Página Oficial de Daniel Estulin. Autor Club Bilderberg, Conspiración Octopus, Imperio Invisible, Los señores de las sombras, Shadow Masters, Bilderberg group. » Internet

La revolución del 99%

Daniel Estulin — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:58:05 +0000

La pelota sigue creciendo …Vanity Fair y Vlad Teichberg están ahí. Hace casi un año avisaba de que el movimiento 15M estaba teledirigido por intereses financieros desde Wall Street, liderado por un tipo que había instalada su cuartel general en la calle Pez en Madrid.

Desde entonces, este hombre había aparecido en todos los medios de masa más importantes del mundo, desde la BBC, hasta NBC, la CNN y la revista New Yorker. ¡Ahora le ha tocado a Vanity Fair! A ver si esta vez la gente empiezan de entender cómo funciona el engaño.

¡Llegó la hora de sacar nuestros cerebros a pasear!

Daniel Estulin

Translation: The ball continues to grow … and Vlad Teichberg and Vanity Fair are there. Almost a year ago I warned you that 15-M movement was remote-controlled by financial interests from Wall Street, led by a guy who had installed his headquarters at Calle Pez in Madrid. Since then, this man has appeared in all mass media in the world, from the BBC to NBC, CNN and the New Yorker. Now it’s Vanity Fair time! Let’s see if this time people begin to understand how the deception works. It’s time to get our brains out for a ride!

Revolution Number 99

America was full of angry people in September 2011, when a few hundred citizens decided to make their anger count. V.F.’s oral history of Occupy Wall Street shows how the spark was lit in Zuccotti Park as a disparate, passionate mix of activists, celebrities, and accidental protesters changed the national conversation.

Related slide show: “The Revolution Will Be Graphic-Designed.” By Max Chafkin With additional reporting by Alexandra Beggs, Mark Guiducci, Jaime Lalinde, Elizabeth Nicholas, Rebecca Sacks and Kaitlin Sanders

PHOTOGRAPH © STEVEN GREAVES/CORBIS.

COMING HOME Occupy Wall Street protesters celebrate being allowed to return to Zuccotti Park after their early-morning eviction on November 15, 2011.

On September 17, several hundred people marched to an empty square in Lower Manhattan—a place so dull that the bankers and construction workers in the neighborhood barely knew it was there—and camped out on the bare concrete. They would be joined, over the next two months, by thousands of supporters, who erected tents, built makeshift institutions—a field hospital, a library, a department of sanitation, a free-cigarette dispensary—and did a fair amount of drumming.

[View with PicLens]

It was easy to infer from the signs protesters carried what the grievances that gave rise to Occupy Wall Street were: an ever widening gap between rich and poor; a perceived failure by President Obama to hold the financial industry accountable for the crisis of 2008; and a sense that money had taken over politics.

The amazing thing about the Occupy Wall Street movement is not that it started—America was full of fed-up people at the end of 2011—but that it worked. With a vague agenda, a nonexistent leadership structure (many of the protesters were anarchists and didn’t believe in leaders at all), and a minuscule budget (as of December, they’d raised roughly $650,000—one-eighth of Tim Pawlenty’s presidential campaign haul), the occupiers in Zuccotti Park nevertheless inspired similar protests in hundreds of cities around the country and the world. What they created was, depending on whom you asked, either the most important protest movement since 1968 or an aimless, unwashed, leftist version of the Tea Party.

Occupy Wall Street quickly attracted intellectual celebrities—and, eventually, actual celebrities—but its founders were an unlikely assortment of stifled activists, part-time provocateurs, and people who simply had no place else to turn. There was Kalle Lasn, who ran an obscure Vancouver-based magazine called Adbusters with just 10 employees and an anti-consumerist agenda. Another key organizer, Vlad Teichberg, was a 39-year-old former derivatives trader who spent his weekends and evenings producing activist video art. David Graeber, an anthropologist at the University of London, quickly emerged as the movement’s intellectual force. If he was known at all, it was not for his anarchist theories or for his research into the nature of debt, but for being let go by Yale in 2005—in part, he believes, on account of his political leanings.

It is unclear whether the impact of Occupy Wall Street will be lasting or brief. But the story of how these unlikely organizers—and the activists, students, and homeless people who joined them—managed to seize control of the national conversation is remarkable, miraculous even. This is how it happened.

I. “Hello, Citizens of the Internet”

VLAD TEICHBERG
Former derivatives trader; co-founder, Global Revolution
People think this started in New York on September 17, but that’s not true. From my point of view, it started in Egypt.

JEFFREY SACHS
Economist, Columbia University
I was in Egypt after Tahrir Square, talking to young people who had accomplished something completely amazing. Two thousand eleven was a year of global upheaval—I’d seen it everywhere. And a number of times in the spring, I said in interviews: Don’t be so sure that this can’t happen here. Because the precursors—of inequality, of a sense of injustice—apply to the U.S.

KALLE LASN
Co-founder, Adbusters
The left had been chattering on about revolutions for a long time, but we’ve basically been howling at the moon. And then, all of a sudden, a bunch of young people [in Egypt] using social media were able to mobilize not just 500 or 5,000 people, but 50,000 people. They inspired us with their courage and with their techniques.

In our brainstorming sessions at Adbusters in February and March, we said, “Isn’t some sort of regime change possible in the United States of America?” It wouldn’t be a hard regime change like what happened with Mubarak, who was basically torturing people every day. We called it a “soft regime change.”

VLAD TEICHBERG

Former derivatives trader; co-founder, Global Revolution
I’d been a Wall Street person and a revolutionary. It was like a double-agent thing. I’d make a few hundred grand and then do another project. My last job for a big bank was in 2008 for HSBC. Before that I was running structured-credit trading for mortgages for this big German bank, WestLB. I was managing a $30 billion book. It was ground zero for the financial explosion.

We knew [the revolution] was going to happen. We just thought it would take a little longer. We decided to set up a base in Spain, because we thought it was going south to sub-Saharan Africa. Then suddenly the Spanish revolution started.

That May, as Teichberg watched, tens of thousands of protesters stormed into Madrid’s Puerta del Sol. The demonstration, which became known as the Indignados movement, quickly spread to dozens of Spanish cities and became a sort of prototype for Occupy Wall Street. Decisions were made, anarchist-style, by consensus; and demonstrations were broadcast, often live, onto the Internet. On June 9, Lasn registered the domain name OccupyWallStreet.org—a coinage by Micah White, the senior editor of Adbusters.

KALLE LASN
Co-founder, Adbusters
We put together a poster for the July issue of Adbusters. The poster was a ballerina—an absolutely still ballerina—poised in a Zen-ish kind of way on top of this dynamic bull. And below it had the [Twitter] hashtag #OccupyWallStreet. Above, it said, “What is our one demand?” I felt like this ballerina stood for this deep demand that would change the world. There was some magic about it.

“Are you ready for a Tahrir moment?” a July 13 e-mail from Adbusters asked, announcing plans for the Wall Street protest. The proposed date, September 17, was Lasn’s mother’s birthday.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aWqj4XmST0

Video courtesy of Barbara Ross.

VLAD TEICHBERG
Not that many people read Adbusters itself, but that idea went viral. People were talking about it, discussing it, organizing around it.

SAM COHEN
New York civil-rights lawyer
In July, Vlad was in the office telling us that plans were on to occupy Wall Street in September. I told him, “You guys are crazy. You’re going to get locked up in the first five minutes.”

Later that month, Adbusters and the leftist group New Yorkers Against Budget Cuts called for an August 2 meeting at Lower Manhattan’s Bowling Green to plan the September protest. The proposed format was a general assembly—a sort of anarchist version of Robert’s Rules of Order that allows anyone to speak and gauges feedback via hand signals. The system had been used successfully in Spain, but many of the New York activists who showed up that day were unfamiliar with the concept.

DAVID GRAEBER
Anthropologist, University of London
I strolled by Wall Street [on August 2], and there was an insane number of cops: horse cops, scooter cops, platoons of foot soldiers standing around looking for something to do. I came up to Bowling Green and there it is: a rally. They had megaphones and a stage. There were banners and a couple of TV cameras. There were maybe 120 people. It was supposed to be a general assembly, but instead we had a top-down leadership group that was going to make all the decisions. They were going to make speeches, and then we were going to march under waving banners. Who fucking cares?

I started tapping people on the shoulder who looked like they were as annoyed as I was and said, If we actually did a real general assembly, would you come? We ended up forming a circle, and at that point everyone defected from the rally. There were maybe 60 or 70 people.

KALLE LASN
Without anybody beside David Graeber, this thing started having a life of its own. Adbusters gave it the spark, but after that we’ve had almost nothing to do with it.

DAVID GRAEBER
On August 4, we came up with the “We are the 99 percent” idea. I just threw it out there. I’m sure a lot of people were thinking it—I just suggested it to the group. It was a reference to all those people who were talking about the 1 percent.

VLAD TEICHBERG
[By early September] it was a very cohesive group, 30 to 50 people, meeting publicly in parks. I started training people on how to deploy live-streaming teams on the day of. The strategy was to quickly edit videos and find ways to make them go viral.

DAVID GRAEBER
None of us knew how many people were going to show up [on September 17]. The Adbusters people said, We have 90,000 subscribers; we’re hoping to get 20,000. We were like, Yeah, right. Those guys don’t understand that these things just don’t happen on the Internet. To make it real you have to do real on-the-ground organizing. We only had six weeks with no money at all. With time and money you could organize buses and put up advertising. Our advertising [strategy] was “Someone has a photocopier at work? How many copies can we sneak out without anyone noticing?”

While Graeber coordinated weekly general assemblies, the Internet was alive with news of the planned occupation, thanks largely to the work of Anonymous, the collection of activist hackers—“hacktivists”—who had brought down the Web sites of Visa, MasterCard, and PayPal the previous winter.

GREGG HOUSH
A spokesman for Anonymous
What we had done up until then was very Internet-based, and this looked like it would take a more old-school kind of activism. I remember one [Anonymous member] saying, “I’m not taking part in any hippie drum circles. Stop talking about this.” But then you had all these vocal people that were like, “We can get this going in the right direction. We can help steer this thing through our media.”

So you started seeing, on some of the bigger Twitter accounts that have many thousands of followers, tweeting about what was coming. Then you started seeing a lot of Anonymous news sites reposting some of the information from Adbusters.

KALLE LASN
Co-founder, Adbusters
Anonymous came out of the blue with a video that was watched by a huge number of people. It gave us a huge boost; it gave us street cred.

The video, which began, “Hello, citizens of the Internet,” was narrated by a computerized voice, and was posted to YouTube in late August. Much of the script was copied, word for word, from Adbusters’ e-mail the previous month: “Anonymous will flood into Lower Manhattan, set up tents, kitchens, peaceful barricades, and occupy Wall Street for a few months.” The video showed protesters wearing Guy Fawkes masks, which commemorate the mustachioed 17th-century insurrectionist and were popularized by the film V for Vendetta. The masks had first been used during the group’s campaign against the Church of Scientology in 2008.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-eFxCDx7Yw

GREGG HOUSH
One of the [discussions] we were having was “With everyone going to the streets, we need to cover our faces if we want to remain anonymous.” So we started spitballing, throwing out a bunch of ideas. [Guy Fawkes] was one of them. We called around to all of the costume shops and comic-book shops in most of the major cities worldwide—from Moscow and Paris to New York. We realized that the V [for Vendetta] mask was in every major city in the world. It was cheap and available.

II. “A New Family”

Occupy Wall Street was set to begin at noon on September 17. Though a small committee of organizers had narrowed down a list of possible sites to occupy, they kept the list secret.

DAVID GRAEBER
Anthropologist, University of London
I got there in the morning and took a couple of pictures and put them on my Twitter account. The Occupy Wall Street Twitter account put out a message saying, Hey, David Graeber is down there. He seems to know what’s going on. Within two hours, I had 2,000 followers. Suddenly I was the communications system [for the entire protest].

VLAD TEICHBERG
Former derivatives trader; co-founder, Global Revolution
On day one, we didn’t know we were going to end up in Zuccotti Park. We were mobile. We were going to try to take the bull, but the bull was already occupied. By the police.

A barricade had been constructed around the iconic charging-bull sculpture near the New York Stock Exchange and was manned by New York City police officers. Organizers distributed a map with several possible locations for an encampment.

DAVID GRAEBER
At noon, everybody was supposed to show up. We thought maybe there would be a couple thousand. At first it didn’t seem like that. I was thinking, Oh, it’s a couple hundred people. This is O.K. I was feeling a little disappointed, but then more and more people started streaming in, and a lot of them were from out of town. They obviously had no place to stay. So they had to occupy something one way or the other.

SANDRA NURSE
Development consultant
I found out about it on Facebook. A friend sent an announcement to me, and she and I came together. We took the subway and showed up at Bowling Green.

NATHAN SCHNEIDER
Journalist who covered the protests for Harper’s and The Nation
The plan was to go to Chase Manhattan Plaza, which the night before had been completely barricaded off. There was a big debate, not only within the tactics committee [which had picked the locations and] which was consulting in a little circle at the time, but on the steps publicly. The whole group was debating what to do.

VLAD TEICHBERG
We basically had these mobile teams [with video cameras] chasing the march around, and we were sitting in Starbucks on Broad and Beaver Streets trying to mix the whole thing together. That was our position. It was us and a bunch of F.B.I. guys watching our screens very intensely.

DAVID GRAEBER
At about 2:30 P.M., [organizers] distributed a map with backup places and numbers on them. And then a guy on a bike came up and said, “O.K., it’s Zuccotti Park.” And when I got there, the park was completely full. We had at least 2,000 people. That was when it turned around for me.

SANDRA NURSE
I’d never been to a general assembly before. I wasn’t aware of this process they used, so it seemed bizarre. But it was also fascinating.

VLAD TEICHBERG
One of the people who was running the [live stream] Web site for us called me and said, “Vlad, you broke the Internet.” It was 300 tweets per second. Our service went down.

That night, many of the protesters went home, but 60 or so slept in sleeping bags and on cardboard boxes in the park.

SAM COHEN
New York civil-rights lawyer
Over the first week, the mood of the encampment shifted from fear and paranoia to a lot of hope. The weather was not great. People were without shelter, and there were some hypothermia cases. The police were strictly enforcing bans on tarps and tents. When there was rain, people would hold up tarps over computers—holding them because police were responding to people who attached tarps to anything.

MICHAEL LEVITIN
Co-founder, Occupied Wall Street Journal, the unofficial newspaper of the protests
It rained like hell. We had some nights that were just non-sleeping nights. You had to jockey for space, find your spot, and lay down your cardboard and your sleeping bag. But there was this incredible energy, staying out there with those people and making a new family.

NIRAL SHAH
N.Y.U. law student
I heard about it on September 18, but I probably didn’t get down and check it out until a few days later. I think I’d grown away from the activist version of myself, and I was ready to go in pretty skeptically like “Aw, these people don’t know anything. These are weird leftists that are going to make the cause look bad.” But then I saw all the enthusiasm that was going on there. There was just something that felt really empowering about it.

SAM COHEN
I got asked to do some research into the legal status of Zuccotti Park. I went back up to the office and that’s when I discovered the phenomenon of privately owned public spaces. It’s a very weird quirk.

The quirk, which was unknown to many city officials and protesters, stemmed from the fact that, although Zuccotti was a public park, it was technically owned by a real-estate developer, Brookfield Office Properties, as a result of a 1968 agreement with the city. Unlike Central Park and Union Square Park, not all public-private parks have explicit closing hours. Neither the city nor Brookfield could legally evict the protesters—or so it appeared at the time. In order to get around city rules about the use of amplified sound without a permit, the group adopted a technique known as “the people’s microphone”—in which a chain of human voices is used to impart information.

SAM COHEN
The people’s microphone—all strangeness aside—was an incredibly effective tool to get around the amplified-sound permit because you need an amplified-sound permit to use a bullhorn or microphone. Everybody within earshot repeats what you say. Speaking in that context was a bit of a challenge: “Parsing my speech. Into sections that can be repeated. In front of large groups of people. While maintaining emphasis.” That was the cadence I would use.

BRENDAN BURKE
Truckdriver, Occupy Wall Street security volunteer
I was in Tompkins Square Park when I was a kid [during the 1988 protests that ended in rioting]. That was just people shooting heroin and having babies and smoking crack. So I thought that’s what this was going to be. But it wasn’t just people doing nothing. They had a media center in the middle of the park with a bunch of people on laptops seriously working. These were college-educated, smart, concerned people who were doing live streams when the protesters did marches and putting the videos out virally. I was like, “Wow. We can control the narrative.”

www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGriO1feMU0

RAPHAEL ROSARIO
Computer technician; married with five children
I was on my way home from work, and a friend of mine said, “Let’s go see the protesters.” I didn’t want to go, but he was like, “Come on, Raph.” I fell in love with this place. There were so many people who felt the same way I did, people from all walks of life. I just didn’t want to stop talking to these people. I called my wife and I said, “I’m going to be babysitting at my sister’s house tonight.”

The next morning, CNN put a camera in my face. I thought my wife might have seen it, so I called her. She was really pissed. She threw me out. She said, “You can stay there if you want to.” I stayed in the park another night. By the second day, I was hooked. I couldn’t leave.

III. “Marches Are So Fun”

In the early afternoon of September 24, hundreds of people—including residents of the park—marched uptown to Union Square, chanting “Occupy Wall Street, all day, all week.” Police intervened, ostensibly to keep them from blocking traffic.

CHELSEA ELLIOTT
Freelance graphic designer
I’d gone there the first week, and I was telling my friends about it: “Oh, there’s this great march on Saturday. Marches are so fun. We dance, and there’s music, and we laugh the whole time.” I mean, parts of it were like that, but it was huge and there was chaos.

RAYMOND W. KELLY
New York City police commissioner
You need a permit to have a parade—that’s 50 or more people. In our minds, if you’re not having an actual parade, we’ll let you walk on the sidewalk. But on Saturday in Union Square Park, they decided to violate the tacit understanding that they would stay on the sidewalk. It was at University Place where they ran down the street and started blocking traffic. I happened to be in the area that day and I actually saw people doing this. That’s where the first large number of arrests took place.

CHELSEA ELLIOTT
I was on the sidewalk at 12th Street and University, and this group of cops stood in front of me and said, “You can’t go past here.” There was this girl behind me who was getting upset, screaming “Fascists.” A cop came and slammed her down on the ground and dragged her by her hair. I just started screaming. Then another officer walked over and pepper-sprayed us. It took a few seconds to actually feel it. I was like, “What happened? Why am I wet?” And then all of a sudden it hurts to open your eyes and you can’t really breathe. It’s this horrible burning all over your face.

Elliott was never arrested. She fell to the ground and was attended by volunteer medics. The officer who sprayed her was later identified by Anonymous as Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna. A Police Department review found that he had broken protocol and docked him 10 vacation days as punishment.

CHELSEA ELLIOTT
I walked back to the park. I talked to some of the people I knew, and they were like, “Yeah, there’s already a video online.”

VLAD TEICHBERG
Former derivatives trader; co-founder, Global Revolution
When the pepper-spray video came out, that was the hook. That’s what made people focus on [Occupy Wall Street]. The video showed that we weren’t just a bunch of quote-unquote anarchists. It showed our humanity.

NATALIA ABRAMS
Co-founder of Occupy Colleges, the nationwide student chapter of Occupy Wall Street, established on October 2
I was driving home and I heard about the girls who were maced by Anthony Bologna in New York City. The moment I heard about the police brutality, that made me want to investigate what the cause was—the moment that I saw the violence against people for doing nothing.

RAYMOND W. KELLY
New York City police commissioner
Any arrest can be made to look difficult; they’re not pretty things. Particularly if someone wants to make it look difficult, they can do that. They can go limp, and it can be required that they be dragged—that’s a photo op you see sometimes. People who put snippets on YouTube will put only the part that fits their position, so you seldom see the precipitating event before an arrest. What you will see are the people who appear to be arrested with a lot of force. Because they want it that way.

MICHAEL LEVITIN
Co-founder, Occupied Wall Street Journal, the unofficial newspaper of the protests
White girls. It’s kind of sad to admit it, but that’s what it took to wake people up. It wasn’t the argument of 1 percent versus 99 percent or the outrageous bonuses for the plutocracy; it was white girls getting nailed unjustifiably.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=moD2JnGTToA

The video clip of Elliott being sprayed was viewed more than a million times on YouTube. (“What the fuck was that all about?” Jon Stewart asked on The Daily Show. “What? That’s here in America?”)

KALLE LASN
Co-founder, Adbusters
Every few days, a luminary would come to Zuccotti Park and give a speech that would circulate around the Internet. All of a sudden it was cool to be a lefty again.

MARK RUFFALO
Actor
I had seen an Adbusters blog post, and I saw that it had been building and that it sounded like a real populist answer to the Tea Party. So I said, “I’m going to go down to check it out on my own.” It was dark, and I had my baseball cap on. I just happened to come right when they were starting their general assembly. I was moved by the sweetness of the place, and just the amount of hope and dignity that they comported themselves with. It was the power of democracy at its purest.

RUSSELL SIMMONS
Hip-hop mogul
I visited every day. From the very beginning I liked the idea that they were at Wall Street; I liked the idea that they were against Wall Street’s control over government. I think that most people in America, or in fact 9 out of 10 Americans, believe that Wall Street and corporations and special interests have too much control over our government.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqQJuv-0gJE

DAVID CROSBY
Musician, Crosby and Nash
We were in Europe on tour. People all over Europe knew about it. As a matter of fact, people all over Europe were doing demonstrations in support of it. I went to Zuccotti Park as soon as I got back and sang to them:

Who are the men who really run this land?

And why do they run it with such a thought-less hand?

[From his 1971 song “What Are Their Names.”]

And you know, when they started singing along—no nothing, just human voices, and guitars—it was very inspiring. Truth is, it gave us goose bumps.

Twenty-six days into the occupation, on Wednesday, October 12, the city announced that it would clean Zuccotti Park, which now had an estimated 200 nightly residents. The cleanup, which was planned for Friday, was seen as a backdoor attempt to end the occupation, and volunteers began frantically sweeping and mopping. The following evening, protesters made their way into the park to try to prevent the police from entering. “The whole world is watching,” they chanted (borrowing a phrase from the protests at the 1968 Democratic Convention, in Chicago). “The whole world is watching.”

MICHAEL LEVITIN
A thousand people descended on the park in the dawn hours, defying Bloomberg’s threat to clean it. The energy in the park was palpable. It was unique, it was giddy, it was precarious.

NIRAL SHAH
N.Y.U. law student
It was fucking packed. Shoulder to shoulder, maybe 2,500 people in the park. They started doing a people’s mike to get us ready. It was pretty tough to hear. One person was talking in the middle of the park, and it took, like, eight rallies of yelling for it to get back to the end of the park. The first thing [announced] was “There’s going to be people who hold the outside of the park. Everyone who doesn’t want to get arrested, go across the street.”

So the next thing that happened was that there was about to be someone from the legal team to come up and get people who are going to be arrested prepared for that. And so right as this is about to happen, someone passes a statement from Bloomberg’s office. And I heard the first part of it through the people’s mike, but before the next line was read and repeated, the crowd just erupted. [It was a] tears-to-your-eyes moment, just out of a movie. Everyone hugging, couples making out.

At 6:20 A.M., 40 minutes before the scheduled cleanup, the city issued a press release announcing that the raid had been called off. Mayor Bloomberg insisted later that day that the raid was called off not in response to pressure from protesters but at the behest of Brookfield Properties. The explanation was widely deemed unconvincing. (Mayor Bloomberg and his deputy, Howard Wolfson, declined Vanity Fair’s repeated requests for comment.)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPJkQgAzrKc

MICHAEL LEVITIN
That was the major turning point. After that, the tents went up. They had had this rule where we could stay in the park—but no sitting on tarps, no bags, no benches. But after that night it was complete defiance. The city loved us. The country loved us.

IV. “There Was a Lot of Drumming Going On”

By October 15, Day 29 of the occupation, rallies had spread to hundreds of cities around the world—Tokyo, Chicago, London, Manila—where violent confrontations with police in subsequent weeks, most famously in Oakland, would keep the movement in the news. In New York, the original encampment—now with tents, electricity, wireless Internet access, and a kitchen that offered free meals—continued to grow, but the amenities began to attract growing numbers of homeless people, drug users, and criminals. Protesters tried their best to keep the peace by increasing the number of security and sanitation volunteers.

RAYMOND W. KELLY
The demonstrators had expanded their footprint. Their plan was to bring in even larger tents. You couldn’t walk through the aisles. There was kerosene and gasoline being used to fuel their generators.

RUSSELL SIMMONS
It was nothing but tent. A third of those tents were homeless people. Some of those homeless people, or homeless families, were inspired and became part of the movement. Also, there were people with mental-health problems. The occupiers tried to feed them, clothe them, and educate them. But it ultimately proved to be a burden that was damaging because the media, like the New York Post, would take their erratic behavior or violent behavior and would assign that to the protest.

From the New York Post, October 26: “Newly sprung ex-cons and vagrants rousted from other parks are crashing the Occupy Wall Street protest, where gourmet meals are free and boozy, drug-fueled parties are on tap.”

RAPHAEL ROSARIO
Computer technician; married with five children
You had kids who used to hang out at the ferry [terminal—about six blocks south]; for years it’s been a magnet for kids to hang out and drink and smoke a little pot. And they all wished they had a little tent somewhere to lay a girl. And all of a sudden this utopia opened up where there was free food and clothes, and they’re giving out tents. It was heaven for them.

RAYMOND W. KELLY
[On October 28] the Fire Department went in to take out the generators. Generators started popping up again, and we were taking them out on a regular basis. And there were obviously concerns from the community. There was a lot of drumming going on. There were violations of the noise code, and complaints about people defecating and urinating in the neighborhood.

RUSSELL SIMMONS
The police were dropping Rikers Island people [recently released from the famed New York City jail complex] right down the block. Those people had nothing to do with Occupy. And if somebody was sleeping in any park nearby, the police would say, “Go sleep over there. There’s food.” They were directing people there. So that sped up the process.

RAYMOND W. KELLY
We have had no proof of that [accusation] at all. I asked Russell Simmons, who had been putting it out there, “Tell us where [this is happening].” No one could show us an example of it happening. If you’re going to have a demonstration that attracts media attention around the world—and you’re going to give out free food and you have tents—guess what: you’re gonna become a mecca for homeless people. This is just common sense. You don’t need the police directing them there. And yet the police were blamed for this. That’s totally unfair.

KEEGAN STEPHAN
Bicycle mechanic; member of Occupy Wall Street sustainability committee
One night the city raided the camp and took away all the gas generators. It was right before that big nor’easter on Saturday [October 29]. There were 40 cases of hypothermia that night. People thought it was fucked up and were looking for answers. Occupy Boston said that they had five bike-powered generators that they could get there the next day. Somebody from M.I.T. who was at Boston came down with supplies and helped us build a ramshackle system made out of wood but that actually charged batteries.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPXBgZ1gAPs

BRENDAN BURKE
Truckdriver, Occupy Wall Street security volunteer
The movement was becoming about taking care of people in a park rather than holding Wall Street accountable for crimes against our Constitution. My personal opinion was that we’d done the park. We occupied it and held it with class and dignity. It smelled fine. It was mellow. I never saw a rat. But at some point it had to transform into something else.

KALLE LASN
The original idealism had been compromised by these homeless people. We lost the narrative. It’s a bit like falling in love. You have these incredible first few weeks and then things change. It just felt like that first idealistic, magical phase was coming to a close. And not only that, but winter was approaching.

V. “A Punch and a Kiss”

On the evening of November 14, Adbusters sent an e-mail to subscribers urging the protest to declare victory and to put less emphasis on occupying parks. “[Let’s] dance like we’ve never danced before and invite the world to join us,” they wrote. “Then we clean up, scale back and most of us go indoors while the die-hards hold the camps. [We’ll] use the winter to brainstorm, network, build momentum so that we may emerge rejuvenated with fresh tactics, philosophies, and a myriad projects ready to rumble next Spring.” Hours later, in the early morning of November 15, hundreds of New York City police officers with riot shields and helmets began assembling around Zuccotti Park.

RAYMOND W. KELLY
We went in at one A.M. The notice was given: “We need you to evacuate the property. You’re going to have to take all your personal gear with you.” Anything that wasn’t taken would be, in essence, abandoned. We gave them 45 minutes before any property was taken.

KEEGAN STEPHAN
I went to a Time’s Up [a bicycle activist group] meeting. We got an early call. We all left on our bikes, just flew down there. The police were already blocking off a block north of Zuccotti Park. You could see the lights they had; you could see the sound cannon moving through. You could see people being arrested and thrown into buses.

RAYMOND W. KELLY
New York City police commissioner
A core group of people went to the middle of the park and locked arms. Police didn’t do anything to disturb them. They were free to get up and leave.

KEEGAN STEPHAN
Bicycle mechanic; member of Occupy Wall Street sustainability committee
All the possessions were being thrown into garbage trucks and compacted. I kept trying to go through [to retrieve the energy bikes], and they kept grabbing me and throwing me out. I threw my hands in the air and started to walk away, and one of the officers just lost it after dealing with me for too long and threw me to the ground. Then a bunch of them jumped on me and threw me into the paddy wagon.

RAYMOND W. KELLY
These were tumultuous situations. Police are human beings. Did we have some over-reaction? Probably. Was there instigation [by protesters]? Absolutely. People were in [the officers’] faces calling them names. We had a line of [police] scooters pushed over. I’ve been involved with police work for many years. It never goes with absolute precision, particularly where people want to have a confrontation that can generate a reaction from the police. Sometimes you have an over-reaction.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dR-cZsyP8E

SANDRA NURSE
Development consultant
I didn’t cry [when the raid was happening]. I was trying to put aside the emotional loss that I felt and just help everyone else.

KEEGAN STEPHAN

I’m just devastated that we lost the park. I just loved the space and loved the people there.

People felt like they had a voice again because we had that space. I don’t know if it’s going to continue to happen if we don’t have that space. We’ll see. I hope it does. I hope we retake the space.

BRENDAN BURKE
Truckdriver, Occupy Wall Street security volunteer
The raid was a punch and a kiss. It’s a punch because the park got taken. It’s a kiss because now the narrative is back on Wall Street. It’s not about policing people. Sex abuse, drug abuse, sickness—that’s all gone. Thank God. The park is symbolic now; it’s in the lexicon and in the culture. The protest is bigger than that. People who want to hang on to Zuccotti Park will hang on to it.

RAPHAEL ROSARIO
Computer technician; married with five children
I spent the night [after the raid] at Middle Collegiate Church. I don’t know what I’m going to do. I may just wind up staying [in shelters] for a while. You know how there are certain things you feel you have a once-in-a-lifetime chance to be a part of? I’ve never felt more right about anything I’ve ever done.

Protesters were allowed into the park later that afternoon, but they were required to pass a security checkpoint and were not allowed to bring in tents or sleeping bags. Over the following weeks, protesters continued congregating in the park, but in much smaller numbers. At any given time, there would be a few dozen people there, huddling together to stay warm. On November 16, an Adbusters briefing recommended using the winter to regroup and prepare for a “Spring Offensive,” but it was unclear if anyone would heed their advice.

JOAN BAEZ
Folksinger
Occupy Wall Street is crazy, and that’s part of the glory of it, as long as they get their hands on the reins. It was clearer to us [in the 1960s] what we were fighting for.

There’s been a lot of stupid behavior. The protesters need to respect Mayor Bloomberg. You don’t get to shout, “Fuck you, Mayor Bloomberg.” It shows you don’t have respect for human life.

JEFFREY SACHS
Economist, Columbia University
I’ve seen in my classes over the years this intensity of a desire to fix things. There’s a lack of the cynicism that is so pervasive in my generation. I subscribe to the idea that there are these long waves of American history and we’re due for one.

JOAN BAEZ
There’s a wonderful element in this movement that we didn’t have: there wasn’t too much fun back then. There’s a lighter spirit now. I don’t know why that is, but it’s just lovely.

MAX
A twentysomething investment banker and resident of Lower Manhattan who declined to give his last name
What is Occupy Wall Street to me? It’s the grown-up equivalent of sort of a mass temper tantrum. Which isn’t to say that sometimes temper tantrums don’t have some sort of root cause. But they’re not necessarily the best way of getting what you want and achieving anything productive.

MOHAMED A. EL-ERIAN
C.E.O. of PIMCO, the world’s largest bond investor
I think when we step back in 20 or 30 years, we’re going to see that Occupy Wall Street was a signal of a massive multi-year adjustment. At the end of all of this, it’s my deep belief that we’re going to end up with a better balance between labor and capital, between finance and the rest of the economy, and between current and future generations. The reason why this is a youth-driven movement—like the Arab Spring—is that the young people realize that their future was mortgaged in order to allow some other sector of society to enjoy a standard of living beyond what they deserved.

MICHAEL LEVITIN
Co-founder, Occupied Wall Street Journal, the unofficial newspaper of the protests
It’s already starting to affect politics. Look at the way they broke out the congressional budget report, into the 1 and the 99 percent. It’s our fucking Congressional Budget Office! Whether or not Obama wants to admit it, it’s helping him. The irony is we’re only here because of our outrage that he hasn’t done what we asked him to do.

PAT
A woman encountered in Zuccotti Park shortly after the raid. She refused to give her last name or age, but said she was old enough to receive a senior-citizen discount. She wore a Guy Fawkes mask
I’ve never been involved in activism, not even in the Vietnam War era. I guess I was too busy trying to be the perfect suburban housewife. I have a kid in his late 20s; he lives in Las Vegas and he’s laughing about his mom being an activist. He sent me the mask with a message: “Go cause trouble.”

Originally published by Vanity Fair

Compartir/Share

Facebook y sus conexiones con C.I.A. y D.A.R.P.A.

Daniel Estulin — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:26:52 +0000

Compartir/Share

Con la salida de Facebook en la bolsa de Nueva York, creo que es un momento oportuno para publicar el siguiente artículo de Facebook And It’s Connections To The C.I.A. And D.A.R.P.A. by Brian S Staveley.

Dudo mucho que tendrá el efecto deseado viendo los comentarios imbéciles de algunas personas que andan vagando por mi página últimamente. Creo que ha llegado el momento de desaparecer un par de años y dejar de escribir libros. Si con todo lo que he publicado, explicado, hablado, comentado y enseñado, la mayoría siguen sin entender nada, haciendo las mismas preguntas idiotas de siempre…¿Para qué escribo?

No obstante, tal y como ya he comentado hace más de un año y medio en diferentes espacios radiofónicos de RNE, Radio 4 Cataluña, Agente Estulin, etc, Facebook es la CIA y es Tavistock. Los que han leído mi último y de lejos mejor trabajo sobre este Instituto hasta ahora absolutamente desconocido para la masa social, dejo una explicación bastante explícita sobre el papel de los científicos sociales en el desarrollo de FaceBook y su papel dentro del aparato de control de la masa.

Daniel Estulin

Facebook And It’s Connections To The C.I.A. And D.A.R.P.A. by Brian S Staveley.

Facebook was setup by the C.I.A. Try telling that to most people and they laugh at it. People seem to think its a coincidence that Facebook seems to be so intrusive over and over again. Privacy policies that would make anyone scratch their head. I’m not going to beat around the bush with this blog post. Facebook was setup by the C.I.A. as a data mining project to collect as much information on as many people as they could. Not only that but it also has very strong ties to D.A.R.P.A. . The purpose of this data mining project that became Facebook was to find out a boat load of things on people. Where they are going. What they are doing. What airline are they using Who do they associate with What type of books or movies have you been reading. How you feel about things politically. The list goes on and on. Before I elaborate let me say that my prior statement about Facebook being setup by the C.I.A. isn’t a theory or a hunch. If you simply follow the money its quite easy to see what is going on. Before we follow this money trail, just think about this.

If Facebook was setup by the C.I.A. (and it was) its a pretty brilliant plan. Never before have the people they want to watch actually given up so much information VOLUNTARILY! The C.I.A. doesn’t even have to dig for most of it. People put it right out there. Think about how descriptive some people’s status updates are. They tell you where they are going, who they are with sometimes, what they like. All these things. Did you know that once Facebook has you tagged in ONE PHOTO they have you identified anytime an image of you is uploaded whether it is tagged, labeled, or anything else to ID it? Facebook runs facial recognition on all photos and can even ID you by running it on some really low resolution shots, and its done for free! Does that sound like something a website would do for free? There are some much more intrusive things Facebook does to track you and every site you visit that you probably don’t know about. All this without visiting Facebook or even needing to be a member!! After I tell you about the money trail and the start of Facebook we will get into more of these privacy issues and there are a lot. The facial recognition is just the tip of the iceberg. Before we do all that let’s have a quick history lesson, the way I do history. With the ACTUAL TRUTH. The movie “The Social Network” was a big hit. It was supposedly all about the start of Facebook from a college dorm room to a multi billion dollar corporation in Palo Alto California. They left out some very interesting things that you all should know. That movie in itself was not about entertainment. It was propaganda to fortify the Facebook lie. Let us go back to the year 2003.

2003 is the year before Facebook officially launched outside of just the dorms at Harvard University. It launched in early 2004. Now in the movie and in the I guess what you could call the “official story” Mark Zuckerberg gets a 500,000 dollar investment from Peter Thiel some big shot exec out on the west coast. With this 500,000 investment Peter Thiel became some thing like a 7-8% owner of Facebook. So for Thiel obviously seeing as Facebook is valued at over 30 billion dollars he made quite the sound investment. This was a huge deal to Mark Zuckerberg. Now he had all the startup money he would need and then some. 500,000 dollars is a lot more than he needs to start a website, buy some servers, and hire some programmers, and it was supposed to be. It was Peter Thiel buying his way into the company. He had to pay something. Now supposedly in the process they screwed one of the other friends of Mark, gave him a tiny percentage and took his name of the mast head. Which they made a big deal about and we will talk about why. Peter Thiel made a huge investment and he wanted his name displayed on the site as one of the owners and rightfully so. Eduardo Saverin made a big stink because his name was taken off. So you see its kind of a big deal. Remember this for later. So they take the money and relocate to California. Facebook takes off so fast. This was in Early 2004. This all happened within a couple of months of Mark launching the site. So they were building it in 2003 in their dorm room and it launched in the beginning of 2004 . This 500,000 investment would also be in early 2004.That’s how they got the money to move out to California. Well you know what would have been a lot better than a 500,000 dollar investment? How about a 12.7 million dollar investment? How about a 12.7 million dollar investment from Uncle Sam? Funny how we didn’t hear about this one huh? That’s 25 times greater of an investment than the one the make a big deal about in the movie.

This huge investment of $12.7 million came from James Breyer who is closely associated with a venture capital company called InQtel established by the CIA in 1999 and he served on the board of BBN. InQtel deals in information technology and intelligence most notably “nurturing data mining technologies”.

So Zuckerberg actually got an investment over 25x greater than the 500,000 dollar investment and there is no mention of it anywhere! Remember we talked about how much pride these guys took in having their names on the mast head. It makes sense. You put in all that money to help someone get a project off the ground you deserve some recognition.

James Breyer’s name is not mentioned anywhere. Now remember Thiel put in 500,000 and got 7% of the company. So what would almost 13 million get you? Well if my math is right it, if you used the same scale as Thiel it would be over 140% of the company. Something doesn’t add up here huh? Starting to think the Thiel investment is complete BS. Either way that is certainetly not the important point. The point is they only mention Thiel and not the guy who threw in over 25 x more money. Almost 13 million put on a college kid’s dreams? Sounds kinda far fetched doesn’t it? Why soooooo much money? That is enough to statup a 1000 social networks! Now why would he want to invest that much? Well look at where he is coming from. He sits on the board of a C.I.A. front company that specialized in using the internet to data mine and find out what people are doing. Where they are going. Who they are with. etc,etc,etc…. What’s that sound like to you?

Then there is the D.A.R.P.A. connection. A brief summary on D.A.R.P.A. for those that don’t know. They invented the internet. They are under the dept of defense. They are actually working on liquid metal robots like in Terminator 2. These are the types of things they do. They would be the most cutting edge inventors for the government and military. Super high tech stuff. Things we can’t even imagine exist, they play with every day. D.A.R.P.A. is tied into all this as well.

The D.A.R.P.A. connection:

Dr. Anita Jones former Director of Defense Research and Engineering for the U.S. Department of Defense. While with D.A.R.P.A. her responsibilities included serving as an adviser to the Secretary of Defense. Dr. Jones was also served on the board of directors for InQtel and is now employed by BBN. This is the same board James Breyer sits on. He is also employed by BBN

D.A.R.P.A. runs the Information Awareness Office whose task it is to collect data on as many people as possible. Their website is full of references to the war on terror, terrorism and terrorist. The IAO claims its programs are for identifying and responding to threats of terrorism. Facebook is an extension of the IOA

I.A.O.’s Mission Statement:

Information Awareness Office is to gather as much information as possible about everyone in a centralized location for easy perusal by the United States government.

Including but not limited to: internet activity, credit card purchase history, airline ticket purchases, car rentals, medical records, educational transcripts, drivers license, utility bills, tax returns and any other available data.

Hmmmm. What website does this sound like??? Facebook has become the world largest database on people. That is admitted. But do you see how simple this is. Let’s sum it up from the truth side of things. In the year 2003 James Breyer is working on a project with Anita Jones and one other Fellow for DARPA where they are trying to find a way to use the internet to get as much information on people as possible. Things like….Where they are going. What they are doing. What airline are they using Who do they associate with What type of books or movies have you been reading. How you feel about things politically. What makes you angry. Where you vacation. They even wanted to track things like internet activity, credit card purchase history, airline ticket purchases, car rentals, medical records, educational transcripts, drivers license, utility bills, tax returns and any other available data. now granted all those things aren’t on Facebook YET but a few more of them are than you think. What do you think happens when you use Facebook to log into a site cuz its easier than remembering all your log ins? Before you answer, remember who’s behind it.

So in 2003 these people under DARPA & the C.I.A. are working on this project and they just happen to throw a college kid 12.7 million dollars because they like his passion?? LMAO! Nope heres the truth and they knew you wouldn’t believe that! That’s why Breyer and his 12.7 million are never mentioned. You’ve never heard of him or any corporation he represents having any stake in Facebook. They tell you Zuckerberg is one of the richest people in the world valued over 30 billion dollars. Maybe. Its possible and I won’t stick on this point to long but I doubt it. It’s a CIA Project! Maybe, Maybe in the begining it was really started as his and his buddies idea and Breyer and his cohorts bought it off them right before it went viral and they (CIA,DARPA) told them to take a hike and the CIA been running it since, but i think it was probably just the IAO project from the start and Zuckerberg is just part of the story. He’s probably well payed but not in the billions. The purpose of Information Awareness Office was to gather as much information as possible about everyone in a centralized location for easy perusal by the United States government. That’s exactly what Facebook does and much more. The People running the IAO gave facebook 25x more startup money than the guy they glorify in the movie. I think it’s safe to say Facebook is CIA. Facebook is D.A.R.P.A which falls under the Dept. Of Defense. This is clear as day when you follow the money. 13 million to start a website? Look who it came from and the timing of their data mining project. This is the data mining project. Isn’t it so clever? Think about it. People are dying to actually give them information. So now that you know, if it really bothers you just stay off Facebook right? Wrong! There are some serious privacy issues that should concern ANYONE using the web.

Facebook has gotten so big that every site nowadays has Facebook buttons on it. Share buttons under all the articles. Like buttons on the page right? I mean it’s everywhere. Do you remember how quick it caught on? You know Myspace was a lil bit younger of a crowd generally but it was huge at one point with over 100 million users before Facebook was even born and there weren’t myspace share things everywhere like there are Facebook. Myspace wasn’t CIA or DEPT Of Defense run. Well as far as I know. Almost any website you go to now has facebook like buttons on it. Well they do that because they know Facebook is really popular and website have tailored to their customers and visitors needs. People want to share so if you don’t have these buttons they might use another site. Even I have Facebook and every other type of share option on my websites. Do you know that ANY WEBSITE that has one of these Facebook buttons on their site, just one that Facebook then uses that and tracks what website you exit to??!! This is ANY SITE with a Facebook button. So if I go to ESPN and read an article and there are Facebook buttons on that site, Facebook is going to know where I go next! It is going to actually be able to place a cookie or whatever it is on me and see where my IP address goes next!! Now first off obviously if your going to something personal like a porn site or a gambling site or whatever it is you do you don’t want the world knowing, FACEBOOK KNOWS!!! Now not only that it works like links in a chain. When you leave ESPN lets say and go to Joe Smoe’s Cleaning site and there are no share options chances are next site you go to isn’t another Joe Smoe’s type of site. The next site because Facebook is soooo big now will most likely have at the very least one of these buttons and BOOM you are being tracked again!!! You do NOT NEED TO CLICK ANY OF THE FACEBOOK BUTTONS for this to occur! Not only that you do not need to be a Facebook member! Facebook has almost taken over the web. Its Facebook vs Google Right?? Ya right. Thats one of those false sneses of choice. Sure you can choose. NSA(Google) or CIA(Facebook) Facebook is so big some companies like say a car company, I see it a lot with them, they plug their Facebook page on their commercials and not their own site. They made Facebook so cool and popular that people not even in on it are unwillingly opening back doors for the government to track their website’s visitors when they leave.

Now you know why Facebook is so embedded everywhere. Now think about everything I said and then look at the new timeline. See how intense the tracking is? That’s a C.I.A. job my friends!

Now Facebook is actually giving Politico access to your private, yes PRIVATE messages, statuses and links. I posted the story a few days ago and here is a small excerpt from it.

Most notably, the Facebook-Politico data set will include Facebook users’ private status messages and comments. While that may alarm some people, Facebook and Politico say the entire process is automated and no Facebook employees read the posts.

Rather, every post and comment — both public and private — by a U.S. user that mentions a presidential candidate’s name will be fed through a sentiment analysis tool that spits out anonymized measures of the general U.S. Facebook population.

How does this make you feel? You think they wouldn’t ever go back on your timeline and use something you said on Facebook against you legally??? I wouldn’t bet on it.

You know D.A.R.P.A. invented the internet. One of the reasons I believe they did it was to track our every thoughts. Think about it. You would think technically speaking they were not capable of tracking all your thoughts but they made this internet thing. Think about how much thought is expressed online. With people that use the computer a lot like I do you could say way more than half my thoughts are tracked. Many of those they might call anti government even though we both know its just anti tyrannical government with me.Think of how clever they are. They invent this thing to track our thoughts. We are giving into it right now! I’m expressing all this through their thought filters and you are letting them know what you like to read about. Pretty f’ed up when you think about it like that isn’t?

They always plan years and years ahead. They are so clever just think again about Facebook. They are literally sucking data right outta people’s brains. You have people that post way too much personal stuff and they love it. You have people like me that probably express myself a lot more than most would feel safe doing. Facebook was a well thought out plan and it is basically running the world wide web. Any site with a FB button tracks where you go next. Think about all the privacy issues. Have you ever taken the time to read their privacy policies? Pretty intrusive and honestly quite absurd. Facebook is run by the CIA. Its the biggest data mining operation in the world and somehow they made that cool.

I’ll close this out with something I was going to save for another blog but lets throw it all out there. We talk of these clever inventions with incredible foresight that predict people’s reactions years ahead of time. I’m talking about them (D.A.R.P.A., CIA) inventing the internet, Facebook and the other invention I know they had a part in, the smart phone.

Your smartphone is awesome! It doesn’t even really matter which one. They all function like computers, have apps, HAVE FACEBOOK. They have nice cameras and even video camera, GPS, and on and on right? Why do you think they are so cool? Just like they wanted to track your thoughts so they were so clever they created the internet. They wanted to track you!! Simply track you, GPS style!! Would you EVER agree to carry around a personal GPS for the government to track you? No of course you wouldn’t! So they build them into the phones and make the phones so freakin cool you can’t leave home with out it can you??? I know I can’t. Then what do you know. Look at the stories that came out this year. I’ve talked about these a lot on my radio shows. It comes out that first the IPHONE then shortly after The Droid were both SECRETLY LOGGING YOUR LOCATION EVEN WHEN YOU THOUGHT YOUR GPS WAS OFF!!!!!! This was not an accident. these manufacturers left back doors open for governments from the start. See what I am saying? They were made so cool with all these apps and everything else so you would ALWAYS carry one. Then they can ALWAYS track whoever they want, whenever they want. No warrant, no hassle. Don’t you wonder with all the advances in technology as the years go by how did the cell phone batteries get so much WORSE???? LOL. They didn’t. they are being drained because yuor phone is secretly running GPS or at least sending reports every few minutes!

As if all this wasn’t bad enough it was then found out that all different phones from all the major carriers in the United States were actually running KEY LOGGING SOFTWARE on the phones! A key logger is a computer program that logs every key you press. Everything you type. Every password. Everything you look at. EVERYTHING you do. You think this is all a coincidence? I am done with coincidences.

Here is a link to the video and a few articles I posted a few months back showing you the keylogging software running and logging every key pressed on the phone in the video.
http://www.thelastamerican.org/1/post/2011/12/11-30-11-carrier-iq-keylogging-everything-you-press-on-your-smartphone-iphone-droid-evo-etc.html
This isn’t limited to one carrier or manufacturer. It’s popping up everywhere. I can’t think of a bigger invasion of privacy. EVERYTHING. Every text, everything you type, every person’s picture you look at. All tracked and logged. Privacy is dead. Free speech is next.

After I finished this one of my fellow researchers in my Real News Online Facebook Group posted the logo for the IAO. You’re gonna love this one. Look at the pic at the bottom.

Thanks everyone,
Brian S Staveley.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIGdWsxHJlM

Compartir/Share

Lo que esconde Wikileaks – Entrevista en Radio Exterior de España

Social Media Manager — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 15:19:06 +0000

Compartir/Share

El superventas Daniel Estulin vuelve a la carga y pone en su punto de mira al controvertido fundador de Wikileaks, Julian Assange, al que conoce desde hace años. El también estudioso del Club Bilderberg asegura que el hacker informático más famoso del mundo es un producto de la misma CIA y que las organizaciones relacionadas con Wikileaks tienen contactos con grupos de la derecha radical estadounidense e incluso los talibanes.

PUEDEN LEER Y DESCARGAR UNA PIZCA DEL LIBRO AQUÍ.

Sólo uno de los directores de cine más combativos, Oliver Stone, está detrás de la adaptación cinematográfica de uno de los fenómenos mediáticos más brutales del siglo XXI. Steven Spielberg también producirá un filmes sobre dos de los recientes best-sellers sobre Assange y su web. Se ha están publicando decenas de libros sobre la crónica de las filtraciones o el papel de Assange, pero Wikileaks saca luz teorías y secretos nunca revelados, como que el pirata informático es producto de un experimento secreto de la CIA de control mental llamado MK-ULTRA. Estulin desmonta el mito Wikileaks. Julian Assange no es quién creemos.

Desmontando Wikileaks, el único libro que destapa las propias filtraciones que Wikileaks nunca quiso que se desvelaran y a un Julian Assange que ha engañado a todo el mundo.

Estulin desmonta Wikileaks y a su lider Julian Assange… el cazador cazado.

Mucho hemos visto y leído en los últimos meses sobre Wikileaks y su líder más visible Julian Assange. Como siempre Daniel Estulin nos revela que todo lo que pensábamos no era real…Qué hay de verdad Julian Assange no es el Robin Hood que los medios nos han querido hacer creer. Se trata de un producto cuidadosamente elaborado por los más poderosos, por la CIA, y donde su organización Wikileaks está fuertemente interrelacionada con organizaciones de todo tipo.

No se trata de un libro más sobre Wikileaks, sino de la parte oscura y desconocida de la organización. Los secretos de los secretos desclasificados.

Social Media Manager

Publicidad: PACK DESMONTANDO WIKILEAKS + IMPERIO INVISIBLE + LA HISTORIA DEFINITIVA DE EL CLUB BILDERBERG + CONSPIRACION OCTOPUS (LIBRINO), todo por 59 euros + Envío.

Compartir/Share

Entrevista en Colprensa.com sobre Desmontando Wikileaks

Daniel Estulin — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:44:04 +0000

Compartir/Share

Colprensa.com, actualizado: 01/08/2011

Por primera vez en Colombia – Daniel Estulin acaba de presentar el libro “Desmontando Wikileaks” donde realiza una imagen perversa de Julián Assange.

Daniel Estulin vive por estos días verdaderas jornadas maratónicas de promoción de sus libros. Por primera vez llega a Colombia con su polémica obra y no llegó a imaginarse el alto interés que había por sus investigaciones.

El pasado jueves su vuelo Lima-Bogotá sufrió un retrazo de más de seis horas, lo que hizo que llegara a la presentación de “Desmontando Wikileaks” y “El imperio invisible”, 120 minutos después de la hora pactada. Sin embargo, nadie se movió, todos le esperaron pacientemente, incluso algunos de pie y otros sentados en las escaleras del auditorio, mientras otro grupo de gente se conformó con escucharla desde afuera.

No era para menos, se trataba de un exagente del contraespionaje de la KGB, quien ha dedicado más de 16 años a la investigación periodística, en especial revelando los más importantes secretos del llamado “Club Bilderberg”, que es la reunión secreta de los hombres más poderosos de la tierra: “Los Amos del mundo”.

Década y media investigando

-¿Cómo seguir realizando investigaciones de temas tan delicados en medio del reconocimiento y la fama internacional que ha ganado con sus obras?

Hay que tener cuidado y separar las cosas, no llegar a mezclarlas, para saber cuándo estas en plan de promoción y cuándo estas viajando investigando. Creo que no me ha costado dividir esas dos partes por mi pasado con la KGB, donde te lo enseñan y lo haces sin pensar. Cuando debes ser visible lo eres, y cuando necesitas ser invisible sabes como llegar a serlo y pasar desapercibido.

-Entonces, ¿tiene bien dividido los tiempos de promoción y divulgación de sus obras y otro distinto para la investigación?

Las cosas se van gestando, pero mis investigaciones y escritura no aparecen a la luz hasta que están terminadas. Lo que ocurre es que esta vez han salido varios libros míos con apenas algunos meses de distancia entre ellos, así que da la sensación de que lo hago todo a la vez.

Se editó “Desmontando Wikileaks” y “El imperio invisible”, y como si fuera poco a finales del año saldrá uno más, pero todo ha sido coincidencia.

-Vayamos por partes? ¿Cómo surge “Desmontando Wikileaks”?

Fue una petición de la editorial, y aunque me resistí, empecé a ver que tenía bastante conocimiento sobre el tema como para compartirlo y que la gente se dé cuenta de las verdaderas intenciones de “Wikileaks”.

-Desconcertante el personaje Julian Assange?

Lo conozco desde hace más de 20 años porque él siempre ha sido un hacker que pertenecía a un club alemán al servicio de la KGB y fue allí que lo conocí completamente. Ahora, al verlo en los medios como el salvaguardia de la verdad, decidí escribir este libro contando la verdad sobre él.

-¿Qué se busca con este tipo de elementos como los Wikileaks?

Estamos en un momento en que son varias las posibilidades para usar este tipo de elementos que sencillamente son conspiradores apoyados por la CIA y la Agencia de Seguridad Nacional. Uno de ellos es orquestar un ataque mininuclear por Estados Unidos contra sus instalaciones, con cerca de 300 mil víctimas, con el objetivo de culpar a los hackers chinos. Con esto, buscar restringir la libertad a través de Internet.

Es sencillo, si le dicen a la gente que hay que restringir Internet, en este momento, todo el mundo dirá no. Pero si generan un acontecimiento de esta magnitud y lo muestras como un peligro, la gente empezará apoyar la idea de restringir las libertades allí. Es algo que suena a locura, como todo lo que he dicho antes, pero que infortunadamente se ha vuelto realidad.

-¿Así de peligroso es Internet para el Club Bilderberg?

Sólo veamos lo que ha pasado en el mundo. Túnez se movilizó por Facebook, y los ejemplos ya son muchos. Necesitan restringir ese tipo de actos para controlar las masas. De ahí que se esté hablando tanto de China, porque desde los medios de comunicación se habla y habla de este país y de sus hackers. Lo presentan como una amenaza y luego los muestran como los causantes del ataque.

Siempre ha sido así, primero los rusos, luego los árabes, han sido los latinos y ahora le echarán la culpa a los chinos.

En la ficción

- Entre los más recientes libros publicados está “Conspiración Octopus”, que es su primera obra de ficción?

Me querían encasillar como escritor de no-ficción, pero mi amor es por la lectura de ficción, mi autor favorito es Navokov, así que tenía muchas ganas de hacer una novela. De ahí nació “Conspiración Octopus” y afortunadamente la gente la ha recibido muy bien.

-¿Cómo fue la construcción de una obra de ficción?

Con los elementos que ya sé manejar, al abordar una investigación periodística y crear un telón de fondo de realidad para empezar a contar una historia.

-En Conspiración Octopus ¿Cuál es el telón de fondo?

Esta obra la empecé a escribir en el 2006 sobre el desplome de la economía mundial que estamos viviendo ahora. El primer capítulo que escribí es sobre una reunión del Presidente de Estados Unidos con su consejo de emergencia mientras ven cómo se desploma la economía de Grecia y de Hungría.

Aproveché el conocimiento que tengo sobre lo que está por venir y lo maticé a través de la ficción.

- ¿La realidad que siempre supera la ficción?

Es totalmente así porque vivimos en un mundo al revés, contrario al que nos han contado o al que queremos ver. Siempre nos dan la versión alternativa de los acontecimientos. Lo que les molesta es que yo no sigo esa línea y cuento las cosas como son.

Verdades alternativas

-¿Cuál es la versión alternativa?

La que dan los medios masivos de comunicación. Toman los personajes principales y empiezan a contarte las cosas de una manera que resulta ser una mentira del principio al final. En mi caso, busco acercarme más a la verdad, contando con más piezas que los demás periodistas pero siempre te terminan faltando, por lo que la búsqueda es inagotable.

-Es lo que sucede en “El imperio invisible”, uno de sus más recientes libros?

Con este libro busco abrir aún más las puertas traseras por donde salen las verdades. Pretendo aún más develar más los engaños y las mentiras que nos han contado, como el capítulo de terrorismo atómico es un primer paso para los temas que tocaré en los siguientes libros, en los que quiero explicarlo todo para aquellos que deseen ver la verdad como es.

-Incluso toca el tema del atentado al Club El Nogal en Colombia.

Si. Luego de investigarlo y reunir una a una las partes me encontré con que había sido un atentado mininuclear también, pero que nunca se ha dado a conocer en realidad. A veces se quiere pensar que las cosas o los hechos no tienen relación entre sí, pero en realidad es un rompecabezas que vas armando y te genera un panorama cercano a la realidad.

Pero son cosas que sólo saben algunas personas de los altos mandos.

-Cuando lanzó sus primeros libros las críticas no se hicieron esperar. Ahora, que todo lo que usted ha contado se ha vuelto realidad, ¿Cómo lo ha recibido la crítica?

Son cosas desconcertantes. Cuando cuento en el 2002 que la guerra en Irak ya está decidida en el Club Bilderberg y un año más tarde comienza. Cuando hablas del aumento del precio del oro de una forma increíble mientras los economistas dicen que se mantendrá estable, y pasa lo que tú dijiste, sencillamente la gente no sabe qué pensar.

-¿Crisis económica fue planeada?

Claro, desde comienzo del nuevo milenio en el Club Bilderberg se decidió atacar la demanda para desestabilizar la economía. Lo dije en su momento, vendan sus casas, vivan un año o más en alquiler, que luego, podrán comprar una casa más grande que la anterior a la mitad del precio y sucedió. Son cosas completamente planeadas.

Ya poca gente duda de lo que estoy diciendo, lo que sucede es que a muchos otros no deja de incomodarles que saque a la luz la verdad, pero eso es otra cosa. Nadie me ha desmontado lo que he dicho, ni nadie me ha llevado a los tribunales.

Compartir/Share

¿Wikileaks, un aparato mediático de la CIA? – Fernando Arrellano Ortiz

Daniel Estulin — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:56:58 +0000

Compartir/Share

El libro de Daniel Estulin sobre control mental y político. – Por: Fernando Arellano Ortiz

¿Wikileaks, un aparato mediático de la CIA?

“Wikileaks es una estafa grande y peligrosa de la inteligencia estadounidense que probablemente se utilizará para controlar Internet…Se trata de una historia muy real de espionaje, control mental y política”. Esta es la hipótesis que plantea en su último libro el escritor ruso-candiense Daniel Estulin, conocido por sus investigaciones bibliográficas sobre el Club Bilderberg, una especie de gobierno soterrado a nivel global integrado por las personas más potentadas y los más destacados traficantes de influencias del planeta como David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, inescrupulosos banqueros y especuladores financieros norteamericanos, judíos y europeos que deciden la suerte del mundo a puerta cerrada.

Estulin estuvo en Bogotá el pasado 27 de julio presentado su libro “Desmontando Wikileaks” (Editorial Planeta, febrero de 2011), y en desarrollo de su charla señaló que esta herramienta interactiva en cabeza del misterioso hacker australiano Julian Assange, no es más que una estrategia de operación sicológica diseñada por la Agencia Central de Inteligencia (CIA) con dos propósitos definidos: 1) controlar el acceso libre a Internet, y 2) preparar el terreno para mentalizar al mundo del cambio de paradigma de la sociedad capitalista ante la crisis por la que atraviesa.

Ante los últimos coletazos de la crisis del capitalismo mundial se busca, arguye Estulin, que el desplome sea “organizado” y que los amos del mundo reunidos en el Club Bilderberg, sigan manteniendo los hilos del poder planetario. Al fin y al cabo hay que tener en cuenta que las crisis financieras y las guerras son los mecanismos con que cuenta el capitalismo para reproducirse.

En el mundo del espionaje y el contraespionaje un proyecto de las características de Wikileaks constituye un “chiste” y un “engañó” por las múltiples falencias y rendijas que deja entrever y las cuales Estulin en un análisis bien documentado se permite analizar y develar en su último libro.

Caso similar al de los Papeles del Pentágono

Para este periodista, exagente de contraespionaje de la KGB, Wikileaks se asimila a “los papeles del Pentágono”, un estudio que mandó a elaborar en 1967 el secretario de Defensa, Robert McNamara sobre el rol desempeñado por Estados Unidos en Indochina. Según la versión oficial, un funcionario del Pentrágon, Daniel Ellsberg, filtró la investigación de alto secreto contenida en más de tres mil páginas y otro tanto de apéndices documentales a The New York Times que comenzó a publicar una serie de artículos a partir de junio de 1971.

“La verdadera historia de los papeles del Pentágono fue bastante diferente. El quid fundamental del proyecto –cuenta Estulin- era el ensamblaje de documentos auténticos seleccionados, muchos creados inicialmente por la CIA o basados en los informes de dicha Agencia, y de materiales adicionales, con el objetivo de exonerar a la CIA de las responsabilidades de una gran variedad de acontecimientos impopulares, militares y similares que la propia CIA había autorizado”.

“En este momento –agrega el periodista ruso-canadiense- nos hallamos ante una repetición de los papeles del Pentágono, pero en la era cibernética… Assange bien podría ser el Daniel Ellsberg de hoy en día”.

Una operación encubierta, como pudiera ser Wikileaks, “siempre finge ser algo que no es, y nunca afirma ser lo que es. En otras palabras, no puede presentarse como un proyecto oficial de la CIA, así que tienen que ocultarlo de alguna manera. Por tanto, en el mundo de la inteligencia, para que una operación de bandera falsa sea eficaz, el 90 por ciento de lo que publica tiene que ser información legítima”.

Estulin parte de la hipótesis de que Wikileaks busca denunciar las mentiras del gobierno estadounidense. Ha revelado información importante en torno a los crímenes de guerra de Estados Unidos. Pero una vez que el proyecto se introduce en el molde del monopolio de la prensa del establecimiento internacional, se emplea como instrumento de desinformación mediática. Filtró el manual de operaciones de la prisión de Guantánamo, así como un informe de la CIA sobre cómo manipular la opinión pública de Francia y Alemania para que mantengan sus tropas en Afganistán.

Un medio “alternativo” al servicio del monopolio de la prensa mundial

Aunque Assange insiste en que su proyecto Wikileaks es un medio “alternativo” que busca develar los secretos de los gobiernos y de las corporaciones que dominan el mundo, lo cierto como lo hace ver Estulin en su trabajo investigativo, es que los miles de archivos que ha filtrado se han publicado, previo acuerdo, en los medios más conservadores que están controlados por los sectores oligopólicos del mundo.

Además, no es un secreto que de la junta directiva de Wikileaks hace parte el cuestionado magnate de medios de comunicación Rupert Murdoch y que uno de los financiadores de este proyecto es el especulador financiero internacional George Soros.

Por eso no es gratuito que Assange haya suscrito acuerdos para que sus documentos digitales, previamente seleccionados, sean publicados en periódicos como The New York Times (controlado por el Club Bilderberg y el Consejo de Relaciones Exteriores); Der Spiegel (la mayor revista semanal de Europa de origen alemán, controlada por el Club Bilderberg); The Guardian (periódico de izquierda de las agencias de inteligencia británicas como el MI6); la revista inglesa The Economist (la biblia neoliberal de propiedad de la dinastía de banqueros Rothschild financiadora del Club Bilderberg desde su fundación en 1954). En el caso de Colombia, el periódico que suscribió convenio con Assange para publicar sus filtraciones es El Espectador de Bogotá, de propiedad del magnate Julio Mario Santo Domingo.

Lo anterior demuestra que el “latifundio mediático” internacional y Wikileaks son socios, de ahí que Assange haya recibido el Premio al Nuevo Medio de Comunicación de The Economist en 2008.

Campaña de desinformación mediática

Estulin no duda en señalar que Wikileaks cumple “con todos los requisitos para ser una operación encubierta de propaganda llevada a cabo por las propias agencias de inteligencia en un sentido amplio, cuando se incluye entre ellas a organismos como el Proyecto Democracia por parte de Estados Unidos, o el grupo de fundaciones Soros, que forma parte de la comunidad de inteligencia y que es una campaña de desinformación mediática muy bien organizada que tiene por objeto demonizar a un poderoso enemigo regional, Irán”, al que han acusado de ser una amenaza para Occidente por un supuesto programa de armas nucleares.

Las filtraciones de Assange, en ese sentido, una vez editadas y reescritas por los grandes medios de manipulación mediática al servicio de Estados Unidos y el gran capital financiero especulativo internacional sirven exclusivamente a sus intereses, entre ellos a los preparativos de ataque bélico que Washington, Israel y la OTAN dirigen contra Irán. Adicionalmente, los documentos de Wikileaks se concentran también en fabricar la idea de que Pakistán es peligroso y satanizan al servicio de inteligencia pakistaní, ISI, haciéndolo ver como instrumento terrorista ya que apoya a los muyahidines, los que en la década de los años 80, Estados Unidos entrenó y armó para que colaboraran en los ataques a las tropas soviéticas que ocupaban Afganistán.

Sobre el tráfico de drogas, ni una sola palabra

En consonancia con los intereses de Estados Unidos, Wikileaks en el casi un millón de documentos que posee no toca absolutamente nada respecto de temas que son comprometedores para el decadente imperio. Sobre el papel del ejército norteamericano en el pujante comercio de la droga en Afganistán no existe ninguna referencia.

“Lo que es indudable es que el ejército norteamericano está en el punto de mira por ayudar a los señores de la guerra afganos a transportar el opio y la heroína. Además, la CIA y el Pentágono están envueltos en una guerra dialéctica que los enfrenta el uno al otro. Ambos organismos se acusan de llevar las riendas del tráfico de drogas en Afganistán”, actualmente ocupado por Washington, señala Estulin en su libro.

Cabe anotar que durante la ocupación estadounidense, “el negocio del opio afgano se disparó hasta el punto que, desde 2007, Afganistán ha producido el 95 por ciento del opio y la heroína del mundo. El silencio de Wikileaks se debe a que la “droga es el lubricante de la economía mundial que proporciona al mercado financiero más de novecientos mil millones de dólares en dinero líquido. Las tropas de la OTAN se niegan a erradicar la droga porque esta se lava a través de Wall Street y proporciona grandes ganancias a las principales empresas internacionales”.

Según una investigación del Congreso de Estados Unidos realizada en el año 2001, “los bancos estadounidenses y europeos blanquean al año entre quinientos mil y un billón de dólares del crimen internacional, la mitad de los cuales los lavan en solitario bancos norteamericanos. Ello significa que durante la década de los 90 las entidades bancarias estadounidenses lavaron entre dos billones y medio y cinco billones de dólares a través de circuitos financieros”, lo cual quiere decir, colige Estulin, que sin este “dinero ilegal, la economía estadounidenses se hundiría”.

Llegados a este punto, cabe preguntarse qué representa Wikileaks: ¿periodismo o política? Estulin responde que Wikileaks representa un cambio en el statu quo, una interferencia internacional y no corporativa en el negocio de la información. Se trata, sostiene, de “una conspiración que hurga profundamente en el sanctasanctórum de la Agencia de Seguridad Nacional (NSA) y la CIA. Una operación encubierta oficialmente autorizada que nos induce a un tenebroso mundo de intrigas, compartimentación, operaciones secretas y ficticias”.

autor: fernando.arellano29@yahoo.es

Compartir/Share