Nazis in New Orleans (#1)

We have dis­cussed Nazi ele­ments in the oper­a­tional New Orleans phase of the JFK assas­si­na­tion in pre­vi­ous pro­grams and posts. In this and future posts, we will excerpt a mas­sive and impor­tant recent book which, when the nec­es­sary hand­i­cap­ping is done, pro­vides detail about the New Orleans Nazis involved with the Guy Ban­is­ter milieu. ” . . . Above the oper­a­tional lev­el, insu­lat­ed and removed to the point of being very near­ly invis­i­ble, appeared to have been indi­vid­u­als whose polit­i­cal ori­en­ta­tion can only be described as Neo-Nazi. Even as I have described this Neo-Nazi aspect, I am sure that it sounds some­what fan­ci­ful. Because of the unbe­liev­abil­i­ty of this part of the pic­ture, I have found it nec­es­sary to refrain from men­tion­ing it . . . . . Nev­er­the­less, the essen­tial­ly Fas­cist ori­gin of the assas­si­na­tion is inescaple.–D.A. Jim Gar­rison’s Let­ter to Lord Bertrand Rus­sell, August 27, 1967. ...”

FTR #946 In Your Facebook: A Virtual Panopticon, Part 2

In FTR #718 (record­ed on Inde­pen­dence Day week­end of 2010), we not­ed that the new social medium–Facebook-might very well be the oppo­site of the lib­er­at­ing, empow­er­ing enti­ty many believed it to be.

On the con­trary, we said–it received finan­cial back­ing from the CIA, per­mits unprece­dent­ed gath­er­ing and data­bas­ing of users’ per­son­al infor­ma­tion, and might very well be a “panopticon”–a type of prison in which the interned can nev­er see his or her jail­ers, but their keep­ers can see the interned at all times.

In par­tic­u­lar, we not­ed the promi­nent posi­tion of major Face­book investor Peter Thiel in “Mon­do Zucker­berg.” Of Ger­man (and prob­a­ble I.G. Far­ben) ori­gins, we opined that Thiel was Under­ground Reich. Opposed to democ­ra­cy because he feels it is inim­i­cal to wealth cre­ation and does­n’t believe women should be allowed to vote, Thiel has now emerged as one of the most promi­nent of Don­ald Trump’s sup­port­ers, tran­si­tion team cre­ators and influ­en­tial pol­i­cy wonks.

Where­as we explored the “vir­tu­al panop­ti­con” con­cept of Face­book with a ques­tion mark in 2010, we now feel affir­ma­tive­ly on the issue.

A very impor­tant sto­ry from New York mag­a­zine sets forth Face­book’s role in the just-con­clud­ed elec­tion. ” . . . . Facebook’s size, reach, wealth, and pow­er make it effec­tive­ly the only one that mat­ters. And, boy, does it mat­ter. At the risk of being hyper­bol­ic, I think there are few events over the last decade more sig­nif­i­cant than the social network’s whole­sale acqui­si­tion of the tra­di­tion­al func­tions of news media (not to men­tion the polit­i­cal-par­ty appa­ra­tus). Trump’s ascen­dan­cy is far from the first mate­r­i­al con­se­quence of Facebook’s con­quer­ing inva­sion of our social, cul­tur­al, and polit­i­cal lives, but it’s still a brac­ing reminder of the extent to which the social net­work is able to upend exist­ing struc­ture and trans­form soci­ety — and often not for the bet­ter. . . .

” . . . . Facebook’s enor­mous audi­ence, and the mech­a­nisms of dis­tri­b­u­tion on which the site relies — i.e., the emo­tion­al­ly charged activ­i­ty of shar­ing, and the show-me-more-like-this feed­back loop of the news feed algo­rithm — makes it the only site to sup­port a gen­uine­ly lucra­tive mar­ket in which shady pub­lish­ers arbi­trage traf­fic by entic­ing peo­ple off of Face­book and onto ad-fes­tooned web­sites, using sto­ries that are alter­nate­ly made up, incor­rect, exag­ger­at­ed beyond all rela­tion­ship to truth, or all three. . . .

” . . . . And at the heart of the prob­lem, any­way, is not the moti­va­tions of the hoax­ers but the struc­ture of social media itself. Tens of mil­lions of peo­ple, invig­o­rat­ed by insur­gent out­sider can­di­dates and anger at per­ceived polit­i­cal ene­mies, were served up or shared emo­tion­al­ly charged news sto­ries about the can­di­dates, because Facebook’s sort­ing algo­rithm under­stood from expe­ri­ence that they were seek­ing such sto­ries. Many of those sto­ries were lies, or ‘par­o­dies,’ but their appear­ance and place­ment in a news feed were no dif­fer­ent from those of any pub­lish­er with a com­mit­ment to, you know, not lying. As those peo­ple and their fol­low­ers clicked on, shared, or oth­er­wise engaged with those sto­ries — which they did, because Trump dri­ves engage­ment extreme­ly bigly — they were served up even more of them. The engage­ment-dri­ving feed­back loop reached the heights of Face­book itself, which shared fake news to its front page on more than one occa­sion after fir­ing the small team of edi­to­r­i­al employ­ees tasked with pass­ing news judg­ment. . . .

” . . . . Some­thing like 170 mil­lion peo­ple in North Amer­i­ca use Face­book every day, a num­ber that’s not only sev­er­al orders of mag­ni­tude larg­er than even the most opti­mistic cir­cu­la­tion reck­on­ings of major news out­lets but also about one-and-a-half times as many peo­ple as vot­ed on Tues­day. Forty-four per­cent of all adults in the Unit­ed States say they get news from Face­book . . . ”

Symp­to­matic of Face­book’s fil­ter of what its users see con­cerns the social medi­um’s recent non-cov­er­age of the wom­en’s march:

” . . . . We don’t usu­al­ly post on Pan­do at the week­end, but this is too top­i­cal and too shame­ful to wait until Mon­day. As you cer­tain­ly know, today is the day of the Women’s March on Wash­ing­ton in protest of Don­ald Trump. The main event is in DC, where some­thing close to 500,000 pro­test­ers of all gen­ders and ages have packed the streets — but there are also major protests in Chica­go, New York and around the world. Includ­ing Antarc­ti­ca.

You cer­tain­ly know this because the protest march is the top sto­ry on every major news out­let, and because updates and pho­tos from the event are flood­ing your Twit­ter and Face­book feeds.

And yet, here’s what Facebook’s trend­ing news feed looked like at the height of the march…

And here’s its trend­ing pol­i­tics feed…

Notice any­thing miss­ing?

Like, say, a half mil­lion women? . . .

In case you think I’m see­ing some­thing dif­fer­ent from the rest of the world, be assured I’m not….”

Face­book has changed its algo­rithm, no longer fac­tor­ing in “likes” and oth­er per­son­al pref­er­ences in deter­min­ing its news feed.

This, how­ev­er, does not bode as well as Face­book would like us to believe. Face­book has pro­mot­ed, among oth­ers, Camp­bell Brown, to an impor­tant posi­tion in struc­tur­ing its news feed: ” . . . . Brown has long­stand­ing ties not just to the tra­di­tion­al news media, but also to con­ser­v­a­tive pol­i­tics, although she describes her­self as a polit­i­cal inde­pen­dent. She is a close per­son­al friend of Bet­sy DeVos, the Repub­li­can megadonor who is Don­ald Trump’s nom­i­nee for Edu­ca­tion Sec­re­tary, and is mar­ried to Dan Senor, a for­mer top advi­sor to Mitt Rom­ney who also served as spokesper­son for the Coali­tion Pro­vi­sion­al Author­i­ty in the wake of the 2003 inva­sion of Iraq. . . .

. . . . And along­side her main­stream media expe­ri­ence, Brown is famil­iar with the world of non-tra­di­tion­al news out­lets spring­ing up online. In 2014, she found­ed a non­prof­it news site, The 74, which bills itself as non­par­ti­san but which crit­ics have said func­tions as advo­ca­cy jour­nal­ism, tilt­ed in favor of char­ter schools and against teach­ers’ unions. The site was launched with mon­ey from donors includ­ing the foun­da­tion run by DeVos, Trump’s pro­posed Edu­ca­tion Sec­re­tary. When the nom­i­na­tion was announced, Brown said she would recuse her­self from The 74’s cov­er­age of DeVos. . .”

Brown is joined by Tuck­er Bounds, a for­mer John McCain advis­er and spokesman for the McCain/Palin cam­paign.

Exem­pli­fy­ing the ter­ri­fy­ing pos­si­bil­i­ties of the vir­tu­al panop­ti­con, we exam­ine the nexus of Cam­bridge Ana­lyt­i­ca, its prin­ci­pal investors, Robert and Rebekah Mer­cer and Steve Ban­non, a key mem­ber of the fir­m’s board of direc­tors and a polit­i­cal guru to Rebekah. ” . . . . For sev­er­al years, a data firm even­tu­al­ly hired by the Trump cam­paign, Cam­bridge Ana­lyt­i­ca, has been using Face­book as a tool to build psy­cho­log­i­cal pro­files that rep­re­sent some 230 mil­lion adult Amer­i­cans. A spin­off of a British con­sult­ing com­pa­ny and some­time-defense con­trac­tor known for its coun­tert­er­ror­ism ‘psy ops’ work in Afghanistan, the firm does so by seed­ing the social net­work with per­son­al­i­ty quizzes. Respon­dents — by now hun­dreds of thou­sands of us, most­ly female and most­ly young but enough male and old­er for the firm to make infer­ences about oth­ers with sim­i­lar behav­iors and demo­graph­ics — get a free look at their Ocean scores. Cam­bridge Ana­lyt­i­ca also gets a look at their scores and, thanks to Face­book, gains access to their pro­files and real names.

“Cam­bridge Ana­lyt­i­ca worked on the ‘Leave’ side of the Brex­it cam­paign. In the Unit­ed States it takes only Repub­li­cans as clients: Sen­a­tor Ted Cruz in the pri­maries, Mr. Trump in the gen­er­al elec­tion. Cam­bridge is report­ed­ly backed by Robert Mer­cer, a hedge fund bil­lion­aire and a major Repub­li­can donor; a key board mem­ber is Stephen K. Ban­non, the head of Bre­it­bart News who became Mr. Trump’s cam­paign chair­man and is set to be his chief strate­gist in the White House. . .

” . . . . Their [the Mer­cers] data firm, Cam­bridge Ana­lyt­i­ca, was hired by the Cruz cam­paign. They switched to sup­port Trump short­ly after he clinched the nom­i­na­tion, and he even­tu­al­ly hired Cam­bridge Ana­lyt­i­ca, as well. Their top polit­i­cal guru is Steve Ban­non, the for­mer Bre­it­bart News chair­man and White House chief strate­gist. They’re close, too, with Trump’s cam­paign man­ag­er Kellyanne Con­way, who also has a senior role in the White House. They nev­er speak to the press and hard­ly ever even release a pub­lic state­ment. Like Trump him­self, they’ve flout­ed the stan­dard play­book for how things are done in pol­i­tics. . . .”

Ban­non’s influ­ence on Rebekah Mer­cer is par­tic­u­lar­ly strong: ” . . . Anoth­er of the Repub­li­can oper­a­tives described Ban­non as the ‘Obi-Wan Keno­bi’ to Rebekah Mer­cer, and a third was even more point­ed: ‘Sven­gali.’ Ban­non is ‘real­ly, real­ly, real­ly influ­en­tial’ with Mer­cer, said the for­mer Bre­it­bart employ­ee. The Mer­cers, the for­mer employ­ee said, made their wish­es known through Ban­non, who would some­times cite the company’s finan­cial back­ers as a rea­son for Bre­it­bart not to do a sto­ry. Ban­non didn’t respond to a request for com­ment about this. . . .”

In turn, the influ­ence of Steve Ban­non with­in the Face­book vir­tu­al panop­ti­con is even more sin­is­ter con­sid­er­ing Ban­non’s polit­i­cal out­look: ” . . . . But, said the source, who request­ed anonymi­ty to speak can­did­ly about Ban­non, ‘There are some things he’s only going to share with peo­ple who he’s tight with and who he trusts.’

Bannon’s read­ings tend to have one thing in com­mon: the view that tech­nocrats have put West­ern civ­i­liza­tion on a down­ward tra­jec­to­ry and that only a shock to the sys­tem can reverse its decline. And they tend to have a dark, apoc­a­lyp­tic tone that at times echoes Bannon’s own pub­lic remarks over the years—a sense that human­i­ty is at a hinge point in his­to­ry. . . .”

One of the influ­ences on Ban­non is Cur­tis Yarvin, aka Men­cius Mold­bug, who has actu­al­ly opened a backchan­nel advi­so­ry con­nec­tion to the White House: ” . . . . Before he emerged on the polit­i­cal scene, an obscure Sil­i­con Val­ley com­put­er pro­gram­mer with ties to Trump backer and Pay­Pal co-founder Peter Thiel was explain­ing his behav­ior. Cur­tis Yarvin, the self-pro­claimed ‘neo­re­ac­tionary’ who blogs under the name ‘Men­cius Mold­bug,’ attract­ed a fol­low­ing in 2008 when he pub­lished a wordy trea­tise assert­ing, among oth­er things, that ‘non­sense is a more effec­tive orga­niz­ing tool than the truth.’ When the orga­niz­er of a com­put­er sci­ence con­fer­ence can­celed Yarvin’s appear­ance fol­low­ing an out­cry over his blog­ging under his nom de web, Ban­non took note: Bre­it­bart News decried the act of cen­sor­ship in an arti­cle about the programmer-blogger’s dis­missal.

Moldbug’s dense, dis­cur­sive mus­ings on history—‘What’s so bad about the Nazis?’ he asks in one 2008 post that con­demns the Holo­caust but ques­tions the moral supe­ri­or­i­ty of the Allies—include a belief in the util­i­ty of spread­ing mis­in­for­ma­tion that now looks like a tem­plate for Trump’s approach to truth. ‘To believe in non­sense is an unforge­able [sic] demon­stra­tion of loy­al­ty. It serves as a polit­i­cal uni­form. And if you have a uni­form, you have an army,’ he writes in a May 2008 post.‘It’s been a while since I post­ed any­thing real­ly con­tro­ver­sial and offen­sive here,’ he begins in a July 25, 2007, post explain­ing why he asso­ciates democ­ra­cy with ‘war, tyran­ny, destruc­tion and pover­ty.’

Mold­bug, who does not do inter­views and could not be reached for this sto­ry, has report­ed­ly opened up a line to the White House, com­mu­ni­cat­ing with Ban­non and his aides through an inter­me­di­ary, accord­ing to a source. Yarvin said he has nev­er spo­ken with Ban­non. . . .”

After dis­cussing Face­book’s new AI tech­nol­o­gy being employed to search users’ pho­tos, the pro­gram con­cludes with the shift of Sil­i­con Val­ley mon­ey to the GOP.

Pro­gram High­lights Include: review of Steve Ban­non’s role on the NSC; review of the mar­tial law con­tin­gency plans drawn up by Oliv­er North dur­ing the Rea­gan admin­is­tra­tion, involv­ing the dep­u­tiz­ing of para­mil­i­tary right-wingers; review of Erik Prince’s rela­tion­ship to the Trump admin­is­tra­tion and Bet­sy De Vos, Trump’s edu­ca­tion sec­re­tary.

Don’t Think Twice, It’s “Alt-right”: Nazi Fellow Traveler Chuck Johnson Helping Trump Transition Team

Noto­ri­ous troll, blog­ger and Naz­i/white-suprema­cist fel­low trav­el­er Charles “Chuck” John­son has sub­stan­tive input in Trump’s cab­i­net selections–“Chuck” may be oper­at­ing in tan­dem with Peter Thiel, whose data­base named the “Plum List” bears a strik­ing sim­i­lar­i­ty to a web­site “ThePlumlist.com,” appar­ent­ly being used by John­son to help staff Trump’s admin­is­tra­tion.

FTR #937 The Trumpenkampfverbande, Part 11: Settling In (The Underground Reich Comes into Plain View, Part 4)

This pro­gram con­tin­ues our analy­sis of the trans­for­ma­tion of the Under­ground Reich into a tri­umphant, broad-based move­ment. Some key fea­tures of the analy­sis include:

“Alt-Right” lumi­nary Richard B. Spencer’s greet­ing to his fol­low­ers at a meet­ing held a few blocks from the White House a cou­ple of weeks after Trump’s vic­to­ry: ” . . . ‘Hail Trump, hail our peo­ple, hail vic­to­ry!’ That’s how Richard B. Spencer salut­ed more than 200 atten­dees on Sat­ur­day, gath­ered at the Ronald Rea­gan Build­ing in Wash­ing­ton, D.C., for the annu­al con­fer­ence of the Nation­al Pol­i­cy Insti­tute, which describes itself as ‘an inde­pen­dent orga­ni­za­tion ded­i­cat­ed to the her­itage, iden­ti­ty, and future of peo­ple of Euro­pean descent in the Unit­ed States, and around the world.’ . . .”

Spencer’s ref­er­enc­ing of Nazi anti-Semit­ic pro­pa­gan­da, racial the­o­ry and attacks on the media in that same address: “. . . . He railed against Jews and, with a smile, quot­ed Nazi pro­pa­gan­da in the orig­i­nal Ger­man. Amer­i­ca, he said, belonged to white peo­ple, whom he called the ‘chil­dren of the sun,’ a race of con­querors and cre­ators who had been mar­gin­al­ized but now, in the era of Pres­i­dent-elect Don­ald J. Trump, were ‘awak­en­ing to their own iden­ti­ty.’ . . . Mr. Spencer’s after-din­ner speech began with a polemic against the ‘main­stream media,’ before he briefly paused. ‘Per­haps we should refer to them in the orig­i­nal Ger­man?’ he said. The audi­ence imme­di­ate­ly screamed back, ‘Lügen­presse,’ reviv­ing a Nazi-era word that means ‘lying press.’ Mr. Spencer sug­gest­ed that the news media had been crit­i­cal of Mr. Trump through­out the cam­paign in order to pro­tect Jew­ish inter­ests. . . . ‘One won­ders if these peo­ple are peo­ple at all, or instead soul­less golem,’ he said, refer­ring to a Jew­ish fable about the golem, a clay giant that a rab­bi brings to life to pro­tect the Jews. . . . Mr. Trump’s elec­tion, Mr. Spencer said, was ‘the vic­to­ry of will,’ a phrase that echoed the title of the most famous Nazi-era pro­pa­gan­da film. [Leni Riefen­stahl’s “Tri­umph of the Will.”–D.E.] . . . .”

Trump’s chief White House advi­sor, “Alt-Right” pub­lish­ing king­pin Stephen P. Ban­non describ­ing him­self as an “eco­nom­ic nation­al­ist” and dis­cussing how excit­ing the com­ing peri­od will be: ” . . . I’m an eco­nom­ic nation­al­ist,’ Ban­non told the news out­let ear­li­er this week. [The term “Nazi” is a con­trac­tion of “Nation­al Socialist”–D.E.] . . . ‘It will be as excit­ing as the 1930s . . . con­ser­v­a­tives, plus pop­ulists, in an eco­nom­ic nation­al­ist move­ment.’ . . .”

Ban­non also ref­er­enced ele­ments he thought were good exem­plars of “dark­ness.” “. . . . Ban­non, in the [Hol­ly­wood Reporter] inter­view, also gave some insight into how he viewed his polit­i­cal foes (pre­sum­ably, lib­er­als and the media) — and the ‘dark­ness’ he touts in fight­ing against them. ‘Dark­ness is good,’ Ban­non said. ‘Dick Cheney. Darth Vad­er. Satan. That’s pow­er. It only helps us when they…get it wrong. When they’re blind to who we are and what we’re doing.’ . . . ”

The fact that New York Times colum­nist Charles Blow voiced what we feel is an accu­rate sen­ti­ment: ” . . . This may well be the begin­ning of the end: the ear­ly moments of a his­tor­i­cal piv­ot point, when the slide of the repub­lic into some­thing unto­ward and unrec­og­niz­able still feels like a small col­lec­tion of poor judg­ments and reversible deci­sions, rather than the for­ward edge of an enor­mous men­ace inch­ing its way for­ward and grind­ing up that which we held dear and fool­ish­ly thought, as lovers do, would ever endure. . . .”

Blow’s under­scor­ing of Trump Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Advi­sor Gen­er­al (ret.) Michael Fly­n­n’s affin­i­ty for “Alt-Right”/white suprema­cist Mike Cer­novich: “. . . . In Octo­ber, Fly­nn tweet­ed: ‘Fol­low Mike @Cernovich He has a ter­rif­ic book, Goril­la Mind­set. Well worth the read. @realDonaldTrump will win on 8 NOV!!!’ The New York­er dubbed Mike Cer­novich ‘the meme mas­ter­mind of the alt-right’ in a lengthy pro­file. The mag­a­zine point­ed out: ‘On his blog, Cer­novich devel­oped a the­o­ry of white-male iden­ti­ty pol­i­tics: men were oppressed by fem­i­nism, and polit­i­cal cor­rect­ness pre­vent­ed the dis­cus­sion of obvi­ous truths, such as the crim­i­nal pro­cliv­i­ties of cer­tain eth­nic groups.’ . . . . ”

Much of the pro­gram focus­es on the media and com­mu­ni­ca­tion and the cor­rup­tion of the very con­cept of truth and the pro­fes­sion of jour­nal­ism. The grow­ing, dom­i­nant phe­nom­e­non of fake news was a major fac­tor in the cam­paign. The growth of social media, the role of Wik­iLeaks and the pro­cliv­i­ty of Don­ald Trump and those around him for tweet­ing dis­in­for­ma­tion are herald­ing the trans­for­ma­tion of jour­nal­ism into pro­pa­gan­da.

In addi­tion to Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Advi­sor Michael Fly­nn, his son and advi­sor Michael Fly­nn, Jr. is a major advo­cate of “fake news,” say­ing that a sto­ry should assumed to be true until proven false. We note that Fly­nn, Sr. dis­sem­i­nat­ed a fake news sto­ry about the Clin­tons alleged involve­ment with a child-molesta­tion ring. That sto­ry tracks back to Erik Prince, the founder of Black­wa­ter, whose sis­ter, Bet­sy DeVos, has been nom­i­nat­ed Edu­ca­tion Sec­re­tary by Trump. Anoth­er of Trump’s advi­sors, Joseph E. Schmitz, suc­ceed­ed Prince as the head of Black­wa­ter. With pow­er­ful, mil­i­tar­i­ly capa­ble out­fits like Black­wa­ter (since renamed) in the Trumpenkampfver­bande, the capa­bil­i­ties for vio­lent sup­pres­sion of dis­sent­ing jour­nal­ism are enor­mous.

Trump has been extreme­ly vocal in his crit­i­cism of dis­sent­ing media, lam­bast­ing broad­cast jour­nal­ists at a recent meet­ing and mov­ing to “loosen libel laws.” With Trump poised to appoint sev­er­al Supreme Court jus­tices and oth­er fed­er­al judges, the capa­bil­i­ties for the Trumpenkampfver­bande to elim­i­nate free speech will be pro­found. Trump has also been one of a num­ber of bil­lion­aires who have made a point of suing media voic­es they dis­like. This comes at a time when the growth of the inter­net has made media out­lets more finan­cial­ly vul­ner­a­ble to that sort of pres­sure.

Oth­er Pro­gram High­lights Include: the cre­ation of a “Pro­fes­sor Watch­list” by a right-wing youth group; rumi­na­tion about how “open-car­ry laws” (such as one in Texas per­mit­ting col­lege stu­dents to take hand­guns to class) might affect the well being of pro­fes­sors on that watch list; the sus­pen­sion of Frank Navar­ro, a Moun­tain View (Cal­i­for­nia) high school teacher and Holo­caust expert, for com­par­ing (right­ly) Trump’s rise to the rise of Adolf Hitler; The U.S. vote against U.N. res­o­lu­tion con­demn­ing the cel­e­bra­tion of Nazism and neo-Nazism on the grounds that it would restrict free speech (tell that to Frank Navar­ro!)

FTR #926 Painting Oswald “Red,” Part 2: “Oswald” in Mexico City

Just as JFK’s assassination–pinned on the ersatz Com­mu­nist Lee Har­vey Oswald–destroyed JFK’s attempts at detente with the Sovi­et Union, the “op” front­ed for by Edward Snowden–the “Obverse Oswald”–destroyed the Obama/Clinton State Depart­men­t’s attempts at a “re-boot” with Rus­sia. This pro­gram is the sec­ond in a series review­ing how Oswald was “paint­ed red.” For pur­pos­es of con­ve­nience and con­ti­nu­ity, we begin the dis­cus­sion by review­ing and syn­op­siz­ing infor­ma­tion indi­cat­ing that Rus­sia has been framed for the “Shad­ow Bro­kers” alleged hack of the NSA, much as it appears to have been framed for the DNC hack.

Indeed, with both the DNC hack and the “Shad­ow Bro­kers” non-hack of the NSA, the evi­dence points increas­ing­ly toward “Team Snow­den” (includ­ing Wik­iLeaks) and Eddie the Friend­ly Spook him­self. The process of pro­pa­gan­diz­ing the high-pro­file hacks as effect­ed by “Rus­sia” is anal­o­gous to the “paint­ing of Oswald Red.” This broad­cast details a vis­it to Mex­i­co City by “Oswald,” in which the pat­sy-to-be of the JFK assas­si­na­tion went to lengths to rein­force the image of a Com­mu­nist, linked to, among oth­er ele­ments, the KGB’s assas­si­na­tion expert Valery Kostikov.

The “Oswald” oper­at­ing in Mex­i­co City did not look like Oswald: ” . . . He was described as ‘appar­ent age 35, ath­let­ic build, cir­ca 6 feet, reced­ing hair­line, bald­ing top.’ In a CIA cable back to Mex­i­co City on Octo­ber 10, the Lee Oswald who defect­ed to the U.S.S.R. in Octo­ber 1959 was described as not quite 24, ‘five feet ten inch­es, one hun­dred six­ty five pounds, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes.’ . . .” He did not speak like Oswald: ” . . . . Equal­ly note­wor­thy in the Octo­ber 9 cable is the evi­dence it pro­vides that the “Lee Oswald” who made the Octo­ber 1 phone call was an impos­tor. The caller, it said, “spoke bro­ken Russ­ian.” The real Oswald was flu­ent in Russ­ian. . . .”

The “Oswald” in Mex­i­co City had unusu­al cre­den­tials: ” . . . [Cuban diplo­mat Sil­via] Duran was a lit­tle sus­pi­cious of Oswald. She felt the Amer­i­can was too eager in dis­play­ing his left­ist cre­den­tials: mem­ber­ship cards in the Fair Play for Cuba Com­mit­tee and the Amer­i­can Com­mu­nist Par­ty, old Sovi­et doc­u­ments, a news­pa­per clip­ping on his arrest in New Orleans, a pho­to of Oswald being escort­ed by a police­man on each arm that Duran thought looked Pho­ny. Duran also knew that belong­ing to the Com­mu­nist Par­ty was ille­gal in Mex­i­co in 1963. For that rea­son, a Com­mu­nist would nor­mal­ly trav­el in the coun­try with only a pass­port. Yet here was Oswald doc­u­ment­ed in a way that invit­ed his arrest. . . .”

The “Oswald” in Mex­i­co City dis­played unusu­al behav­ior: ” . . . He took a revolver from his jack­et pock­et, placed it on a table, and said, ‘See? This is what I must now car­ry to pro­tect my life.’ The Sovi­et offi­cials care­ful­ly took the gun and removed its bul­lets. They told Oswald once again they could not give him a quick visa. They offered him instead the nec­es­sary forms to be filled out. Oswald did­n’t take them. Oleg Nechiporenko joined the three men as their con­ver­sa­tion was end­ing. For the sec­ond day in a row, he accom­pa­nied a depressed Oswald to the gate of the embassy, this time with Oswald’s returned revolver and its loose bul­lets stuck back in his jack­et pock­et. Nechiporenko says that he, Kostikov, and Yatskov then imme­di­ate­ly pre­pared a report on Oswald’s two embassy vis­its that they cabled to Moscow Cen­ter. . . .”

A CIA tele­phon­ic inter­cept of the “Oswald” appears to have been a fab­ri­ca­tion: ” . . . . The CIA’s tran­script states that the Sat­ur­day, Sep­tem­ber 28, call came from the Cuban Con­sulate. The first speak­er is iden­ti­fied as Sil­via Duran. How­ev­er, Sil­via Duran has insist­ed repeat­ed­ly over the years, first, that the Cuban Embassy was closed to the pub­lic on Sat­ur­days, and sec­ond, that she nev­er took part in such a call. ‘Duran’ is said to be phon­ing the Sovi­et Con­sulate. Oleg Nechiporenko denies in turn that this call occurred. He says it was impos­si­ble because the Sovi­et switch­board was closed. The ‘Duran’ speak­er in the tran­script says that an Amer­i­can in her con­sulate, who had been in the Sovi­et Embassy, wants to talk to them. She pass­es the phone to a North Amer­i­can man. The Amer­i­can insists that he and the Sovi­et rep­re­sen­ta­tive speak Russ­ian. They engage in a con­ver­sa­tion, with the Amer­i­can speak­ing with the trans­la­tor describes as ‘ter­ri­ble hard­ly rec­og­niz­able Russ­ian.’ This once again argues against the speak­er being Oswald, giv­en his flu­ent Russ­ian. . . .”

The net effect of the pho­ny Oswald in Mex­i­co City was to rein­force the notion that a Com­mu­nist killed Kennedy, increas­ing pres­sure for retal­i­a­tion against Rus­sia and/or Cuba and esca­lat­ing Cold War ten­sions. ” . . . . One must give the CIA (and the assas­si­na­tion spon­sors that were even fur­ther in the shad­ows) their due for hav­ing devised and exe­cut­ed a bril­liant set­up. They had played out a sce­nario to Kennedy’s death in Dal­las that pres­sured oth­er gov­ern­ment author­i­ties to choose among three major options: a war of vengeance against Cuba and the Sovi­et Union based on the CIA’s false Mex­i­co City doc­u­men­ta­tion of a Com­mu­nist assas­si­na­tion plot; a domes­tic polit­i­cal war based on the same doc­u­ments seen tru­ly, but a war the CIA would fight with every covert weapon at its com­mand; or a com­plete cov­er-up of any con­spir­a­cy evi­dence and a silent coup d’etat that would reverse Kennedy’s efforts to end the Cold War. . . .” The pro­pa­gan­da blitzkrieg against Rus­sia over the high-pro­file hacks, Ukraine and Syr­ia have posi­tioned Hillary Clin­ton in an anal­o­gous fash­ion. It will be VERY dif­fi­cult for her to avoid being sucked into the New Cold War dynam­ics. Pro­gram High­lights Include: Review of the dis­in­for­ma­tion link­ing Oswald to the KGB’s alleged assas­si­na­tion of Stephan Ban­dera (head of the OUN/B); review of the role of Pierre Omid­yar in the Maid­an coup; review of Oswald’s alto­geth­er improb­a­ble activ­i­ties in the U.S., giv­en his sup­posed Com­mu­nist sta­tus.

Munich Gunman “Worshipped Hitler”

Ini­tial­ly report­ed to be a “lone nut,” Munich gun­man Ali David Son­boli “wor­shipped Hitler,” with whom he shared a birth­day. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

“Enthusiastic Hitlerite” Eleanor–The Third Side of The Dulles Iron Triangle

” . . . Few peo­ple out­side of the Unit­ed States had heard of Miss Dulles since she won noto­ri­ety dur­ing the Roo­sevelt era as being pro-Hitler. But her qui­et, square-jawed per­son­al­i­ty, much like her two elder broth­ers, had a lot to do with build­ing up a strong, remil­i­ta­rized Ger­many. . . . an ‘enthu­si­as­tic Hit­lerite’ . . . Miss Dulles remained the key Ger­man advis­er to her broth­er [John Fos­ter] dur­ing his career as Sec­re­tary of State.”

Volodymyr Viatrovych’s American Sojourn and the Orwellian Rewrite of Ukraine’s World War II History

A recent arti­cle fur­ther devel­ops the activ­i­ties of Volodymyr Via­tro­vych, appoint­ed as head of the Insti­tute of Nation­al mem­o­ry by Vik­tor Yuschenko, re-appoint­ed by Petro Pet­roshenko, and serv­ing with the Har­vard Ukrain­ian Research Insti­tute (HURI) in between. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

FTR #901 Fascism: Past, Present and Future

Col­lab­o­ra­tion by pow­er­ful, influ­en­tial West­ern and Amer­i­can insti­tu­tions has enabled the per­pet­u­a­tion of what Mr. Emory calls “The Under­ground Reich.” In addi­tion to the cor­po­rate inter­ests who backed the Axis, jour­nal­is­tic orga­ni­za­tions such as the Asso­ci­at­ed Press collaborated–the lega­cy of that col­lab­o­ra­tion being a dis­tort­ed view of his­to­ry. Much of the pro­gram high­lights the return “above-ground” of polit­i­cal ele­ments of the Under­ground Reich. In Ukraine, the heirs to the OUN/B fas­cists con­tin­ue to gain grav­i­tas polit­i­cal­ly and mil­i­tar­i­ly. The open­ly Nazi Azov Bat­tal­ion will now receive fund­ing and train­ing from the U.S. gov­ern­ment, thanks to the omnibus fund­ing bill passed in Decem­ber of 2015. With Ukrain­ian mem­bers of Par­lia­ment open­ly man­i­fest­ing their Nazi sym­pa­thies, those who pro­fess to be “shocked, shocked” at devel­op­ments should recon­sid­er their point of view. In Croa­t­ia, Ustachi ele­ments have gained con­trol of the gov­ern­ment, as attest­ed to by the out­go­ing prime min­is­ter. Croa­t­ian cul­tur­al events, such as foot­ball [soc­cer] match­es con­tin­ue to expe­ri­ence open cel­e­bra­tion of pro-Ustacha sen­ti­ment. After review­ing the Cru­sade For Free­dom and its pro­jec­tion of East­ern Euro­pean Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors into the GOP, the pro­gram high­lights the Nazi-like polit­i­cal agen­da of the AfD. Rep­re­sent­ed as “anti-immi­grant,” it embraces a qua­si-eugen­ics agen­da and his­tor­i­cal revi­sion­ism rem­i­nis­cent of the NSDAP’s agen­da. The pro­gram con­cludes with a look at the future of fas­cism, with Nazi hack­er extra­or­di­naire Andrew “Weev” Auern­heimer hav­ing hacked print­ers and made them spew white suprema­cist pro­pa­gan­da, as well as tweet­ing Nazi ide­ol­o­gy in such as man­ner as to (appar­ent­ly) aug­ment his stash of Bit­coins. The pro­gram fea­tures a look at Tay, the Microsoft AI “chat­bot” that turned into a Nazi 24 hours after going online. Pro­gram High­lights Include: the AP’s use of SS press liai­son Franz Roth as a pho­to edi­tor; the AP’s cov­er-up of the Lviv pogroms in Ukraine; the direct asso­ci­a­tion of Croa­t­ian cul­ture min­is­ter Zlatko Hasan­be­gov­ic with the son-in-law of Croa­t­ian World War II dic­ta­tor Ante Pavel­ic; Auern­hemer’s asso­ci­a­tion with Glenn Green­wald; Ukrain­ian pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko being allowed to address to the Knesset–the Israeli parliament–despite his hav­ing laid a wreath in trib­ute to the OUN/B at the site of the Babi Yar mas­sacre (1200 of the 1800 exe­cu­tion­ers at Babi Yar were from the OUN/B); the ele­va­tion of Svo­bo­da par­ty mem­ber Andriy Paru­biy to be the speak­er of the Ukrain­ian par­lia­ment; the use of the “14 words” by Svo­bo­da politi­cians in Ukraine, as well as Auern­heimer; recap of Croa­t­ian foot­baller Joe Simu­nic’s lead­ing of a crowd in the “Za Dom Sprem­ni” Ustachi chant.

Why Did Gerard Williams and Simon Dunstan Receive Death Threats for Writing About Hitler’s Escape?

In FTR #791, we pre­sent­ed the research of Ger­rard Williams and Simon Dun­stan indi­cat­ing that Allen Dulles and Mar­tin Bor­mann struck a deal to effect the escape of Adolf Hitler. The authors have been receiv­ing death threats: “. . . Yes­ter­day . . .Williams. . . . said: ‘We have ruf­fled some very big feath­ers. Tra­di­tion­al his­to­ri­ans don’t like it and cer­tain gov­ern­ments don’t like it. We have had some death threats already.’ ” All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.