Episode 338 – NGOs Are The Deep State’s Trojan Horses

05/21/201853 Comments

The Trojan horse was the earliest recorded military psyop. That psyop continues to be deployed on unsuspecting populations and it is just as useful as ever, but today’s tricksters have donned the mantle of philanthropy, and their Trojan horses are not wooden statues but non-governmental organizations offering “aid” to foreign nations. In today’s edition of The Corbett Report, we’ll learn about how NGOs are the deep state’s Trojan horses.

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).


Troy, 12th century BC.

The Greeks’ decade-long siege of Troy is drawing to a close. The cunning Odysseus has hit upon a plan to subvert the Trojans’ defenses. The Greeks build a giant wooden horse and then pretend to sail away, leaving the horse at the gates of Troy as an apparent offering to the goddess Athena. The Trojans, believing the gift will make their city impregnable, take it within the city gates.

But it is a trick. Odysseus and his men are hidden inside the hollow horse and they emerge during the night to open the gates and let in the Greek army, who have returned to take the city. The Trojans don’t get a chance to learn from their mistake; the Greeks sack the city and massacre its inhabitants.

The Trojan horse was the earliest recorded military psyop. The lesson of the story, recorded in the counsel to “beware of Greeks bearing gifts,” is that we should not let down our defenses when an erstwhile enemy offers us aid. Today, that counsel is as useful as ever, but today’s tricksters have donned the mantle of philanthropy, and their Trojan horses are not wooden statues but non-governmental organizations offering “aid” to foreign nations.

The bitter truth is that in a surprising number of cases, NGOs are the Deep State’s Trojan Horses.

This is The Corbett Report.

In 2015, Kyrgyzstan made what might seem at first glance to be a surprising move: It canceled a cooperation treaty with the US that had been in place since 1993. The treaty granted tax breaks and customs privileges to organizations like the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and gave their workers diplomatic immunity in the country. All of that came to an end after the US granted a human rights award to Azimjon Askarov, an activist swept up and thrown in jail for life for “creating a threat to civil peace and stability in society” after the Uzbek riots in South Kyrgyzstan in 2010.

Reaction from the usual Western outlets was swift and predictable: Kyrgyzstan has lost its mind. Or, to be more precise: It’s all Putin’s fault. Somehow. But don’t worry, the US will continue aiding Kyrgyzstan anyway, whether they like it or not, because that’s just how they roll. Go, Team America!

But Kyrgyzstan is not the only country to crack down on “aid” from foreign NGOs. In the last few years a series of countries, including Russia, China and India, have passed laws placing stricter controls on the operations of these organizations within their borders.

MARGARET HOWELL: Russia is throwing the smackdown on poor little old NGOs, these charitable organizations that were set up. Their reasoning behind them? That they might be trying to take down the Kremlin.

The Kremlin is moving to ban the US-backed MacArthur Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society Institute and ten of their foreign groups, calling them “unwelcome organizations” by law. They’re also mulling over something called a “patriotic stop list.” Anyone caught collaborating with these groups, they’re facing six years in prison.

SOURCE: Russia Bans Foreign NGO’s

ANCHOR: China has passed the country’s first law regulating overseas NGOs, or non-governmental organizations.

HAO YUNHONG (VOICEOVER): The Chinese government always welcomes foreign NGOs to come to China to expand cultural and charity activities, and your achievements are highly spoken of by the Chinese authorities. But there are a few illegal exceptions in which NGOs came to China to harm its national security.

ANCHOR: The law covers activities of NGOs founded outside the Chinese mainland. They must register with public security authorities and declare where their funding is coming from.

SOURCE: China adopts law regulating overseas NGOs

REPORTER: India has placed Ford Foundation on a watch list and ordered all funds from the US-based nonprofit organization to be routed to recipients only after the Home Ministry’s approval. Citing national security concerns, the Home Ministry has asked the Reserve Bank of India to ensure funds given by Ford Foundation to Indian recipients be brought to its notice and dispersed only after its clearance. The ministry said in its order that it wanted to ensure funds coming from Ford Foundation were utilized for bona fide welfare activities without compromising on concerns of national interest and security.

SOURCE: Ford Foundation on India government watch list

REPORTER: An Egyptian Court has convicted 43 Egyptian and 16 American NGO workers for working illegally in Egypt while encouraging unrest. The defendants, who were mostly absent from court, were sentenced to up to five years in jail. The verdict calls for the closing of US nonprofit groups such as the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, which back in 2012 Egypt accused of receiving illegal funding and operating without licenses.

SOURCE: Egyptian court sentences NGO workers including Americans to up to five years in prison

So what on earth is going on? Why are all of these countries kicking out all of these US-based non-governmental and quasi-governmental entities? Why would they be opposed to charity and aid?

The answer is not difficult to understand. These organizations are Trojan horses: designed to appear as gifts, but containing secret trap doors through which hidden forces can enter the country and covertly undermine the governments in question. This explanation only sounds outlandish to those who look no further than the organizations’ names and have no idea of their history of operations.

Take USAID, for example. Created in 1961 by executive order, it’s a US government agency that seeks “to end extreme poverty and to promote resilient, democratic societies while advancing our security and prosperity.” So why did President Morales kick them out of Bolivia in 2013? Because he’s crazy and irrational? Or because USAID ran a program through its remarkably frankly-named Office of Transition Initiatives that provided $10.5 million of funding for “Strengthening Democratic Institutions” throughout the country, including in opposition stronghold areas? Was it paranoia on Morales’ part, or merely the recognition that mealy-mouthed rhetoric about “Strengthening Democratic Institutions” is a thinly veiled euphemism for “overthrowing the government,” exactly as leaked diplomatic documents proved was the case for USAID’s identically named program in Venezuela?

EVA GOLINGER: USAID was originally an agency created to provide humanitarian aid and disaster relief to countries in need, and throughout the 1980s and the 1990s and more into the 21st century it’s evolved into a political arm and a funding branch of the US government for what they call “promoting democracy.” And it’s actually now a part of US counterinsurgency campaigns that involve the Pentagon [and] the State Department, in terms of diplomacy and obviously war activities. And USAID is the third agency involved in counterinsurgency, and their goal precisely is to provide what they called aid for promoting democracy or stabilizing or helping a country through some kind of political transition or economic transition.

In the case of Venezuela, Venezuela is a country that is oil wealthy so it’s never qualified for any kind of direct USAID help. Therefore, USAID has never had an office here officially, and they didn’t actually come the country and set up an office until 2002, right before the coup d’etat against President Chavez. And the documents—internal documents obtained under Freedom of Information Act—reveal that the sole intention of setting up the office here in Venezuela was to aid opposition forces to eventually ouster Chavez from power.

SOURCE: Is the US trying to “fix” Venezuela?

Should governments trust USAID after it was revealed that the agency secretly created its own social media network in Cuba for the express purpose of undermining the Castro government? Or when it was revealed that USAID had sent a team of agents to Cuba under the guise of “health and civic programs” to incite rebellion amongst youth, including creating a phony HIV-prevention workshop that the agency itself described as the “perfect excuse” to “identify potential social-change actors?” Or when it was revealed that the agency had attempted (and miserably failed) to infiltrate Cuba’s hip-hop scene “to break the information blockade” and spark a youth movement of “social change” in the country?

ANCHOR: A US agency infiltrated the Cuban hip-hop world in an attempt to launch a youth movement against the government there. The secret operation tried to use Cuban rappers to build a network of young people seeking social change. But the Cuban regime caught on and the operation failed. In the process the US Agency for International Development unintentionally compromised a vibrant music culture that produced hard-hitting grassroots criticism of the country. Several artists that the agency tried to promote ended up leaving Cuba or stopped performing after pressure from the government.

SOURCE: USAID Attempt to Co-opt Cuban Hip-Hop Scene Fails

In fact, USAID’s black ops programs for undermining foreign governments go all the way back to the founding of the agency itself. Some of the lowlights include USAID’s “Office of Public Safety” and its part in running a CIA front program for training foreign police in torture and terror tactics in Latin America; co-funding (with the CIA) the opium-smuggling Xieng Khouang Air Transport, a private airline for narcotics trafficker (and CIA point man in Laos) General Vang Pao; and co-funding opposition groups in Ukraine (prior to the 2014 coup) with Glenn Greenwald-backer Pierre Omidyar and, of course, George Soros.

FAREED ZAKARIA: George Soros, pleasure to have you on.

GEORGE SOROS: Same here.

ZAKARIA: First, on Ukraine: One of the things that many people recognize about you was that you—during the revolutions of 1989—funded a lot of dissident activity, civil society groups in Eastern Europe and Poland, the Czech Republic. Are you doing similar things in Ukraine?

SOROS: Well, I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent of Russia, and the foundation has been functioning ever since and played an important part in events now.

SOURCE: George Soros admits playing an integral part in the Ukraine crisis

But this NGO/Trojan horse problem is by no means confined to USAID and its associated organizations. Take the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as another example.

The official story is that the NED was created in 1983 by an act of Congress in order to “encourage the establishment and growth of democratic development” in target countries around the world in line with US foreign policy goals.

The actual story is that the NED was created expressly as a front for funding CIA activities inside target countries, a fact that Allen Weinstein, one of the members of the study group that led to NED’s founding, openly bragged about in The Washington Post: “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA,” he was quoted as saying. Even more blatant is an admission by then-Director of Central Intelligence William Casey, who wrote a memo to the White House advocating for the creation of NED but cautioning that “we here [at the CIA] should not get out front in the development of such an organization, nor do we wish to appear to be a sponsor or advocate.”

The NED’s participation in covert destabilization campaigns rivals that of USAID and, like USAID, involves too many operations to detail them all here. Lowlights include:

RON PAUL: What about Ukraine? I understand there are a few organizations that have been involved through this in Ukraine, trying to disturb that government. Of course, we have visited on this subject quite a bit, but I didn’t realize how much the NED is involved over there.

DANIEL MCADAMS: And this is a big issue, because I think the argument could definitely be made that NATO should have ended after the Cold War, but definitely the National Endowment for Democracy should have been ended after the Cold War. Instead, they say, like with every government program, “No, now’s the time we need more!”

But in Ukraine just this past year…Ah, this is an interesting article written by the president of the National Endowment for Democracy—he’s president for life—Carl Gershman. I know this might shock you, but he’s actually a Trotskyite. He was a founding member of a communist breakaway party, the Trotskyite Social Democrats USA. He wrote an editorial in The Washington Post [in] September of ’13, just before the events happened in Ukraine, and he wrote as the president of the National Endowment for Democracy. He said, “Ukraine is the biggest prize.” And he mentioned that “Ukraine’s choice to join Europe will accelerate the demise of the ideology of Russian imperialism that Putin represents,” and “Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.” So his real goal is regime change. He spelled it out just before all of these events took place.

SOURCE: National Endowment for Democracy? Hardly!

These types of Trojan horse operations have been used hundreds of times in the past, and there is no sign that the deep state is ready to abandon the trick now. Quite the opposite.

It worked during the “Arab Spring” when even The New York Times blithely admitted that the leaders of the protests had “received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House” and the State Department blithely admitted they had spent $50 million helping activists in the region network, communicate and organize with each other through Trojan horse NGOs like Movements.org.

The deception also worked in Syria, where leaked documents proved the US had been providing millions of dollars of support to opposition groups in the country since 2006 through a variety of Trojan horse NGOs like the Movement for Justice and Development.

And as we saw earlier this year in “The White Helmets Are A Propaganda Construct,” even first responder groups like the “Syria Civil Defense” (founded by an ex-British military intelligence officer) have been used as Trojan horses to spread propaganda and advance the agenda of the US and its allies in their quest to topple President Assad.

Let’s be clear: This is not to say that all NGOs are Trojan horses. It is not the case that every group or program that receives money from USAID or the National Endowment for Democracy or a similar organization is thereby automatically a deep state change agent. That is not how the Trojan horse technique works.

No, what makes these NGOs so effective as disguises for regime change operations is that much of the time, they are doing what they claim to be doing: providing aid, assistance and charity where it is needed. It is for this very reason that the US and its allies can so effectively smear NGO skeptics as crazy.

But consider this: In 1938, the US Congress passed the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). With the notable exception of AIPAC, NGOs, lobby groups and individuals who are representing a foreign agent are required to register under the act and are subjected to greater scrutiny of financial records and other activities. The irony is that FARA is essentially the same type of legislation that has recently been passed in China, but when the Chinese do it, it’s craziness; when the US did it 70 years ago, it was just good common sense. Once again, the hypocrisy is evident for those who wish to see it.

If there is any good to come out of this, it is that the public is increasingly aware of these types of covert activities. Perhaps more to the point, victims of these operations are now more willing to stand up to the US (and suffer its potential diplomatic wrath) by scrutinizing, monitoring, watchlisting, regulating, or even kicking out these agents of chaos.

And now, just like the Trojans thousands of years ago, the world is learning the hard way that sometimes a “gift” is better left unopened.




Filed in: Podcasts
Tagged with:

Comments (53)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. The Last American Vagabond says:

    Great video! It’s increasingly frustrating just how willfully blind Americans are to their very own history. As if this group, this effort, this president is somehow different today, despite all the evidence to the contrary, and all the same results year after year. I guess we are truly ‘doomed to repeat it’ as the saying goes. Thank you for your continually exceptional work James.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      Corbett recently “plugged” one of your videos (with “Recommended Viewing” on a recent article).
      You do an excellent job of reporting.

    • Gaslight says:

      Hello Vagabond,

      During your last broadcast I heard you exclaim; Morality is “an ENTIRELY subjective thing”

      I suggest with respect to history, that you yourself are “doomed to repeat it” as well.

    • scpat says:

      I have a duel part hypothesis on why the mass of humans keep repeating stupid things throughout history. Human beings are the only species on earth that will do the same thing over and over again hoping for a different result. The key difference between humans and other species in this regard is our imagination. I think the human imagination keeps people invisioning rosey outcomes from events that keep yielding the same results (i.e. voting).

      The second part of my hypothesis comes from an idea that Larken Rose hammers out in his book, The Most Dangerous Superstition. That is, the belief in authority, or the “right to rule”. Most people believe politicians have the right to create laws and issue commands because they believe it is necessary in a civilized society. There are a lot of people who realize that history repeats itself and that political rulers exploit the people time after time, but most can’t envision a world without a ruler that “keeps order” and “prevents chaos”. I think this is a major thing people are scared of. The perpetual conditioning from childhood chains people to the belief that they need authority to live in a civilized way, and that “authorities” have the right to use force in order to achieve it.

      • I Shot Santa says:

        Just to chime in and add to the confusion, I read a meme this morning (now the world is safe!) and it said something like, we are not afraid of the unknown, but we are afraid of the end of the known. People don’t like change, even though change is neither good or bad and is also the only constant in life. We like our ruts and so do our owners. JimBob who ain’t got no owner, but that might be because no one wants to own him outside of the wild chickens roaming outside.

    • mkey says:

      My theory on why people do what they do is based on laziness and unwillingness to change. The theory is so simple I don’t think it needs too much explanation, the good ole’ kiss.

      Socialization works well in tandem with these as the public gets lulled into the “everything is peachy, no problem, no sweat” state of mind, something that, especially with age, becomes harder and harder to break out from. The “prison for your mind” thing.

      Another thing that keeps people down, in this age of information, is bad schooling. I guess it had to be introduced in this past century to curb the flow of free ideas.

  2. Gaslight says:

    Let’s not forget the non-charitable NGO’s that unleash these pseudo-philanthropists. Examples include; CFR, UN, IMF, etc.

    We’re being asked to accept rule by un-elected “governance” in the name of “sustainable development” as this most recent, antiquated system quickly loses it’s veil.

    i.e. rule by “experts”

    All this in a world where new tech allows us all to live off the grid with zero carbon emissions.

    This is the insanity which Gnostic’s are suggesting we conform to, as they try to give birth to their pipe dream.

    Think this is not about religion folks? It’s all about religion.

    The elimination of all…save theirs.

  3. s.jamieson says:

    This is another example of how excellent is the work of James Corbett. It says clearly and specifically what people think in vague and muddy thoughts. People like me, at least.

  4. Fawlty Towers says:

    Yes another great report James.
    There’s just one thing I don’t get though.

    “Take US Aid for example, created in 1961 by executive order, it’s a U.S. government agency that seeks “to end extreme poverty…” ”

    “Take the N.E.D. as another example. The official story is that the N.E.D. was created in 1983 by an act of Congress in order to encourage the establishment and growth of democratic development…”

    USAid an NGO?
    N.E.D. an NGO?

    How can groups created by the government be non-governmental orgs?
    Aren’t they oxymorons?

    • Gaslight says:

      Good morning Fawlty Towers,

      I see your dilemma, so lets widen the lens a bit.

      As long as we’re talking about Trojan Horses, we may as well just throw in D.C. and all the rest ’round the world.

      We all know who steers the good ship Gnostic: Un-elected “NGO’s”

      This (of course) qualifies our own, antiquated, sham governments THEMSELVES
      as NGO’s.

      …but we all know that.

    • scpat says:

      The government organizations, USAID and NED for example, are used to funnel funds into NGOs and other organizations that then spend the funds towards the objectives of regime change or whatever else. This creates a degree of separation for plausible deniability.

      • Gaslight says:

        …it would be easier to just name the relevant organizations which are NOT controlled by the un-elected…

        …unfortunately, none come to mind at present.

        Give me a few millennium. Perhaps I can think of one.

  5. willrock says:

    I don’t know how your Spanish is, but the whole operation of arresting Hugo Chaves and instituting a puppet was worse than Sharon Stone’s acting skill.

    The problem with oil is not its scarcity. Actually it’s its abundance.

    • Gaslight says:

      That’s for sure willrock,

      The problem is indeed today’s abundance of all energy in general, and our increased ability to harvest it for ourselves outside the draconian “smart grid”.

      Meanwhile, tightening control policies over the masses are accelerating for that very reason, i.e.: The elite are in panic.

      We don’t need them, nor do they need us to fill their factories anymore.

      Something’s got to give as the industrial age winds down.

      Either the young folk get a (compartmentalized) job in bio-engineering to further “the agenda” or go away.

  6. VoiceOfArabi says:

    Very nice report James, I have enjoyed it…

    it also further confirms the value wise old-age sayings and how important to follow them.. You should do a report on this…

    for example…

    “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”

    if people follow this very basic statement, then you will know that now one is going to give you anything without return.. Not even the “soup kitchens” in NY or any other city…

    but the problem is… I think majority of Corbertt Report members would work for an NGO at $200K a year in a heartbeat. They will know it is shady, but they will join because “they mean well”.

    again.. it is all Human Nature… (were is the in-depth report on human nature when it comes to this) 🙂

    • scpat says:


      I would argue that there is no such thing as “human nature.” First I would ask, can it be defined? There is no clear definition of it because people act in different ways all the time, and there are infinite possibilities of how people can act. There is no way to model it accurately because we are all individuals making free and spontaneous choices.

      I think majority of Corbertt Report members would work for an NGO at $200K a year in a heartbeat. They will know it is shady, but they will join because “they mean well”.

      again.. it is all Human Nature… (were is the in-depth report on human nature when it comes to this)

      It seems that what you are doing here is speculating.

      • VoiceOfArabi says:

        Hello scpat,

        Thanks for your comment above, however, Facebook would disagree with you as they have models for how people act under certain conditions, and ways they can socially engineer those people at will…

        for the second part, I am speculating, however, it would be interesting if people ask themselves that question, and answer it truthfully.

        After all… large number of doctors are selling drugs and services that people don’t really need, but they feel it is ok to do as long as they help few people from suffering.

        I guess (and it is a guess), large number of the population would be OK with doing bad things as long as they don’t “see it” explicitly – i.e. they can say, we did not know….

        • scpat says:

          So you believe Facebook has modeled this thing called “human nature.” I don’t know what exactly they have modeled, but I would guess that they have modeled certain human behaviors. The problem with your idea is that those behaviors lumped together don’t equal human nature, because who is to say exactly what that term can mean. It is a vague term that can’t describe anything because there is so much variation in human action and interaction. We are not a uniform mass that can be broadly described by the term “human nature.”

        • Gaslight says:

          Hello Voice of Arabi,

          Pursuant to your closing line. You certainly do not have to hazard a guess.

          People have always rationalized their bad behavior. The controllers know this, and reinforce it.

          Human behavior is FAR AND AWAY, the elite’s most studied.

          Here’s an early example of intimate data collection:

          So you’ve sinned have you? Tell us all about it, and how you feel about your bad behavior, in this dark “confession” booth. We’ll absolve you of everything with a few prayer exercises, and thanks for the “confidential” information on how better to promote obfuscation.

          • brian.s says:

            Behaviour follows automatically from belief and definition – though it may be expressed or suppressed.
            The study of guilt, fear, shame and wishful magic, is the armouring of the manipulator who can then interject in what the target is already doing (to themselves). They can also generate and cultivate the conditions that encourage and nurture guilt, fear, shame and false hope.
            It is easy to see this in others. less so to catch ourselves in act.
            Obfuscation of a direct awareness of reality is the engagement of ‘thinking’, identity in conflict but seeking to assign the cause away from itself – except where playing victim operates a better defence.
            The idea of mind-control is built into our notion of the function and nature of mind.
            The belief in power is almost exclusively rooted in a belief in powerlessness – such that shared power sounds like a self contradiction. But that is the true nature of true communication.

            Who among us seeks out all that is worthy in those we meet or even think upon?
            Does not the mind automatically judge and seek the witnesses to its judgement – and is not the judgement a sense of lack of worth – if not an image of things we justify hating, withdrawing blessing from and withholding the extension of worth?
            Oh if people tick our boxes we ‘like them’ as long as they don’t paint over the lines we set.
            The mind is completely blind to its own activity and we see many examples of this in those we love to hate or judge against in (self) righteous arrogance.

            First we judge our behaviour after the fact. And this fact is worth noting. Hindsight applied backwards makes guilt in place of learning, or awakening a true responsibility. Beware the deceiver and be awake to where you receive from. Self-hate rises from a false self image.

      • brian.s says:

        Human nature is revealed by its denials and corruptions. You couldn’t have a usurping or fake reality without a genuine to pass off as.
        Human deceit is a substitution reality – ie fake or masked. What we call human consciousness is generally a dissociated and displaced subjective model of self-justification for denial or evasion of the true – as a result of being phished into and identifying in the false – hence the reversal.
        The nature of our being is thus filtered and distorted through layers of (self) definition – such that the movement of oneness becomes the urge to dominate (for example).

        One of the things I feel in ‘world-watching’ is that it reflects self-knowledge that such a world was made to hide – ie – we WANT to ‘see evil’ OUT THERE to evade or mitigate our own core responsibility (to ourself).
        The psychic-emotional construct of the personality/society is predicated to mask (deny) its fear and guilt by displacement and projection onto ‘others’ who are then attacked, penalised, made sacrifice of.

        So the underlying ‘model’ is protected with the ongoing sacrifice of the living – where that model is a hidden or unowned addictive compulsion.

        Living FROM a sense of self-lack is a form of tyranny whatever forms it takes. Uncovering the nature of simple presence in its own light – and not a a weaponised or marketised subversion of the masking form – is the restoring of the alignment in being – rather than ‘fear thinking’.

        The nature of being is humanly expressed and embodied through the ideas we accept true for us (for whatever reason, and this includes ‘unconscious belief’).

        Living under terror is no capacity to live – so where the terror is made real by reaction, that reaction is a form of appeasement or alignment by which to hide from or evade the fear and pain of loss.

        • I Shot Santa says:

          I like that phrase “see evil” that you use. Funny how people do see evil in anything that’s not the way they’re thinking it oughta be. I can see how it might make sense to take note of different things, but most people prefer fear. And so they remain enslaved. JimBob who often sits outside the cave people’s place while they’re watching the shadows and just ups and starts playing his bagpipes. Badly. As if there is a good way to play them. What were these Scots thinking? Bagpipes, golf, hagus? At least they gave us Scotch. God bless the Scots.

        • VoiceOfArabi says:

          Hello brian.s,

          Very interesting post, and some of it went above my head, but i will try reading it again few more times.

          You should consider doing an interview with James Corbett on this subject as you appear to have knowledge on a topic that our enemy studies in depth, and we almost know nothing about… (let us not forget.. we know (almost) nothing about “ourselves”

  7. manbearpig says:

    This Warburg “non-governmentally funded” “Think Tank” The Institute for Policy Studies also has quite an intriguing history in achieving Deep State objectives (according to Daniel Estulin and a couple of others, at least):





    The modern “Gatekeeper’s” genitor among other things…?

  8. Octium says:

    I would be interested if anyonyone had some information on Amnesty International? As I noticed them in the visuals a couple of times.

    I have my suspicions about them but have not found any information that sounds conclusive when presented to the layman.

    I’m also interested in them because it is common for them to be fundraising in malls around where I live.

    That’s a double shame. It’s bad enough when some rich bastard is spending their money to spread propaganda, but when the money comes from the well intentioned who can’t really afford it.

    • Gaslight says:

      Hey Octium,

      I’m sure (as it should be) you’re not giving them a dime.

      My grandfather gave me some great advice when I came of age;

      “beware the do good-ers…they’ll do ya’ good”

    • Fawlty Towers says:

      I’m also interested in them because it is common for them to be fundraising in malls around where I live.

      That’s a double shame. It’s bad enough when some rich bastard is spending their money to spread propaganda, but when the money comes from the well intentioned who can’t really afford it.

      In a similar vein…
      I contacted The Intercept to ask about their current “fundraising” efforts.

      I found it rather strange that they would be fundraising so soon after receiving $250 million from Omidyar.
      I mean with a staff of about a dozen or so, how much money could they possibly need in one year?
      $2, $3, $4 million?

      What was their answer?
      “It’s for the future, you never know”. Yeah right. B.S.!

    • manbearpig says:



      • I Shot Santa says:

        You know, I’d heard some rumors about them before, but the way it had been presented it seemed like they were infiltrated and not directed. But notice how easily they are uncovered. Their plans all depend upon people not paying attention. Those days are numbered. JimBob who hopes it ain’t too many numbers as he was a history major and not a math major for a pretty good reason.

      • Octium says:

        Thanks for that, yes that was the kind of information I was after. Interesting too that many of the sources in the article are the same ones as being attacked by the Unmentionable Woman as well.

      • CQ says:

        Thanks to the two links you provided, manbearpig, I explored the new-to-me website WrongKindOfGreen.org and discovered, among other gems, a book titled “Celebrity Humanitarianism: The Ideology of Global Charity,” written by York University professor Ilan Kapoor and published in 2012.

        Last month the website published an excerpt from “Celebrity Humanitarianism,” found here: http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/category/non-profit-industrial-complex-organizations/organizations/humanitarian-agencies.

        A book review that appears above the excerpt makes the entire non-profit industrial complex (NPIC) sound like one giant Trojan horse: “Ilan Kapoor’s stunning new book exposes the most appealing–and thus most dangerous–sacred cows of contemporary ideology: the humanitarian actor, the billionaire philanthropist, and the NGO. Kapoor shows that it is precisely where we feel most emotionally satisfied that we must be most suspicious.” — Todd McGowan, University of Vermont

  9. milan says:

    Why you did not mention Serbia (ex Yugoslavia) and “Otpor” with his leader Srđa Popović [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srđa_Popović_(activist) ] which topped serbian president Slobodan Milosevic in 1999.?

    Srđa Popović with his organization CANVAS, also played major role in Arab Spring!

    And you did not mention pivotal person: Gene Sharp! [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp ]

    James, please do consider investigating these people and their work!

  10. scpat says:

    To further expand on a particular use of “Aid” organizations, there is an example in the US covert operation of funding the Contras in Nicaragua to overthrow the Sandinistas. Here are a few notes that I took while reading Gary Webb’s book, Dark Alliance.

    State Department unit called Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance Office (NHAO), created in 1985, was used to oversee the delivery of $27 million in “humanitarian” aid Congress agreed to give the Contras. Top aid of Oliver North, Robert Duemling, was assigned to NHAO and used as a liaison to drug dealers that the CIA didn’t want to be seen with.

    Duemling oversaw an NHAO contract with a Costa Rican shrimp company called Frigorificos de Puntarenas. Operating Frigorificos was the idea of a Medellín drug cartel accountant who used it, and many other businesses, to launder millions of dollars in drug money. In 1982, Frigorificos was taken over by a group of Miami-based drug traffickers. Cocaine was packed into containers with vegetables and fruit that was then shipped to the U.S.

    The operation was made possible by a sister company called Ocean Hunter, that brought the caught fish from Frigorificos into Miami. Moises Nuñez, a Cuban Bay of Pigs veteran, suspected drug trafficker, and CIA agent, worked on the Costa Rican side and was a big part of the success of the operation.

    Frigorificos was valuable to the State Department because of its international bank accounts that were used to broker “humanitarian aid” money to the Contras.

    • weilunion says:

      Yes indeed, James. Good report. I wrote about USAID, Freedom House, NED and others as it pertains to Ecuador but alas, everything has been shoved down the memory hole.

      Ecuador now sees these players once again, since the coup d’etat in 2016.

      They are everywhere influencing media, protests and such.

      I lived in Nicaragua as a journalist all of 1985. We saw them there most certainly.

  11. Drazen says:

    Your Quote,

    “Let’s be clear: This is not to say that all NGOs are Trojan horses. It is not the case that every group or program that receives money from USAID or the National Endowment for Democracy or a similar organization is thereby automatically a deep state change agent. That is not how the Trojan horse technique works.

    No, what makes these NGOs so effective as disguises for regime change operations is that much of the time, they are doing what they claim to be doing: providing aid, assistance and charity where it is needed. It is for this very reason that the US and its allies can so effectively smear NGO skeptics as crazy.”

    The whole idea of a needle in a haystack works best if there is lots of hay. A stack of needles is pointless.

    • Fawlty Towers says:

      The whole idea of a needle in a haystack works best if there is lots of hay. A stack of needles is pointless.

      Truth be told, a stack of needles is very pointy!
      Sorry I couldn’t resist. 🙂

  12. VoiceOfArabi says:

    Hello everyone…

    I keep going on about Human Nature (maybe i should use Human Behavior instead), but here is something i have just seen….

    I was watching a very experienced journalist, who used to be a Muslim Brotherhood member, who decided to leave Muslim Brotherhood because he recognizes that what they are doing is not in the interest of Islam or Muslims, and they seems to be serving a different master..

    When a wide awake guest says that Bukko Haram was a French secret police creation, and ISIS was a CIA creation and Muslim Brotherhood was MI5 creation, he nearly had fit. He can accept that the other two are created by secret police, but he cannot accept that Muslim Brotherhood is the same.

    He is not stupid, he actually decided to leave them.. But he is unable to accept that they are the same as ISIS and Bokko Haram, even when the majority of the world accept that they are.

    I guess if he does, it means he was a dumb mule (and a side note… why are mules suppose to be dumb??) for the period he was part of them.

    That my friends is…. Human Nature (or behavior). Majority of the times, people prefer to do the wrong thing to save face… completely illogical.

    • Gaslight says:

      Hello Voice of Arabi,

      Many men leave the western military because they understand the dynamic, i.e.; they woke up to the con and did the right thing.

      I didn’t see the WA interview, but I can spot men like this journalist (the guest) a mile away. He’s purveying half-truths…and we all know who loves to mix lies with the truth.

      The devil exists only in the hearts and minds of men. Defeating him is the meaning of life itself.

      There’s no room for evil on the new frontier!


      • VoiceOfArabi says:

        Hello Gaslight,

        You Say “The devil exists only in the hearts and minds of men. Defeating him is the meaning of life itself.

        That possibly is the greatest thing i heard this week… which reminds me of the fact that the fight with oneself is the biggest challenge of all.

        thanks for that

        • Gaslight says:

          You’re welcome brother,

          Take it to the bank. It’s the reason why we’re here.

          Achieving it is it’s own reward a thousand times over.

          We all see the wonderful possibilities right in front of us.


    • pearl says:

      Rats! Just submitted my response to you, VoA, but see that I failed to directly “reply” to you. In case you’re subscribing to direct replies to you alone, I hope you’ll see mine which is, unfortunately, standing alone just below.

  13. pearl says:

    Human Nature (or behavior). Majority of the times, people prefer to do the wrong thing to save face… completely illogical.

    Hey there, VoA. Hope you are well in your part of the world. As to human behavior, I don’t know if I’ve actually typed my thoughts out here or if they’ve merely been hammering the walls of my mind (because I think about it a lot, particularly as I live and watch my own family), but one thing that has stood out to me more than anything is that fear is the common denominator of human activity. Fear will justify throwing your loved ones under the bus to save face and, obviously, life. And it’s simultaneously painful and fascinating to me that people who live and breathe orthodox christianity are some of the most fearful and quick to trample their own to further their selfish desires, in stark contrast to the very words of the One they claim to hold as their moral compass.

    Another common denominator (math was never my strong suit…can there be more than one denominator?…) is shame. You may recall my mentioning the open source investigation of Dr. Tjeerd Andringa called “Geopolitics and Cognition”. Though lengthy reading, it’s not dull or dry but highly fascinating. Broken into chapters a day, one could finish it in a week or so. To address shame, I include the link on that chapter:


    P.S. Scpat and Gaslight, I include you two as well since you’ve both provided very interesting insight above.

    • VoiceOfArabi says:

      Hello Pearl,

      I hope you are well, thanks for the comment above, and it is very relevant, and i really like the link to the further reading.. It looks very promising.

      You are absolutely right in saying that human nature appears to be driven by fear, pride, etc, more than logic and what is good for self and the group.

    • Gaslight says:

      Thank you Pearl,

      I’m a voracious reader and always looking for more. I’m sure Scpat will appreciate your thoughtful contribution too. It’s worth so much more than the money we give.

  14. weilunion says:

    Yes indeed, James. Good report. I wrote about USAID, Freedom House, NED and others as it pertains to Ecuador but alas, everything has been shoved down the memory hole.

    Ecuador now sees these players once again, since the coup d’etat in 2016.

    They are everywhere influencing media, protests and such.

  15. anonymint says:

    James I applaud your work. I hope we can do more to make more people aware of the value and so they become more informed.

  16. heartruth says:

    How about this from Jimmy Dore… and his weird experience at the Human Rights Foundation’s ‘Freedom Forum’ in Oslo recently.


    JD asks a polite, sensible question on whether the HRF would discuss US domestic human rights violations… and their masks slip… BIG TIME! (LMAO!)

  17. manbearpig says:

    Just watched this again and at 14:18 I sat up straight when I noticed a NYT headline: U.S. GROUPS HELPED NURTURE ARAB UPRISINGS… that I hadn’t noticed the first time around… And even more irksome to my ego was the CBC article “U.S. Admits funding Syrian Opposition” shown just after that at 14:45; Irksome because the leaked documents referred to by Mr Corbett had, according to CBC, been provided by Wikileaks…

    So I was forced to take another look at Assange to see if I must reassess my conclusion that he’s a deep state asset. Though the alleged Wikileaked 2012 “Syria Files” have ultimately and predominantly served to hurt Assad this could legitimately be blamed on the media.

    Just before the release, Assange himself is quoted as saying on his site:

    “The material is embarrassing to Syria, but it is also embarrassing to Syria’s opponents. It helps us not merely to criticise one group or another, but to understand their interests, actions and thoughts. It is only through understanding this conflict that we can hope to resolve it.”


    A little lukewarm for someone who apparently had wind of a project to topple Syria as early as 2006.


    And that statement was made after he’d recently taken credit for the ousting of the Ben Ali government, the first step in the so-called “Arab Spring”.

    But the most compelling argument I’ve found against Assange and Wikileaks was made by Webster Tarpley:

    “…Wikileaks = Cass Sunstein’s Program for Cognitive Infiltration In Action

    It should be clear that Assange and Wikileaks are precisely the practical realization of Sunstein’s program for “cognitive infiltration” shock troops to counteract and overwhelm any real mass understanding of oligarchical domination in the modern world, and any discussion of what kind of economic policies are needed to secure a recovery from the present world depression.

    In line with Sunstein’s recipe, Assange is a self-declared enemy of 9/11 truth…

    …But the scandals Assange is offering target mostly the adversaries of the CIA…”


    Indeed, Assange’s roundabout ambiguous statements reminded me of articles written by Chomsky…

    until recently…where he seems to have a clearer view of what’s actaully happening in Syria… which makes me think that this sequestration at the Ecuadorian embassy might have been what the doctor ordered to gradually set a momentarily floundering but potentially powerful propaganda priest back into the papal throne of orienting alternative opinion…a temporary crucifixion in the form “house arrest” to put the martyr’s shine back on his hacker’s halo.

    All he needs now is a cherry-picking outspoken disciple/priestess à la Mary Magdalene for consecration and credibility to make it a movement…

    Oh wait… could that be Johnstone the Apostle…?

    [disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this comment are the sole responsability of the creature posting them and do not necessarily reflect those of the hapless website owner.]

  18. sTevo says:

    Hello, we’re from USAID and we’re here to help!

  19. cherub says:

    Could you tell me if I have been ghost banned on any of these sites? Now I can only view my minds account if I have a cookie from logining into minds.com. Other wise I get a channel not found message.




Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top