Identifying a limited hangout
Zenaan Harkness
zen at freedbms.net
Tue Jul 4 17:13:49 PDT 2017
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-americans.html
> 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-claim-in-the-new-world-order
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
More information about the cypherpunks
mailing list