This, the New Cold War’s Dossiers, looks to me like The New Cold War’s effort at doing Avalanche Snapshots, except that their ‘snapshots’ are much more detailed than mine. Avalanche Snapshots are my ongoing presentation of (links to) reports, mainly from alternative media (by which I mean other than corporate media), of the Corporatocracy’s killing of communication. My blog post introducing that series, posted on August 9, 2017, is titled “A Loud Whoompfing Sound.” I initially intended to point to reports giving only clear-cut, simple examples of the establishment killing communication. The deletion of a blogger’s YouTube account by Google for example, is my idea of a simple act of killing communication. But I realized fairly early on that I needed to include reports that were not only about killing unwanted YouTube messages but were also about any situation that involved the killing, in various ways, of unwanted communication. I would have had very little to talk about, in regard to the Corporatocracy’s killing of unwanted communication, if all I was covering was yanked YouTube, or Twitter, or Facebook accounts, not necessarily because there’s not lots of that going on but How much of it will I discover?
As for alternative media, ‘alternative’ does not automatically mean true, or genuine or progressive. And ‘progressive’ doesn’t always mean ‘progressive’, especially if folks have different definitions for the term. And then there’s two other problems here. People at any time can simply sell their souls. A genuine progressive can become a fake progressive. Amy Goodman et al out of the blue (as far as I can tell) started doing State Department-approved shows promoting the terrorist White Helmets. Sibel Edmonds out of the blue (as far as I can tell) started doing reports attacking real progressives like Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett. The other problem is with people who are already fakers who pretend to be progressive and who crank out propaganda under the banner of ‘progressive’. Some of them get a pass from real progressives. How do we deal with that? How do we view that? The awesome late Robert Parry carried (and CN carries for all I know) articles by CIA asset Graham Fuller. The odd reader attaching comments to articles on Consortium News, would complain about it and be met with complete silence. Maybe I missed something. I don’t live on any single website but flit around among many, so I could have missed something. Craig Murray carries a link to faker Juan Cole. ZNet, which carries Noam Chomsky’s articles is also home to a whole slew of fakers. I could go on. And then, I guess, there’s a further problem: Who will judge another’s progressiveness? I would definitely call someone who calls himself a progressive but supports regime change against countries that don’t support the global dictatorship of the US a fake progressive. But what about someone who honestly believes, for example, that North Korean leaders are insane and dangerous and North Korea is full of zombie people who only hate the US and want to destroy it because he or she has never been told differently? That was me only a year or two ago.
We have all grown up with fake news, because it was always there, pushed at us by a resource-rich Right. Until the internet and the freedom it provided for dissenters and principled people to publish real news came along, all we had was fake news. If I’ve learned one thing, it is that I can’t always trust everything I think I know about the world owing to that one fact. Most of those who know about the Rwandan genocide, whether they are leftwing or rightwing, believe that Hutus conceived and implemented a genocide targetting Tutsis, when in fact the opposite is the case. Read Ann Garrison’s interview with Edward S. Herman about it. The article is titled “Rwanda, the Enduring Lies: A Project Censored Interview with Ed Herman by Ann Garrison.” And there’s the progressive Canadian website, Rabble, happily giving a home to Rwandan propagandist Gerald Caplan who spreads, deliberately, Rwandan propaganda. Rabble’s owners know better. They also carry stellar reportage from real progressives, like Yves Engler.
The darkness is powerful. It will take more than any individual progressive or group of progressives to beat it back. Indeed, it’s going from strength to strength. Faithless progressives (the majority, I’m afraid) choose to believe that if we imperfect humans don’t save the world then it won’t be saved. That’s not my position. Nor do I say do nothing and let God deal with it. But, because I have faith that no one can stop God from eventually ending this system of things and the darkness that accompanies it, I do not go along with other progressives in supporting lesser evils in elections. Which isn’t the same as acknowledging that no one’s perfect. You look at people’s intentions, which you can usually read if you look closely enough and possess principles yourself. And looking closely that involves passive learning doesn’t cut it. Sitting in front of the television set (a powerful, effective weapon of the 1% if ever there was one, mixing entertainment with propaganda) and absorbing all of it’s darkness and fake news doesn’t enlighten anyone. One must actively learn and one must employ skepticism. Question experts and authority. It would help if people read books. And it would help if people read books, aggressively, in order to learn. There’s little of that happening.
We are all born imperfect and, for now, will die that way. But we can choose to care and caring is knowing. If you care, then you put your head up and look around. When you look around, you see. Seeing is knowing. We aren’t born knowing all the facts about everything. But as long as we aren’t completely repressed, we can, as individuals, start gathering them. (And when we learn that we are being fed lies, we can choose to actively gather facts rather than just take note of what we think is truth, since, in this world, truths and facts are mingled with lies. Noam Chomsky talks about the assiduous reader of establishment and corporate owned media and establishment books who manages to come away from exposure to all of that with facts nevertheless. That implies that that assiduous reader is both principled and aware that he or she is being fed much falsehood. But the advantage goes to the established, resource-rich forces of darkness that have been working on you since you were born and before you started seeing and knowing. That is why the world is ruined.) What I would say is that, Once we get to the point where we are physically unable to communicate with each other and the only things we can say to each other are things that those who have self-modified (into believers in deceit, inequality and violence) allow us to say to each other, then God will have to step in and he will. However, Faithless progressives are wrong about the most important fact that people, who know it, can tell others. It isn’t about Russia or Rwanda or Myanmar. It’s about Jehovah God and his plan of salvation for imperfect humankind.
My definition of progressive would be: going in a direction away from those – usually capitalists or dull people who capitalists use – who allow themselves to be animated by this dark world’s paradigm, or operating principle, of ‘riches for the strongest’. Such ones have jettisoned their God-given conscience, an inner rule-book that all humans, perfect (no perfect humans exist right now) and imperfect, possess. All humans also possess free moral agency and can choose to ignore their inner rule-book and simply make survival, rather than ‘how’ they survive, their main priority. They therefore are free to employ deceit, violence and theft in their efforts. (Neoconservatives are people who do that openly.) And they obviously have no real problem with inequality, since When they take the means of survival from others, in order to both survive and feel strong, then others, namely their victims, will possess less. (The modified one now possesses twisted desires and values and enjoys feeling strong by harming others. He or she values glory, which war and conquering confers when others, namely the conquered and other conquerors and anyone, see that aggressiveness and rapine unfold. Glory that is unseen isn’t glory.) In this world, with its money system (or systems), money has come to mean, perversely, life. (From God’s standpoint, it is no such thing. But, while the Issue of Universal Sovereignty is on, it means life for all imperfect humans on this planet.) As the apostle John said, “Do not be loving either the world or the things in the world… because everything in the world… the showy display of one’s means of life… does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world.” (1 John 2:15-17)
Much of the Left thinks that because I believe in God, as in a Creator God who isn’t us, I therefore am not progressive. Anything that I report that stems from my Christian understanding, therefore, will be ignored by that Left and others. I will be, therefore, excluded, disappeared as it were, by those who in other circumstances so eloquently and passionately argue for the inclusion – and acceptance and protection – of those who the establishment disappears. So be it. Those (like Palestinians and First Nations and 3rd world victims of imperialism) who the establishment disappears, who the Left then defends, are not entirely disappeared since they have those leftist defenders, however weak or strong those defenders may be. The few, like myself, who possess religious views that the Left and Right can’t (which means ‘chooses not to’) support are without defenders and supporters and likely to be ignored. We are those, truly, without bars and doors, the main targets, in fact, of Gog of Magog, which is the crowd of ruined people who Gog uses before they are destroyed. ‘Gog’ is another name, meaning ‘darkness’ according to Jehovah’s Witnesses, for Satan. Gog is prophesied to attack God’s people in the final days of this temporary system of things. He attacks those who ‘foolishly’ rely on God, rather than the wild beast of Corporatocracy (that Gog in fact directs), for protection. (Ezekiel chapter 38:10-12)
The New Cold War editors have said a lot in their introductory article about their new series and therefore there’s lots to be said it about it. I applaud the caring and note the urgency with which they are pushing ahead with their project. (And that introduction could use some editting actually.) Indeed, As I note in “A Loud Whoompfing Sound,” the avalanche of communication-killing actions by the fascist Corporatocracy has begun in earnest (2016) and is rushing downward and onto all of us. It began when deep State entities like Google reacted to the real news that the then free internet allowed caring people to avail themselves of. The State’s corporate media allies’ lies were exposed, as they continue to be (with more difficulty each day as the avalanche catches progressives and progressive orgs). The urgency felt by the New Cold War’s editors is justified. My first examination of the Dossiers section revealed some chaos. I think that that’s been tidied up. I haven’t examined everything in minute detail, but if the editors tweak this going forward, of course it’s going to get better. In any case, unlike my snapshots, the dossiers are, clearly, going to be far fewer but analytical and in depth, a good thing. Goodness knows, and so do the editors, that every progressive with a platform needs to be both taking in honest, factual reportage and passing it on. I am sure that the editors will do a good job with their Dossiers project.
The third point is the proliferation of informative and useful alternative internet sites – a very inadequate list is provided on our site and we will endeavour to keep it updated – which not only dissect, critically, the narratives of the official media but provide genuine news from sources, including sources on the ground, that contradict these narratives. This makes the censorship much harder and indeed, even increases the attention paid to alternative sources among people it provokes to think for themselves. This is why it is important to understand the present limits of the censorship as an attack on freedom of information and not principally (so far) freedom of speech. The alternative sites are not banned; they are prevented from being seen. If the left makes sure that they are seen, by sharing and promoting posts from each other, this will not succeed.
Let’s examine The New Cold War’s introduction, titled (“The New Face Of Censorship”). The following will not be any sort of deep analysis and excerpts will not be presented in chronological order. It won’t be a critique, really. I’m only going to look at (some) parts of the intro that I find interesting or perhaps don’t get or which I disagree with. (And I take NCW’s points about establishment media’s attack on Jeremy Corbyn, but I’m saddened by the boost that faker Jeremy Corbyn gets from the Dossiers introduction. There are many references to Corbyn in the introduction but they look at his victimization only. John Pilger and Barbara McKenzie give progressives an idea why we should pause before lifting Jeremy up to saint status.) But, again, I certainly support the goal of the Dossiers. Every progressive who blogs should do this. NCW’s material will be in italics. I see that WordPress turns my block quotes into italics also. There’s nothing I can do about that, so I will just alert readers to it and point out that the NCW editors do not quote from the Bible in their introduction, ergo…
Self-censorship – that is to say, compliance with censorship norms externally imposed – has also become widespread: journalistic standards are being abandoned to such an extent that political editors in the mainstream outlets do not even correct falsehoods when their own regulatory bodies call them out for it, while mainstream media cease to engage in or respect critical or investigative journalism as they once did, reducing their function to a simple repetition of the authorized establishment line.
I don’t believe in being extremist, as long as truthfulness and clarity are preserved. Some journos, like Paul Street, take issue with the use of the phrase “mainstream media.” Like ‘main street’, I guess, ‘mainstream’ might convey the idea of the people rather than the 1% and its tools and allies. But, I only got that idea, or flavor, once people like Street made an issue of it. I won’t be the only one, I’m sure. We all know by now what ‘mainstream media’ means. I sometimes use the expression ‘major media’. Those terms mean corporate-owned media. (‘Fascist’ media works.) It means media created and run by the resource-rich Right wherein you’ll find most fake news. Having said that, I do think we’d all be better off referring the corporate-owned media as ‘corporate-owned’, or just ‘corporate’, media. I also have my pet peeves when it comes to terminology. Folks (and there are some who have a problem with the word ‘folks’ for gosh sake!) keep coming up with different ways to label global government by business interests. John Perkins made the word Corporatocracy famous. I like it and that’s the label I choose to use for the kind of rule we all, for the most part, live under. And then there are those who keep threatening that we are heading for world government! We are there, but they say that we are ‘heading’ there. If that isn’t ego, and a desire to control the debate or discussion, then it’s something darker, namely an effort to gum up discussion and communication. What are nation states today? They are, like electoral systems themselves, plausible denial. They are meant to convey the idea not just of national sovereignty, but democratic national sovereignty, in whereby people have democratic, political representation in which they, not special interests, choose their political ‘representatives’. That is not the reality though. That is the idea which the Corporatocracy is selling. It should be noted that there are some places (Venezuela, Bolivia) where there is democracy and political representation to some extent, but there is no place on earth where democrats are left in peace to pursue democracy. Uncle Sam will not stand for it. Any country that resists absorption into the global dictatorship of the United States is forever pressured, in various ways (or outright attacked), by the US and its allies to accept being absorbed, fully, into the US-led (‘dominated’ is a truer characterization) Corporatocracy or else.
I also sometimes refer to global governance as the ‘wild beast of Corporatocracy’, riffing off of the Bible’s terminology. The Bible refers to a number of human groupings as wild beasts, including the wild beast of nation states that see, at any given time, a powerful nation state, or combination of states, dominating (and being most, if not entirely, successful at steering the world in the direction it wants to go). Depending on the discussion, the Bible may refer to the wild beast of nation states (having seven heads – including a couple of dual world powers, such as the Medo/Persian combine and the Anglo/American combine – since Egypt, the world’s first superpower from the Bible’s standpoint), or specifically to some part of it, like the Anglo/US combination, also as a wild beast. Different nation states are depicted as various beasts in the Bible book of Daniel, which helps us to better understand the use of that symbology in the Bible book of Revelation.) And it may refer to the religious part of composite global rulership as Babylon the Great, who is said to ride on the back of another wild beast (symbolizing the United Nations; which is scarlet colored). In the Bible, Babylon the Great is depicted as a harlot who, right up to the beginning of Armageddon, rules jointly with the secular irreligious elements of the world and is said to ride on the back of the scarlet colored beast (the UN). She is also said to make the nations drunk with the wine of her fornication. Instead of faithfully representing God to the people, she misleads them about God (for example by proposing that the man-made plan of salvation that is the UN is actually the political expression of God’s Kingdom on earth) while giving a stamp of approval, and ideological support, to the kings (secular realm) with whom she fornicates.
The more tenuous the story, the more effort must go into suppressing or discrediting its critics,: countries still (as yet) a long way from fascism themselves are driven by the needs of their clients into the embarrassing position of whitewashing fascist forces and activities, covering up for those associated with them, and witchhunting those who threaten to expose the truth.
And then there’s the term ‘fascism’. All kinds of people want to complicate the idea of fascism. Some do so because they want to show off their knowledge of historical fascism, e.g. German Nazism or Mussolini’s fascism. And that isn’t helpful. If you distill it all, fascism is simply a collusion (bound together, which is the root meaning of fascism) of powerful, special business interests and rightwing political parties and figures to run things, very deliberately without interference from regular people. (Corporatocracy is fascism.) Obviously, Fascists don’t describe their fascism that way. They all claim that they are democrats and they point to elections and voting, which they allow, as proof that the people have democracy. Interestingly, Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman, in their powerful and useful two volume “The Political Economy Of Human Rights,” distinguish between fascism that does have the support of the people, generally, and fascism that is forced on the people who would otherwise reject it, and they call the latter ‘subfascism’. I hadn’t thought of it before – in those terms. The only problem with the term is that in most people’s discussion of fascism, whether they complicate it or not, the phrase subfascism doesn’t arise. It’s unknown by most and, it seems, those who know it don’t use it. In fact, I’ve never encountered the term ‘subfascism’ outside the pages of Noam Chomsky’s and (the late) Edward Herman’s writing. If I was to use the term all the time, I’d constantly have to explain it. I’m not even sure that the term ‘subfascism’ is helpful, but not because it is technically faulty. What it refers to, in fact, is the mental and spiritual ruination of people, but from one particular standpoint, namely their acceptance or rejection of fascist leadership. That people can be ruined, mentally and spiritually, to the point where they support their fascist leaders, as in Israel or any number of countries, sadly, is, or should be, uncontroversial. But whether a majority of the populace is or is not thusly ruined, fascism will obtain wherever political and business interests conspire to run societies in an undemocratic, anti-people, fashion. Indeed, How can you not cut the people out when it’s your intention to exploit them! (The core of neoliberalism, which has been foisted on people everywhere, is inequality.) And taking steps to keep them out of your hair is called ‘counterrevolution’. Let’s move on.
The journalists and commentators whose accounts are censored are not being prevented from publishing what they have to say, since their websites as such are usually still standing. They are being prevented from reaching their readers. It is the readers’ rights that are being infringed, and since there are greatly more readers than writers, the scale of the threat to democracy is proportionately the greater…
Good point that. I would add though, that people have some responsibility to care and know. And caring is knowing. When you put your head up and look around, because you are concerned for your safety and the safety of your family and community, you see. When you see, you know. And you don’t have to have special education to care and know. And how much special education do you have to have in order to know how to be a decent human being? Jesus Christ made the point that in the last days, a time when he is here, but not physically, the earth would be ruined just as it was in the days of Noah. He mentions men marrying, women being given in marriage (?), people eating and drinking; in other words doing normal things. But his point followed that and was that “they took no note.” (Matthew 24:36-39) What did they take no note of? They took no note of the things that mattered, including “the weightier matters of the Law, namely justice and mercy and faithfulness.” (Matthew 23:23) They took no note of God and his standards. They took no note of the inner God-given guide book they were all born with, namely their consciences. Let’s not blame the wild beast of Corporatocracy and counterrevolution and counterinsurgency for our spiritual failure.
This manipulation has always been implicit in the social media business model; the platform gets its income from advertising, and the primary purpose of its algorithms is therefore to ensure that paying clients get their messages to the users, not to ensure that users get access to the information they want.
What is new is that this new technology is being handed on a plate, and without legal regulation, redress, rights of appeal, transparency or accountability, to state and political actors whose motives for messaging are qualitatively more sinister. Goebbels at least had to seize the mass media of his day; the new social media are voluntarily offering their masters a sophisticated and perfected new instrument for social manipulation.
Another point needs to be made. We are in the last days of this system of things, a time when God, probably a word meaning ‘darkness’, launches his attack, as prophesied in the Bible book of Ezekiel (chapters 38 & 39). Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that it is only they who are attacked. If that attack is solely physical, then their reasoning would be sound here. If Gog’s attack is not solely physical, then it looks like they are wrong. I’ve always maintained that that attack is psychological/spiritual. I don’t know how else to express it. Everyone is attacked, even though many of the vicitms are turned, like vampires, and end up joining in the attack. Jehovah’s Witnesses – supposing that they are God’s people – can be the main target without the attack being targetted solely at them. (In fact, I don’t believe that that organization has God’s blessing. I do believe that it did. There is no recognizable earthly human group that can claim to be God’s people at this time, which doesn’t mean that God’s work doesn’t continue and his plans are not being realized.)
The State’s, and the Corporatocracy’s, killing of communication – light – is a part of that attack by the lord of darkness. But many are fighting back. Are they God’s, or Satan’s, people? Are they neither? Remember Jesus’s lesson of the good Samaritan. When God’s people fail and those who aren’t step up, then, Who really is your good neighbor? If my progressive brothers and sisters don’t know that they are my brothers and sisters, then the need is for them to continue standing until the end. As the apostle Paul said, “So let the one who thinks he is standing beware that he does not fall.” (1 Corinthians 10:12) They must uphold their loyalty to the truth and when they are exposed to the Truth that can lead them to everlasting life, they must accept it. Here’s the thing: The State is powerful. Its invisible (temporary) ruler is powerful. The people are indeed outgunned. So, What if the last weapon, or tool, that progressives and people with integrity possess with which they can resist the Corporatocracy and it’s destruction of the earth, literally and spiritually, namely Vanessa Beeley’s “truth to power complex” (by which she means progressive publishers: bloggers, book authors, podcasters and organizations, collectively) is taken away? There are two things to consider when answering that question. 1. Once everyone who tells the truth is unable to be heard, Does that mean that what people ‘have’ heard wasn’t enough for them to be able to know what they need to know about this dark world? If they haven’t cared sufficiently, then no amount of communicating facts to them will help.
“However, Do not let this escape your notice, beloved ones; that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years is as one day. Jehovah is not slow concerning his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire anyone to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance. But Jehovah’s day will come as a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar, but the elements being intensely hot will be dissolved and earth and the works in it will be exposed.” – 2 Peter 3:8-10
2. When people can no longer communicate meaningfully with others (where some speak ‘and’ others are allowed to hear), What happens? We are fast approaching that state. We know what the Corporatocracy’s attitude is. They who worship and feed the wild beast are full of attitude. They are also full of wrath, or anger, and it is directed at God and light and all that is godly and any who are weaker than they are. They are those who the angel spoke of when he told John to let those doing unrighteousness do it still (Revelation 22:11). They will fill up their measure fully and then judgment against them will be, rightly, executed (2 Thessalonian 2:9-12). When people can learn no more, literally, because they have been silenced and/or made deaf, then the lesson that we all have been learning (which is to say ‘are being taught’ even if not all want to absorb it), namely the lesson, or issue, of universal sovereignty, will be over. With this spreading and deepening darkness that all can see, we should expect Armageddon soon. Other signs that the Bible gives, besides Jesus’s mention of the way that people will take no note of truly important things, is the attack on global organized religion by the secular realm (when many progressives will fall). And that attack will involved the United Nations in some fashion, as Revelation chapter 17 makes clear. Look at organized religion! Has it not done much to bring the world’s wrath upon it. There are the Islamic crazies unleashing terrorism – with the West behind much of that – in the name of God. Then you have all of the irrationality that goes with every religion out there. That is not to say that the secular realm’s attack on organized religion, together with the people who support that soon-to-come pogrom launched by the secular realm, become rational and godly. That is not the case.
And I saw the wild beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the one seated on the horse and against his army. And the wild beast was caught, and along with it the false prophet that performed in front of it signs with which he misled those who received the mark of the wild beast and those who worship its image. While still alive, they both were hurled into the fiery lake that burns with sulfur. But the rest were killed off with the long sword that proceeded out of the mouth of the one seated on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh. – Revelation 19:19-21
Note the phrase “while still alive” in the above passage. That means that there is neither a reformation of this godless, violent system of things nor those who knowingly and willingly side with it, namely those who roar: “Who is like the wild beast and who can do battle with it?” (Revelation 13:4) The ruined ones call to God to “Bring it!” and he will. Knowledge isn’t the deciding factor. It’s critical but our everlasting fate depends on our free choice of what and who to commit to. Jesus said “Where your heart is, there your treasure will be.” Your ‘heart’ is all of you (the proverbial ‘all of your eggs’). It’s your committed self. If you choose to commit to, or invest in, the godless system of things that I call Corporatocracy (the proverbial basket), then when it goes, you’ll go with it. (There are those who support the wrong side, in this war between light and darkness, out of ignorance. While God can’t bless such ones, and demonic influence may be the result, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are hopelessly lost. But God will not violate his own standards and credit to you treasure in heaven if you haven’t earned it.) It doesn’t matter whether you know that you sided with Satan and against God. Once you cross the line where you knowingly and deliberately work against God, you no longer have his protection (if you did before [Matthew 12:31,32]). Demons can now influence you and they will. (Demonic influence will likely make you a little nuts, rather than dangerous, if you are without God’s protection but not without your soul. It’s like hypnosis, unless I’m wrong. You can be hypnotized but you can’t be made to do anything truly evil if you are actually opposed to evil.) You will become a part of the problem that is the ruined earth. And your mental/spiritual illness will be perceived by you to be enlightenment.