Latest / UK Column Radio / American universities are captured by the CIA | Jerm Warfare

Transcript

American universities are captured by the CIA | Jerm Warfare · UK Column Radio

0:35
None. Very few people know
0:40
intelligence has been involved in the education system in the
0:44
US. Absolutely.
0:45
Yeah, I think this is. And that's why they're they're
0:48
so effective that they keep, I mean, the the intent of a covert
0:51
operation is for it to be secret and hidden.
0:56
And often they are successful and, you know, countries around
0:59
the world and yeah, increasingly within the United States, and I
1:04
think they've been a much larger propaganda offensive and that
1:09
include the targeting of education.
1:11
But yeah, it's very subtle. It's very hidden and that's why
1:14
it is effective. People don't realise how skewed
1:18
the American educational system is.
1:20
And people who go through that system might even scoff at that
1:24
notion and, you know, think that they're well educated and
1:28
objective and, you know, their analysis and in some way they
1:31
are well educated, but their worldview has been skewed and
1:35
they don't realise that. So what you're saying is that
1:39
the American education system is effectively captured?
1:48
I would say to a large extent, yeah.
1:50
I think there are some exception.
1:52
There are some, you know, professors out there who who
1:56
bucked the grain and who try and teach certain taboo topics and,
2:02
you know, critical, genuine critical thinking and analysis.
2:06
But I think they face a lot of hurdles and blacklisting and
2:11
difficulties sustaining their jobs.
2:14
And now in higher education you have a growing system where they
2:18
rely more on part time faculty and adjuncts.
2:22
So that makes it easier to block list more independent thinkers
2:27
by marginalising them as adjuncts.
2:29
And they really can't make a living doing that, so they end
2:33
up having to leave academia or live a very difficult life.
2:38
And that's a way of intimidating a lot of other professors into
2:43
kind of following the company line, as they say.
2:47
But I mean, when you talk about the education system, just for
2:49
clarity, what are you talking about?
2:52
Well, there are different levels, you know, I have the,
2:56
the, the public education system and I, I think we're talking
2:59
about especially, you know, field of history and political
3:04
science and international relations, American history.
3:09
So there's a level of the, you know, public school system and
3:13
then there's a higher education. A lot of my articles have
3:16
focused more on higher education and I have a background having
3:20
worked in higher education, familiarity with higher
3:24
education and how it operates. And yeah, the particular bias
3:31
and problem comes in these fields, modern teaching, a
3:35
modern American history and fields like Russian studies.
3:39
Those are the areas I think that the CIA has targeted and
3:43
infiltrated US foreign policy and especially vis A vis Russia,
3:49
China, Cold War. And that's where, yeah, it's
3:54
very difficult to teach in a kind of independent line of
3:58
analysis for any young faculty who wants to, you know, sustain
4:03
a career in higher education. So is it about what is taught
4:08
about or about what is not taught?
4:12
A lot of it is what is not taught exactly.
4:16
It's not that the information given to students is false.
4:19
It's just very one sided. And an example I can give, like,
4:23
you know, I did a book on Barack Obama and I included, you know,
4:27
some of the early chapters dealt with his early career, including
4:31
his time at Columbia. And I did some research this
4:34
time as a student at Columbia. And, you know, there was a
4:38
discussion, I, I forget who said this.
4:40
It may have been another student or I think it was one of Obama's
4:43
professors because Obama took a course on, on socialism at, you
4:48
know, in Eastern Europe and, and Soviet Russia.
4:51
And it said, you know, it did not present a flattering
4:55
portrait at all of these systems.
4:58
And it went over the syllabus and it was just all books, you
5:02
know, denial, you know, from, from dissidents or people who
5:06
denounce those systems. So I mean, it's, it's very one
5:10
side. I mean, there is truth in a lot
5:12
of those critiques, but there is another side.
5:14
I mean, if you, you know, if you spend time travelling in Eastern
5:17
Europe or the Soviet Union, you get a perspective from people,
5:22
you know, I mean, Russia, you know, that there is some
5:25
sympathy for that era. There were some, and I mean,
5:28
they even celebrate his national holiday, the Russian Revolution.
5:32
You know, for for a lot of the Russians, it was about
5:34
establishing autonomy, you know, from a foreign country that had
5:39
exploited Russia and the czarist air and overthrowing the czarist
5:44
system and establishing more, you know, autonomy as a nation.
5:48
And, you know, it was the Soviet Red Army that defeated Nazi
5:51
Germany. And that's a great source of
5:53
national pride. And also there's nostalgia
5:57
because I spent time in Eastern Europe and a lot of the older
5:59
people are nostalgic for the communist era because, you know,
6:03
provided thing like free education, free housing, and
6:08
there was, you know, full employment, you know, so not too
6:11
ideal. I, I think a balanced education
6:13
would look at some of the dark side of communism, but also
6:17
analyse why it's just, I mean, the communist system sustained
6:22
itself for, you know, 80 years or so, however many years and,
6:26
and there's nostalgia and then there's a, you know, instilled
6:30
certain pride. And there's also aspects, you
6:31
know, Eastern Europe had a kind of colonial relationship with
6:34
Western Europe and there was an effort more to take control over
6:37
their national resources, you know, industrialised.
6:41
So there was a guiding ideology, a nationalistic aspect and and
6:46
you don't learn that. And these courses like that
6:48
Obama took, and I've been through those courses myself.
6:51
It's just like equates Stalinist Russia or or Soviet Union with
6:56
Nazi Germany and, you know, focuses on all it paints the
7:00
worst possible picture. And that was the quote in the
7:03
book I have where I think a professor said, you know,
7:05
presented these societies in the most damning term.
7:09
It doesn't try and understand them on their on their own terms
7:12
or present any kind of balance. And you know, similar with Mao
7:15
is China, their their book that just and I know you've travelled
7:19
in China. The way they present it is just
7:22
like a dark you know, Mao is like a monster.
7:25
And they don't present any. Contact, you know historical
7:27
contact that China had been colonised by you know neo colony
7:31
of Great Britain and the Chinese revolution was a source of pride
7:35
for the Chinese people just like the Russian Revolution.
7:37
Yes there was an underside. There was a lot of bloodshed.
7:40
You can should teach about that, but you know, you should also
7:45
help understand how those revolution prevailed, much like
7:48
the American Revolution. You know, father ain't the
7:50
British. These were society who had faced
7:52
kind of neo colonialism. I mean, Russia had that too.
7:55
If you look at Russia under the Czar, a lot of their economy was
7:58
dominated by foreign interests and owned by foreign, you know,
8:02
companies. And the Russian Revolution was
8:04
trying to reclaim Russia's economy, and I mean the economy
8:08
boom. There was a boom with, you know,
8:11
state. Driven industrialization.
8:13
So they don't, they don't cover that aspect.
8:16
And that's, I think the, the infiltration of the, of the CIA.
8:20
They infiltrate those fields and they're kind of gatekeepers in
8:23
the profession who kind of dictate the agenda of the field
8:27
and who gets promoted, you know, because they control the, the,
8:30
the top journals and so they can dictate who gets published in
8:34
those journals. They have influence over the
8:37
hiring process. There's a whole way it works.
8:42
And if you look at the people like at Harvard, who've
8:45
dominated those fields of like Russian study, there was a guy,
8:48
Richard Pipes for years with like a dominant figure in that
8:52
field. And he had arch conservative
8:55
and, and reactionary views. And he had, I think he worked
8:59
for U.S. government agencies. He was an aide to Ronald Reagan.
9:02
He was, you know, staunch Cold Warrior, you know, and they said
9:05
he had a history of the Russian Revolution and it presented the
9:08
revolution a totally negative term and idealised the czarist
9:13
society, the pre revolutionary era.
9:18
And yeah, he had worked for the Reagan administration.
9:21
He was tied with the Team B in the 70s.
9:24
That inflated the Soviet threat to justify, you know, rearming
9:30
the United States. And tearing up arms.
9:32
Control agreements. So he was either staunch
9:35
neoconservative and his son was a key champion of the Iraq War.
9:40
He was part of the project of the new American Century.
9:43
So it's kind of that clique that runs these feel like Russian
9:48
studies and dictates how it's taught to students.
9:51
And you see that today. You know, Russia has presented
9:54
in a demonised way in most courses.
9:57
You know Putin's presented as a devil.
9:59
And it's unfettered Russian aggression and this heroic.
10:03
Stands for Ukrainian democracy and if you follow who the
10:06
professors are at elite schools in this field, they follow that
10:10
line just like in the Cold War they were promoting this
10:13
hardline anti communist view and one sided analysis and they
10:18
developed this theory of you know, Soviet totalitarianism,
10:22
the Cold War. He had, you know, people like
10:24
big new Brzezinski who are key figures influencing US foreign
10:29
policy, also had career in academia and elite Ivy League
10:33
institution. Burzynski taught at Harvard like
10:36
Kissinger and Colombia. And he had developed this model
10:39
of Soviet totalitarianism that compared it to Nazi Germany and
10:44
presented again in the Soviet Union only the worst possible
10:47
light without analysing the the ideology, the basis of of
10:52
support within that society. Some of the accomplishments and
10:55
there are some books you can read that point of a much more
10:59
positive picture of Russians and people in the Soviet Union.
11:02
What they're trying to accomplish.
11:04
But those kind of books are never assigned to students.
11:07
And I know, I mean, I was a student in some fairly elite
11:10
schools and it was only much later that I found these books
11:14
because, you know, hang out and use bookstores and I identify
11:18
more, I guess, dissident circles.
11:20
So I found these books that were kind of obscure and it really
11:23
opened my mind to a different point of view or, or less what
11:26
what I feel is more objective analysis.
11:30
And when I present that to students, they do appreciate it
11:32
because they grew up in this environment, this kind of Cold
11:36
War demonology type environment. And they're used to, you know,
11:40
only negative and, and they want to try and understand those
11:43
societies on their own terms. And I think that's what the
11:46
professor should do, help better understanding.
11:49
And I think that can feel peace between society instead of
11:53
denouncing and trying to understand that society on its
11:56
own terms. And then once you have an
11:58
understanding, you can develop good relation and accommodation
12:03
based on mutual understanding. So I feel that education is
12:06
important toward peace. And I feel that these professors
12:10
have betrayed their calling because they're, they're fueling
12:14
this demonization and hatred and, and, and prejudice.
12:19
You know, Russophobia, I think is a, is a sickness like racism.
12:22
And it fuels this hatred towards Russia that's leading us toward
12:26
potential nuclear war. And that's LED us into this
12:29
disastrous war in Ukraine. And it's cost millions of lives.
12:33
And there's been a catastrophe. And I think you can make the
12:36
same argument about China. They're fueling this by by
12:39
presenting China in the worst possible light, they're fueling
12:42
this xenophobia that's running rampant now in our society, and
12:47
it could lead to future. Wars.
12:49
I have come to realise over the years that these single word
12:55
descriptors for populations like communists or capitalists or
13:00
socialists or whatever, these are very unhelpful and fairly
13:03
divisive terms. So I tried personally not, not
13:07
to pigeonhole myself into these these terms because you're
13:11
right, you only ever get taught the evils of communism, right?
13:18
And then when you go to China, it's not this totalitarian
13:23
hellhole that you're expecting. What you're suggesting also is
13:26
that this is coming from intelligence.
13:29
It's it's by design. Yeah.
13:32
Well, yeah. And those are great points that
13:35
you're making. And I agree fully with what
13:37
you're saying that you know people.
13:38
Who go to? Those countries don't find a
13:41
different story from what they're being taught.
13:43
It's not this dark place. They're regular people there.
13:46
They have similar aspirations to people in Western country.
13:50
They want to have a good life for themselves, you know,
13:53
advance their career, their family, have access to good
13:56
schools, jobs, etcetera. And they're doing the best they
14:00
can. They're often, you know, proud
14:02
they're country. And I think the other aspect is
14:06
that they idealise in demonising those societies, they idealise
14:11
Western society. I mean, we have serious, you
14:13
know, and you know of. Course there are.
14:15
Problems in China and Russia, the governments there are
14:18
injustices that occur among their governments, there are
14:22
injustice that occur in our government, our In the United
14:25
States, the criminal the United States is the most heavily
14:28
incarcerated. Country in the.
14:30
World And you know I've covered criminal justice this issues as
14:33
a side job in Oklahoma and where I live the state I live and
14:37
there's horrendous injustices that occur and a lot of
14:40
corruption you know in the judicial system so draconian you
14:45
know sentencing so you know and and the analysis of the
14:49
Burzynski's and like it just idealises western capitalism and
14:54
democracy when. We have far.
14:55
American exceptionalism. American exceptionalism.
14:59
And so, and then, yeah, as you say, it is by design because if
15:03
if you look at the, you know, the, the, for instance, Covert
15:06
Action had an article that I wrote.
15:08
It was a review of a book by David Price, who's a professor
15:13
at West Coast University, who's a great historian, you know, so
15:18
there are some good people who managed to get in.
15:21
You know, it's a good job like this guy.
15:23
It's not an Ivy League school, he teaches that, it's a small
15:26
called, but he's had a good career.
15:28
Anyway. He produced a book on the Asia
15:30
Foundation and how it funded all these educational programme and
15:35
sponsored professors and that was ACIA Front Operation.
15:39
So that's one way. They operate through foundations
15:42
and they give subsidies and funding to professors who kind
15:47
of toe their line. And so that's one way.
15:50
And, and there seem to be other ways, I think their networks at
15:53
Harvard, elite universities like Harvard and Columbia, who have
15:57
intelligence connections and they seem to, you know, be the
16:01
kind of controllers of the profession, as I was pointing
16:04
out at the beginning, they help establish who gets promoted, who
16:08
gets the good job, because often they groom students.
16:11
And then they place them in in good universities.
16:15
And those are often intelligenceling people.
16:19
And I had the experience, you know, at university, I was
16:22
teaching the head of the political science department,
16:26
who was the president of the university, even lists on his
16:29
website that he's an intelligence consultant.
16:32
And he was a graduate of Harvard in the Russian studies field.
16:37
And then he runs this organisation locally called a
16:43
Committee on Foreign Relations where they bring in speakers to
16:48
like mid sized cities to the in theory promote foreign policy
16:53
debate. But he's actually bringing like,
16:56
you know, CIA or Ned, National Endowment for Democracy.
17:00
We're basically promoting the propaganda line of the US
17:03
government. While it's presented as
17:07
objective analysis and he's also bringing those speakers onto the
17:11
campuses to give talks, so to promote a certain view.
17:16
And this guy, he was the president of the university and,
17:21
and he's a very influential guy in the, you know, academic
17:24
world. And he censors anybody because
17:26
I, when I joined that group, I tried to bring in more, you
17:29
know, some whistleblower, including national security
17:32
whistleblowers and insiders who I knew.
17:36
And he he blocked them and they they refused to.
17:40
Invite me or publicise any of my books and I faced a lot of
17:44
problems in higher education even though the students were
17:48
appreciative. And found that I, they, you
17:51
know, considered me actually to be fairly objective because I
17:55
would try and present different side, like studying the Korean
17:58
conflict. I would spend a lot of time
18:01
trying to explain a North Korean point of view, which I don't
18:06
think they do in many courses. It's just that demonised view of
18:10
North Korean totalitarianism and they're the aggressors.
18:14
And in fact, I reviewed some textbooks that were very
18:17
influential by quite well known liberal historians and they
18:21
presented the Korean War in that vein too.
18:24
Just as you know, North Korea is this dark place and they were
18:28
responsible for starting the. War.
18:30
And so I, I spend a lot of time just trying to understand the
18:34
North Korean perspective and I also do give a lot of
18:37
information. All different sides of conflicts
18:40
including the American policymaker views.
18:43
So the students actually don't find my analysis bias like we
18:48
have student reviews. And they often give very
18:51
favourable reviews and they'll say, I appreciate he gave a lot
18:55
on the Vietnamese side, you know, North Vietnamese communist
18:59
side. But I think the other professors
19:02
are not doing that. They just present this one sided
19:05
narrative. So that's actually biassed.
19:08
And yeah, I think somehow the intelligence networks are able
19:12
to control through appointments and through giving a hard time
19:15
to any faculty who challenges US foreign policy.
19:20
They they face blacklisting. So that's that's part of the
19:24
game, I think. Yeah, and you've also noted that
19:28
they omit. Yes, that I found.
19:31
I mean, there are tonnes of books.
19:33
And to be honest, I didn't have a full understanding of this
19:36
topic until I started working for Corporate Action magazine.
19:40
And I started doing research, a series of articles on political
19:43
assassination and started working with the guy.
19:46
And somehow he contacted me, an expert who lives in Austin, TX,
19:51
who has studied the JFK assassination and is adamant
19:56
that Lyndon Johnson played a key role.
19:58
And I think he has very good evidence.
20:00
And anyway, I started working with him so I better understood
20:03
the talk. And he guided me because there
20:05
are a lot of the books. It's a bit intimidating on that
20:08
topic. He guided me in some of the good
20:10
books to read. Since you can't read, there are
20:12
hundreds of books. And as I developed a better
20:16
understanding, yeah, I had a better understanding how biassed
20:19
academia was because they continued they they basically
20:22
ignore all these good book that there are a lot of the good.
20:25
Books, but they're like, you know, they're not reviewed in
20:28
The New York Times or the major, you know, intellectual journals.
20:32
And they're small, kind of off the beat press, so they don't
20:36
get any attention in mainstream academia.
20:39
And then, yeah, I think there are these gatekeepers who are
20:42
committed to the line that Oswald was the assassin James
20:47
Earl Ray killed King, you know, the lone gunman there, though,
20:51
Because I I think if you look into these assassinations, it
20:54
punctures the myth of American exceptions.
20:57
It's always a lone gunman. Yeah, it's very clear that there
21:00
are these wider conspiracies that the CIA and FBI were
21:04
involved in different levels, including the cover up.
21:08
And it showed that American democracy is not pure.
21:10
And it relates to what we were discussing earlier, that, you
21:13
know, we demonise Soviet Russia and China, that they're so
21:17
undemocratic. But if you look deeply at our
21:20
society, we're not very democratic either.
21:23
We have these violent coups and violent power struggles just
21:27
like in other countries. But but that's where these
21:30
intellectual gatekeepers come in to preserve the myth of American
21:33
exceptionalism. And yeah, like after the recent
21:37
the example I gave in an article I wrote after the, you know,
21:41
Trump document release, this Harvard professor came out and
21:45
said, oh, we these documents further and corroborate that Lee
21:50
Harvey Oswald with lone assassin and anyone who thinks otherwise
21:54
is a conspiracy nut. And that's kind of the typical
21:57
line. This guy is a very influential.
21:59
Professor at Harvard. And I mean, I don't have any
22:02
evidence that he's directly tied with intelligence agencies, but
22:06
subconsciously, perhaps he knows that to get, you know, sustain
22:10
that position at Harvard, he's got to take that position.
22:13
And then there was a a Yale historian who won the Pulitzer
22:16
Prize for a biography of J Edgar Hoover.
22:19
And remarkably, she brings up the King assassination.
22:23
And she mentioned, she does cite because William Pepper was the
22:27
King family lawyer and he did the most intense investigation
22:32
that I think definitively show that James Earl Ray was set up
22:35
as a Patsy. And, and he actually uncovered
22:39
the whole story 'cause he got these informants who were in the
22:42
Memphis City Council and an organised crime and who was
22:47
connected with the, you know, with J Edgar Hoover and Clyde
22:50
Tolson. And he revealed a lot of
22:53
information to to William F Pepper and his books are
22:57
remarkable and really tracing the full details of this
23:00
conspiracy and how they set up James Oray.
23:04
So this Yale historian who wrote this critical, it is a critical
23:08
book on FBI Director J Edgar Hoover.
23:11
And she won the Pulitzer Prize for history, I believe 2021 or
23:15
some year like that. And she cites Pepper, but she
23:19
doesn't discuss at all the details about the FB is role in
23:25
the King conspiracy. And she basically exonerates the
23:30
FBI and Hoover and doesn't implicate him in in King's
23:35
killing. When when we have the Pepper
23:37
study that has evidence, you know, beyond or I mean, this is
23:41
a very strong courtroom case if if you're trying it the the
23:45
evidence is quite overwhelming to implicate the FBI and yet she
23:50
leaves it out of that history. So students are left without an
23:55
understanding and you know, they have this great education at
23:58
Yale. They have this famous Pulitzer
24:00
Prize winning professor and she studied the FBI and J Edgar
24:04
Hoover for years in a Pulitzer Prize winning book.
24:08
And they're not going to learn from her how the FBI was
24:11
involved in the murder of a national hero.
24:15
So that's just par for the course there, you know?
24:18
And yeah, as you say, it's maybe it's, it's not that they're
24:21
lying to students. It's that she's leaving out an
24:25
important part of U.S. history. Because if you understand how
24:28
the FBI was behind King's murder.
24:31
It raises all sorts of questions like we're raising about, you
24:35
know, American exceptionalism, about the need for, you know,
24:39
real change in society, not just some mild reform when you have
24:43
the leading police agency. Murdering top civil rights
24:47
activists who violated no, no laws.
24:49
So it's a very, very stark omission.
24:54
And then they attack, you know, any academic can't get a job if
24:58
you, you know, investigate that topic honestly and uncover all
25:04
this stuff or or relay all this stuff.
25:06
You you won't get a job. It can't be taught and it never
25:10
makes its way into the history textbooks.
25:13
Like because I reviewed a book book by Eric Faulner, who's a
25:16
leading historian at Columbia, has a very good reputation as a
25:20
historian, as a very liberal guy who wrote all these books about
25:24
slavery and Reconstruction and Abraham Lincoln.
25:28
But in reviewing his text again, like this Pulitzer Prize winning
25:32
historian, he leaves out. How the FBI.
25:34
Was behind King's assassination. I was studying the Huey Long
25:37
assassination. Huey Long was a very populist, a
25:41
left wing figure who was challenging Roosevelt from the
25:44
left in the 36 Democratic Party primary and was very popular
25:48
governor of Louisiana who had a share in the wealth programme,
25:52
was going to really tax the rich and redistribute to the poor and
25:56
and went after the Standard Oil company in the state of
25:59
Louisiana. And he was beloved by the masses
26:02
of Louisiana like no other politician ever since.
26:05
And he was assassinated and and Phoner writes that it was this
26:09
doctor, you know, because the, the the long assassination was
26:13
like the king and Kennedy. There was this Patsy who was set
26:16
up to make it look like he was this deranged lone gunman.
26:19
But it was actually a coordinated plot because long
26:22
was probably could be the next president if they didn't
26:24
assassinate him. And he's going to really
26:26
challenge the powers that be on the wealthy oligarchs in the
26:30
country. So they had them assassinated
26:32
and his the evidence crime scene evidence is clear.
26:35
His bodyguards killed them, but Foner repeats the lie that this
26:40
doctor shot him and was the lone assassin.
26:44
So his book is very biassed. And again, it's hard to
26:49
understand. I mean, whether the
26:51
intelligence, I don't think he's on the payroll of some
26:54
intelligence agency, but there are forces at work, I think that
26:59
make sure that this kind of skewed history is taught or that
27:04
certain pertinent facts are omitted from the dominant texts
27:07
and the dominant schools. I think there is some evidence
27:12
the CIA may have been involved on some level, but the Pepper
27:16
investigation found more, much more direct link with the FBI in
27:21
that case. And yeah, in Pearl Harbour, the
27:23
CIA wasn't yet established because it was established in
27:26
47. But yeah, that's another case
27:28
where historians, even though the evidence is very clear in
27:33
that case, because I, I did an investigation myself, I read
27:37
about 30 books on Pearl Harbour at one point and did an article
27:42
and I found very clearly the evidence was actually
27:45
incruntrovertible that the Army Chief of Staff, George C
27:49
Marshall actually had, he was informed of the Pearl Harbour
27:52
attack very early in the morning on December 7th, 1941.
27:58
And then this was, you know, Washington, DC time, whereas
28:02
Hawaii where the attacks occurred is 7 hours or 8 hours
28:06
behind in time. So, and they they said, and
28:09
actually he was grilled by an Army Commission and asked why he
28:14
didn't pick up the scrambler phone.
28:16
Because they had a technology where all you had to do was pick
28:19
up the scrambler phone and notify the naval commanders in
28:23
Hawaii of this attack. And they could have prepared
28:26
their defences and launched a counter attack and saved the
28:30
lives of 3000. Americans who were.
28:33
Killed. And he gave an excuse, he
28:36
admitted, because he sent the message via regular Courier,
28:41
which got to Hawaii, you know, a day later after it was too late.
28:47
So this is a fact of history. And he was actually asked about
28:51
this by an Army Commission. And he gave the excuse that,
28:55
well, if I picked up the scrambler phone, the Germans
28:58
might have found the message. And that that was totally
29:02
irrelevant to his role. And as and as chief of the Army,
29:06
his job is to protect national security and then you know,
29:09
there's an attack going on your country.
29:12
You have the. Duty to inform the proper
29:14
commanders to stop and he didn't do that and that is simply a
29:18
fact. However that is left out, it's
29:22
made like it's some conspiracy theory that Roosevelt knew in
29:25
the dance when it is a fact that he had that information.
29:28
And it's also a fact that the Army Cryptanalysis Division had
29:33
cracked the Japanese code and knew and knew of the Japanese
29:38
plans in the dance. And they failed to properly warn
29:41
the Hawaiian naval commanders who were scapegoated and the
29:45
those the families of those commanders fought for years to
29:48
exonerate and restore their public reputation, which
29:52
Congress eventually did in the late 90s.
29:55
So I don't find any conspiracy over this.
29:58
And you can you can look at the motive.
30:01
The motive was clear that the Roosevelt administration knew
30:05
the public would never support US intervention in another World
30:09
War unless the country would directly attack.
30:11
So he had to allow that attack since he had plans to go the war
30:15
and he had campaigned on an anti war platform in 1940.
30:20
So that's just the historical facts.
30:22
But if you read the phoner textbook or most textbooks, they
30:27
leave that out of the story. They make like it's some
30:29
conspiracy theory that Roosevelt might have had advanced
30:33
knowledge. And they continue to frame it as
30:35
a surprise attack on America when it was not a surprise
30:40
attack. And so that's a bias and it's at
30:45
all levels of history, whether it's the public, you know,
30:48
primary or for high school history courses or collegiate,
30:52
the professors are are just as bad.
30:55
And some of it I think is because, you know, professors
30:59
Revere FDR for the New Deal and, you know, with conservative and
31:04
that. Era it was conservatives.
31:06
Who had attacked, you know, criticised FDR and said he has
31:10
misled the public at Pearl Harbour.
31:12
So they don't want to associate with a conservative position.
31:16
That may be one reason why liberal historians still 80
31:20
years later are reluctant to cover that topic objectively.
31:24
And it also, it points to the pattern because there was a
31:27
major cover up, you see, and, and most people don't know this
31:30
history and I didn't know it from my own education.
31:33
I had to read, as I said, I read all these books on my own time.
31:37
And a lot of them are kind of obscure, hard to find books.
31:42
But the, the, the facts are there and they, they set up a
31:46
Commission. See, there's a pattern with the
31:48
Warren Commission, the 9/11 Commission.
31:50
They're all cover ups. And it goes back after Pearl
31:53
Harbour. FDR set up the Roberts
31:56
Commission, headed by Supreme Court Justice to basically
32:00
validate the official position and exonerate Marshall and blame
32:04
these Hawaiian naval commanders who actually were not
32:07
responsible at all, who who performed their service
32:10
honourably and were not responsible.
32:12
But the Commission was a complete hoax.
32:15
And actually a member of the Commission spoke out.
32:17
That's not my assessment. That was the assessment of an
32:20
Admiral named William Stanley who was appointed to the
32:23
Commission, who'd been the US ambassador to Moscow in World
32:26
War 2. And after he retired, he said
32:29
that Commission was the most corrupt Commission to that point
32:32
in American history. It was as crooked as a snake.
32:36
It was totally rigged. These are his words in his
32:39
memoir that he published right before his death.
32:42
And then another top naval officer said that that was the
32:45
most corrupt and dishonest investigation in American
32:49
history to that point. So that's irrelevant history to
32:52
understand the pattern with then the Warren Commission cover up,
32:55
the 9/11 cover up. And they're going to continue,
32:58
you know, until this cycle of, of, of corruption is broken.
33:02
I, I think knowledge is power. If more people understood the
33:05
history and the pattern, they wouldn't go along with these
33:08
commissions, and they would push to root out this corruption and
33:12
deception in the government. But that's why these academic
33:15
gatekeepers come in, to keep the public in the dark.
33:18
And I think they divert a lot of academia.
33:21
They don't even cover these topics anymore.
33:23
I think part of it is that they cover like more trivial topics
33:29
in academia now, you know, so that students don't learn this
33:32
stuff. And I had a guest lecture when I
33:35
was teaching at the University of Tulsa.
33:37
I had, I brought in this great guy named Fred Brafman, who had
33:40
exposed the secret war in Laos. And he was a great hit among the
33:46
students. But when he came to the school,
33:48
they had a display of some faculty books, and he just like
33:51
they were on the most obscure topics imaginable.
33:55
And he was like, what? Pardon my language?
33:58
What in the world is going on here?
34:00
Like they're writing on these, you know, topics that are so, so
34:04
obscure. And I mean, who would want to
34:07
even read? I mean, it's great that somebody
34:09
took the all that time to write a book, but if it's on the most.
34:12
Obscure topic, only a few people would have any interest in what
34:17
they uncovered, and that that's often what you find in academia.
34:20
They do these topics of. Obscure topics so that they
34:27
don't have to cover these core issues and, and and that's I
34:31
think by design as well. And again, you have to look at
34:35
the structure of promotion and the structure of universities
34:38
and the board of trustees and the wealthy interests that
34:41
control the universities ultimately and maybe ultimately
34:46
the ones controlling the type of.
34:48
Education that that students are having access to.
34:52
Didn't Harvard launch its own quote unquote misinformation
34:59
journal funded by the Ford Foundation, which I think was a
35:03
CIA front Once Upon a time? Yes.
35:07
And that, and that is something to look more into.
35:09
And I hope that some of these articles I've done would prompt
35:12
more investigations into this. And I think it was positive that
35:16
like students at MIT when they had the the Israeli genocide in
35:19
Gaza were starting to investigate the university's
35:22
role in that genocide. And they should expand their
35:27
investigation into some of these foundations because, yeah, Ford
35:30
Foundation had a background as as a FIA front.
35:35
It's goal, I think, was to neuter the intellectual left.
35:39
And and. You know, discredit intellectual
35:44
leftist viewpoint. That was I think, one of the
35:46
goals of the foundation. That's why they sponsor
35:49
education. They had a pattern going well
35:51
back into the Cold War of sponsoring educational
35:54
programmes that would basically promote the US Cold War position
35:59
and, you know, critique. They sponsored intellectuals who
36:03
would criticise more left wing or more critical of the US, you
36:08
know, military industrial complex to attack them and try
36:11
and marginalised them. That was actually part of their
36:14
mission. And yeah, they're funding this
36:16
journal Misinformation Studies that it's just like echoing CIA
36:22
propaganda talking points, like the articles are all about how
36:25
Russia is trying to infiltrate the media and promote Russian
36:29
disinformation or stuff about the COVID.
36:31
And that's another area where academia was really very
36:37
authoritarian. I mean, anyone who questioned
36:40
the COVID narrative was facing what I was describing.
36:45
Also those who questioned the premise behind the Cold War or
36:48
US foreign policies or trying to present more nuanced analysis of
36:52
of communist or socialist governments.
36:55
You face the the blacklisting. And they just censored those
36:59
views. And, you know, more and more has
37:02
come out and and you're an expert on the corruption and the
37:05
COVID and the, the, you know, the horror of the vaccines and
37:10
the corruption, the scientific establishment.
37:13
So that's a whole other area. And this journal was attacking,
37:18
you know, people who were criticising the COVID narrative
37:22
and, and what kind of education is that?
37:25
Like it's just like parroting State Department government
37:28
propaganda. It's trying to purportedly
37:31
analyse how these supposed nefarious forces are ingraining
37:37
either pro Russian or like anti vaccine views in media or
37:42
education when those people are actually being blacklisted.
37:46
And as we know that the CIA has had an active misinformation
37:49
campaign for decades. We know about the Operation
37:54
Mockingbird and how they planted journalists and me.
37:56
So I mean, if it was genuinely committed to studying
38:00
misinformation, it should have tonnes of articles about the CIA
38:04
and how they try and propagandise the American public
38:07
and and so misinformation. But that was not discuss it all
38:11
in this journal. And to me it showed a decline in
38:14
American intellectual life because if I was a student, you
38:18
know, I learned nothing from I, I read through the journal and
38:21
researching that article, I read through about 5 or 6 issues of
38:25
the journal and with complete torture and I, you know, I like
38:29
to read, but these article were useless.
38:31
I it was just like the State Department and propaganda.
38:35
I mean, and that's like out of the old Soviet Union, I mean, a
38:38
negative of the Soviet Union. They had no freedom of press and
38:41
they had this kind of rigid ideological dogma and a
38:44
corrupted intellectual life because there was no freedom of
38:47
thought and the intellectual just had to parrot what the
38:50
Communist Party said. And that's what this is like.
38:54
They're just parroting government propaganda.
38:57
There's no independent thinking and there's no insights or, or
39:01
learning that goes on from reading that.
39:03
So I mean, students are are being, and I feel sorry for
39:07
students and their families because they're paying a huge
39:10
amount of money to send their students to these universities
39:13
now. You know, the cost of education
39:14
has gone through the roof and this is what they're getting.
39:17
They're basically getting these hacks.
39:21
They're not real. A real intellectual is a probing
39:24
guy. Like I would say William Pepper,
39:27
the great intellectual, you know, he's a lawyer, but he was
39:29
probing into the into the real truth behind the King murder and
39:34
he did some outstanding research.
39:36
So that's a real intellectual, you know, and somebody does that
39:42
on the academic plane. But this journal is just these
39:45
these hacks who repeat government misinformation.
39:48
And it's fueling this new McCarthyism of blacklisting and
39:52
ridiculing anybody who challenged the official line,
39:55
whether on the COVID, whether on US foreign policy toward Russia,
40:00
et cetera. And then at the same time,
40:03
Stanford awarded Netra News for journalism.
40:10
Meanwhile, Netra News is funded by the Ned, which is a CIA
40:14
front. Exactly.
40:17
And that, that was my point, that also the, the education
40:20
system is becoming degraded because, you know, a journalism
40:24
school and I have some training in journalism.
40:26
And, and so I, I know what the proper training entails is to
40:30
learn how to try and be an objective reporter by getting
40:33
different sources, different sides of the story.
40:37
And that's like kind of what I'm, you know, trying to do in,
40:39
in teaching as well. And that's, that's what I was
40:42
trained to do. And I think that is the right
40:44
way to do it. But this is, is the exact
40:47
opposite. They're promoting, you know,
40:49
and, and you learn in journalism school the different between
40:52
journalism versus propaganda and the differences of the
40:55
journalists are trying to get different sides of the story.
40:58
And you know. Interview different people,
41:00
different perspectives. But a propagandist just promotes
41:05
a certain narrative. So when it comes to politics,
41:07
they're going to just denounce. And unfortunately, a lot of our
41:10
media is just propaganda because, you know, CNN will
41:13
denounce the Republicans, Fox will denounce Democrats.
41:16
And that's not real journalism that that is propaganda.
41:19
And they skew all the evidence, you know, to fit their
41:22
narrative. And that's what this Netra News
41:24
was doing in in the case of it was a Bangladeshi newspaper
41:27
funded by the National Endowment for Democracy.
41:31
Which is ACIA. Front operation and it was
41:34
designed to facilitate a regime change in in Bangladesh that
41:38
overthrew this woman Sheikh Hasina, who is the granddaughter
41:42
the founding father of Bangladesh who had allied
41:44
Bangladesh more with China. And that was really the issue.
41:48
I mean, she may have had her flaws as a leader, but then but
41:52
the Netra News, it was just a propaganda outlet that published
41:56
article after article demonising her, presenting her in the worst
42:00
possible light, obscuring the larger international relations
42:04
context, obscuring the, you know, role that outside powers
42:08
were playing and stirring these revolts against her and was
42:11
trying to incite rebellion and hatred against her.
42:14
And then when the new government took over, they didn't that
42:18
government supported huge human rights violation.
42:22
You know, they, they publish all these stories denouncing her
42:25
human rights record and how she cracked down on the student
42:28
protest. But then when the new government
42:30
took over and these Islamic gangs were targeting Hindus and
42:35
pogroms, there was no, they totally left that out.
42:39
There was no articles at all, no outrage because it was a
42:43
politicised organ of, of US foreign policy.
42:46
And then you have this Stanford, this prestigious university,
42:50
giving them this major journalism award.
42:53
When journalists are supposed, the students at the school are
42:55
supposed to learn not to be propagandist, but to try and get
42:59
different. Sides of the story so.
43:01
What kind of message are they sending to students and
43:03
education are they providing? And then looking into it, I
43:06
found ACIO link to a lot of the professors there.
43:09
There was a guy, Jiwak Shin, in the Asian Studies department and
43:14
he was on the. Board that selected.
43:16
This Netra News and I just went on their website and there was a
43:19
video of all these talks on the campus.
43:22
So I clicked on one of the talk on Korea and lo and behold, it's
43:26
a CIA agent. They bring a CIA agent to
43:31
discuss the Korean conflict. So students are not, you know,
43:34
getting somebody independent in their objective to try and
43:37
facilitate their understanding. They have a CIA agent.
43:40
And so I, I listen to the talk and in the beginning, this guy,
43:44
Jiwak Shin, who's a professor there at Stanford, again, he was
43:49
on the board. He introduced the CIA agent and
43:52
then he said something. He said, oh, my friends in the
43:56
agency said he's the best CIA analyst on Korea.
44:00
So I'm like, why does he have friends of the CIA?
44:03
He's a, he's a Stanford professor.
44:05
He's bringing a CIA agent and to the campus as if he's an
44:10
objective analyst of the Korean conflict.
44:13
And then he has all these friends in the CIA who know all
44:16
about this guy. So that would seem that he's,
44:20
you know, tied to the CIA And, you know, then they're awarding
44:25
the CIA outlet. So that school seems.
44:29
And that gets back to your question at the beginning.
44:31
I mean, we seem to have direct CIA dominance.
44:35
And then if you look at other faculty in the.
44:38
International relations department of Stanford, you
44:40
know, and that's a very, very prestigious university.
44:43
Who wouldn't want to study at Stanford or if they have kids,
44:46
you know, send their kids there. What an honour, Stanford and
44:49
it's a beautiful university, has a great reputation, but.
44:53
If you cut beneath the surface, they're not Students are having
44:56
these CIA people teaching them. And then, you know, a key member
45:00
of their international relations department.
45:02
There's a guy, Michael Mcfaul, he with the US ambassador to
45:05
Russia, and he's a key figure behind the Russia gate.
45:08
He's been incessantly promoting this anti Russian hatred and
45:13
he's one of the key champion. This bloody war in Ukraine has
45:18
cost over 1,000,000 lives in which the US has been funding
45:22
neo Nazi groups as your show has documented.
45:26
And then another key faculty there in that department is a
45:30
guy, Larry Diamond, who is the editor of the NE DS Journal that
45:35
is basically ACIA journal that warns about about the rise of
45:40
authoritarianism in the world, but only authoritarianism in
45:44
Russia and among US enemy states.
45:47
And there's no mention like Ukraine.
45:49
Well, they, you know this. We know in Ukraine that there
45:53
were supposed to be election several years ago.
45:55
Those have never occurred. And we know that the Zelensky
45:59
government barred 12 political parties and assassinated the
46:03
head of the Socialist Party in Ukraine's parliament.
46:06
But somehow that doesn't qualify as authoritarian in there in
46:10
this journal. That's a a great democracy.
46:13
Somehow there's no attention placed on Saudi Arabia because
46:17
that's a staunch US ally, which he knows one of the most
46:20
authoritarian governments in the world.
46:22
Or Egypt. The journal is all about Russia
46:26
and how how bad Russia and and China are and some other
46:29
countries like Venezuela because that is a socialist country and
46:33
the US wants to steal their oil. So they have to demonise that
46:37
government. So it's all part of the the CIA
46:40
agenda. And these guys are have the top
46:44
positions at these prestigious universities and the students
46:49
are being basically propagandised at those schools.
46:53
And if you would investigate the faculty at a lot of these
46:57
campuses, that's what you'll find.
46:59
I mean, I was a student at Brandeis in the political
47:02
science. One of the star professors was a
47:04
guy named Kanan Makiya, who was an Iraqi dissident against
47:08
Saddam Hussein, who lo and behold, received funding from
47:12
the National Endowment for Democracy because he wrote.
47:16
And he was a key champion of the war in Iraq because he he wrote
47:20
the book supposedly documenting Saddam Hussein's human rights
47:23
abuses in the late 90s, early 2000s.
47:26
And then he was cheerleading for the regime change in Iraq.
47:29
And I was a graduate student. I went to a talk and he was one
47:33
of the speakers. And he said American troops will
47:36
be greedy with sweets and flowers in Iraq.
47:38
And this is the heroic moment for democracy in my country.
47:42
That's what he said. And, you know, there was some
47:45
Arab students there, like scratching their head.
47:48
And, you know, they, they viewed this guy as an Uncle Tom.
47:52
And then I asked him if he'd ever read Edward Saeed, who was,
47:56
you know, critical of US foreign policy and was a great scholar
48:00
of the Middle East and Western attitude toward it.
48:04
And he kind of scoffed and dismissed Edward Saeed.
48:08
So those are the kind of people that gain appointments in
48:12
prestigious universities and they're tied with NEDCIA and
48:18
they're propagandising students and they're presenting very one
48:22
sided analysis and that this is going on very widely.
48:26
You've also noted that the Pentagon has infiltrated the
48:30
education system. University of Texas has received
48:34
$50 million for Army robotics and weapons research.
48:38
MIT $15 million per year for Air Force AI Georgia Tech Lockheed
48:44
Martin has got complete access to students and their research,
48:50
Johns Hopkins 828 million in Pentagon grants including
48:55
nuclear weapons work, and then another 50 universities involved
48:59
in nuclear weapons production. Well, yes, yeah.
49:04
I could say a lot about this. Yeah.
49:05
And about John Hopkins. That school has been heavily
49:09
infiltrated by by the CIA and intelligence agencies, including
49:12
the John Hopkins School of International Studies.
49:16
And actually, I believe the president of John Hopkins at one
49:20
point was appointed to George W Bush's top intelligence Advisory
49:26
Board. So that school had long been
49:29
compromised. And that's a very prestigious
49:31
university. And yeah, they're one of the top
49:34
schools as far as Pentagon contracts.
49:36
And these are very prestigious universities.
49:38
MIT, which is called the Pentagon on the Charles and John
49:43
Hopkins. Topped the list.
49:45
MIT was students did investigation and found that the
49:50
robotics department was getting all this money from the Israeli
49:54
Defence Force and they were developing Jerome swarms at MIT.
49:58
I also found in my investigation of MIT that they were running
50:03
covert operation in the Ukraine war out of MIT, that there was a
50:07
professor Rosemary Wood who was a Russian specialist and I
50:11
surveyed. Her scholarship was right out of
50:14
the CIA playbook, totally demonising Putin.
50:17
She wrote these pseudo scholarly articles demonising Vladimir
50:21
Putin, blaming him, the sole aggressor of the Ukraine war,
50:26
ignoring all the back story that I think we've discussed on this
50:30
show and that I have many article in the Covert Action
50:33
magazine about how the CIA was involved in the Maidan coup.
50:37
I mean, and it's been important in the New York time that they
50:40
had set up 12 bases in Ukraine after the Maidan coup and was
50:44
helping to provoke the Russians. That of course that that's a
50:47
fact that was left out of course of her scholarly work.
50:52
And what was found, what I found, she was running this
50:54
Ukraine project out of MIT. And that there were students,
50:58
this was actually openly advertised in the MIT newsletter
51:02
that there are military veterans who are also students at MIT who
51:06
are involved in developing a more efficient system for
51:08
getting weapons to get to the front lines for the Ukrainian
51:12
military. And this may have had some
51:15
support from MIT. And these were MIT students
51:20
openly involved in in that dirty war or these, you know,
51:24
Ukrainian army were killing a lot of civilian in eastern
51:27
Ukraine that is never reported in U.S. media.
51:31
So they're complicit in war crimes.
51:33
And then yeah, University of Texas, a lot of these
51:36
universities like their scientific divisions are getting
51:39
huge amount of of funding from military related industry.
51:43
And the students are put to work on projects for development of
51:47
military weaponry, whether it's hypersonic weaponry, drones.
51:52
And I, I had a student, I was teaching at the University of
51:56
Tulsa and a student of mine gained some information about
52:00
this who was studying the sciences.
52:02
And he and I were starting were doing some investigation
52:05
together and we were looking into the Oklahoma State
52:08
University because they had these huge contracts for drone
52:12
development. And then we did interview some
52:15
people there and professors and they, although one or I mean,
52:19
some of the professors were nice and were kind of suspicious
52:22
about it. But like officially they were
52:25
trying to, you know, make it seem like it was all for using
52:29
drones for civilian purposes. And they were kind of
52:33
underplaying the military aspect.
52:35
But they're getting huge money from the Pentagon related
52:39
agencies and other military firms to develop drones on their
52:45
campus. And a lot of graduate students,
52:47
that's the work they were doing was in drone development.
52:49
So this is just a huge phenomenon.
52:53
And yeah, there was a report about nuclear weapons. 50 school
52:56
have found that there are fifty universities where their schools
53:00
are involved in research for the development of nuclear weapons.
53:03
And I did an article, there was a small group at the University
53:06
of Arkansas, Fayetteville, who had a protest because the
53:12
company, I think it's with Honeywell, who's a major
53:16
military contractor, they put in a lot of money into the
53:20
engineering division at the University of Arkansas.
53:23
And we're getting students to do research projects that advance
53:28
nuclear weapons development. So some students mounted A
53:32
protest and I covered that. And it was a group of people I
53:36
had worked with on a couple of events before.
53:39
So and they were raising awareness about this.
53:42
And yeah, University of Arkansas was one of school one part of
53:45
that network of 50 schools. The biggest was the University
53:49
of California, which I think has long run the nuclear weapon
53:52
programme of the United States or various aspects of it.
53:56
And you know, in the 60s, what we need is more research on this
54:01
and protest, because in the 60s, during the Vietnam War, students
54:05
mounted a lot of protests on their campus.
54:08
And at MIT, they succeeded in getting, they found that their
54:13
campuses were complicit in the war in Vietnam, that their
54:16
professors were developing counterinsurgency strategies,
54:19
like in their political science departments.
54:22
They were connected to the CIA at the MIT political science
54:25
department like in the Vietnam era had a lot of top CIA people
54:29
like Walt Rostow taught there. He with the advisor to JFK and
54:34
LBJ and a key hawk on Vietnam and architect of the war.
54:38
They had a guy Lucian Pie, who was a CIA analyst, you know, a
54:42
specialist on devising counterinsurgency strategies.
54:46
They had a guy if he'll Del Sola Pool and Max Milliken.
54:50
These are all professors at MIT political science who are famous
54:53
for developing US counterinsurgency strategy.
54:57
And then they had a lot of science laboratory that were
55:00
producing weaponry used in Vietnam.
55:03
And students started protesting those professors protesting
55:06
their classes and protesting these labs.
55:10
And at MIT, I know they succeed in getting a major lab, the
55:13
Lincoln lab, moved off the campus because it is a betrayal
55:17
of the mission of higher education to educate students
55:20
and try to create a more humane world and not to get students
55:24
to, you know, to indoctrinate them, to promote these, you
55:27
know, nationalistic or, you know, as we saying, hatred for
55:31
other countries and to to enmesh them in, in developing weapons
55:36
systems. It's antithetical to really the
55:39
mission of higher education. And students in that era mounted
55:43
a lot of protests and it raised awareness there.
55:45
There was also movement to get the CIA off their campus because
55:49
CIA also has recruiters on campuses.
55:52
They have professors so that movement needs to regenerate
55:57
itself and we can try and effect some change in higher education.
56:02
So how it connects together, Jeremy, correct me if I've got
56:06
this wrong, but you have schools not teaching history properly,
56:12
they're emitting important aspects of our past.
56:17
Then you've got universities that are creating fake research
56:21
and creating journals to deal with misinformation, quote
56:28
unquote, but they're actually perpetuating propaganda.
56:32
You've got media outlets that are being funded by CIA linked
56:38
NGOs and other groups. And then you have weapons
56:41
research that's quite literally happening at university thanks
56:46
to the Pentagon creeping in. Have I got it kind of correct?
56:51
Yes, you do. And I think this needs more
56:53
attention. Not so many people are aware of
56:56
this. And and I think this is very
56:57
vital in the destruction of democracy because, you know,
57:01
school and education is vital lifeblood of democracy and
57:05
particularly a free education system.
57:08
And and that's not what's going on here.
57:11
Yeah. It's been corrupted by the
57:12
military industrial intelligence complex and, you know, the CIA
57:17
advances authoritarianism because their whole mission is
57:22
to, you know, advance US foreign policy interest and, and to
57:26
destroy left wing thinking and ideas.
57:29
And so they, they, it's like McCarthyism on steroids.
57:32
You know, they attack instead of engaging in intellectual debate.
57:35
What, what should the, the university should be a, a place
57:39
where people discuss these issues and debate different side
57:42
and, and all our ideas are allowed and students exposed to
57:46
all different kind of view, not just the view of the US
57:49
government. And what they're doing is, is
57:51
censoring anybody who they consider left to centre or
57:56
critical of the government or critical of the COVID narrative.
58:00
They're being purged and they're not allowed into a debate.
58:03
And they use name calling. They don't want to even hear out
58:06
their ideas and debate them. They just call them names.
58:10
Conspiracy theorist, Putin lover, Russian.
58:15
He promotes pro Russian propaganda.
58:17
We can't have him on our campus, but in a real education, free
58:21
education system, the spoons are exposed to all kinds of ideas
58:25
and there's real engagement and debate with those ideas instead
58:29
of name calling. And that's the method of the
58:32
CIA. They don't, you know this, this
58:34
is an authoritarian agency that has an agenda and they use
58:38
vicious tactics to discredit their enemies.
58:41
They're not interested in debating the merits of an issue
58:44
because usually they're wrong. So, and that's what's happening
58:48
now on our campuses. Instead of having debate over
58:50
these issues, you have this name mudslinging, name calling, and
58:54
it's poisoned the intellectual culture and environment.
58:57
And a lot of students feel intimidated to even speak out in
59:01
class on various issues because they don't want to be labelled
59:06
certain ways. And young faculty are totally
59:08
intimidated because they know that to keep their job, they
59:12
have to tell a certain line. So this is, this is wrong.
59:16
And yeah, it's it's a part of the destruction of our
59:20
democracy. So in the 1960s, students were
59:23
protesting war. Now they're protesting not being
59:28
able to to be the other gender. Well, and that's part of the
59:34
diversion. I think they've elevated these
59:35
cultural issues above the political, economic issues.
59:39
And now the left is somehow associated, yeah, with these,
59:43
these culture war clashes and some of these issues that are
59:47
really marginal issues. And I mean, they, they should be
59:52
debated and, and people have a right to, you know, some people
59:55
are passionate about that and, and a free society.
59:58
They have a right to advocate for whatever position they like.
1:00:01
But I think the the bigger picture that the the CIA in the
1:00:06
in trying to manipulate the campus environment, they're
1:00:09
elevating these cultural war issues, sidelining the other
1:00:12
issues and totally blacklisting or ostracising any critical
1:00:17
faculty raise critical questions related to political.
1:00:20
Economy and military, industrial intelligence complex corruption
1:00:24
of the, of science and the Pharmaceutical industry that is
1:00:28
not being allowed. And they're channelling the
1:00:32
angst of youth because youth are often.
1:00:34
And I think the, the CIA and authority know that youth are
1:00:38
always a potential rebellious population because at that,
1:00:41
that's an age where people are coming of aid.
1:00:42
They're starting to learn about the world.
1:00:44
They see things are wrong. There's a natural inclination
1:00:47
toward rebellion at that age. So if they channel them into
1:00:51
these cultural war issues, I think that's what they want.
1:00:54
And I would argue they do that with climate change too, because
1:00:57
that's a very fuzzy issue. And I think you've been on top
1:01:00
of that. There are a lot of credible
1:01:02
scientists not in the pay of the fossil fuels who see climate
1:01:06
change as more related to patterns in the sun.
1:01:11
So, and it's, it's a nebulous issue politically, these
1:01:16
political, economic issue, there is stuff we can do.
1:01:19
We have to confront the power structures, we have to change,
1:01:22
you know, reduce the military budget, reduce the intelligence
1:01:26
agency budget. Those are very tangible goal
1:01:28
that a social movement could pursue and that rebellious youth
1:01:32
should mobilise in favour of and then getting the military off
1:01:36
their campuses. But they, they don't want youth.
1:01:39
So they, they channel them into these kind of nebulous issues,
1:01:42
climate change, the culture wars.
1:01:45
And I would even argue that they've held the, the Israel
1:01:48
Gaza, they push that over everything else because the big
1:01:53
ticket of the military industrial complex is what we're
1:01:55
discussing. China and Russia, The, they need
1:01:59
China as the enemy and Russia as the enemy to justify these huge
1:02:03
military budgets. You know, Trump is now pushing
1:02:06
it to above 1.5 billion. It's already a trillion.
1:02:10
It's already eclipsed a trillion, the US military budget
1:02:13
and he wants to raise it even further and then the huge
1:02:18
intelligence agency and police budgets.
1:02:21
So I think they'd rather focus on the Israel Palestine, since
1:02:27
that's a polarising conflict. And that's only a small aspect
1:02:30
of the, I mean, it is a huge amount of aid that the US gives
1:02:33
to Israel, but it's still a drop in the bucket compared to, you
1:02:38
know, to containing Russia, containing China and the big
1:02:42
ticket, you know, as far as the nuclear arms race and, and the
1:02:46
arms industry. So they really don't want the
1:02:49
youth questioning the US attitude toward Russia.
1:02:53
So I think they prefer focus be on on on Gaza.
1:02:59
It's just my opinion, but yeah, overall.
1:03:03
And, and if you look at the Ford Foundation, their history, that
1:03:06
was their goal. They, they infiltrated, they
1:03:09
even infiltrate student movements to get them to focus
1:03:12
on certain issues over others. They've done that historically.
1:03:16
And they also get the protest movement to be counterproductive
1:03:20
to, to kind of destroy themselves.
1:03:21
That's what they did in the 60s because you had Students for
1:03:24
Democratic Society. It was emerging as a formidable
1:03:27
student organisation that could have fundamentally transformed
1:03:30
US politics. And they were against the
1:03:32
Vietnam War. You know, it was a very
1:03:34
progressive organisation. So the CIA did all kinds of
1:03:38
dirty tricks. They formed a conservative
1:03:40
counterpart, Young American for Freedom.
1:03:42
They infiltrated SDS and formed these violent radical offshoots
1:03:47
like Weather Underground, and they sow division within SDS to
1:03:51
weaken it. And the Weather Underground
1:03:53
ultimately took the name SDS and destroyed it.
1:03:56
And they were, you know, carrying out terrorist
1:03:58
activities across the United States.
1:04:01
And a lot of it was by FBI informants.
1:04:04
And they created this in California where there was a
1:04:06
headquarter of radical movements.
1:04:08
They created the CIA, created the Symbionese Liberation Army.
1:04:12
And there's a good book about this and I did a review.
1:04:15
It was this violent cult like group that was designed to
1:04:20
discredit the, you know, left wing and progressive movement.
1:04:23
So they use all kinds of dirty tricks, whether it's diverting
1:04:26
the focus of these movements or trying to destroy them.
1:04:31
So, you know, people should be alert to that, but the issues
1:04:35
are are very important I think that we're addressing here.
1:04:38
And I think that youth movements and social movements should
1:04:42
focus on targeting that the military complex.
1:04:46
And also there needs to be broader awareness of how the
1:04:48
education system has been corrupted and taken over by
1:04:52
military intelligence agencies. And we need to fight for free
1:04:55
education. That's a lifeblood of democracy.
1:04:59
OK, so Jeremy, how can I follow your work?
1:05:04
Well, you can follow me in Covert Action Magazine or on Sub
1:05:08
Stack, Too Hot for the Mainstream.
1:05:11
And I also have a podcast and radio show every Thursday called
1:05:15
Uncontrolled Opposition. And I also have a website
1:05:18
jeremykuzmirov.com. I just want to point out that
1:05:23
you have a great first name. Absolutely.
1:05:28
All right, Jeremy Kuzmirov, thank you for joining me in the
1:05:32
trenches.