, blogs, feeds, and alerts. And since much of this content comes from sites that are designed for adult audiences, what your kids see, hear, or read might not always be age appropriate. Making things even more challenging is the fact that many kids are getting this information directly on their phones and laptops. Often parents aren’t around to immediately help their children make sense of horrendous situations.

The bottom line is that young kids simply don’t have the ability to understand news events in context, much less know whether or not a source of information is credible. And while older teens are better able to understand current events, even they face challenges when it comes to sifting fact from opinion—or misinformation.

No matter how old your kid is, threatening or upsetting news can affect them emotionally. Many can feel worried, frightened, angry — even guilty. And these anxious feelings can last long after the news event is over. So what can you do as a parent to help your kids deal with all of this information?


Reassure your children that they’re safe. Tell your kids that even though a story is getting a lot of attention, it was just one event and was most likely a very rare occurrence. And remember that your kids will look to the way you handle your reactions to determine their own approach. If you stay calm and considered, they will, too.


Keep the news away. Turn off the TV and radio news at the top of the hour and half hour. Read the newspaper out of range of young eyes that can be frightened by the pictures. Preschool children don’t need to see or hear about something that will only scare them silly, especially because they can easily confuse facts with fantasies or fears.

At this age, kids are most concerned with your safety and separation from you. They’ll also respond strongly to pictures of other young children in jeopardy. Try not to minimize or discount their concerns and fears, but reassure them by explaining all the protective measures that exist to keep them safe. If you’re flying somewhere with them, explain that extra security is a good thing


Carefully consider your child’s maturity and temperament.Many kids can handle a discussion of threatening events, but if your children tend toward the sensitive side, be sure to keep them away from the TV news; repetitive images and stories can make dangers appear greater, more prevalent, and closer to home.

At this age, many kids will see the morality of events in stark black-and-white terms and are in the process of developing their moral beliefs. You may have to explain the basics of prejudice, bias, and civil and religious strife. But be careful about making generalizations, since kids will take what you say to the bank. This is a good time to ask them what they know, since they’ll probably have gotten their information from friends, and you may have to correct facts.

You might explain that even news programs compete for viewers, which sometimes affects content decisions. If you let your kids use the Internet, go online with them. Some of the pictures posted are simply grisly. Monitor where your kids are going, and set your URLs to open to non-news-based portals.


Check in. Since, in many instances, teens will have absorbed the news independently of you, talking with them can offer great insights into their developing politics and their senses of justice and morality. It will also give you the opportunity to throw your own insights into the mix (just don’t dismiss theirs, since that will shut down the conversation immediately).

Many teens will feel passionately about events and may even personalize them if someone they know has been directly affected. They’ll also probably be aware that their own lives could be impacted by terrorist tactics. Try to address their concerns without dismissing or minimizing them. If you disagree with media portrayals, explain why so that your teens can separate the mediums through which they absorb news from the messages conveyed.

Additional resources: For more information on how to talk to your kids about a recent tragedy please visit the National Association of School Psychologists or the American Psychological Association.

© 2014 Common Sense Media, Inc. All rights reserved.



Here’s my alternative approach:


Turn off the TV and tell the kids to go out and play.

Turn off the TV and read a good book to them. 

Take them to a museum, or on a hike. 

If they whine and carry on, get them invested in reading, community and after-school ventures in creativity, drama, the arts, photography, athletics, the worlds of science, technology and math.

When they get old enough to understand:

Explain the concept of media concentration (see notes 1 and 2).

Explain what propaganda is (see notes 3, 4 and especially 5), as well as this book.  Explain something about the history of Bernaysian thought and application; a trip to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays will probably suffice for openers, especially if you get the connection between “Torches of Freedom” and the incidence of lung cancer.

Explain the rudimentary concepts of perception management (see notes 6, 7, 8 and 9).

When you feel the child is ready (probably at least deep into high school), you can consider introducing them to information warfare (note 10), and then venture as you dare into the topics of  thought control, psychological warfare, mind control and mind wars

Tell them all about Operation Mockingbird (notes 11, 12, 13 and 14), the law that approves domestic propaganda (note 15), and how the CIA circulated a memo that set out the idea of a “conspiracy theory”  for the first time (note 16) right after they killed the President of the United States and before they killed the leading candidate for peace and reform emerging from out of the Presidential primary process. 

Explain the relationship of news to entertainment and vice versa (notes 17, 18 and 19), how the movies and TV shows aid perception, the role of the CIA in Hollywood (notes 20, 21 and 22), the links between Zionism and Hollywood (notes 23, 24 and 25), the links between Zionism and terrorism (notes 26, 27, 28 and 29), Operation Gladio (notes 30, 31, 32 and 33), and the silent sound technology built in to HDTV (notes 34 and 35 ) and the surveillance tools built in to smart TV’s (notes 36, 37 and 38 ).

Give them a short primer in the emergence of a secret, centuries-long plan starting in an obscure group in Bavaria called Perfectibilists into a secret exclusive fraternity at Yale that since the 1830’s has placed in control virtually every major large-group society, publishing venture or non-governmental organization under the control of people whose allegiance seems sworn to Luciferianism, including the American Psychology Association. You can read all about it for free with a 14-day trial at Scribd. 

Finally, after securing your child to a board and holding them upside down under a faucet, ask them if they have done their homework.  [Refresh their memory about the use of the term “hot and cold running images”.]

Then explain the ties between the American Psychological Association and the use of torture in American prisons (see notes 39, 40 and 41) and ask them if they want that organization to provide tips on how they should watch TV and understand the news.


  1. http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6?op=1 

2) http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1118&context=aulr [“Media Concentration: A Case of Power, Ego, and Greed Confronting Our Sensibilities”]

3) http://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-archives/gi-roundtable-series/pamphlets/what-is-propaganda 

4) http://changingminds.org/techniques/propaganda/propaganda_is.htm 

5) http://www.schooljournalism.org/recognizing-types-of-propaganda-in-advertising/ 

6) http://www.scribd.com/doc/53678637/Basic-Concept-of-Perception 

7) http://www.scribd.com/doc/25022575/The-Concept-of-Perception 

8) http://www.csc.kth.se/~ronniej/pubs/perception_management.pdf 

9) http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/12/30/endless-war-and-victory-perception-management 

10) http://inform.nu/Articles/Vol9/v9p213-223Hutchinson64.pdf 

11) http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_CIA_and_journalism 

12) http://whale.to/b/mockingbird.html 

13) http://www.amazon.com/Mighty-Wurlitzer 

14) http://investmentwatchblog.com/cnns-anderson-cooper-admits-working-for-the-cia-operation-mockingbird-asset-exposed/ 

15) http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5?op=1 

16) http://memoryholeblog.com/2013/01/20/cia-document-1035-960-foundation-of-a-weaponized-term/ 

17) http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/26/business/media-at-cbs-the-lines-between-news-and-entertainment-grow-fuzzier.html 

18) http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/16/arts/television/george-stephanopoulos-and-the-line-between-news-and-entertainment.html?_r=0 

19) https://www.princeton.edu/~mprior/Prior2005.News%20v%20Entertainment.AJPS.pdf  [“… greater media choice makes it easier for people to find their preferred content. People who like news take advantage of abundant political information to become more knowledgeable and more likely to turn out. In contrast, people who prefer entertainment abandon the news and become less likely to learn about politics….”] 

20) http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/01/28/hollywood-and-the-cia-a-dark-marriage-revealed/ 

21) http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/is_hollywood_secretly_in_bed_with_the_cia_partner/ 

22) http://utpress.utexas.edu/index.php/books/jencia [The CIA in Hollywood: How The Agency Shapes Film and Television]

23) http://www.whale.to/c/jews_and_hollywood.html 

24) http://www.whale.to/c/jewish_media_control.html 

25) http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/09/the-connection-between-zionism-and-organized-islamophobia-the-facts/ 

26) http://www.whale.to/b/zionists.html 

27) http://www.serendipity.li/zionism/israel_terr.htm 

28) http://rense.com/general21/pastzionist.htm [Don’t expect any Hollywood films highlighting any of these massacres committed by Jewish-Zionist terrorists, notably by the Zionist Hagana, Irgun and Stern Gang groups.]

29) http://www.ihr.org/books/ztn.html 

30) http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA%20Hits/Gladio_CIAHits.html 

31) http://www.globalresearch.ca/operation-gladio-cia-network-of-stay-behind-secret-armies/9556 

32) https://www.danieleganser.ch/assets/files/Inhalte/Interviews/Zeitungsinterviews/pdf_05/EIR_Interview_Gladio_and_911_08.04.05.pdf 

33) http://wideshut.co.uk/gladio-b-the-origins-of-natos-secret-islamic-terrorist-proxies/ 

34) http://proliberty.com/observer/20090118.htm

35) http://wariscrime.com/new/digital-tv-mind-control-by-the-sound-of-silence/ 

36) http://www.pcworld.com/article/2889472/samsung-faces-complaint-in-us-ftc-over-smart-tv-surveillance.html 

37 https://www.rt.com/usa/smart-tv-security-access-092/ 

38) http://www.networkworld.com/article/2225091/microsoft-subnet/black-hat–smart-tvs-are-the–perfect-target–for-spying-on-you.html 

39) http://radioboston.wbur.org/2015/07/21/apa-pentagon 

40) http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/us/report-says-american-psychological-association-collaborated-on-torture-justification.html 

41) https://theintercept.com/2015/07/14/cia-involving-psychologists-torture-sounds-bad-ok/ 


source of image: 



Suggested reading to put the emphasis back on the proper development of your child as a sentient intelligent creative and empathetic being:

Seven Times Smarter: 50 Activities, Games and Projects to Develop the Seven Intelligences of Your Child, Laurel Schmidt, Three Rivers Press, New York 2001. [If you want a pearl, you have to put a grain of sand in the shell.]

Smart Moves: Why Learning is Not All In Your Head, Carla Hannaford, Ph.D., Great Ocean Publishers, Arlington, VA 1995. [The author is a nationally-recognized neuropsychologist and educator. This is a fascinating, very readable and

important book on neuroscience, educational kinesiology and the brain/body connection as it affects us in learning, in performance, at work, and in society. It explains several basic BrainGym exercises, very simple techniques anyone can use to enhance their lives in innumerable ways.]

Sparks of Genius: The 13 Thinking Tools of the World’s Most Creative People, Robert and Michele Root-Bernstein, Houghton Mifflin, New York. 1999. [The primary tools are observing, imaging, abstracting, recognizing patterns, forming patterns, analogizing, body thinking, empathizing and dimensional thinking; the integrative tools are modeling,

playing, transforming and synthesizing.]

The Everyday Work of Art: How Artistic Experience Can Transform Your Life, Eric Booth, Sourcebooks, Napierville, Illinois 1997.

How To Be, Do, or Have Anything: A Practical Guide to Creative Empowerment, Laurence G. Boldt, Ten Speed Press, Berkeley, CA 2001.

Becoming Adult: How Teenagers Prepare for the World of Work, Mihaly Csikszentmthalyi and Barbara Schnieder, Basic Books, New York, 2000.

One Kid at a Time: Big Lessons from a Small School, Eliot Levine, Teachers College Press, New York, 2002.

Schools With Spirit: Nurturing the Inner Lives of Children and Teachers, edited by Linda Lantieri, Beacon Press, 2001.

Deep Play, Diane Ackerman, Random House, New York, 1999.

Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, M. Csikszentmihalyi, Harper & Row, New York, 1990.

Reclaiming Our Children: A Healing Plan for a Nation in Crisis, Peter R. Breggin, M.D., Perseus Books, Cambridge, MA 2000.

Walking in this World: The Practical Art of Creativity, Julia Cameron, Tarcher/Putnam 2002. [A follow-up to The Artists’ Way, this book is about rediscovering our senses of origin, proportion, perspective, adventure, personal territory, boundaries, momentum, discernment, resiliency, camaraderie, authenticity and dignity. Her list of recommended reading is remarkable.]

Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television, Jerry Mander, William Morrow Paperbacks, 1977. [“TV stops the critical processes of the brain.”]

Mosaica Reprise

“…  beneath the open surface of our society lie connections and relationships of long-standing, virtually immune to disclosure, and capable of great  crimes, including serial murder….  These forces are still with us, and they are not benign.”

Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the death of JFK, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1996, pages 17 and 21,  cited as one of the epigraphs for Section 5  (entitled “Magic in Theory and Practice”) in book 3 (“the Manson secret”) of Levenda’s Sinister Forces trilogy.



Music video:

Jack DeJohnette – Peace Time 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67aTJ-1VBN4 (1:02:07)


This and what follows are excerpted from my now-defunct blog in Google’s Blogspot universe. There has been expansion of the text with some minor re-tooling.  



A deep understanding of the mindset (“world-view”) that is explained in depth and detail in the book Perfectibilists, written by Terry Melanson, and which is spelled out in the form of a self-replicating plan that rewards greed, avarice, power-mongering and the tyranny of a group of people who forever hide their work, function furtively, lie routinely, consider life and people dispensable, and to pledge a centuries-long quest to dominate the world.

Clearly, if one reads Kris Millegan’s edited tome entitled Fleshing Out Skull and Bones: investigations into America’s most powerful secret society, the perfect masters of the enlightenment, reason, and a Machiavellian kind of destruction that would further enable their control (do you follow the news closely?) took root at Yale University and spread from there throughout the United States in the forms of placement into leadership of key cultural institutions of education, the media, politics, government and the intelligence agencies. It ran in parallel with other similarly-seeded efforts in the United Kingdom, Europe, and found fertile soil in the form of the Trilateral efforts, the Council on Foreign Affairs, etc.

On the shelf of reagents in Melanson’s laboratory are the plans for the development of numerous machine de guerre, the purposeful destruction of religious faith, the designed takedown of governments, eugenics, the Hegelian dialectic, small containers of Luciferianism, the fact that Marx was demonstratively involved, and a recurring degree of instruction for and about the use of secrecy, psychological subversion, mind control, propaganda and infiltration within the halls of power.

A short summary of the thesis behind that series of posts — almost 600 pages in typewritten length under the general moniker “Mosaica” — then, is that — through the centuries-old plan explained in those two books —  the goal and intent of apparently opposite energies and theories of socialism, communism, fascism and capitalism may be pushing us all in the same direction.  In fact, I further submit that they have been knowingly but covertly engineered by fascists, socialists, communists and capitalists — masquerading as one another and morphing as necessary.    The clues and guideposts for this journey lie in a detailed effort, historically and in terms of current events, to understand the degree of transfer of technology and glove-in-hand intelligence/counter-intelligence that has occurred, particularly with regard to nuclear weaponry and other technologies of mass destruction.  They have leant each other the tools, and found, recruited and kept the best practitioners.


My essential thesis can use an analogy drawn from the technical design and the deep inner functioning’s of an atomic (fission) bomb in which a core material — which is to be brought to criticality — is surrounded by a ring of explosives which — when triggered in functional sequence — create a compressive shock wave that results in devastating destruction.


The destruction of sovereignty at the personal level as well as the national level, and the destruction of any resistance to a vast totalitarian global system, is the purpose of the metaphorical ring of explosives. 


The ring of explosives that will bring about the global totalitarian “New World Order” consists of educational systems, media systems, vast panoptic surveillance, integrated independent militarized intelligence systems capable of small independent as well as large integrated “black ops”, previous attacks that have weakened or destroyed the governance possibility of the United States Constitution as well as other political structures and the rule of law itself, and the ignorance, apathy, or passive complicity of the people. It generates continued violence both domestically and globally, including war, military action of overt and covert nature, etc. Witness the recent and recurring shooting incidents.

The metaphorical ring of explosives has slowly been built. While it is possible to extend the time frame back in history well beyond the mid-to-late 18th-century, it is possible to see and review the extent and depth of the plan in the planning–in an English language that can be comprehended–through studies of the history of Adam Weishaupt, the German Enlightenment, the Perfectibilists, other secret societies (most notably, Yale’s Skull and Bones), the role of the occult in intelligence agencies and fascism, and more.

The wiring for the ring of explosives has been carefully constructed over the course of the 20th century, beginning with the continuation or outgrowth of the activities of independent think tanks, NGOs, “circles”,  secret societies, and the integrated, long-range planning that has been in place and working effectively since before World War I. Deeply woven within this braid of explosive wiring are the ideologies and practices of hegemony, panoptic control, Zionism, socialism/communism, the theories of central banking, capitalism, imperialism, and the intelligence and counterintelligence systems across several continents.

Critical to this braiding (it may not, in the end, be necessary to differentiate the precise roles of each ideology, each phase, each agent) is the deep, secretive, game of information and technology sharing that has gone on across sovereign lines using covert intelligence agencies and their operatives. This includes the history of the Dulles brothers in and around the end of World War I and the reshaping of the European continent’s stability and balance (including activities and around Versailles and Istanbul), Prescott Bush, Sullivan and Cromwell, Brown Brothers Harriman, the deep background activities of major financial banking houses (including, to be sure, the role of the Rothschild enterprises), the early 20th century financial baronages of the Rockefellers, the Morgan’s, Carnegie, et alia, the funding necessary for the development and fueling of the Russian Revolution, the funding of the rise of Hitler and Naziism, and the role of the OSS (including and especially the role of Dulles in  in Switzerland in facilitating the transfer of Nazi knowledge and technology, “the secret surrender”, Operation Paperclip, the purposeful mishandling of diplomatic entreaties for peace from Japan through the Bank of International Settlements, the forging of cooperative agreements between Nazi intelligence and counterintelligence agents in Europe, the forging of cooperative agreements between Jewish/Israeli/Zionist agents in Italy and elsewhere and OSS agents who would go on to become high placed officials in the CIA). The evidence appears in numerous CIA operations and gambits, as well as in the development of Israel and its intelligence methods, agencies, operations, etc. Sprinkle in some Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzeskinki in key places at key times. Note — if you can find a copy and deep and accurate references to it — the topic of Kissinger’s doctoral thesis about maintaining a balance of power, and pay attention to the play and the players within the tableau and the timeframe of his historical analysis.

In the aftermath of World War II, Jewish money and influence was critical to the creation of both the Israeli state and its intelligence and counterintelligence agencies and its nuclear capacity) and the development of “the national security state” within the United States of America. What grew out of this included a hand in-glove relationship between US intelligence and Israeli intelligence and allowed for extensive technology transfer across all major nuclear states including Russia, China, France, Great Britain, the US and Israel. The histories of NUMEC, Dimona, PROmis, Centralign, krytons, covert transfer of weaponry, deep and extensive narco-trafficking, espionage and targeting software are available to the curious.  The transfer of technology has been a focus of covert espionage for decades, but the open and slightly-covert (or occult?) transfer by major agents of government both inside and outside of intelligence agencies has been effected almost as much and to greater effect. It probably also includes the transfer of military technologies into Red China in indirect manner.


Americans (and to some far lesser extent others throughout the world) have been propagandized and Bernays’ed  into a bland hunk of pliable, moldable political tofu, to be shaped as appropriate into a force not yet designed but capable of being reshaped and redeployed into a vector in ways not yet conceived; collectively, we are a force awaiting our orders which will come through predictive programming, tele-screen, repetition, and official pronouncement carefully sculpted to be something other than what it appears to be.

Americans are the residua, depending on their age and schooling, of the stresses, media influences (real-time and, more predominately, in terms of mythic history reshaped and re-packaged) and prior manipulations of World War II, Korea, the McCarthy Red scare, the Time/Look/Luce media Wurlitzer, the Nixonian games, Dealey Plaza and its fifty years of stacked and layered ops, cover-ups, and lies, Skull and Bones Dewey-ist Prussian “dumbing down”, the 60s, drugs, assassinations, coverups, Straussian neocon games, unending warssszs, 9/11, psy-operas, more coverups, weather modification and warfare, mind control and menticide, tsunamis of disinformation, and repeated warnings about conspiracy (theories, facts, and everything in between).

Most Americans, because they don’t read more than the TV Guide or other consumerist pablum, are incapable of reading comprehension and deep thought, and cannot begin to follow the deep, embedded, long-term machinations of the elite enlightened ones (TV being far too pervasive, addictive and mind-numbing).  They cannot know who they are, what they were, or what they stand for (i.e., political, interpersonal, and moral values) without being told and they blindly choose the next path or decision (whether for what to buy or whom to vote for) on the basis of that which has been pounded into a tasteless mush of sameness.


The hands-in-gloves dual-deniability nature of intelligence/operations between the CIA and the Mossad [and which must also to include criminal narco-trafficking gangs — foreign and domestic, historic and now-being-formed), international intelligence agencies, as well as a veritable plethora of other national military or investigative intelligence agencies] extends from the present day back through 9/11, Iran-Contra, the days of the Gulf of Tonkin and the USS Liberty, Dealey Plaza, the dual birth of the US national security state apparatus and the sovereign state of Israel, the days of the OSS, Operation Gladio, the use of false flag terror by the Nazis and the Zionist/Israeli entities, the GehlenOrg, the Muslim Brotherhood, “al-Qaeda”, as well as the numerous and increasing domestic incidents of terror which include multiple shootings and other mysteries of sudden death. (I think of the schoolhouse shootings, the Beltway sniper, Jared Loughner, the Aurora shootings, Fort Hood, and General Wheeler, among many, many others almost too numerous to list, which is of course part of the strategy of tension derived from the deep covert psychological research done by Nazi scientists and Freud and Bernays and the people at Tavistock and its off-shoot institutes.]

It is permanently easy to say ‘it couldn’t have been us” because the work was out-sourced. Plausible deniability on steroids… “It” of course also uses “patsies” given “legends”, false instructions,  mysterious missions, mind control and, eventually, a death sentence. The “game” centers on crazed lone gunmen, pre-papered with ‘evidence’ of ideological leanings or manifestos or pamphlets or prescriptions or diagnoses of mental illness, followed by jailhouse visitations, show trials, pleas that avoid the pitfalls of the justice system (or direct manipulation of the justice system itself).

The nature of this multi-headed, multi-armed beast is that if you suggest that it is Communist in origin, the counter-cry is to warn about McCarthy-style blacklistings, freedom of speech, etc. or to suggest that the people involved are variegated politically and have assimilated.  If you say “socialist”, the counter-cry is to list the long list of abuses of capitalism (and they are numerous). If you say Jews, or perhaps Zionists, or perhaps banksters, the counter-cry is anti-Semitism. The counter-attacks are panopticonism, hyper-surveillance, and attacks against people and organizations on lists maintained by the Southern Poverty Law Center, the US DHS and the ADL, keeping in mind that B’nai B’rith and the ADL were formed to protect the flanks while the Federal Reserve was quietly and secretively cemented into place by the same people who funded Nazism and Bolshevism to keep the weapons factories humming and the rich investors uber-wealthy.

From the beginning (at least since the formation of the Perfecibilists), the major tactic has always been to appear to be something other than what you are, and the central strategy has always been to maintain a balance of power by playing one against another, funding the weaker while making money off the profits and usurious interests and control of the second- and third-generation consequences, by infiltration, secrecy, treachery and treason, double- and triple agent espionage, arms sales, illegal cross-border trafficking of guns, drugs and people, and by foreknowledge and the ability to manipulate fiscal transactions in marketplaces by counterfeiting, data manipulation, and the more modern variants of “pump and dump”, derivatives, high-speed high-volume sales, or simply the control of investigative, media or regulatory agencies.


“… we begin to realize that the word “conspiracy” does not do justice to what is, after all, merely a group of people from similar backgrounds with similar goals, all working to a common purpose which is hidden from the world at large by virtue of a Great Wall of wealth, trustees, culture and power. We begin to see that what the rest of us call conspiracy is just business-as-usual for the people that operate above, behind and below what we know as consensus history, consensus reality. I believe that the word “conspiracy” is over-used and emotionally-loaded in this context. Let us instead, and rightly, use the word “cabal” to denote this gathering of sinister forces.”

Sinister Forces: a grimoire of American political witchcraft (Book 2:  A Warm Gun), Peter Levenda, TrineDay 2006.


The essential questions that has driven me for some time…. since probably the time I encountered significant opposition on at least four discussion boards … is the very visceral and oft-repeated process in these kinds of matters that “you” are not allowed to look here and you are not allowed to ask those questions and you are not privy to what we know and we are going to divert your attention in a variety of ways (including ad hominem attacks, banishment, intimidation, threats, blackmail, violence, even death)…: ? What is the glue or commonality that connects all the areas in which such counter-reaction is vehement, vitriolic and venomous?  What are the modus operandi in use by intelligence agencies, groups, interests and ideologies that can be demonstrated to be recurring patterns? Can there be a simple demonstration of linkage between them?

I submit there can be.


The question:

“What could still be “too dangerous” to talk about more than forty years after the fact?” [page 86, Janney’s Mary’s Mosaic]


These days, you have to make the assumptions that whatever/whomever it is you are reading (including me) is dotted with error,  lackadaisical research, submerged ideological intent, or at least the presence of a conscious or unconscious filter born of aging, cultural immersion, prior education, etc.


Crosscheck and verify major critical statements using:


  • Google or other search engines (Google and the World Wide Web ISPs,-pedias, sites offering “expertise” are, in themselves, filters and agents);
  • wide reading among ideologies;
  • deep/obscure and suppressed books; and
  • the books written by disinformation artists (even this info has to have a high degree of accuracy or resonance with truth and proven fact in order to be acceptable; though we have the added burden of figuring out which is which, this becomes easier if there is wide reading and wide dialogue);
  • hum int(Amory Lovins and a multitude of other people will tell you that to get the most meaningful information and understanding, you have to talk to people — lots of them; there’s even an ancient Chinese proverb about it); and, of course,
  • time.


Looking back over time – knowing, of course, that there are forces at work whose intent is to alter, mold, shape, erase or re-create history – allows patterns and modus operandi to emerge from the depths. Cross-reference as much as you can.

This all takes a lot of time and energy. Most people aren’t in the slightest bit interested (that’s what they count on and they facilitate with multiple levels of distraction), or don’t have the time, energy, money or sense of purpose/mission to dig deep. And remember that, in the rapid currents of today’s Prigoginal River of info/dis-info glut [ http://www.amazon.com/Order-Out-Chaos-Ilya-Prigogine/dp/0553343637], what media ecologist Robert Dobbs (page 36, Cryptoscatology: Conspiracy as Art Form, by Robert Guffy) called “software/wetware conditions”, it is very difficult for a single sentient biped (even one with access to terabytes of memory) to remember everything and see it correctly.

Ask yourself how you can get more information, how you can get more time, and how can you save or conserve resources.  Manage what is manageable, deal with definites, dig quickly for disconfirmation. Actively look for the information  that does not support your preferred beliefs or outcome options. Do source-and-assumption checks to ascertain validity of the information. Is there any contradictory information? Do an oversight and certainty check.

All this kind of work is helped by the Internet. But that is work done under the watchful surveillance of the NSA, the Federal Reserve, independent private investigators, and Homeland Security. And they will pump in more information to confuse and distract you.

The answer: That which is ongoing, that which reveals the key to understanding….



“The scholar who teaches most teach with the whole personality. This requires considerable self-awareness. One may hide from others but not from oneself. Instead, one must quite deliberately seek not the hide from oneself. The counterpoint to this need is that one also observes others with care. One must know not only, as teacher and researcher, how to ask the right question, one must know when to ask no question at all. Answers bring closure, often too soon, so that shape is given the knowledge before it should be given, so conditioning the questions that follow. One must know how to wait. A quality of quiet watching is essential.”

[page 57, Cloak and Gown: Scholars in the Secret War, Robin Winks, William Morrow and Co., New York 1991.]




“If one keeps on asking the questions, the answers will gradually begin to fit together.” [Page xii, The Man Who Kept the Secrets: Richard Helms and the CIA, Thomas Powers, Alfred Knopf 1979.]




“As a rule, counterintelligence people say, once you start looking in the right place all sorts of evidence turn up…..”[Page 71, The Man Who Kept the Secrets: Richard Helms and the CIA, Thomas Powers, Alfred Knopf 1979]



The operative concept you must perceive and identify

in your readings of Perfectibilists and Fleshing Out Skull and Bones

is “infiltration”.



“…the so-called “deep state” should not be seen as a structure, but as a milieu….”

Pawley wrote in his unpublished memoir, “Russia is Winning,” that “The whole pattern is now colored with a thin, pasty coating called ‘detente,’ a Communist tactic to prepare the trusting democracies for the kill…It can end only in surrender.”[62] [ David Price Cannon, More Ruthless than the Enemy: The Dark Diplomacy of Ambassador William Douglas Pawley, web-published, http://williampawley.blogspot.com/2009/12/chapter-57-detente-betrayal.html. ]

“… President Kennedy was not assassinated by a marginal neglected loner who was quickly killed, but by some deep enduring force in our society, with the power to affect bureaucratic behavior. ….”



Doug Valentine: Angleton ran the CIA’s narcotics operation, in league with the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, until 1971, when Helms put it under Tom Karamessines at operations; Karamessines was the former CIA Athens chief.

I know for a fact that Angleton in the counterintelligence division of the CIA was in charge of its relations with law enforcement agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which is one of the reasons organizationally that he ended up having relations with people like Charlie Siragusa, a high ranking official in the FBN. This is how Angleton enters into relationships with Corsican drug traffickers and uses them for counterintelligence operations.

I know this because I interviewed one of the officers who was on Angleton’s staff and who actually was his liaison to the Bureau of Narcotics. And I’ll be talking more about that in my new book, Strength of the Pack. The guy’s name was Jim Ludlum. People say he’s related to Robert Ludlum.

In 1968 the Federal Bureau of Narcotics was abolished and Lyndon Johnson’s administration created the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. Angleton and the CIA continued to have an official relationship with the BNDD until 1971, at which point Nixon declared narcotics law enforcement a national emergency and made it an issue of national security.

And at that point relations switched from Angleton at counterintelligence to the operations branch of the CIA. That’s incredibly important in understanding the history of the CIA’s involvement with drug trafficking, because now it’s no longer a function of counterintelligence, something deep inside the Agency. Now you actually have CIA chiefs of station all around the world becoming actively involved in collecting intelligence on drug trafficking. It became in 1971 a very, very big business – drug trafficking within the CIA.

Doug Valentine: One of the great untold stories of the CIA. Privatization of intelligence – as you call it, Shackleyization.

RJ Hillhouse, a blogger who investigates the clandestine world of private contractors and US intelligence, recently obtained documents from the Office of the Directorate of National Intelligence (DNI) showing that Washington spends some $42 billion annually on private intelligence contractors, up from $17.54 billion in 2000. Currently that spending represents 70 percent of the US intelligence budget going to private companies.

William Casey sort of paved the way for the downfall of the Soviet Union. The CIA officers involved in the Russia division at that time were responsible for recruiting over to our side KGB officers, intelligence officers, government officials who brought about the breakup of that republic. Those relationships still exist. And if anybody was REALLY interested in doing a history of the CIA, that particular aspect would be the most explosive story.

Suzan Mazur: In your book you also tie in Agency drug operations to the JFK assassination. You note that “the CIA protected its drug dealing assets in the Mexican intelligence services” and say further:

“[I]t’s possible that SDECE [French Intel] agents working for the KGB may have sent an assassin into Dallas [to kill JFK] through Angleton’s [Irving] Brown-[Maurice] Castellani drug network, or through Paul Mondoloni [a Corsican who smuggled drugs from Mexico and then from Cuba under Batista’s protection].”

You say this assassin may have been the Agency’s own QJ/WIN with Oswald as the patsy:

“The best evidence suggests that this mysterious operative [QJ/WIN] was Jose Marie Andre Mankel, as Mason Cargill (a staff member of vice president Rockefeller’s Commission to Investigate CIA Activities within the United Sates) reported in a 1 May 1975 memo. . . . According to documents contained in his 201-file, QJ/WIN was tall and thin, married (although homosexual), with many friends in well-to-do Parisian circles. He was a conman extraordinaire!”

It’s interesting, Tim Weiner says in his book that President Lyndon Johnson requested all the files on Oswald following his murder by Ruby — who you say was a Federal Bureau of Narcotics informant beginning in the 1940s — and that those files then vanished. You say further in your book:

“JFK wanted to expel Air America, the CIA’s drug smuggling proprietary airline from Laos. And, in 1962 in another attempt to curb the CIA’s drug smuggling activities in East Asia, Bobby [Kennedy] indicted Sea Supply manager Willis Bird. . . . Kennedy’s enemies ensured that the Bird prosecution was blocked, and that Air America kept its contract in Laos, and continued to fly drugs. Meanwhile, General Walker, the far-right American Security Council (including General Lansdale and Air America Chairman Admiral Felix Stump), and the Texas ultras started plotting their coup d’etat in Dallas.”

And you note that Senator Estes Kefauver’s committee investigation was kept away from a discussion of Dallas, Ruby would only tell the committee what he knew about Chicago.

“Was it to deflect attention from the Pawley-Cooke mission in Taiwan, which was funded by ultra Texas oilmen like H.L. Hunt, and which in 1951, was facilitating the CIA-Kuomintang drug smuggling operation that entered the US by crossing the Mexican border at Laredo, Texas?”

You also say that Joseph Civello ran the heroin business in Dallas with John Ormento and the Magaddino family in Buffalo and that they were linked to Carlos Marcello, Santo Trafficante, Jr. and Jimmy Hoffa – “the House Subcommitte on Assassination’s three prime suspects in the JFK murder.”

Then you note that Hunt and the other Texas oil men, including the emerging Bush dynasty, were also outraged at JFK for planning to “eliminate the oil depletion allowances” not to mention JFK’s desegregating the South…..


Doug Valentine: First of all, I don’t pretend to know who killed Kennedy. For all I know it could have been Lee Harvey Oswald. That chapter on JFK in my book is speculative, that is to say, if the CIA was involved in JFK’s assassination, how would it have been involved. And it goes back to the relationship the CIA had with the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and in particular with an agent named George White.

George White was the guy the CIA went to when they wanted to start up the MKULTRA program at Bedford Street. But prior to that, in 1947, he was head of the Chicago office and one of his informants was Jack Ruby.

Jack Ruby went to Dallas in 1948 working for White and actually infiltrated Bugsy Siegel’s Mafia drug connection with the Kuomintang in Mexico. As far as I know nobody was ever arrested. Bugsy Siegel was killed because he was getting a little out of control.

Doug Valentine: The CIA doesn’t get arrested. So you never really know. It’s an espionage organization.

The Rosenbergs in the United States were tried for espionage and given a death sentence. But this is what the CIA does for its business. It goes around the world and it gets foreign nationals to spy on their government and it has an army of Rosenbergs out there. It’s a group of mafia bosses who are getting people of foreign countries to spy on their own countries and subvert their own countries and they give them masses amounts of dollars to do it.

The CIA people who do these things are no different than the KGB people running the Rosenbergs.


Suzan Mazur: But you cite in Strength then-general counsel for the Thai Consulate in Miami, Paul Helliwell, establishing and directing a “string of drug money-laundering banks for the CIA. And you mention Vanguard Services set up as a front in 1962 “for yet another batch of CIA-financed, drug-related anti-Castro operations.”
Can you say more about these outlaw banks?

Doug Valentine: A little. Drugs again, and Nugan Hand, and Golden Triangle stuff, among other things. The Mafia connection to Trafficante and JFK. Angleton.

Paul Helliwell had been in the OSS. When Nugan died in 1980 or 1981, he had William Colby’s business card on his body. William Colby was providing legal counsel for the Nugan Hand bank and it had on its board numerous generals, retired US generals who had been in Vietnam. AND ALL THESE GUYS ARE IN IT FOR THE MONEY.

And if they can get the money selling drugs, they get the money selling drugs. If they can get the money breaking up the Soviet Union, and then cutting deals with the Mafia and robbing the Russian treasury, then they’ll do it that way.

THE CIA IS REALLY INTERESTED IN FINANCIAL CRIME. And one of their stronger suits is financial intelligence and following the money. Something they’re light years ahead of the FBI or DEA on.

The CIA was able to put together strong boxes full of $750 million dollars and bring them over to Iraq for paying off Iraqi officials in $20 bills. Where did this covert cash come from?

They’ve got a diversified portfolio after 60 years in the business: The institutions they started building up from Ford franchises in the Philippines, kickbacks from Westinghouse for helping them get contracts in Korea, deals with the Mafia, drug traffickers and arms dealers.

The CIA gets oodles of money from the arms business. Most of their income comes from criminal activity.

The Russian Mafia operates with a sort of impunity. And so does the Israeli Mafia. And one of the reasons they have this sort of impunity is that they’re sharing their profits with the CIA.

And I think a lot of CIA money is capital investments. They’re like movie producers. They want to overthrow the Iraqi government, they go to companies like Halliburton and others who are going to profit from the overthrow of Iraq. And like the executive producers of some movie, they get them to ante-up some cash. Telling them, don’t worry about it, the government contracts you get in return will cover your investment. Plus they have the old boy network – which now is so far flung.

Suzan Mazur: Plus some of the military contractors are organized crime and have had contracts since the 50s.

Doug Valentine: Exactly. Which bring us back to Barry Seal (Iran-Contra). Because in 1972, Barry Seal was to fly some arms and some explosives into Mexico. What the Brooklyn Drug Task Force found out is that this guy named Murray Kessler, who was involved with the Gambino family in Brooklyn, had an arms manufacturing company in New Jersey where the guns and the bombs came from.

Suzan Mazur: And some of these arms merchants also had security clearance during the McNamara and Clifford years of heading the Defense Department. They make weapons for the US government and some for whoever they feel like.

Doug Valentine: From my perspective, the spy industry and especially the arms industry, is the foundation on which the American empire is built. The United States has a military budget of I think $300 billion dollars and the CIA budget is like $50 billion – that’s a year. Together that’s bigger than the gross national product of any country in the world. And in the meantime we’re worried about 20 guys in Al-Qaeda.

Suzan Mazur: And the American people are largely innocent captives of this ever-turning screw.


Suzan Mazur: Which exploits of the agency do you consider the most diabolical – aside from the fact that one of its founding fathers molested two of his own children – and a reason why the CIA should have been dismantled years ago?

Doug Valentine: Your readers don’t want to know that answer. The most dastardly thing that the CIA has done is to wage this campaign of psychological warfare against the American people. Where the American people don’t see the CIA for a bunch of basically American KGB agents who are conducting criminal activities around the world. There’s a movie called The Usual Suspects with a much feared criminal named Keyser Soze. And Keyser is talking to a cop and he says the greatest trick that the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn’t exist.

And this is what people like Weiner are doing with books about the CIA that don’t explain it for what it really is. They’re part of a propaganda machine that’s making the American people see the CIA in mythological terms as good guys, crusaders, as Lawrence of Arabia – when, in fact, they’re criminals. They’re part of THE GRAND LIE.







Lenin in 1920 made an analysis of the political conditions in Germany after the failure of  the Communist (Spartacus League) uprising in 1918. The Communists had split into two rival factions. The issues facing the German Marxists were somewhat analogous to those facing the Marxist movements today especially in the industrial world.

This fact makes many of Lenin’s observations of the conditions in Germany relevant to the struggles of today both in advanced  capitalist countries such as the U.S. (where Marxist political groupings barely make a blip on the radar screen), Europe (where Marxist parties offer viable alternatives to the status …

Lenin on the Role of a Marxist Party in Relation to the People

Chapter Five of ‘Left Wing’ Communism an Infantile Disorder

by Thomas Riggins / November 13th, 2012

(Full article …)


America Is Being Systematically Transformed Into A Totalitarian Society

Posted on January 9, 2013 | Leave a comment

rightsidenews.com | Jan 7, 2013

by American Cream



“The possibility of treating US citizens as foreign ’terrorists’ has been a constant objective of the government executive since the attacks of 9/11.“By the new prerogative which has been awarded him by the National Defense Authorization Act – that of being able to nullify Habeas Corpus for US citizens and not just for foreign nationals – the Obama administration has achieved what the previous government had only planned but never instituted.”



Etzioni: “no philosophy that better describes Obama’s position than communitarianism” 

Amitai Etzioni, the high priest of communitarianism, was in Israel recently and was interviewed by the Jerusalem Post.

Here’s a short, but revealing excerpt:

Why did you call your movement “Communitarianism”?

That’s actually an interesting story. I started a little group in 1990, and I tried to find a word to counter excessive individualism. Communitarianism is actually associated with…


Well, yes, when it first came up in the mid-19th century, it was associated with communism in East Asia. So we had a very long debate about whether to use it or not. But we just couldn’t come up with another term that would speak for community and common good. And we hoped that our kind of neo-communitarianism would succeed in becoming a kind of a symbol for this other approach. It’s a particularly key point at the moment, because there is no philosophy that better describes Obama’s position than communitarianism. But nobody wants him to label it thus, because it immediately evokes the image of East Asia, Singapore and Japan. So, it may have been an imperfect choice of a term, but now we’re kind of stuck with it.

1) He admits that Communitarianism is traditionally associated with Communism; and 2) he specifically identifies Obama’s ideology as that of Communitarianism.

If you haven’t delved into the research of Niki Raapana, I recommend that you do. I’m not sure when it was that she first labeled Obama a communitarian, but it was quite some time ago – long before the admission of Etzioni (as if we needed that anyway).

By the way, there’s a bit of subterfuge in the above excerpt. While answering the reporter’s quip about communism being associated with communitarianism, Etzioni replies with: “Well, yes, when it first came up in the mid-19th century, it was associated with communism in East Asia.” If you’re talking East-Asia, shouldn’t that have been the mid-20th century? And even if it was a mistake and he meant to say mid-20th, it would still be incorrect. Communitarianism did not “first come up” in the mid-20th.

In fact, Etzioni is well aware of exactly from whence it came. In his The Essential Communitarian Reader, p. ix, we read:

…the term itself was coined only in 1841 by [John Goodwyn] Barmby, who founded the Universal Communitarian Association. In this and other nineteenth-century usage, communitarian means “a member of a community formed to put into practice communistic or socialists theories.” [my emphasis]

Basically, yes, that’s where the term originated; but Barmby’s “Universal Communitarian Association” was originally called the “Communist Propaganda Society“!

And talk about disingenuous. Etzioni would have us believe that a loose assemblage of naive sociologists and change agents, in the ’90s, stumbled upon a unique-sounding word; liked what they heard; investigated its origins and ideological legacy; found that it was synonymous and contemporary with Owenite socialism, Fourier’s Phalanxes, Barmby’s Christian Communism, Left and Right Hegelians, and the Utopian schemes of the Saint-Simonians; decided to adopt it anyway; and that it henceforth shall have a totally new meaning and purpose!

I would like to draw your attention to another story at Niki Raapana’s “Living Outside the Dialectic” (a clever and apt title if there ever was one). I wasn’t aware of this, but it turns out that Fareed Zakaria (Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, CFR) is quite the Communitarian as well. Now I am immediately reminded of that photo taken of Obama’s choice of literature back in the summer of 2008.





A new Gallup Poll finds that socialism is now viewed positively by 39 percent of Americans, up from 36 percent in 2010. Among self-described liberals, socialism enjoyed a 62 percent positive rating, while 53 percent of Democrats and independent voters who lean Democratic gave socialism a thumb’s up….

In 2010, only 20 percent of conservatives viewed socialism favorably. Today, the number is 25 percent. That’s right: one-quarter of American conservatives view socialism favorably.

Among Republicans, the increase has been slightly more notable. In 2010, only 17 percent of self-identified Republicans had a positive view of socialism. Now, that number had increased to 23 percent. So if you meet four Republicans, one of them is harboring socialist sentiments.


Not really.

Socialism has deep America roots—going back to when Tom Paine used his final pamphlet, Agrarian Justice, to outline a social-democratic model for establishing a just and equitable society. Socialist communes and political movements flourished in the United States during the first decades of the republic’s history, and the advocates for those movements found a home in the radical experiment that came to be known as the “Republican” Party.

Founded at Ripon, Wisconsin, in 1854 by utopian socialists and militant abolitionists, the early Republican Party included many German-American immigrants who arrived in the United States after the European revolutions that stirred in 1848 were repressed. The man who issued the call for that meeting in Ripon, and who is to this day frequently identified as a founding figure for the Republican Party, was Alvan Earle Bovay, a veteran radical who had led militant movements for land reform that urged the poor to organize politically and “Vote Yourself a Farm.”

Among the first Republicans were many allies and associates of socialist causes, and even of Karl Marx. Among their number was Joseph Weydemeyer, a former Prussian Army officer who would continue to correspond with Marx as he rose through the ranks as a military officer during the Civil War.

Abraham Lincoln, like most of the leading Republicans of his day had read Marx and Engels in the pages of the Horace Greeley’s New York Herald Tribune (for which the two men wrote for many years as European correspondents). The sixteenth president spoke often about the superiority of labor to capital and was highly critical of concentrated wealth. Toward the end of the Civil War, the White House accepted the congratulations of Marx and his fellow London Communists after Lincoln’s 1864 re-election.

Lincoln was no Marxist. But, like a good many of the initial leaders of the Republican Party, he had been exposed to the ideas of Marx and Engels in the Tribune. In fact, Lincoln chose as one of his closest White House aides (and eventually as his assistant secretary of war) Charles Dana, Marx’s long-time editor. Famously, Dana once declared, “Everyone now is more or less a Socialist.”

John Nichols on December 1, 2012 – 7:58 PM ET 



The term “neoconservative” (sometimes shortened to “neocon”) was used initially during the 1930s, to describe American communist intellectuals who criticized Soviet ideology.[6]

^ a b Context of Late 1930s – 1950s: Neoconservative Philosophy Grows from Communist Intellectuals’ Disenchantment with Soviet Ideology

Late 1930s – 1950s: Neoconservative Philosophy Grows from Communist Intellectuals’ Disenchantment with Soviet Ideology

The philosophy that becomes known as “neoconservativism” traces its roots to leftist ideologues in New York City who, before World War II, begin sorting themselves into two camps: those who support Franklin D. Roosevelt’s economic “New Deal” policies, and more radical individuals who consider themselves followers of Soviet communism. Many of these radical leftists are Jews who, staunchly opposed to Nazi-style fascism, find themselves finding more and more fault with Stalinist Russia. In their eyes, Josef Stalin’s Soviet Union has betrayed the ideals of the original Russian Revolution, and has instead created a monstrous regime that is as bad towards Jews and other ethnic and cultural minorities as Germany’s Adolf Hitler and Italy’s Benito Mussolini. The betrayal they feel towards the Soviet Union, author J. Peter Scoblic will later write, cannot be overestimated. Seminal movement figures such as Irving Kristol (see 1965) lead a small cadre of academics and intellectuals far away from their former leftist-Communist ideology, instead embracing what Scoblic will call “an ardent nationalism” that they see as “the only feasible counterweight to the Soviet monster.” The USSR is as evil as Nazi Germany, they believe, and as committed to world domination as the Nazis. Therefore, the USSR cannot be negotiated with in any form or fashion, only opposed, and, hopefully, destroyed. During the 1950s, Scoblic will write, “these intellectuals adopted a strict good-versus-evil outlook—and a scorn for radical elements of the American Left—that was not unlike that of the ex-communists… who were defining modern conservatism.” But unlike their conservative counterparts, Kristol’s neoconservatives either espouse a more liberal social construct similar to Roosevelt’s New Deal, or care little one way or the other about the entire skein of issues surrounding economic and social policy. The neoconservatives will drive themselves even farther right during the social upheaval of the 1960s, and, according to Scoblic, will hold leftist leaders in contempt in part because they remind the neoconservatives of their Stalinist compatriots of thirty years ago, colleagues whom they have long since abandoned and held in scorn. The fact that some antiwar New Left figures will support Soviet, Chinese, and Vietnamese communism will further enrage the neoconservatives. [SCOBLIC, 2008, PP. 83-85]


The term “neoconservative” was popularized in the United States during 1973 by Socialist leader Michael Harrington, who used the term to define Daniel Bell, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Irving Kristol, whose ideologies differed from Harrington’s.[9]

The “neoconservative” label was used by Irving Kristol in his 1979 article “Confessions of a True, Self-Confessed ‘Neoconservative.'”[10] His ideas have been influential since the 1950s, when he co-founded and edited the magazine Encounter.[11] Another source was Norman Podhoretz, editor of the magazine Commentary from 1960 to 1995. By 1982 Podhoretz was terming himself a neoconservative, in a New York Times Magazine article titled “The Neoconservative Anguish over Reagan’s Foreign Policy”.[12][13] …

Neoconservatism was initiated by the repudiation of coalition politics by the American New Left: Black Power, which denounced coalition-politics and racial integration as “selling out” and “Uncle Tomism” and which frequently generated anti-semitic slogans; “anti-anticommunism“, which seemed indifferent to the fate of South Vietnam, and which during the late 1960s included substantial endorsement of Marxist Leninist politics; and the “new politics” of the New left, which considered students and alienated minorities as the main agents of social change (replacing the majority of the population and labor activists).[22] Irving Kristol edited the journal The Public Interest (1965–2005), featuring economists and political scientists, emphasized ways that government planning in the liberal state had produced unintended harmful consequences.[23]

Norman Podhoretz’s magazine Commentary of the American Jewish Committee, originally a journal of liberalism, became a major publication for neoconservatives during the 1970s. Commentary published an article by Jeane Kirkpatrick, an early and prototypical neoconservative, albeit not a New Yorker….

Many neoconservatives had been leftist during the 1930s and 1940s, when they opposed Stalinism. After World War 2, they continued to oppose Stalinism and to endorse democracy during the Cold War. Of these, many were from the Jewish[30] intellectual milieu of New York City.[31]



“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The Communist Party must command all the guns; that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”

– Mao Zedong




Seeing What Is Concealed

It’s been a while since I visited here.

I’ve been under the weather, literally and figuratively, swamped by successive waves of benign viruses  and a storm named Hercules which is now dumping 14-28 inches of snow on my county, all this sandwiched around a re-scheduled furnace rehabilitation (the old one still works), and the residua of the holidays.

Over at the Bell [ http://www.thesullenbell.com/2014/01/02/wayne-madsen-at-work/] , I’ve posted some recent Madsen articles.

And soon I’ll proceed to catch up with what I perceive was a dormant news cycle, unless you’re interested in Sharon’s organs or Sotomayor’s dropping the ball on the ACA. Doink!

While recuperating from nasal and chest congestion and the sniffles, and apart from having finished reading Operation Kronstadt and starting Volume One in seriousness of The Gulag Archipelago, I had a chance to browse through the TV dial.

9/11 students may or may not find something of interest on the Science Channel http://science.discovery.com/  show “Blowdown”, in which the former spy ship the USNS Vandenburg is sunk to make an artificial reef off the coast of Florida by fitting its steel hull with lots of explosive charges fitted by the company Controlled Demolition Inc. that blew holes in it after the drilling of air holes that allowed the air to escape as the sea water in.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSj2Anti28g (7:11)

This show was followed by the demolition of a “Hurricane Proof Tower” http://www.locatetv.com/tv/blowdown/6876996, but I didn’t watch that one.




I didn’t get much out of it, though I was torn between the TV and the kitchen and the phone and other ADL’s, but it seems to fit into a larger pattern about which most of you are already aware: the making of TV to further muddy the waters of cognitive awareness and understanding by the use of close-but-not-exactly-the-same docu-drama and reality TV and fictional stuff that seems to be “predictive programming”, that flirts with the sense that the people behind the lens know more than they are telling, and which thus may actually lead the truly-interested researcher (as apart from those that Solshenitzyn called the rabbits and we sometimes refer to as the sheeple) astray.

Another such example showed up early in the morning when I arose to a) get the trash and the recyclables curbside before the storm arrived, b) be alert and awake for the arrival of the HVAC sub-contractor (the electrician was stuck in traffic somewhere, I presume) and, c) to check on the weather forecast. Having satisfied myself with the local weather update, while waiting for the contractor to call, I hit the combo of numbers on the remote that would bring me to the movie channels and immediately hit pay-dirt, dropping in late for a showing of a movie that was clearly topical and predictive and water-muddying programming: Antitrust “(also titled Conspiracy.com[4] and Startup[5]) a 2001 thriller film written by Howard Franklin and directed by Peter Howitt.[1][6].” Panned by the critics, its about software, programming, the open source movement, surveillance, the theft of intellectual property, the infiltration of government agencies, and the world-wide distribution of media.  It got and kept my attention.



Working with his three friends at their new software development company Skullbocks, Stanford graduate Milo Hoffman is contacted by CEO Gary Winston of NURV (Never Underestimate Radical Vision) for a very attractive programming position: a fat paycheck, an almost-unrestrained working environment, and extensive creative control over his work. Accepting Winston’s offer, Hoffman and his girlfriend, Alice Poulson, move to NURV headquarters in Portland, Oregon. [Vancouverites will recognize much of the scenery and architecture.]

Roger Ebert found Gary Winston to be a thinly disguised pastiche of Bill Gates; so much so that he was “surprised [the writers] didn’t protect against libel by having the villain wear a name tag saying, ‘Hi! I’m not Bill!'” Similarly, Ebert felt NURV “seems a whole lot like Microsoft“.[8] Ebert wasn’t alone making these observations; parallels between the fictional and real-world software giants were also drawn by Lisa Bowman of ZDNet UK,[9] James Berardinelli of ReelViews,[10] and Rita Kempley of the The Washington Post.[11] Microsoft spokesman Jim Cullinan said, “From the trailers, we couldn’t tell if the movie was about [America Online] or Oracle.”[9]

Antitrust’s pro–open source story excited industry leaders and professionals with the prospects of expanding the public’s awareness and knowledge level of the availability of open-source software. The film heavily features Linux and its community, using screenshots of the Gnome desktop, consulting Linux professionals, as well as cameos by Miguel de Icaza and Scott McNealy (the latter appearing in the film’s trailers). Jon Hall, executive director of Linux International and consultant on the film said “[Antitrust] is a way of bringing the concept of open source and the fact that there is an alternative to the general public, who often don’t even know that there is one.”[9]

Despite the film’s message about open source computing, MGM did not follow through with their marketing: the official website for Antitrust featured some videotaped interviews which were only available in Apple‘s proprietary QuickTime format.[9]

Antitrust was released as a “Special Edition” DVD on May 15, 2001[32] and on VHS on December 26, 2001.[33] The DVD features audio commentary by the director and editor, an exclusive documentary, deleted scenes and alternative opening and closing sequences with director’s commentary, the music video for “When It All Goes Wrong Again” (which is played over the beginning of the closing credits) by Everclear, and the original theatrical trailer. The DVD was re-released August 1, 2006.[34]

Here’s the trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMHF5LjY9EI (2:31)

I wasn’t able to see the whole film; I came in at the second act or so, but I stayed to the ending, a bit lame perhaps, in the context of the current NSA dust-ups, but interesting nevertheless. Automotive fans will be thrilled with the appearance of a 2CV in cherry condition.



Closing disclaimer: Stanford University has not endorsed this motion picture and no filming took place on the Stanford campus. There are a number of other entities and persons with names which may be the same or similar to those used in this motion picture. However, this motion picture is entirely fictional and (except for minor incidental references) is not intended to depict or refer to any other existing entities or persons and any such references are purely coincidental.


When the flick was over, I went back upstairs to bed, swallowing the morning pills and an extra Day-Quil, for a 4.5-hour nap. [I’m related to the family Ursidae and tend to hibernate in the winter.]


So what’s the point of all this movie madness? Should you go in pursuit of these things?  I’d suggest no, unless you’re really really interested in one of the sub-topics.  Television is, by its very essence, the means by which we are diverted, dissuaded, persuaded, mislead, intrigued, misinformed, propagandized. I take note that two of the leading names associated with television were Zworykin  and Sarnoff.









In January 2011, Sarnoff Corporation was integrated into its parent company, SRI International, and continues to engage in similar research and development activities at the Princeton, New Jersey facility.[2][3]


“I hate what they’ve done to my child…I would never let my own children watch it.” – Vladimir Zworykin on his feelings about watching television.


Speaking of children, there is this crossing my threshold recently:

Zuckerberg’s Dream of Connecting the World: What Can We Expect? (Part 3)

30 Monday Dec 2013

Posted by Ken S. Heller in Media Effects, Media Psychology, Psychology



Facebook, ICT, Impact of ICT, Influence, Internet, Internet.org, Media Effects, Mobile Computing, Mobile Phones, Persuasive Technology, Social Change

Recapping the earlier posts on this topic, Mark Zuckerberg’s new non-profit consortium of information and communication technology (ICT) corporations would like to connect the remaining 5 billion inhabitants of the planet to the Internet who are not now connected (Internet.org, 2013). Many of the five billion people in question will most likely come from collectivistic non-western cultures. What effects can we expect?

More at the link above…


I wonder if Ken has read this?:

http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2013/01/jewish-hero-aaron-swartz-exposing-elite_16.html or these:



And of course there’s no connection to the former Director of National Intelligence, the man who ran death squads, who misled Congress about what his right-hand-man was doing with “Total Information Awareness”…









But, then, on the other hand, I learned in my collegiate-level introduction to the mass media that the word tele-vision means to see across the distances [http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=television], and I’m a sucker for travelogues because I love to travel.

Television, or TV for short, (from French télévision, meaning “television”; from Ancient Greek τῆλε (tèle), meaning “far”, and Latin visio, meaning “sight”




Aside from the old standby of Rick Steves, here are some new HD examples:








And now I’m off in search of some insight for my next edition of