On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 04:35:21PM -0700, Ryan Carboni wrote:
Muckrock has long been publishing the writings of Michael Best, now Emma Best. I have previously pointed out that Muckrock is unwilling to contradict the powerful, who as I pointed out, includes John Young of Cryptome.
Now Best has been writing quite a bit about spicy topics regarding the CIA. But how does a limited hangout work, and when you see it in action, why is it so effective? It is quite a mystery why no one has espoused this in plain English. A limited hangout serves to satisfy people's curiosity in predominant narratives or explanations in what is going on. It is only by merely being curious that you can succeed against limited hangouts.
Nice insight! A technical strategy arising from this insight is "balance of conflicting and competing powers" - discussions in the past welcomed e.g. Tor nodes from each of the major TLA snoop jurisdictions (five eyes, Russia, China).
But the New York Times is clearly and obvious a pro-communist publication.
Is that truly pro-communist, or perhaps pro-corrupted Western socialism and democracy? (The lay person probably cannot tell them apart, and been so brainwashed that they don't see the Western capitalist state as a bees dick away from 'fascist communism' - unfortuntely with endless decades of propaganda it's almost impossible to have a straight conversation these days without reams of qualifications and definitions clarified.)
In fact, I googled "new york times communist" I get this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/29/opinion/sunday/when-communism-inspired-am... Still, more examples can be found here: http://www.conservapedia.com/The_New_York_Times#Newspaper_of_Record
Similar cases re-occur by numerous dishonest individuals, even those not closely associated with the New York Times, Chomsky defends Pol Pot as not that bad and the news reports on Pol Pot as exaggerated.
"Rockefeller spelled it out in his book that all nations should be run like China" google gives the quote but the original article text has removed this quote - here are some alts: https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/asia/item/21025-china-staking-clai... The globalists were evidently pleased with their handiwork. In a 1973 op-ed in the New York Times, for example, senior globalist architect David Rockefeller actually celebrated the mass-murdering regime after a trip to China. “Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose,” he claimed, seemingly oblivious to the ghoulishness of his words. “The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.” The Western banking magnate neglected to mention that it also resulted in the murder of an estimated 77 million innocent people, according to University of Hawaii democide scholar R.J. Rummel. And a litany of Rockefeller quotes here: http://www.buddylogan.com/rockefeller-warburg.html