Blog Archives



by H. Michael Sweeney

What you will learn reading this post…

  • The nature of official reasons given for war, and the forces behind them;
  • That those reasons have nothing to do with the real cause of war;
  • That a sense of direction is the true culprit, as shown by countless examples;
  • That the mechanism is metaphysical (Satanic), or perhaps geophysical — Mother Earth.

Updated 7/17: invalid link removed, typos and clarifications addressed, additional examples added.

The usually cited reasons for war

“The 38th Parallel is South of us; smell the food?”             Image: Guardian, UK (click)

Historians tell us that wars were originally fought to acquire territory for their resources, including people, commonly used as slaves or to fuel economies with tribute or pillage. As societies developed more sophisticated cultures, religious and political doctrinal differences were often sufficient enough to spark wars. As Ferris Bueller once said while talking to the mirror, “Ism’s, in my opinion, are not good. A person should not believe in an ‘ism,’ he should believe in himself.”

But we live now in modern times, and it seems that recently we have wholly different problems which have caused us to start to go back to war for resources, once more. Wars to control oil, control illicit drug trade, even to control money supplies. Imagine that; corporate war, banking war. As many people are pointing out, most of the last few wars and especially the ones forecast against North Korea and Iran… are against the last few countries on Earth without a Central Bank controlled by the Rothchildes and their Globalist, Power Elite friends, the 1% of the 1%.

Banking manipulation was, after all, a key part of the original Illuminati plan, its roots in Scottish Free Masonry, to establish what they themselves secretly called the New World Order, the very model of Fascism. Their end goal was a one-World government (ergo, Globalism), that they might, as I maintain, seat the Antichrist. Another key part, as pointed out in the Masonic Bible by its Satanist author, Albert Pike, was to get all three splinter faiths of the one true God, the God of Abraham, to war with each other that all those other ism’s Ferris takes objection to, might flourish; the old Divide and Conquer.

This was amplified by the inventing of whole new isms which at their core were Satanic in intent; whole new religions and other belief structures upon which to ‘guide’ men’s hearts and minds, including things just for the Power Elite, like eugenics (racial population control), sustainability via Agenda 21 (control of everything, everybody, every place), and Carbon-based monetary systems (control of controls). And more such. The rest of us suffer the consequences while fighting in deliberate distractions over any partisan topic a Politician can think of to infuriate a good chunk of us, and about esoteric and philosophical pablum in minutia designed to keep us examining our navels.

In support of all this, the U.S. military, like all militaries we might suppose, is lead by men who are quite often Satanists, and/or members of the moderen-day Illuminati groups which generally fly the banner of Globalism. They have two oaths, the one to their country which they undertake as a lie and which becomes a pretext for select acts of office, those acts taken to fulfill their other oath or affirmations of loyalty to the Bilderbergers, Council on Foreign Relations, Rhodes Scholar Fellows, or other groups evolved with Masonic constructs/principles (e.g., Skull and Bones, Knights of Malta), and so forth. Traitors.

Specifically, and perhaps to cover for any machinations which might be deemed objectionable if observed in full context of the above, the illumined at the Department of Defense have more recently redefined themselves with something called RMA, The Revolution in Military Affairs. Intended to ‘modernize’ the thinking of military planners, they have totally redefined war making to be more in line with the Illuminati plan. That’s not how they would choose to describe it, but how it works out. Part of that was to create whole new sets of and names for types of wars, including wars fought invisibly and without declaration. The most troubling of all, to me, was the People’s War, a war with “Constitutionalists, patriots, the disenfranchised, and poor.” Excuse me?

That can’t be very good for you or me, and underscores what I said about oaths, and then of course, there is the military’s Shoot Americans Questionnaire, and more. The People’s War is, perhaps, unique in another way. They also defined something called the Military-Politico Force Matrix, an array of options involving all manner of forces which can be applied by politicians (Police and the courts, law) and military commanders (lethal and non lethal) against the enemy (you and me) to maintain political control. Non lethal includes psyops, disinformation via media manipulation, and other forms of Political Control Technology, aka mind control, much of which originates from outside of military quarters (e.g., Media and other government agencies… intending to mean Media IS a de facto government agency, what some call the Fourth Estate or Branch).

The upshot is, that the People’s War is not just a possible shooting war through revolution or coupe sponsored conflict born of Martial Law, but also, a silent invisible war, a psychological war, a cyberwar. But here’s the thing: in all of this described above, we have what constitutes the obvious and perhaps some lesser known causes for war, and the thinking which drives them. But I’ve learned something new: none of that looks at the true cause of war and what drives the thinking used in a presumed logical and unknowing pretext. The real answer will at first seem nonsensical, but History proves it out, if you will please bear with me…

Will korea declare war on America?

Here is the real reason for going to war

The real reasons for war oft escape detection

The above reasons are mere logical but flawed deductions made by men incapable of seeing the simple truth; reasons we give ourselves so we sound reasoned. Their point of view was constrained within a falsely justified box of their own making. The real truth, it seems, is very planet itself fosters wars. Once I explain it, one might be tempted to see it as some geomagnetics-based self-defense mechanism to get rid of the parasite that are destroying its ecology: Mankind. War, we might be tempted to presuppose, is the result of a virus injected into our minds by the Earths magnetic core. But don’t forget… Satan was condemned to be in the Earth and to have charge, there, his domain being Hell. Have not we heard that “War is Hell?” I suspect that geomagnetics are, at best, mere tools he employs.

Regardless of which it is, or both, the simple fact no one has yet discovered is that Wars are not fostered by isms or any of the other reasons we give ourselves, but by they Earth’s rotation and the rotation of the Earth’s inner core, which establishes the magnetic fields which causes a Compass needle to point Northward. Think of it this way. A Compass is used to tell you which way to go. It points North. Want good things? Go north. Peace? Go north. Ergo, bad things lie to the south… including war. Silly sounding, yes — but true, also yes.

Why? Man’s sinful self does not that which it should, and Satan guides us the opposite direction: south. Wars are fought to go south! Below, I make the case that almost always, a nation in the North is the aggressor against a nation to their south. Perhaps this weird mojo is why some military units, CIA, Globalist corporations and the Masons are so fond of using the Compass Rose as logo or emblem, or why so many employ a global map or stylized globe or its shape (circle) as part of their Logo. I’m convinced the Earth itself is quite central to Satanic Illuminati plans in a very real, physical and metaphysical way.

Still think it silly? Are you so sure? Look at which nation initiates combat, or applies untenable pressures which spark war, and their geographic relationships. I’m saying to keep in mind that wars are sometimes declared because the other side engineered the need (a southern power might fire the first shot because a northern Power forced them by other forms of aggression, deceits, or perceived wrongdoing). Of more importance, is that you may need to travel East or West in order to find the enemy which also lies… to the SOUTH:

What do all wars have in common?

The Direction of War is Southward

North Korea tried to take over South Korea, and still wishes to do so;

North Vietnam took over South Vietnam after the U.S., France and other European forces from the north attempted and failed to subdue North Vietnam (to their south) in that revolution;

Our own Civil War was the north seeking to control the south, though the south fired the first shot;

The Vikings attacked points south to include England, coastal Europe;

The Scotts and Irish revolted against oppressive rule from London to their south;

Basqu Spaniards (and others) in the north of Spain revolted against oppressive rule from the south;

A civil war (the Fronde) in France involved the Conde province in the north against the Tourin in the south;

The Congo Crisis (civil war) saw Rebels in the North rise up against the south;

       The Zulu in the North rebelled against the Germans in what is now South Africa;

Britain colonized India and Hong Kong, and other points to its south, both ejected by forces originating from their north (Ghandi, China);

Pakistan declared war on India, to its south;

China usurped Nepal, to its south;

Note: According to Wikipedia, there have been many, many civil wars, for the bulk of which maps and ‘sides’ are not geographically stated (because of general revolt nation-wide, or it is simply not described in available information/maps). However, in every case I was able to find depiction, it was North against south. To continue…

The actions of Britain to our North sparked the American Revolution;

America was forced into a series of additional wars with Great Britain;

Britain declared war on Argentina, a whole hemisphere to its south;

Iraq declared war on Iran to its south;

Iraq then declared war on Kuwait to its south;

Russia declared war on Afghanistan, to its south;

Afghanistan was also southerly to our seat of power when we invaded;

The Halls of Montezuma and the Shores of Tripoli (Libya) were to our south, once you get to the Mediterranean;

The Spanish American War was principally fought against Caribbean holdings to our South;

We went to war with Mexico;

Texas went war with Mexico;

We’ve more recently attacked Haiti, Grenada, The Dominican Republic, and Panama;

CIA has involved us in countless Central American revolutions;

England had numerous wars with France, to its south, generally called the 100 Years War;

England had two wars with Spain, to its south;

France went to war with Spain, to its south;

France warred with American Colonists from Canada while we were under British rule;

Napolean declared war on Spain and Portugal to his south;

England, Prussia, Russia, Austria, and Sweden declared war on Napolean, to their south;

All of Alexander The Great’s campaigns were essentially to his South, though the worst forces he faced (Persian Empire) required him to battle Eastward, as well, once he had gone south to engage;

The Great Wall was built against the barbarians of Siberia to China’s north;

The Dynasties of China were warlords seeking control of vast regions, the earliest originating in the North and commonly consolidating southward in a series of repetitious efforts;

The Communist revolution in China originated in the North and spread south;

Red China vows to acquire Taiwan to its south, the last vestage of the old Republic of China;

Russia’s growth has always had a focus to the south (some three dozen provinces, the ‘stans’ near Afghanistan);

Even Russia’s expansion toward Europe was as much southerly as Westward;

South American nations were formed by militant colonization which moved southward along its coastlines from European sources;

African nations were similarly formed southerly along their Western Coast by such colonization, as well as southward from the Mediterranean shores;

What is the history of Indian wars?

What about American Indian Wars?

1899 art by unknown artist: Calvary pursuit

The territorial growth of America was first southward along the Atlantic Seaboard. And as it moved Westward, it was more so at the northernmost regions, and from there southward again. Call it a southwest movement, if you wish. Indian wars were sparked here and there for various reasons and at various times, and yet, there are some patterns which emerged after initial colonization, which generally followed in sets of Southerly evolving wars, then westerly for the next Southerly set:

The Tuscarora war in North Carolina was followed by the Yamasee War in South Carolina;

The Pontiac War in Northern Ohio River Territory was followed by Lord Dunmore’s War in southern Ohio River Territory;

The Tippecanoe battle in Indiana was followed by the Creek War in Georgia and Alabama, and the first Seminole War in Florida;

The Black Hawk War in Illinois and Wisconsin followed by the second War with the Seminole in Florida, and the Navajo in Arizona and New Mexico;

The Sioux Wars traveled westward as their Nation was pushed off their lands, but originated in the Dakotas and Michigan and ended in Wyoming to the south;

The Apache War was in upper Arizona and New Mexico, and moved southerly into Texas and across the border to Mexico;

The Rogue River War in Oregon was followed by yet another Seminole War in Florida;

There were only a few sporadic uprisings after that. We all should be ashamed who are not Red Men, for our country is based on broken treaties and lies, and stolen lands. Their noble pride and heritage holds many lessons for us, not the least of which is that being South of a major power is not a very good sign for prolonged peace.

The Roman Empire is a wonderful example

The Roman Empire was waged using the Appian Way, which led south against other nation states of the Italian Pennensula, and allowed consolidation of all of Italy;

Rome expanded through Slovenia and marched south through the many States bordering the Adriatic Sea, to Greece;

It then battled southward to Turkey and beyond, to the Middle East and Persia, itself;

It used Roman sea power to control the entire northern rim of the African Continent to its south;

The Huns (Germanic peoples) continually attacked the Roman Empire to their south;

The Gauls (France) attacked Rome, to its south;

Hannibal’s Elephants attacked Rome from the Alps, going south;

After defeat of Gaul, the Empire moved south to what became Spain and Portugaul;

The only time it truly moved North was into Britain and in eventual defeat of the Huns. Subsequently, the Celts in the North attacked southward.

 What are the similarities between WWI and WWII?

World Wars I and II are more complex, but still follow the pattern

When nations have mutual defense agreements, what happens after the first attack may not seem to fit the pattern, but more often than not, it still does — as if by unseen design; what I’m claiming is in play. WW II was almost an exact replay of WW I in many ways:

In WW I, Austria and Hungary declared war on Serbia, to their south, while in WW II Germany annexed Austria, to its south, and declared war on Poland, to its south;

In WW I, Russia sided with Serbia and attacked Austria and Hungary to their south, while in WW II, Germany declared war on Communist Russia, being forced into it, from their viewpoint. The first attacks drove south to capture Russian oil fields, and then east to the Capitol;

In WW I, Russian involvement also forced Germany to war with Russia with the same strategy, and they then also declared war on France to their south;

In both WW I and II, Germany has to march south through Belgium to get at France with tactical usefulness, and in response, England declared war both times on Germany, to its south;

The whole Serbian thing in WW I was tied to the old Turkish empire (Ottoman), so Russia, Britain, and France declared war on Turkey to their south;

Note: The two exceptions would seem to be Japan v. America, but Japan allied with Germany to our north, and America responded out of alliances to Britain and France in both wars.  Germany declared war on all of Scandinavia, to its north, but did so as tactical advantage to prosecute war with both Russia and England, to the south. In the end, of course, Russia, to our north, became our Cold War enemy, as did Cuba and other Central American communist regimes to our south.

In WW II, Hitler soon allied with fellow Fascist, Mussolini, and war was launched by the Axis partners against all points South in the manner of the old Roman Empire, described earlier;

Later, Hitler essentially annexed Italy, to his South;

Japan in WW II deserves its own study:

Japan had its own war going while Hitler was coming to power. It invaded Korea, which lay at the Southern tip of Japan, which sparked a campaign which required conquest of Manchuria, also south;

From there they went further south into other parts of China;

From there, further South into the bulk of Southeast Asia — Burma, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, etc.

From there, Southward again to all of Malaysia and the rest of Indochina, the countless islands including the Philippines;

They then attacked Hawaii, which is South of Japan, and America was brought into the war, along with the rest of our allies, including Australia to Japan’s south.

Is there a way to predict wars?

Are there ANY exceptions to Wars aligned to Southward interests?

I’m sure my review is not exhaustive, as there are many more wars of lesser note, or I may have missed a major one in my attempt at casual review (a full-day’s Web search). But there were three interesting exceptions I did find.

One was Genghis Khan. His Empire can be described as expansion in purely East and West directions, save the annexation of Siberia to his north without a battle. Most of the territory in early expansion was, however, a mere unification of the various clans of Mongols under a single leader. Then a whole series of Buddhist ruled States to his West overthrew their existing rulers and ‘joined’ him without need for Battle, save some tactical helps. He was done, he thought, having achieved more than he had set out to do.

He arranged for peaceful trade with points further west, but fate was not to allow long lived peace. He was dealt with deceitfully and his caravans of merchants were murdered and their goods stolen by Persian Sultanates. In response, he conquered them and entered the steps of Europe and the decayed throws of the Roman Empire, where he was able to finally rest. While feared as an evil conqueror in the far West, in all of Mongolia and in peacefully acquired territories, he was revered as a wise and beloved leader, even to this day. His campaigns were exclusively westward and northward.

The second was the Ottoman Empire, which was essentially nothing more than a reversal of fortunes of the Roman Empire. As Rome crumbled, the Ottomans pushed at their weak points and seized almost all of the same territories they had held, warring mostly westward along the Northern shores of Africa, and northward and westward into Europe. Turn about, it seems, was only fair play. One might argue, perhaps, that it was simply the end of the same war.

A third ’empire’ followed the same exact pattern as the Ottomans, and even beat them to the punch, after a fashion: Christianity. Early Christianity mirrored and even forshadowed the Ottoman’s gains, and once establishing itself in Rome, would eventually become the Catholic Church we know today, which spread throughout the World from Rome and New World colonization.

But in consolidating power, the pattern of attacking North to South would resume — and not just by following in free-ride fashion the Southerly patterns of colonization already earlier spoken of for North and South America, and Africa. It has to do with the fact that the Roman Catholic Church was self corrupting…

As result it sponsored the so-called Holy Crusades against ‘heathens’ in Holy Lands to its south, sending in the Knights, including the Pope’s own Knights Templar, forerunners of the Masons and Illuminati, and in my research, the financiers of Rothschild;

The Knights Templar, at war end, established strongholds in Spain, and other points to the North, from where they revolted against Rome, to their South — at least in a manner of speaking; corrupted to Satanic practices acquired on the Crusades (along with their tremendous wealth). They were destroyed, but many escaped with their wealth into hiding;

Martin Luther sparked the first protest of Church corruption from Germany, in the north, forming the Lutheran Church, from which all Protestant churches evolved, and spread southward;

The King of England (also from the north) revolted to form the Anglican Church of England controlled by the Pope (to his south), a trigger of the Spanish Armada invasion already mentioned, in the name of the Pope (and a desire for wealth and power);

These affairs led to the Thirty Years War between Protestant countries and those remaining loyal to the Church; a vastly North (27 flags) against South (6 flags) relationship except one additional flag on each side reversed in placement);

The Templars ‘hid out’ until infecting the Mason’s Guild, later taking it over as Free Masons, from whence the Scottish branches in the north spawned the Illuminati, bringing us full circle by starting their campaign against European nations to their south.

How many wars has America fought?


North Korea can’t help it. And if you accept the premise I’ve offered, it makes perfect sense, but not for any reasons their leadership may believe to be true, or the political rhetoric we hear on the news. It is, therefore, quite inevitable. If you want to know where the next wars will be, judge not just political context and rhetoric, or mere intelligence data… but also, where in the World the potential combatants are.

Let’s see where both sets of such clues overlap: Iran is rather to our south, and certainly south of our European allies, and Saudi Arabia is even more so. Iran will require a war, but Arabia can be taken over by revolt, per the Libyan and Syrian models, taking the Emirates with them as bonus. Then we control the whole of the Middle East Oil Supply, and our friends in Israel can stop worrying about the Islamic Bomb (or so they think, for there surely will eventually be an “abomination which maketh desolate” set up against them).

Cuba is to our south, still, though they’ve politically moved northward of late by cooperating with the U.S. in the return of fugitives and kidnapped children.  Castro retired, long live the new Castro, unless the Power Elite wish otherwise, of course. And if we did war with Cuba, while we are down there, we might as well fix the problems in Haiti and the Dominican Republic. That will insure all the Banana Republics (and their dictators we helped install) give us full cooperation when we look their way — not to mention South American countries, given the Big Stick mentality, and all.

More to the point, it would eliminate the last vestages of Communism and Cold War enemies, save Red China. However, China is due West at almost all points with America. So, despite the belief expressed by their top General that war with America is inevitable (because they think we are a war-like hegemonic State — which we are)… I don’t think so. At least nothing like any war we have been talking about. And why should there be such a war, when Mr. Sorento keeps giving away our country away to China as collateral, or we sell it to them one corporation at a time?

Besides. That country is headed towards its own revolution… just like we are. Who knows, perhaps it will be a Global revolution and the Globalists and North vs. South causes will all just go away and leave us alone for awhile… in the best of all possible outcomes. Now, that would leave the Illuminati 1% to go fish. And I know of just the boat for them; the Titanic II.

Bon voyage, and don’t come back.

FascistBook: The Growing Case for Government Targeting via Social Media


The Growing Case for Government Targeting via Social Media

by H. Michael Sweeney,
copyright © 2011, ProparanoidPress, all rights reserved
permissions to reproduce available on request to pppbooks at comcast (net)
In two parts.
Dateline Portland, OR August 15, 2011


Part I, The Social Media Beast and its Masters


This UML diagram describes the domain of Faceb...

Image via Wikipedia: One way to visualize FaceBook. Did I mention it was complicated?

I write this as an activist, investigative writer with seven books generally on abuse of power, privacy, and security matters, and a consultant to targeted persons. So I get an awful lot of feedback from countless persons on the issue this article regards. Namely, that social networks are nothing more than government tools for spying on and targeting the politically incorrect among us. I fear there is truth in the supposition.

I’m on Twitter and FaceBook, and switched almost exclusively to FaceBook as I can get more reach there more quickly than on Twitter. Tweets tend to be more frivolous and for whatever reason, are less likely to share. In the space of time it took me to get 25 Followers on Twitter, I had over 500 on FaceBook, and the quality of exchange was much higher. Kudos to FaceBook on that score, at least — though I think that may be premature given how things are of late, as will be reviewed in Part II of this blog.

To be fair, understand that I do not write this as an expert on FaceBook or social media in general. In point of fact, I struggle with many aspects of what older hands might consider child’s play. It is a complex topic and even more complex software. What I am considered expert on is my personal experience and the that includes shared experiences with thousands of other users and clients, and the general topics relating to the problem as represented in my books, consulting, and other activities. So I can put experiences into context, and I think I can relate them with logical analysis. Only where a given item of concern may be questionable with respect to deciding it represents a mere technical glitch or misunderstanding of procedure, vs. a deliberate spy or harassment tactic, should my lack of FaceBook experience be much of an issue. ANYONE, may feel free to correct or educate me on any errant matter expressed. (Note: in nearly a year since this post first went up, no such corrections have been offered. Yay!) I will do my best to flag areas where there is a difference between supposition or conjecture, and evident realities, as well as points in between.

I will additionally suggest one might get more out of this article if they also review my blog, 33 Axioms of Fascism.


The Intelligence Community and Social Media

It is well known, or should be, that virtually all of the Social Networks have gained funding and, in many cases, direct negotiated working partnerships with government agencies. Of principal concern are those which involve the military or intelligence community, and their greater apparat, which would include think tanks, research firms, PR firms, financial institutions, Institutes and Foundations, Round Table Groups, and other entities which tend o do their bidding (or be their bosses) or support them in key ways. Collectively, this mish-mash forms what generally represents a spy ring network in functionality. Even Law Enforcement Agencies at the local level are now players. That is a pretty broad-based group, and should be explored more carefully…


Examples might be:

Think Tanks:

The Rand Corporation, a CIA/DOD think tank which has developed several new information gathering systems for its clients. This includes ExpertLens, a new system “to aid complex decision making, adapting online and social media technologies” and which incorporates the Delphi methodNominal Group Technique, and CrowdSourcing to collect information and forecast against solutions. These are very savvy ‘products’ which can be customized for a wide variety of needs and uses, and incorporated into pre existing informational collection and analysis systems. Are they a potential threat to privacy in social media? You bet.

Public Relation Firms:

Hill & Knowlton is CIA’s PR firm of choice, who conspired to fraudulently get Americans behind the idea to kick Iraq out of Kuwait. They used outright lies before Congress and in media campaigns about bayoneted babies to steal incubators. Same thing happened, by the way, in WWI, when the munitions industry went out of its way to buy a handful of newspapers responsible for the bulk of public opinion, and insure they told us Germans were cutting the breasts off of Belgian women. Its in the Congressional Record (prior link). Wasn’t true, of course, but it heated up the debate and did contribute significantly to the war mood. HK publicly admits to using social media to shape opinions, which translates as disinformation given that their publicly posted policy on such use in no way reflects the kind of blatant dishonesty which they have repeatedly exhibited.

          Research Firms:

DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency is actually a corporate-like research entity reporting to the Department of Defense and, secondarily, contracting with major corporations. They are very interested in “solicitating innoative research proposals in the area of social media.” Many analysts see this as a move to track social media for ‘propaganda,’ which from their perspective would be any politically incorrect agenda “so that they can be countered before they can gain traction,” which would, of course, require direct intervention in some way, such as will be discussed in Part II of this blog. This will dovetail nicely with other items in this list, ‘coincidentally.’

Financial Firms:

In-Q-Tel is a CIA venture capital firm that invests in start ups it thinks can serve Agency needs. They originally wanted to be named In-Q-It, but someone (blush) registered those names (.com, .org, .net) before they thought to do it, and rather than pay me (given the animosity between us at the time) a few hundred dollars for the names, elected to instead spend thousands to change the company name. They have since invested heavily in all manner of Internet spying ventures, and continue to seek new avenues. They have not touched ‘closed networks’ such as FaceBook, as yet, at least not directly. However, they have invested in the makers of software used by FaceBook, Google, Yahoo, and others to develop and operate their social media, giving way to speculation that back-door access is quite likely a problem worth considering.


The Project for a New American Century (PNAC), as I expose in my book set Fatal Rebirth, is a kind of Foundation which has no peers when it comes to treasonous villainy. September 11 attacks, the resulting Gulf Oil Wars, Homeland Security, the entire election and War Cabinet of the Bush White House, as well as their policies, were all laid out well in advance (1997), and all came to pass almost exactly as planned, and on schedule. They are not finished either. Their membership roster included a rogues gallery of war profiteers, Bush dynasty cronies and family, and villains like Richard Perle.

Questions: How is it that the invasion date of Afghanistan was known prior to September 11? How is it that Colin Powell and DOD Generals were trolling other nations in support of a war against Afghanistan before September 11? Without September 11, what justification for a war did they expect would materialize? Talk about prior knowledge. Amen, Truthers!

I use them as example here, because one of their PNAC friends, Arianna Huffington, wrote an op-ed article in Lebanon’s Daily Star entitled ‘Social media will help fuel change in the Middle East,’ essentially giving the ‘idea’ to the youth of Islamic nations as the article spread virally, that they could use their phones and computers to organize against their government(s). This was some several months before it actually happened in Libya exactly as she wrote it. Huffington, by the way, is described as having very profitable business ties to the Israeli arms industry and has been female companion to Mortimer Zuckerman, a pro-Israel media magnate. So what’s a nice Jewish girl like her doing writing for Islamic media about social networks for revolutionaries? Clearly, this is a form of manipulation of social media users for political gain… a form of social media control being used as Political Control Technology.

Round Table Groups:

 The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is one of the Round Table Groups better known in the U.S., as they are based in New York. Unabashed globalists with an agenda for a One-World Government, they infect every element of the corporate world as well as every institution of government. Mere Congressmen cower in their presence and hang on their every word, most of them being members who, as if talking about a fellow Wizard at Hogwarts, fawn over and point out membership in their speeches as if a medallion for Exceptional Wizardry.

It is not. It is a signpost of treasonous shame. They seek to destroy national sovereignty. Their best known members are, perhaps, Rockefeller, Bush, Clinton, Carter, Brzezinski, and Kissinger. The CFR lay the foundation for September 11 in Brzezinski’s book, The Grand Chessboard, in which he said the U.S. must remain dominant in the World, and that to do that, we need to control the oil production of the Middle East and Soviet fields bordering with the Middle East. It stated that unless there was some catalyst event to justify a war in the the region, there was sadly no way to achieve that. So PNAC set about to insure it happened just that way. Good old American Capitalism at its best.

With respect to Social Media, CFR has published another work which essentially says what we all know, that it is a great tool for civilians to organize and can become a tool for political change of governments, to include their downfall. It goes on to say, that properly managed, it can become a tool to translate unrest toward rapid and undesirable (their perspective) changes to a more evenly paced and acceptable (their perspective) change. They stress the importance of gaining such a tool. So you can bet that somewhere, people are making it so. In fact, pretty much everyone listed.

Law Enforcement:

Lately, the New York Police Department has established their own Social Media Unit to infect social media with the presence of Cops looking for clues. Well, that might be OK if looking for a specific clue from a specific suspect in an ongoing investigation, but NOT if it is general snooping to create intelligence files on citizens — as has been common practice in almost every major city well before Internet even existed. Portland and San Francisco PDs, and 18 other Police agencies were involved in trading such files on 20,000 non criminals who had never been subject of investigations, as well as those who had, with B’nai B’rith/Anti Defamation League, South African spies, and CIA. So we know it happens. In fact, my dossier was involved, obtained through FOIA. A lawsuit against ADL by San Francisco was dropped amid huge pressure common to anyone who says bad things about any Jewish organization. Well, that didn’t include me, then, but it does, now: Bad ADL.


Too Many Masters, Too Few Slaves

Model of a social network. While not the intended representation, one might imagine you and your friends in the left group, and the government snoops in the right group. Are you that second guy on the left?

In each of the above examples, I simply used the first group or firm, etc., that popped into my head (deliberately skipping over some of the more obvious choices, because I already know the answer, for them), and then Googled to see if they had any truck to do with social media which borders on manipulation or spying. In every single case, it was found to be true. From this we might deduce, then, it is likely that EVERY such agency in each category has already or will soon effect a similar intention or action which can be pinned to its lapel. The problem is, that means literally many hundreds of groups who seek to control and subvert social media networks to their own internal and often insidious needs. The bulk of these I would not trust with my life, much less my Nation’s security, and certainly not my privacy, much less counting on them to obey the law.

But there are only so many such social networks, and only a few of them are large enough to merit attention. The larger they are, I suspect, the more valuable a target they become. The largest of these is FaceBook. So it is perhaps no surprise that charges of spying and digital assault on the politically incorrect should be more common to FaceBook users than any other such media forum. Both because there are so many users (more than 700,000,000, or about 1 out of every five computer users World-wide), and because there are so many wanna’ be system infiltrators who rank them the number one choice for manipulation.

I don’t think that Mark Zuckerberg, CEO/President and creator of FaceBook is dumb, but I think he would be stupid to do the things he has done already to cooperate with these kinds of manipulating bastards, unless the scope of the problem as just described, was not known at the time. You can bet he and his brethren competitors were fed a line of crap which started with ‘National Security,’ and ended with ‘personal assurances,’ and you can bet that 90% of that was bull. I can’t imagine anyone willing to give endless back doors and unchecked control of their cash cow to a bunch of people who, in the final analysis, would probably be shot if there were a revolution right now, and their side lost. But once such a bed has been made… as with a deal with the Mafia or the Tong… you can’t go back and undo it. So whatever state FaceBook and its competitors are really in in terms of bedding with evil partners, they, and we, are stuck with it… at least until that revolution takes place.

As I see it, and as is true for all social networks…


There are three basic paths for abuse to take root

1. Those already inherent in the design or added to it intentionally by the creator/owner of the network which enable their own form of ‘control’ over their client’s experiences, and which could be used in punitive or immoral ways if desired. That does not mean they do so intentionally, but it creates temptation. They would, we presume, be very difficult to discover and almost impossible to prove, but there are clues which might suggest their presence and use. Saying something bad about the media and, in almost every instance, suffering a punitive response, would imply such to be the case.

2. Those added by agreement or as concession to investors or partners. These are undoubtedly on purpose and very likely to be employed to the detriment of end users, where present. These would generally need to be extremely covert in nature and almost impossible to detect. The exception might be harassment or targeting methodologies, but a clever programmer can make these look like glitches. Well, I don’t know of any activist on FaceBook without their glitches.

3. Those obtained by back door access, hacks, etc. You can bet these are in constant wholesale use, where present. Absolutely covert and highly illegal in nature, there will not be any opportunity allowed for discovery, which means that they are not used for harassment. They are snooping solutions, only. Thus short of an announcement of discovery, the end user will never know of its existence, which is also true of the operator of the social media. For this reason, I fear In-Q-Tel’s strategy more than, say, DARPA’s. I fear DARPA’s more than I fear Hill and Knowlton.


This ends Part I.

Part II,  will look at some specific facts, issues and actual experiences reported about FaceBook in media and by users. The issues described in the three paths, above, will be considered and applied where possible in an attempt to evaluate. We need a sense of reality, not conjecture, when it comes to charges of spying and targeting, lest the decisions we make be more dangerous by false assumptions.

%d bloggers like this: