Interview 1127 - New World Next Week with James Evan Pilato

01/21/20166 Comments

Welcome to New World Next Week — the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. In this week’s episode:

Story #1: Saudi Arabia, China Sign MoU to Build Nuclear Reactor
China Offers Support for Yemen Government as Xi Visits Saudi Arabia
China's Xi Opens Refinery With Saudi King Salman
Egypt to Receive $1 Billion from China
Xi Jinping’s Iran Visit is of ‘Historic Significance’
Jinping Bows to ‘Death Star’-Like Sphere at AIIB Ceremony

Story #2: Davos Robot Eclipses Davos Man as Gloom Descends on Elite
Meet “Beware”, The New Police Tool That Data-Mines Your Life
Palantir, the War on Terror's Secret Weapon
DiCaprio Gives Indigenous Peoples Lip Service On TV, But Really Hangs With Banksters at Davos
Media Monarchy: Rise of the Robots - Dollar Edition
PDF: “Extreme Automation and Connectivity: The Global, Regional, and Investment Implications of the Fourth Industrial Revolution”
Markets In TurmOIL: Futures Plunge, Japan Enters Bear Market, Crude And Commodity Currencies Crash
For the Sake of Capitalism, Pepper Spray Davos

Story #3: People Trust Search Engines More than Traditional Media for News
Flashback: Google’s Search Algorithm Could Steal the Presidency (Aug 2015)

#GoodNewsNextWeek – Positive Polls, Liberty-Minded Librarians, Wal-Mart Closings

#NewWorldNextWeek Updates: Canada's New Hope And Change Is A Lie
Monsanto Works Hard to Evict Argentinian Protesters
The Story You Aren't Being Told About Iran Capturing Two American Vessels
Media Monarchy: Interview w/Brent DeBoer of The Dandy Warhols
Immigrant Union - “War is Peace”

Previous Episode: Apple Emotions, Threat Score, Palantir

Filed in: Interviews
Tagged with:

Comments (6)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. setatliberty says:

    In regards to the “Good News Next Week” story of people turning to search engines to get their news, I noticed around August of last year that the algorithms were being customized and censored. I actually had to have a friend look up some information for me, because my profile revealed zero results on one particular search. It was disturbing enough to know that Google has plans to make certain that everyone’s “truth” will be cordoned off inside their personal devices and IPs.

    Last month I needed to recall some source links from my yahoo mail sent folder for a book that I am writing. My email had been hacked and those specific linked emails were mysteriously deleted. The recipients of those emails all had their email accounts hacked also and those specific emails (that had the links I was searching for) were also deleted. I spent hours searching several different search engines to finally find the information that I was looking for. The good news is that I was able to find them. These were important as they clearly distinguished the money treadmill, proving that the Susan G Komen foundation is actually complicit in generating more breast cancer cases through their financial support of Planned Parenthood. Chemical and surgical abortions have been proven to generate breast cancer, and well, it is, indeed, a money machine.

    I had asked your subscribers if anyone knew of a non-controlled or “Google powered” search engine that does not personalize results. I never received a response. Judging from your response to this weeks “Good News,” James, It doesn’t appear that you are aware of any either. The “Good News” does appear to be unmitigated.


    Just so it is somewhere else, even though these are not the original sources, they do show some of the info and provide a better base :

    • Octium says:

      There is a decentralized peer to peer search engine called “YaCy”

      It takes a little bit more effort to use than Google as you have to install the search engine on your own computer first – You computer actually becomes part of the search engine.

      One it is installed it is easy to use.

      • setatliberty says:

        Thank You Octium! This sounds like a MUCH better option.

        When I searched “Google”, Yahoo, Bing, etc.. Yacy never came up on the front pages of results for an alternative search engine. That is a good sign. Have you used it for long? Are you aware of any privacy concerns or restrictions/limitations using yacy that could be counter-productive?

  2. HomeRemedySupply says:

    As was pointed out in this newscast, the Saudi’s are in talks with China. A major play that the Saudi government is trying to do is to increase their oil market share in China and take away Russia’s rapidly growing market share in China. See this 2% Saudi stat compared to 30% Russia stat…
    (Sidnenote: Saudi Aramco has $1 billion DAILY in revenue.)

    We know that the decline in oil prices are deliberate. It is the same playbook as Rockefeller in the early days.

    Sometimes, I wonder if the “28 pages” had any type of influence on this Saudi intention to drive down the oil prices. It is only speculation and just throwing out the idea.

  3. HomeRemedySupply says:

    Many people, especially the younger generation, are not familiar with “The Official 9/11 Story”.

    September 2015 – The University of Texas (at Arlington) online campus student paper had an animated advertising link to Corbett’s fantastic YouTube video.

  4. VoltaicDude says:

    I would say the Chinese Saudi Arabia/Yemen policy is mitigated “good news” too.

    Just as I would say the same about the Russian intervention in Syria, which it seems may have prevented another genocidal bloodbath in Syria to match the millions of civilians murdered in the invasion of Iraq (of course, both attacks by the U.S. justified with State Department lies).

    I say “mitigated” about the Chinese-Saudi/Yemen accords because we shouldn’t be too naïve about such things, but “good” in that just the structure of and relationship between these two agreements and the general Chinese approach signifies a departure from the brutal, heavy-handed maneuverings of the Western Powers (NWO) in this region historically.

    The structure here is similar to how the Chinese have built working relationships with various countries in Africa, which has been much more apropos of the western cliché-slogan “win-win” than any western development plans anywhere in Africa ever have been – funny to think the “communists” have far better lived up to the overtly stated intentions of capitalist slogans, which the cronies only ever intended as platitudes.

    The Chinese seem to be building structure to put them in a place to influence their “children” to play nice – perhaps a little patronizing in the long run, but still better than the “psycho-parents” of the NWO that would have siblings kill each other in order to collect on the insurance policy.

    Thanks also for the update on how internet search engines have become the new Walter Cronkite (along with PBS – “the most trusted news source in America” – !).

    However, the problem with couching the dilemma here as the need for a more “objective” search engine program is based on the misconception that the “mechanical” (dispassionate) application of a “good” search engine program could ever be “objective.”

    There is no “objectivity” to the act of searching! In fact it almost sounds like the foible of technocracy rearing its ugly head.

    Searching for what? – That’s the whole point. There is no simple answer to this other than that people must simply be pro-active about what they will accept regarding “provided” information. This even goes beyond social bias per se.

    The concept of “averages” is a good analogy. A mathematical average is a fairly straight-forward objective finding. However there is still variance even within this standard regarding mean, mode and median averages. Each has its utility. To be effective one simply needs to know how to use these concepts and what they mean – so to speak, not to be biased.

    The silver-lining here may ultimately be that while smoke-filled, back-room shenanigans involving social engineering plots might never be accessible without violating important social privacy standards, a search engine’s program could be made public domain (open-source), and in that way could be scrutinized and monitored in a public forum, as opposed to these absurd hidden standards that are truly one of the greatest, most insidious threats to our society to which nobody seems to be paying attention (a bit like Diebold voting machines).

    With an open-source search engine only the types of issues associated with the “average” concepts as described above would be at play, and not the issues of covert, self-serving and malicious social engineering.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top