The Unraveling of the Propaganda Industrial Complex

On February 5, the White House confirmed that over $8 million of taxpayer money was paid to POLITICO during the final year of the Biden administration. It has also been reported that The New York TimesReuters, the Associated Press, and the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) received millions of U.S. taxpayers dollars.

This story is still breaking, with the scale of the scandal escalating with every new X post, especially this one by Elon Musk, reposting a WikiLeaks apparent scoop: “USAID was funding over 6,200 journalists across 707 media outlets and 279 “media” NGOs, including nine out of ten media outlets in Ukraine.” Musk, who is spearheading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has been investigating government spending, posted a one word response: “wow.”

Musk also reposted a message from President Trump, which suggests an even wider scandal.

Keep reading

The Mockingbird Media Will Never Recover From These Shocking Revelations About The Associated Press, The New York Times, And Politico

A free and independent press is absolutely essential.  In fact, Thomas Jefferson once warned that “our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”  Sadly, we have just learned that some of our most prominent media outlets have been receiving enormous amounts of money from the government.  The New York Times, Politico and the Associated Press were being absolutely showered with money during the Biden administration, and it is no coincidence that their coverage of the Biden administration was extremely favorable.  This is a scandal of epic proportions, and there is no way that these media outlets will ever recover from this because their credibility is totally gone.

What has been happening at Politico is particularly egregious.

It is supposed to be an independent media entity, but it has been receiving millions of our tax dollars.

In fact, it has received more than 8 million dollars from USAID alone.

Keep reading

The USAID Scandal Is Getting Worse by the Minute

The data is coming in so hot and fast today that it’s all I can do not to fall behind too much, but the numbers all tell the same story: the Mainstream Legacy Media is a bought-and-paid-for arm of the Deep State. So while I was busy researching how more than $8 million in tax money went to Politico…

…you did see that story, didn’t you?

Politico’s financials aren’t public. I found estimates today that its 2023 revenues were as high as $400-plus million and as low as $7 million. Whatever the case, nobody, and I mean nobody forgets who paid it $8 million in subscription fees. 

Anyway, a couple of hours later, Ian Miles Cheong reported, “The US Government gave the New York Times tens of millions of dollars over just the past 5 years despite paying relatively little money to the NYT in the years preceding 2021.” We know who came into power in 2021. “For instance, in August 2024, the US government awarded $4.1 million to the NYT.”

“The bulk of the funds came from the US Department of Health and Human Services at $26.90m, followed by the National Science Foundation at $19.15m.”

Interesting that it was DHHS and the NSF ponying up 50 million American taxpayer dollars to a paper owned by a Mexican billionaire at a time when Washington wanted to silence certain voices on health issues pertaining to the emergence of COVID and the ridiculous government measures taken to “combat” it. 

Keep reading

At the call of the pocket: Hollywood stars received round sums from USAID for supporting Kiev

Hollywood stars, actively acting on the side of Ukraine in the conflict with Russia, received impressive sums from the US Agency for International Development (USAID) for their support.

Sean PennOrlando BloomJean-Claude Van Damme and other Hollywood stars publicly supported Ukrainians in the conflict with Russia and even went to Kiev. But, as it turned out, not at the call of the heart, but for round sums. Van Damme received $1,500,000, Ben Stiller – $4,000,000, Sean Penn – $5,000,000, Orlando Bloom — $8,000,000. Angelina Jolie cost the most — she was paid as much as $ 20,000,000,” writes the telegram channel “MIG of Russia”.

Keep reading

Digital Hegemony: Sophisticating Monitoring And Propaganda – Love Your Servitude!

Today, we are witnessing a profound transformation. We are increasingly impacted by algorithmic decision-making, artificial intelligence, data proliferation, data harvesting and sophisticated monitoring of how we think and act. This affects how we work, how we access services and how we relate to and interact with others. 

While digital innovations and online platforms offer unparalleled ease, they also raise critical concerns about our independence. The constant connectivity and data-driven decision-making that characterise modern life has major implications. Technological advancements are used to shape preferences and behaviour, and predictably, powerholders use the notion of convenience to manipulate and exert control over populations.

Giant corporations and the state are leveraging what is often termed ‘technological solutionism’ to establish a digital iron cage of control. By monitoring and predicting our thoughts and actions, these intertwined entities impose a tightening noose of automated systems, suffocating personal liberty.

We are increasingly hurtling toward a reality reminiscent of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, where a dystopian technocracy merges with a plutocracy.

Keep reading

Sports and Militarism Shouldn’t Mix

I’m a sports fan. And last weekend I caught the epic clash between the Buffalo Bills and Kansas City Chiefs, once again won by the Chiefs and the magical Patrick Mahomes. Yet seemingly no big NFL game is complete without a military flyover, in this instance by a B-2 nuclear stealth bomber. There’s nothing like mixing potential nuclear Armageddon with football — it’s uniquely American.

It put me to mind of this article that I wrote in 2018 for TomDispatch. We just can’t seem to be able to play ball nowadays without the event turning into a celebration of the U.S. military and its most deadly weaponry. There’s a place for everything, and the place for combat jets, military camouflage and the like is not at sporting events. Sports is supposed to bring us together in a thrilling celebration of competition that isn’t deadly. When the game ends, after all, opponents shake hands, even hug; they walk away together, knowing there’ll always be another game. Another chance at victory. Life, even in defeat, goes on.

War, to state the obvious, isn’t like that — at all. Make sports not war, America.

Keep reading

Capturing the Counterculture

In a previous article, we traced the development of structures of oversight from Edison’s physical monopolies through Tavistock’s psychological operations, witnessing how corporate and banking interests and intelligence agencies converged to shape public consciousness. Now we’ll see how these methods reached new sophistication through popular culture, beginning with the British Invasion of the 1960s, which demonstrated how thoroughly orchestrated music movements could reshape society.

The Beatles and Rolling Stones weren’t just bands—as researcher Mike Williams has extensively documented in his analysis of the British Invasion, their emergence marked the beginning of a systematic and profound cultural transformation. Williams notes that even the term ‘British Invasion’ itself was telling—a military metaphor for what was ostensibly a cultural phenomenon, perhaps Tavistock telegraphing its operation in plain sight. 

What seemed like playful marketing language actually described a carefully orchestrated infiltration of American youth culture. Through hundreds of hours of meticulously documented research, Williams builds an overwhelming case that the Beatles served as the spearhead of a broader agenda that used albums like Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band and the Rolling Stones’ Their Satanic Majesties Request to deliberately steer youth culture away from traditional values and family structures. What seems tame by today’s standards represented a calculated assault on social norms, initiating a cultural transformation that would accelerate over the following decades.

Williams’ research goes further, presenting compelling evidence that the Beatles were essentially the first modern ‘boy band’—their image carefully crafted, their music largely written and performed by others. This revelation transforms our understanding of the British Invasion: what appeared to be an organic cultural phenomenon was in fact a meticulously orchestrated operation, with professional musicians and songwriters behind the scenes while the Beatles served as appealing frontmen for the massive social engineering project.

As a lifelong music fan and Beatles devotee, confronting this evidence initially felt like sacrilege. Yet the pattern becomes undeniable once you allow yourself to see it. While debate continues over specific details like the Frankfurt School’s Theodor Adorno’s alleged involvement in crafting Beatles songs—a claim that has both passionate proponents and critics—what’s clear is that the operation bore all the hallmarks of Tavistock’s social engineering methodology.

The deliberate crafting of a “good boys/bad boys” (Beatles/Rolling Stones) dialectic offered controlled choices and allowed “both sides” to advance the exact same desired cultural shifts. Andrew Loog Oldham masterfully crafted the Stones’ ‘bad boy’ image using public relations techniques reminiscent of Edward Bernays’ methods (the ‘father of public relations’ who pioneered mass psychological manipulation)—creating desire through psychological insight and manufacturing cultural rebellion as a marketable commodity. 

As Oldham himself acknowledged in his autobiography, he wasn’t just selling music but rather ‘rebellion, anarchy, and sex appeal wrapped up in a neat package’—deliberately creating a myth for people to buy into. His sophisticated understanding of cultural branding and mass psychology reflected the broader methods of influence that were reshaping media and public opinion during the era.

Behind Mick Jagger’s rebellious persona lay an education at the London School of Economics, suggesting an insider with a deeper understanding of power systems at play. This assiduous development of image extended to the performers’ inner circle—notably Jagger’s girlfriend Marianne Faithfull, herself a successful singer and socialite, whose father was an MI6 officer who interrogated Heinrich Himmler and whose maternal grandfather had Habsburg Dynasty roots. The Stones’ finances were managed by Prince Rupert Loewenstein, a Bavarian aristocrat and private banker whose noble lineage and financial circles intersected with the Rothschild dynasty—another example of establishment figures behind seemingly anti-establishment movements.

Even the record label itself fit the pattern: EMI (Electric and Musical Industries), which signed both the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, began as a military electronics company. During World War II, EMI’s research and development contributed significantly to Britain’s radar program and other military technologies. This fusion of military-industrial interests with cultural production was no coincidence—EMI’s technical expertise in electronics and communications would prove valuable in both warfare and the mass distribution of cultural content.

These carefully managed British experiments in cultural control would soon find their perfect laboratory in America, where an unlikely convergence would reshape youth culture and the family unit forever. Britain had pioneered these methods of cultural orchestration through music, embedding intelligence ties into the British Invasion, but America would refine and scale these techniques to unprecedented levels.

Keep reading

The Architecture of Control

Author’s Note: For years, I understood advertising was designed to manipulate behavior. As someone who studied the mechanics of marketing, I considered myself an educated consumer who could navigate rational market choices. What I didn’t grasp was how this same psychological architecture shaped every aspect of our cultural landscape. This investigation began as curiosity about the music industry’s ties to intelligence agencies. It evolved into a comprehensive examination of how power structures systematically mold public consciousness.

What I discovered showed me that even my most cynical assumptions about manufactured culture barely scratched the surface. This revelation has fundamentally altered not just my worldview, but my relationships with those who either cannot or choose not to examine these mechanisms of control. This piece aims to make visible what many sense but cannot fully articulate – to help others see these hidden systems of influence. Because recognizing manipulation is the first step toward resisting it.

This investigation unfolds in three articles: First, we’ll examine the foundational systems of control established in the early 20th century. Next, we’ll explore how these methods evolved through popular culture and counterculture movements. Finally, we’ll see how these techniques have been automated and perfected through digital systems.

Keep reading

Just Like Clockwork, the Propaganda Push for Digital ID Kicks Into Gear in the UK

After avoiding the issue for years, the legacy media are now trying to manufacture public complacency and consent for the government’s digital identity — and by extension, CBDC — agenda.

On July 5, the day Keir Starmer became UK prime minister, we wagered that a Starmer government would intensify the push to roll out a digital identity system in the UK — a country that has, until now, resisted all recent attempts to introduce an identity card system, including, most notably, by Starmer’s backroom consultant and mentor, Tony Blair.

Unfortunately, that prediction has proven to be pretty much on the money. Since taking office, the Starmer government has:

  • Launched the new Office for Digital Identities and Attributes, with the task of overseeing the country’s digital ID market. As of October 28, almost 50 organizations with DIATF-certified services had been added to the office’s register.
  • Pledged to roll out a digital ID card for army veterans. As in the US, the UK government is also looking to launch a digital driving license by next year.
  • Announced plans to introduce digital ID legislation for age verification purposes, meaning that young people will soon be able to use digital ID wallets on their phones to prove they are over 18 when visiting pubs, restaurants and shops.

Now, the propaganda is kicking into gear, and the main selling points, as always, are speed and convenience.

Keep reading

How the Human Rights Industry Manufactures Consent for “Regime Change”

In the words of the United Nations, “human rights” range from “the most fundamental—the right to life—to those that make life worth living, such as the rights to food, education, work, health, and liberty.” These rights are supposed to be “inherent to us all.” But this lofty ambition has become distorted, not only by the UN itself but by the whole of what Alfred de Zayas calls the “Human Rights Industry.”

This industry, headed by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), has multiple layers that include UN “expert groups” and “rapporteurs,” regional commissions like (in the Western Hemisphere) the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, international NGOs such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, and tens of thousands of other non-governmental organizations.

In part, this industry still attempts to defend real human rights—the most topical example being the remarkable work of the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Palestine, Francesca Albanese. But, take almost any other country as an example—such as the much less publicized case of Nicaragua—and the real purpose of most of the human rights industry is exposed.

Keep reading