Conspiracy Theory

Brad Friedman recently noted that the Romney family is at least partial owner (may actually have full ownership given the opaque nature of its ownership) of a voting machine company which may play a crucial role in a number of swing states this presidential election.

The immediate corporate media response was "conspiracy theory, conspiracy theory"!

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was recently questioned about the well-publicized presidential drone kill list, to which she responded, "conspiracy theory, conspiracy theory."

Now, any so-called media talker, or "journalist" (forgive me for trashing that honorific) who can't answer the question, who owns the three major voting machine companies and what portion of the vote will they affect --- is too idiotic for adult discussion, but then their patently robotic reply to everything factual is always the same, "conspiracy theory, conspiracy theory."

Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! news show is probably the closest thing to a valid, daily real news content show in existence in America; she reports on important topical events ignored by the corporate media --- yet sadly even her show goes only so far, addresses reality to only a low level, but no farther.

A recent talk by Noam Chomsky, the embodiment of the quasi-radical, perfectly illustrates this. Chomsky, who enjoyed a very long tenured position at MIT, never would bit the hand that kept him well fed; he would keep all discussion at the political level, never venturing towards the real powers-that-be, always the perfect disinformation specialist!

In 2011, Chomsky gave a series of talks around the country, which might be called his "Wall Street apologist" tour. Well into his mealy-mouthed speech, Chomsky would state that the Wall Street fellows were really good people, the problem was "the system." (This is such obvious dishonest nonsense --- who lobbied and financed the decriminalization of financial fraud, after all?)

This has always been the crux of Chomsky's talks --- it just happened, nobody was really responsible, etc., the perfect Wall Street lackey.

Chomsky has long been a supporter of the Warren Commission's contrived fantasy on the JFK assassination --- just as Chomsky immediately supported the Cheney-Bush 9/11 conspiracy theory, and Chomsky finally made mention of the destructive effects of the offshoring of American jobs in 2011! (2011 ? ? ?)

Chomsky also just loves to slip in revisionistic nonsense about the Kennedy administration --- he just loves his clever revisionism.

Years ago, in the 1980s in Washington, D.C., I attended the typical cheapo, after hours gathering of a bunch of poor, volunteer political activists at the end of a campaign, and one fellow passed around a photo he had taken, just by chance, of Henry Kissinger and two other men at a diner immediately outside a CIA facility in central Virginia.

He was shocked to learn that one of the other two fellows was Noam Chomsky, with the third being Robert Gates; they were attending an intelligence briefing seminar.

Not that long ago, Democracy Now's Amy Goodman interviewed Steve Coll on his latest book on ExxonMobil, yet remarkably never inquired as to the ownership of that oil behemoth. (Nor did any other media personage bother to inquire either.)

Steve Coll is the president of the New America Foundation, a quasi-non-partisan foundation financed in part by the Pew Charitable Trusts (oil money) and Peter G. Peterson (private equity leveraged buyout guy and protégé of oil/banking giant, David Rockefeller).

Peterson has parked his latest, pro-austerity astroturf outfit, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget ("Fix the debt" is their mantra, which means the 99% must pay off their debts) within the New America Foundation, of course.

Personally, I have nothing against Paul Krugman, who claims to be a "liberal." In fact, sometimes I occasionally agree with him --- on those few occasions he actually falls on the side of the public interest --- the vast majority of times Krugman appears to always side with the speculators and central bankers.

When the housing bubble was obvious to all --- Krugman claimed there was no bubble!

When the rampant oil speculation was obvious to all --- Krugman claimed that speculation wasn't the cause for the rise in prices (when the paper market price is 13.8 times higher than the physical market price, it's pretty darn obvious)!

Recently, Krugman claimed that QE (the Federal Reserve's Quantitative Easing) was anathema to the banks --- they didn't want it! (Now that is too idiotic to even comment upon.)

Also recently, Krugman gave a talk before the EPI --- if you want a bit of cognitive dissonance, be sure to look it up.

Krugman has almost always come down on the side of the speculators and central bankers since his appointment to the Group of Thirty (Larry Summers, Jean-Claude Trichet [forget what he was indicted for], Ernest Zedillo [didn't Mexico just attempt to extradite him from the USA??], et al.), a group of the top monetary and financial types, established by the Rockefeller Foundation in 1978.

This was the group who recommended the removal of "legal risk" regarding credit derivatives after reviewing the JPMorgan report, Glass-Steagall: Overdue for Repeal, which circulated among the top banks in the 1990s. (This led to the passage of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act in 1995.) By "legal risk" they meant the decriminalization of financial fraud, thus it came to be.

When we look behind the curtain, reality becomes much clearer, much sharper in focus.

When CIA director, Richard Helms (the only Director of Central Intelligence to be convicted of lying to Congress), was involved in a traffic accident at the entrance of the Chestnut Lodge Sanitarium in Rockville, Maryland in the 1970s (an upscale private institution for schizophrenics from the wealthier families), he told the newsies that he was seeing a psychoanalyst there. (A comedic movie was later made based upon this false premise.)

Of course, it later turned out that Director Helms was directing the removal of highly sensitive --- and self-incriminating --- files and records from the wing of that sanitarium which entirely served the CIA's MK ULTRA program. (While all the data about their operations there aren't known, it has been ascertained that it was used for memory erasure, and successfully so.)

Several years ago a young friend returned from Canada, excited about a documentary on MK ULTRA he had viewed in that country --- a documentary banned in the USA?

MK ULTRA wasn't simply about mind control or programmed assassins --- that was one of its numerous subprojects --- but thought control, the control of the medium.

This was slowly realized, year by year, decade by decade, with the concerted consolidation of the US media, the explosive growth in think tanks, and utilizing said think tank personnel to "convey the news" --- along with other subtle forms of propaganda, public relations, and political process control.

The CIA's MK ULTRA program --- the ultra control of the message --- was the obvious phase of the financial-intelligence-complex, the top tier of plutocratic control which came into existence during World War II, when the Wall Streeters created the American intelligence establishment, not for purported national security purposes, but for financial intelligence gather and control to profit themselves and their families.

When Juan Gonzalez did his outstanding reportage the New York City contract with SAIC, where their consultants were finally arrested by the FBI for overt thievery, robbery and embezzlement, the story stopped there --- had the resources and a real media --- been available, perhaps the stunningly obvious questions might have been asked: why would the NYC government contract with SAIC, which copied their sensitive financial records, which SAIC had screwed up on their previous contract with NSA (but copied so many of their files), and before that their FBI contract (but copied so many of their files) --- almost appears their entire agenda was just copying sensitive files and consolidation of a centralized database?

When Helms approached CIA Director Allen Dulles sometime around 1950 or so, to create MK ULTRA, assisted by the advice and later consultation from Edward Bernays and the Nazi scientists brought to the USA after World War II, a process was initiated, leading to Helms and his group --- under investigation in the 1970s --- to relocate the MK ULTRA program to the DoD/Pentagon.

When Carl Bernstein published his story in the Rolling Stone on the CIA and the media in 1977, detailing the deep penetration of the media by the US intelligence establishment, he was exposing only a single node of manipulation and control among a considerably large and expanding network.

Today, we are exposed to the same non-content, the same misinformation and disinformation from Fox, NPR, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, etc. --- the same stooges from the same disinformation-peddling gangs: the Brookings Institution, the Cato Institute, American Enterprise Institute, Peterson Institute, the Heritage Foundation, etc., this foundation or that trust, ad infinitum, ad nauseum --- all very pre-canned and psychometrically designed.

When Chris Hayes, faux-liberal, response with "conspiracy theory, conspiracy theory" to Brad Friedman's concerns on the voting process, he's the same Chris Hayes who wrote articles proclaiming that the NAFTA Transnational Highway to be just so much conspiracy theory --- when the plans and agenda appeared on numerous web sites, such as the site of the Council on Foreign Relations, various Chambers of Commerce, and other business forums.

When ABC's Brian Williams, former Pentagon PR spokesman, talks the "news" he really isn't that far removed from the DoD.

There isn't any media in America today --- only MK ULTRA.

MK ULTRA is ultra control and it appears the super-rich have adequately proven just who is in control!