Billionaires are Behind Communism – Reece Committee


May 5, 2018


220px-B._Carroll_Reece.jpgNORMAN DODD, A YALE GRADUATE, INTELLECTUAL AND NEW YORK CITY INVESTMENT BANKER, was chosen to be the research director for the Reece Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives in 1953. The Reece Committee was named for its creator, Rep. Carroll Reece of Tennessee, left and was formed to investigate the status of tax-exempt foundations. 


After the war, the Carnegie Endowment trustees reasoned that if they could get control of education in the United States they would be able to prevent a return to the way of life as it had been prior to the war. They recruited the Rockefeller Foundation to assist in such a monumental task. According to Dodd’s Reece Committee report: “They divided the task into parts, giving to the Rockefeller Foundation the responsibility of altering education as it pertains to domestic subjects, but Carnegie retained the task of altering our education in foreign affairs and about international relations.”

ROWAN.jpgDuring a subsequent personal meeting with Mr. Dodd, President Rowan Gaither (left) of the Ford Foundation said, “Mr. Dodd, we invited you to come here because we thought that perhaps, off the record, you would be kind enough to tell us why the Congress is interested in the operations of foundations such as ours?” Gaither answered his own rhetorical question with a startling admission:

“Mr. Dodd, all of us here at the policy making level of the foundation have at one time or another served in the OSS [Office of Strategic Services, CIA forerunner] or the European Economic Administration, operating under directives from the White House. We operate under those same directives…. The substance under which we operate is that we shall use our grant making power to so alter life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”


Related-Makow  “The Aim of Freemasonry is the Triumph of Communism” 

-How University Betrays Students & Society 

Dodd interview with Ed Griffin

Interview with Stan Monteith 

Source Article from

Why do Billionaires Keep Buying US Newspapers despite their Terrible Future?

Today, BH Media announced that it is laying off 148 employees and will not fill 101 vacant positions, for a total of 249 jobs, representing about 6% of the workforce. These cuts include 43 jobs at the Omaha World-Herald.

The drop in advertising revenue is a “harsh reality” in the industry, explained BH Media CEO and publisher of the Omaha World-Herald, Terry Kroeger, echoing what Buffett already knew in 2009, well before he bought the outfit, and all the other outfits.

Kroeger blamed e-commerce which has caused a large number of their regional and national clients to cut back on their advertising spend because their brick-and-mortar businesses are being disrupted by online retail.

This is the second round of job cuts in 10 months: In April 2017, BH Media announced 289 job cuts, including 108 vacant positions. At the time, it employed 4,450 people. The World-Herald:

Kroeger said the company is experiencing a “critical moment” as print newspapers have “suffered from the growing popularity of the digital environment.” Regional and national advertisers are being hurt by online retailers, he said, causing them to reduce their print advertising.

Buffett is number 3 on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index ($82 billion). If newspapers have such a “terrible future,” why do billionaires – who’re supposed to have brilliant business minds – keep buying them?

Billionaires have been all over print newspapers

Earlier in February 2018, Patrick Soon-Shiong, biotech mogul and number 175 on the Billionaires Index ($8.6 billion), acquired the Los Angeles Times, along with the San Diego Union-Tribune, Spanish-language Hoy Los Angeles, and some community newspapers. His private investment firm, Nant Capital, agreed to pay $500 million and will assume $90 million in pension liabilities.

“Ultimately, this decision is deeply personal for me,” he said. “As someone who grew up in apartheid South Africa, I understand the role that journalism needs to play in a free society.”

The New York Times was less merciful. It said the deal “brings to a close a tumultuous period marked by the ouster of top leaders, the suspension of the newspaper’s publisher and a contentious unionization effort.”

In recent months, the frustration in the Times newsroom erupted into public view, as The New York TimesHuffPost and other news outlets published articles on the tensions between staff and management at the 136-year-old newspaper.

So now a billionaire owns that baby.

The seller was tronc, the third-largest newspaper publisher in the US (think Chicago Tribune), in which Michael Ferro, Jr., who doesn’t get to play with the big boys on the Billionaires Index, has a 28% stake.

In November 2017, Charles and David Koch, the numbers 12 and 13 on the Billionaires Index ($48 billion each), put their money behind the acquisition of Time Inc., the publisher of the once iconic TimeSports Illustrated, and well, People. They did so with a $650-million capital infusion from Koch Equity Development into media conglomerate The Meredith Corporation that then used this money to acquire Time Inc.

Despite the Kochs’ active involvement in the political scene, the deal announcement said that Koch Equity Development would not have a seat on Meredith’s board and would “have no influence on Meredith’s editorial or managerial operations.” The New York Times:

The deal could represent the beginning of the end for one of the country’s most celebrated magazine publishers, whose titles commanded the attention of global leaders and chronicled world events, sometimes with striking photography.

The company failed to keep pace as the industrywide transformation from print to digital rendered old methods of magazine-making obsolete and publishing companies crumbled under the pressure of declines in print advertising and circulation.

April 2017, Ron Perelman, number 57 on the Billionaires Index ($18 billion), acquired The Independent, a free weekly paper based in East Hampton. “I am a firm believer in tradition and history, and preserving the qualities that make our community so strong,” he wrote in an open letter. OK, so The Independent isn’t exactly the global paper of record, but hey, any paper counts.

In 2015, Sheldon Gary Adelson, number 20 on the Billionaires Index ($38 billion), founder and CEO of Las Vegas Sands Corporation and its gambling empire that stretches across Las Vegas, Singapore, and Macau, secretly acquired the Vegas Review-Journal.

When it came out, the NY Times posed the question this way:

And so the $140 million question – why Mr. Adelson, 82, and his family would want the newspaper at such a lavish price – remains mostly unanswered. It is particularly pressing to many in Nevada because he is perhaps the most powerful and overtly political figure in the state.

And when it comes to his own interests, Mr. Adelson can get prickly, according to the NY Times:

He has pursued libel suits against journalists whose reporting on his sprawling empires drew his ire. In one continuing case, Mr. Adelson sued a reporter from The Wall Street Journal over an article about another legal battle Mr. Adelson was engaged in with a former employee.

In October 2013, Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon and number 1 on the Billionaires Index ($123 billion), acquired The Washington Post via his private investment company Nash Holdings for $250 million.

In August 2013, John Henry, owner of the Red Sox and at the time widely called “billionaire” though he currently does not figure on the Billionaires Index, acquired the Boston Globe for $70 million.

This story itself is a glaring sign of the print media’s death spiral: the seller was the NY Times,which was trying to stop the bleeding. It had acquired the Boston Globe in 1993, at peak print-media, before the Internet would tear it all apart, for the fabulous sum of $1.1 billion.

In 2007, Rupert Murdoch, currently number 85 on the Billionaires Index, acquired The Wall Street Journal for $5 billion via his company, News Corporation, from the Bancroft family, which had owned it for over 100 years.

So what is it with billionaires wanting to own newspapers even though they have a “terrible future,” as Buffett had put it so elegantly in 2009 before he started buying newspapers himself?

Wealthy people buying and running newspapers is a well-established practice. And fortunes have been made founding the old print media, including by such newspaper moguls as William Randolph Hearst. It’s just that there are a lot more billionaires these days, with asset prices inflated as they have been since the global money-printing orgy started in 2008. The print media may be in a death spiral, but some of their online versions have a large and growing readership, though they might still lose money. And a little red ink may well be worth the price to influence the debate.

Or silence the debate, which the media chose to do when the Treasury Department issued its “Financial Report on the U.S. Government.” And that may have been a good thing, given what a fiasco it is. Read…  US Treasury Posts Gigantic $1.16 Trillion Shortfall in Fiscal 2017, Hilariously Points out “Where We Are Headed”

Would you like to be notified via email when WOLF STREET publishes a new article? Sign up here.

Source Article from

How They Do It–NY Times Op-Ed Accuses Jewish Billionaires of Agitating for War Against Iran

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,872 other followers

Source Article from

Secret bitcoin billionaires will renounce their U.S. citizenship before cashing in?

Bitcoin is volatile, but traveling back in time to 2010 to buy Bitcoin instead of going to medical school is still a great career plan (helpful calculator).

The question for today is whether we can expect our least deserving rich folks to depart the U.S.

The typical rich bastard with unrealized capital gains can’t renounce U.S. citizenship, move to a tax-free jurisdiction, and then cash in, tax-free. The U.S. charges an “exit tax” for anyone trying to flee. Also the U.S. can disregard the renunciation and continue to try to collect taxes if it deems the citizenship renunciation to be insincere.

Consider the bitcoin billionaire (or at least $100 millionaire). His or her wealth is on a Post-It and nobody else knows about it. So the person who was clever enough to buy bitcoin in 2010 renounces in 2018, becomes a citizen of a country without income tax or one that doesn’t tax foreign holdings, and then starts cashing in without the U.S. government ever becoming aware.

Readers: What do you think? Will an American with secret-from-everyone Bitcoin gains stay and pay the tax? Or develop a sudden fondness for life abroad?

Source Article from

Canadian Billionaires Murdered

Canadian Billionaires Murdered

January 27th, 2018

Via: National Post:

Toronto police say a six-week examination of an enormous amount of evidence leads them to believe billionaire pharmaceutical giant Barry Sherman and his philanthropist wife Honey Sherman were the targeted victims of a double murder.

Barry Sherman, 75, who founded the generic drug manufacturing giant Apotex, and Honey Sherman, 70, were found dead in their Toronto mansion on Dec. 15, 2017.




Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Source Article from

Canadian billionaires were ‘murdered’, say private detectives

Barry Sherman, 75, who was the chairman of Canada’s largest drugs manufacturer Apotex, was found dead with his wife Honey, 70, at their home in Toronto on 15 December.

The city’s homicide unit had said that both Mr and Mrs Sherman were strangled to death but did not classify the deaths as homicides.

Officers ruled out murder after the husband and wife were found hanging in their home. According to Canadian media, they believed Mr Sherman killed his wife and hung her before hanging himself.

The memorial service held for the Shermans last month
A memorial service was held for the Shermans last month

But the couple’s four children told the Toronto Star a murder-suicide did not make any sense and hired a lawyer to probe deeper into the deaths.

The lawyer, Brian Greenspan, hired private detectives and asked for another post-mortem examination of the bodies.

The pathologist and detectives – some of whom are former Toronto homicide investigators – reportedly found markings on Mr and Mrs Sherman’s wrists.

They said it showed their hands had been tied with a cord or plastic zip tie, despite the pair being found with their hands untied and no sign of ropes or cords nearby.

Toxicology reports showed no signs of abnormal drug use.

Neighbours place flowers outside the Sherman home
Neighbours placed flowers outside the Sherman home

The hired team claimed Mr and Mrs Sherman were actually strangled to death with men’s leather belts.

The newspaper said sources close to the family had described the deaths as “professional”, a “staged homicide” and a “contract killing”.

According to the Star, there was no signs of damage, forced entry or evidence of a home invasion at the property.

A review by police and the private investigators of CCTV footage taken from nearby homes has not sparked any leads, the newspaper said.

Mr Sherman founded his company, which employs more than 11,000 people, in 1974. He is often credited with revolutionising the drugs industry in Canada.

Source Article from

New mail policy in Michigan prisons: Billionaires profit at the expense of prisoners, their families and friends, and U.S. Postal Service

by Rand Gould

This picture illustrates the announcement of the new mail policy on the Michigan Department of Corrections website.

“When the state is most corrupt, the laws are multiplied.” –Tacitus

Effective Nov. 1, 2017, the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) has instituted a new mail policy, which they falsely claim will stem the flow of contraband, primarily the controlled substances suboxone and fentanyl, into Michigan prisons, when they well know over 80 percent of all contraband is smuggled into prisons by employees, as confirmed by multiple studies. If the MDOC really wanted to stop drugs and other contraband, such as cell phones and tobacco, from entering its prisons, then they would search all MDOC employees just as thoroughly upon entry as they do prisoners’ families and friends when visiting.

Consequently, one can only conclude that stopping contraband is not the goal of this new policy, merely the excuse for it, and a cynical person might easily think this new policy’s goal is to enable MDOC employees to corner the remaining 20 percent of the contraband market.

Its real goal, however, is to stop prisoners, their families and friends from sending mail via the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) and force them into buying email “stamps” from JPay, so JPay and the MDOC can rake in profits, while enabling this mail to be closely monitored and recorded for future reference. Thus taking a big step towards the eventual shutdown of prison mail rooms, while effectively abrogating the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by preventing newspapers, magazines and other publications from entering MDOC prisons.

As already established, sending and receiving email is not a right, it is a privilege, with prisoners on sanctions not allowed access to JPay kiosks, when prisoners on sanctions, even in the hole, i.e., administrative segregation, send and receive USPS mail by right. Welcome to the Panopticon, where all is seen, yet remains hidden, so billionaires can stuff their pockets at the public’s expense.

Its real goal is to stop prisoners, their families and friends from sending mail via the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) and force them into buying email “stamps” from JPay, so JPay and the MDOC can rake in profits, while enabling this mail to be closely monitored and recorded for future reference.

JPay, by the way, is a subsidiary of Securus, the second-largest prison phone company in the U.S., currently owned by the shadowy hedge fund Abry Partners, and in the process of being sold, if not sold already, to Detroit Pistons owner Tom Gore’s Platinum Equity. Meanwhile, Pitney Bowles, FedEx and UPS are waiting in the wings for the USPS’s demise in order to snap up the profitable urban and suburban mail routes, leaving the unprofitable rural routes with minimal, if any, mail service.

The USPS having been rendered “unprofitable” through the Congressional accounting trick of forcing it to fund pensions years in advance, at behest of Pitney Bowles et al., at the expense of its infrastructure. The final blow will likely come from Donald Trump, whose policy is to sacrifice the public’s interests and assets on the altar of private capital.

A close read of the MDOC’s new mail policy directive and operating procedure, PD05.03.118 and OP05.03.118A, respectively (n.b., both posted at, signed by MDOC Director Heidi Washington, reveals they have less to do with stopping drugs and way more to do with ending prisoners’ communication via USPS mail, while going a long way in proving George Orwell’s point that “the greatest enemy of clear language is insincerity.”

Tellingly, the section of the new PD05.03.118 titled “Prohibited Incoming Mail” begins with a blatant lie: “Envelopes which cannot be effectively searched may provide a means of introducing controlled substances, for example suboxone or fentanyl, or other contraband which poses a threat to the security, good order, or discipline of the facility [emphasis supplied].”

A lie because the MDOC well knows plain envelopes can be easily and effectively searched using a “Light Pad” or detection light as described in OP05.03.118A, paragraph C, subparagraph 4, which it has been doing for years. Formerly, they claimed that only “padded, corrugated” envelopes could not be effectively searched, as stated in the old mail policy, PD05.03.118, paragraph BB, effective date Sept. 14, 2009 (

A close read of the MDOC’s new mail policy directive and operating procedure reveals they have less to do with stopping drugs and way more to do with ending prisoners’ communication via USPS mail.

Nevertheless, according to the new mail policy and procedure, all incoming envelopes will be thrown in the trash, unshredded, leaving anyone, including other prisoners, access to prisoners’ families and friends’ addresses. They will then be replaced with new plain white envelopes, paid for by our Prisoner Benefit Fund (PBF), with our names and numbers written on them, hopefully, with our letters inside and, in most cases, leaving us no way of knowing the return address or even the name of the sender.

However, the newly rewritten, effective Nov. 1, 2017, PBF policy directive, PD04.02.110, paragraph E, still specifically forbids the MDOC’s use of the PBF to purchase these replacement envelopes: “The PBF shall not be used to fund an activity or program that is necessary to institutional operations [MDOC’s emphasis].”

Ignoring the preceding paragraph, the MDOC added language in paragraph F that directly contradicts it: “In addition, the PBF shall be used to purchase plain envelopes used for the delivery of prisoner mail in accordance with PD05.03.118.”

An error typical of the MDOC, which has long taken the position that it is not required to follow its own rules or the law for that matter.

Similar to the Indiana Department of Corrections’ new mail policy put in place “temporarily” on April 1 (April Fool’s Day, really!?), as reported this summer by Kwame “Beans” Shakur in San Francisco Bay View, the MDOC’s new mail policy requires all personal correspondence to be printed or written only in black or blue ink, or graphite pencil, and greeting cards to be commercially produced, which effectively prevents any drawings or cards made by prisoners’ children, grandchildren, nieces or nephews from coming into prisons.

I, for one, really looked forward to the drawings my niece made, usually in crayon, and was looking forward to similar drawings from her two girls. None of which will be allowed in, according to this new mail policy, and none of which is capable of coming in via JPay. No photos printed on photo paper, cardstock, or paper heavier than 24 pound will be allowed in either.

Moreover, some prison mail room employees, either through malice or ignorance, are misinterpreting the new mail policy regarding ink color and paper weight to apply to publications sent directly from the publisher or authorized vendor, such as newspapers, magazines, books etc., when both policy and procedure state they are to apply to “written content” only. See PD05.03.118, paragraph OO, subparagraphs 2 and 3; and OP05.03.118A, paragraph C, subparagraphs 6(b) and 6(c).

Further, they are ripping, or cutting, off the mailing labels on these publications, when OP05.03.118A, paragraph C, subparagraph 6(a) specifically states: “The following prevents an effective search and therefore shall be rejected:

“a) Unless received directly from the publisher or an authorized vendor, mail that is taped, pasted, or otherwise joined to another item [emphasis supplied].”

We are issuing a call to our families and friends, especially those in the prison abolition movement, to organize actions against this illegal and outrageously repressive new mail policy.

One MDOC employee even claimed they would be rejecting Bibles with red printing inside and removing bindings from hardcover books, as incredible as that sounds.

None of the foregoing, including the new mail policy itself, meets the test of rationally relating to a serious penological concern set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Turner v. Safely, 482 U.S. 78,89 (1987). Certainly, the MDOC’s concerns regarding incoming prisoner mail can be addressed using far less dangerous and destructive methods, such as the use of a light pad and a physical search, as before, in order to avoid this wholesale trampling of prisoners’, their families’, friends’ and other mail senders’ constitutional rights. Especially, those of freedom of speech and press, and to send and receive USPS mail, as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Spreading from Indiana’s prisons to Michigan’s, like some viral disease, it is only a matter of time before this policy of monetizing and restricting prisoners’ mail at the expense of their families and friends, as well as various publishers and the USPS, for the financial benefit of hedge fund billionaires, other corporate bottom-feeders and prison administrators, infects the whole country from coast to coast.

That is why we are issuing a call to our families and friends, especially those in the prison abolition movement, to organize actions against this illegal and outrageously repressive new mail policy. We also urge everyone to phone MDOC Director Heidi Washington, who is responsible for this travesty, directly at 517-373-0720, or via the MDOC’s main number at 517-335-1426, and state your objections.

Finally, we request any concerned attorneys to contact us at our address below in order to help us litigate against this egregious infringement upon all our First Amendment rights.

Don’t monetize prisons, abolish them!

Send our brothers some love and light: Rand W. Gould, C-187131, Chippewa Correctional Facility, 4269 W. M-80, Kincheloe, MI 49784, and Charles Edward Atiba Bomoni Payton, A-571203, Chippewa Correctional Facility, 4269 W. M-80, Kincheloe, MI 49784, who assisted with this story.

Source Article from

The Bloodlines Of ‘The Billionaires Club’ Run Deep…


Leftists, who believe whatever they are told to believe (because they are “intellectual free thinkers”), like to imagine that the super-rich are mostly “right wing extremists,” meaning anyone to the right of Karl Marx. But, in reality, many of the richest people support leftist causes, and the few who do not mostly support RINO Republicans or the equivalent.

There don’t seem to be any at all who openly tell the truth about the New World Order (NWO) conspiracy or oppose it in any way. But how can “capitalists” support Marxism? How can communists ally themselves with billionaires? The answer is simple. Most of the super-rich do not believe in true free market competitive capitalism, but in crony capitalism, a system of monopolies in bed with the government.

As for the leading communists, none of them, not even Marx himself, have ever truly believed in the “classless society,” the “withering away of the state,” or “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” This is meaningless claptrap designed to fool the UIs (useful idiots) at the bottom of the Marxist pyramid. Communism, not religion, is the true “opiate of the masses.” Communism is, quite simply, fascism, and it was never intended to be anything else.

So it should not surprise us that some of the richest people, like John D. Rockefeller and his descendants, have proudly supported one world government and set up tax free foundations to support every leftist cause. Consider the various Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegiefoundations which have gained control of modern medicine and education. John D. said “competition is sin,” and David Rockefeller openly admitted his support for a one world government.

Most patriots are aware that George Sauron (Soros) is behind ACORN and La Raza, the Tides Foundation, the “Open Society” Foundation, Media Matters,, and the Center for American “Progress,” and supports Planned “Parenthood” and the Southern Poverty Law Center. Born Gyorgy Schwartz in Hungary on 8/12/30, Sauron has a net worth of some $25 billion dollars, mostly acquired via currency speculation.

Anyone familiar with the effects of fiat money and its manipulation by the central banks can see how easy it is for people with the right connections to know in advance what the money supply and interests rates will be and become fabulously wealthy with little effort or risk…and it requires no great intelligence to do it. Sauron, during WWII, helped Nazi officials confiscate the wealth of his fellow Jews and considers that period to be a happy one for him.

Fewer are aware of Peter Sutherland, a grotesque creature who was an executive at Goldman Sachs, a.k.a. bankster central, and then British Petroleum (the nice people who gave us the Gulf oil spill). Peter supports “free” trade, open borders, and unlimited immigration of Muslims and Africans into what is left of Europe. He is a Bilderberger, and has been on the European Commission and was for a time Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission.

For almost a decade Gov’t Slaves has worked tirelessly to bring its readers the most critical news the corporate media does not want you to see. We have no intrusive ads, pop-ups or clickbait, just NEWS. If you happen to be in a position to support my work, PLEASE consider making a one-time donation below or purchasing a product from the GOV’T SLAVES STORE. Your support is humbly appreciated. Thomas @ Gov’t Slaves

Source Article from

Bozell & Graham Column: Liberal Billionaires Are Never Villains

Charles Pierce, the resident radical-left political pundit at Esquire magazine – that intellectual powerhouse best known for its “Sexiest Woman Alive” award  – is lamenting the role of Steve Bannon in electing President Trump, as well as Trump financial backers “Robert and Rebekah Mercer, the reactionary New York gozillionnaires.” 

Pierce wanted everyone to read about a lawsuit filed in May (news that’s almost a half year old is “breaking” if the targets are conservatives) by a former Mercer employee named David Magerman, who, against company policy, felt compelled to tell The Wall Street Journal his boss had “contempt for the social safety net” and wanted “government be shrunk down to the size of a pinhead.” (Horrors!) In his lawsuit, Magerman upped the ante and claimed Mercer held racist views.

Full disclosure: The Mercers are not just supporters, they are friends. That kind of repugnant slur is undeserving of a response and will get none here.

Magerman is irrelevant. That lawsuit as “news” is silly. So why the story? It’s all about “gozillionaires.”

Left-wingers in the media believe “gozillionaires” are a malignant force in politics — unless they are on the “right side of history.” The Mercers get an amazing amount of media ink — most of it predictably negative — because they are aren’t. They are conservatives. Worse, they are rich conservatives. Their wealth is dangerous. They are dangerous. They must be exposed!

But check out the Forbes list of top billionaires. At the top of the pile sits Bill Gates, a liberal. Next in line is Warren Buffett, also a liberal. He’s followed by Jeff Bezos, liberal. At #5, uber-liberal Mark Zuckerberg. At #10, Michael Bloomberg, another leftist. George Soros, a radical leftist if ever there was one, registers at #29. In fact there are liberals all over the Forbes Top 100 and Top 500.

You won’t find the Mercers in the top 1,000. 

Quick: When was the last time — ever a time — you remember a media story focused on the controversial views of Gates, Buffett, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, or Soros?

It’s quite the opposite. A few months ago, the very same Esquire writer mocked the Trump people for objecting to liberal “gozillionaires.” According to Charlie Pierce, conservatives thought anti-Trump protesters in Washington DC were “some sort of a plot concocted by George Soros.” To object to political activity by wealthy people on the Left is to dabble in cockamamie conspiracy theories, this being just another one of them.

Except it was true. The Media Research Center documented that Soros and his Open Society Foundations had contributed $246 million between 2010 and 2014 to 100 of the 544 groups listed as partners of the Women’s March protest the day after the Inauguration. Did the liberal media care? Were they alarmed?  They yawned. Soros is on the “right side of history.”  

These self-righteous attacks on the Mercers are nothing new. Before Bob and Rebekah Mercer there were David and Charles Koch, and before them, there was Richard Scaife, dubbed the “Godfather of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy” by some liberals. Twenty years ago Time magazine’s “Most Influential” list  identified Scaife as a “Conservative Agitator” who funded “rabidly anti-Clinton magazines.” Pages later, Time described George Soros as a “Philanthropist” with an “iconoclastic critique of free-market capitalism.”

Liberal “gozillionaires” are hailed as Time magazine “Persons of the Year” (Bill and Melinda Gates) or get a presidential Medal of Freedom from Obama (Buffett). It doesn’t hurt that liberal journalists can often thank these billionaires for jobs – or be grateful that their colleagues are employed by them. Buffett, Bloomberg, Zuckerberg and Bezos are all in the left wing media business now. 

The same trend applies to leftist foundations like the Ford Foundation (Endowment: $12+ billion), the Pew Charitable Trusts ($5+ billion) and the Rockefeller Foundation ($4+ billion). Toss in Carnegie, MacArthur and so many more. Controversy — anywhere? Conservatives have nothing to match any of them. 

As we type these words it has just been announced that Soros has recently transferred a cool $18 billion to his radical Open Society Foundations, making it instantly the second largest foundation in the world after Bill and Melinda Gates.

But still it’s all about the Mercers. 

Source Article from

Tech Billionaires Are Secretly Funding a Plan to Break the Human Race out of The Matrix

The Simulation Argument presupposes the development of this posthuman civilization, at which point, Bostrom states, advanced humans or AI might develop simulations of the past in the same way that current scientists create test environments; some of the simulations would likely be for entertainment reasons, as well, in the same way humans currently create video games and movies.

In recent years, a number of high-profile figures have come out to state their belief that we are living in a simulation. Chief among them is tech magnate Elon Musk, who has stated that the video game No Man’s Sky confirmed his belief that someday simulations would approximate reality so comprehensively that they would be indistinguishable from reality. Apparently, he was sitting in a hot tub with friends when he finally converted.

Musk is the CEO and brains behind Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and OpenAI. In recent years, he has expressed bold plans for his companies that he believes will advance the human race: with Tesla, he wants to spearhead a transportation infrastructure that doesn’t rely on burning hydrocarbons; with SpaceX, he wants to assist in humanity’s gradual extraplanetary migration to Mars; and with Neuralink and OpenAI, he wants to facilitate humanity’s merger with advanced computer technology.

When he was asked about whether humans are living inside a computer simulation, Musk made headlines last year by saying he thinks the chances are one in billions that we aren’t.

“The strongest argument for us probably being in a simulation I think is the following: 40 years ago we had Pong – two rectangles and a dot,” Musk stated. “That’s where we were. Now 40 years later we have photorealistic, 3D simulations with millions of people playing simultaneously and it’s getting better every year. And soon we’ll have virtual reality, we’ll have augmented reality. If you assume any rate of improvement at all, then the games will become indistinguishable from reality, just indistinguishable.”

Here Musk is referring to the exponential growth of technology, the lynchpin of the Singularity theory. If in 40 years we’ve gone from the two-dimensional pong to the cusp of augmented and virtual reality, imagine where we’ll be in another forty, or a hundred, or 400. Provided the human race survives, one may assume we will achieve the ability to produce simulations with sentient beings. Already, the Department of Defense has created the Sentient World Simulation, a real-time “synthetic mirror of the real world with automated continuous calibration with respect to current real-world information, such as major events, opinion polls, demographic statistics, economic reports, and shifts in trends,” according to a working paper on the system.

In recent years, other scientists have conducted research and even experimentation in attempts to show actual evidence of the Simulation. Heads turned last year when theoretical physicist S. James Gate announced he had found strange computer code in his String Theory research. Bound inside the equations we use to describe our universe, he says, is peculiar self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code.

team of German physicists has also set out to show that the numerical constraints we see in our universe are consistent with the kinds of limitations we would see in a simulated universe. These physicists have invoked a non-perturbative approach known as lattice quantum chromodynamics to try to discover whether there is an underlying grid to the space/time continuum.

So far their efforts have recreated a minuscule region of the known universe, a sliver of a corner that is but a few femtometers across. But this corner simulates the hypothetical lattice of the universal grid, and their search for a corresponding physical restraint turned up a theoretical upper limit on high-energy particles known as the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin, or GZK cut off. In other words, there are aspects of our universe that look and behave as a simulation might.

With news that there are two anonymous tech billionaires working on a secret project to break us out of the Matrix, it’s hard to know whether we should laugh or scream in horror. Simulation talk is great epistemological fun and metaphysical amusement of the highest order, but it may speak to an underlying anxiety regarding the merging of our reality with machines, or an underlying existential loneliness. It’s even been posited as a solution to the Fermi ParadoxWhy haven’t we met aliens? Well, because we live inside a world they built.

Our earth is marooned in a cosmic void so vast it would take our current Deep Space I propulsion system an astonishing 81,000 years to reach the nearest star — in a galaxy of hundreds of billions, which is, itself, just one of hundreds of billions. The thought that it’s all 1s and 0s rendered by a futuristic microprocessor is philosophically sexy but, perhaps, sociologically lazy.

RELATED: 100 Days Till US Economy Crash Proven By American Finance Council

That there is anxiety about reality being manufactured in a society obsessed with simulated pleasure and mediated experience isn’t altogether surprising. It’s the ultimate, though perhaps accidental, expression of resistance to a culture steeped in consumerism and artificial growth.

Source Article from