Case Studies in Disinformation: Nicaragua and Angola — Fixing Your Perspective on Media and History, the Origins of Propaganda, the ‘World of the Naive,’ and Trump.

First, I want to say that I’m sorry I didn’t write last week. I haven’t been feeling well lately, and it’s been hard for me to find the motivation to write my posts.

I’m writing this post because I believe many people have the wrong perspective on the media and how to interpret what’s happening in the real world. I often hear people talk about how the media is spreading propaganda and how we’re becoming like the Soviets. To me, that reflects a misunderstanding of history and a distorted view of the present.

The lecture titled “Case Studies in Disinformation: Nicaragua and Angola” offers insight that I believe could help correct these misunderstandings. The so-called propaganda machine people talk about today isn’t new. Saying that we’re “suddenly turning into the Soviets” because of propaganda shows a lack of historical awareness.

Don’t get me wrong — I’m not saying the Soviets didn’t use propaganda or lie. But even then, Soviet propaganda was nothing compared to Western propaganda, which this lecture illustrates very clearly.

History of the Contras and Nicaragua

Let’s take the lecture about the Contras in Nicaragua and compare it to more recent events — like Ukraine, Israel, and Syria.

I originally wanted to include the opening monologue from the lecture here, but it was too long. So instead, I’ll use a few excerpts. I encourage you to watch the full lectures I’ve linked — they are well worth your time.

Now, another thing that’s important to remember is that the Central Intelligence Agency has also been involved in this effort, and that they are forbidden by their own charter and by Executive Order 12333, which was signed by President Reagan in 1981, from engaging in any domestic operation that is designed to influence U.S. political processes, political decisions, or the media. In spite of this, there is a great deal of evidence in U.S. government documents and in World Court documents that indicate that in fact, since 1981, the Central Intelligence Agency has been engaged in a systematic campaign to control news coverage of the Nicaraguan conflict.

This effort to control coverage began as the Central Intelligence Agency was working to form the Nicaraguan Democratic Force (FDN), the largest Contra organization. They worked in ’81 and ’82 to get this organization together, and according to Edgar Chamorro, who was the former spokesman for the FDN, the Central Intelligence Agency even chose the name of the group because they wanted to be sure to get the word “democratic” in the title of the organization.

The Central Intelligence Agency’s activities in the United States for the Contras have included:

• Writing Contra press releases and writing the FDN’s statement of principles.

• Supervising press conferences, including coaching Contra leaders how to lie to reporters effectively about what the Contras’ purposes were.

• Faking press events in Central America, including Contra military operations that were staged specifically for television cameras.

• Funding a public relations office in Washington D.C. that, according to Justice Department documents signed by the leader of this public relations office, included disseminating propaganda to the U.S. media and lobbying members of Congress.

• In addition, it has included specific direct lobbying efforts, including having agency personnel coach members of the Contra organization on how to lobby members of Congress, providing them with profiles of members who would be vulnerable to charges of being “soft on communism,” paying for lobbying trips to Washington and the members’ home districts so the Contras could contact members of Congress directly.

We’re talking here about the years 1981 and 1982 — before the fall of the Soviet Union and before the Cold War ended. So when people say things like “look at what our media has become” or “we’re suddenly turning into the Soviet Union with all this propaganda,” it just shows that they have no real understanding of the world or its history.

We were told the Soviet Union had an evil propaganda machine, while we, the West, were noble truth-tellers — and if there were any lies, they were merely innocent mistakes. The problem is that most people aren’t aware of this hidden side of our own history. Since we, the West, won the Cold War, we also got to write the history — because, as the saying goes, history is written by the victors. And as Orwell famously put it, “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”

What was done with the Contras back then is being repeated today in Ukraine, Israel, and Syria.

In Central America, the agency’s campaign has included, again according to documents, bribing journalists in Costa Rica and Honduras to fake stories about Contra military successes, to create or edit stories that would make the Sandinista government look bad, and also to suppress any negative information about Contra human rights abuses.

Now you can understand how war crimes and horrific atrocities committed by Ukraine are not mentioned or are deliberately ignored. How Israel’s war crimes, atrocities, and acts of genocide are omitted from our media coverage. How Al-Qaeda in Syria can slaughter Christians and commit terrible atrocities — yet it goes unreported by the media.

None of this is new. The same propaganda tactics were used when Al-Qaeda was fighting the Soviets, when it came to the Uyghurs in China, or when so-called jihadists were labeled “freedom fighters” in Libya.

Just because you’re only now noticing the lies and propaganda in Western media doesn’t mean it hasn’t been happening all along.

In addition, the Central Intelligence Agency has funded for the last several years a weekly newsletter that goes to major newspapers throughout Latin America called Nicaragua Today, which purports to tell the truth about what’s happening in Nicaragua. However, the editor of this newspaper is Pedro Joaquin Chamorro Jr., one of the former editors of La Prensa, and when I talked to Pedro Joaquin about where he got his money, he said, “Well, I can’t tell you anything about that,” but other Contra leaders told me quite openly that the agency funds it.

In addition, the CIA has paid for the Contras to buy a radio station in Costa Rica called Radio Impacto. Radio Impacto has one of the strongest signals in Central America; its signal is easily picked up in Nicaragua. The money was provided by the agency according to a number of Contra leaders whom I interviewed. And one of the techniques that the station has used is an attempt to discredit U.S. journalists that the Contra radio station operators feel have not been negative enough toward the Sandinistas. They have personally attacked, for instance, a stringer for the Miami Herald and a former stringer for Time named June Ehrlich, calling her a “piti guaca,” a “rabid dog who is in the pay of the Sandinista government.”

The reason that the Central American campaign is especially important is because what’s printed in Central America about the Contras filters back up to the United States through a process called blowback. What happens is that many U.S. correspondents go to the region, pick up the newspapers there, and usually have them translated because a number of correspondents cannot speak Spanish, and then filter that information back up in their own dispatches to the United States. So what that means is that distorted or false stories that appear in the Costa Rican and Honduran media are often reprinted in the United States media as fact. This is a process that’s been going on for years.

Now let’s remember how USAID was briefly halted — and suddenly, all Ukrainian media started facing economic problems. For those naive enough to believe that USAID was truly stopped, ask yourself: if it had actually ended, why didn’t Ukraine’s media go bankrupt, since it was being funded by USAID?

The truth is, USAID wasn’t stopped — it was simply moved under the direct control of the U.S. government. In some ways, that’s even more telling. They can no longer pretend it’s an independent organization promoting democracy. It has always been a tool of the U.S. government, but before, there was at least a veneer of independence. That illusion is now gone.

People need to stop being naive and thinking USAID has ended and things are somehow “better” now. It was just restructured — but it still functions in the same way it always did.

Now, this so-called “blowback” they talk about exists, and it shows in how Western media covers stories — like the recent claim that Ukraine destroyed 40 Russian planes in a drone operation on Russian airfields. The U.S., through the CIA, controls Ukrainian media, which pushes stories like this one, or the Bucha massacre narrative, and many more. These then get repeated in Western media as if they were undeniable truths.

I’ve used this example before, and I’ll use it again — because people forget. I’m genuinely astonished by how short the public memory is in the West. Here are just a few stories most people have already forgotten.

Rape has reportedly become a weapon in Ukraine. Finding justice may be difficult

Widespread allegations of rape at the hands of Russian soldiers have been coming out of Ukraine. Experts say rape in conflict is often used to pursue strategic aims.

Ukrainian children, abducted by Russia and then returned, are speaking out

Ukraine says more than 19,000 children have been illegally taken by Russia since the war began. NPR’s Leila Fadel speaks with two teenagers who were abducted from Ukraine.

Images out of Bucha are difficult to look at, but it’s important not to look away

In the Ukrainian town of Bucha, dead bodies have been found along with mass graves after Russian forces withdrew from the area. It is on the outskirts of the capital city Kyiv.

Ukraine destroys more than 40 military aircraft in a drone attack deep inside Russia

The attack was disclosed on the same day as Zelenskyy said Ukraine will send a delegation to Istanbul for a new round of direct peace talks with Russia on Monday.

These are modern examples of the same “blowback” that was discussed in relation to Nicaragua and the Contras back in 1981 and 1982. This is nothing new — you’re simply starting to notice something that has been happening all along.

What astonishes me most is the public’s short memory. Where is the outrage now that the story about Russia using rape as a weapon of war has been discredited and exposed as false? The same goes for the claims about children being kidnapped by Russia, and for the Bucha massacre.

Again, this pattern of short-term memory and the continued use of discredited stories as if they were truth is nothing new — and it’s exactly the kind of propaganda technique discussed in the lecture I’ve attached to this post.

1:11:59

…involved in the cocaine trade, all based on anonymous sources, when the same reporters could go, you know, and get the court documents from California, and spend the time going through the Iran-Contra documents, and talk to the DEA, which after President Reagan’s speech in April of 1986, in which he said the Contras were running drugs, the DEA came out the next day and said, “I’m sorry, we have no information about the Sandinistas being involved in drug running.” But the problem is that all of these “well gee whiz, we found out the story wasn’t true” moments come later, and are not given the same kind of play that the original story is given.

I was very grateful after President Reagan’s 1986 speech, which was sort of a benchmark, that the Associated Press put a reporter on tracking down the charges that the President had made in that speech about persecution of the Jews in Managua, about drug running, about the Nicaraguans sending arms to leftist rebels in Brazil. And the Brazilian government demanded to know where that information had come from, and the State Department had to back off and apologize to the Brazilian government. That story, in the newspaper where I live in Tucson, Arizona, ran on page three and was cut. That story did not make the front page, top-of-the-fold headlines that the President’s speech had made.

And when Jonathan’s talking about the El Salvador White Paper, that white paper was discredited. He was the one who wrote one of the original stories, you know, actually reading the documents, but many newspapers never even ran the stories that the white papers were totally discredited. The person who wrote them for the State Department actually came out and said, “Well, yeah, you know, we sort of guessed at the figures, and there were problems with the translating, and well, I don’t, you know, I’m not really sure where some of these documents came from.” That white paper continued to be quoted to me when I would go to Washington and go to the State Department. They continued to give me this white paper as if it were authoritative, and when I would raise questions about it, there’d be this enormous official anger, and I would be sort of escorted, you know, out of the office.

So there is this continual problem that you get that even when something is discredited, it is still used, and reporters going down to Central America without the kind of experience and background in dealing with the government and this kind of attempt to control the news, they accept this stuff, and they continue to quote from it. Just as there were quotes from William Casey, President Reagan, George Shultz all through 1984 about the fact that the only reason we were supporting the Contras was to interdict arms being shipped to El Salvador, despite the fact that in May of 1983, you know, a year, 18 months earlier, the House Intelligence Committee had issued a public report—a very unusual public report—in which they recommended that funding for the Contras be eliminated because the members of that committee—and this was a bipartisan report—did not believe the Central Intelligence Agency’s explanation that the reason the Contras were being funded was to interdict armed shipments. There you have the House Intelligence Committee, Republicans and Democrats, saying this in May of ’83, and up through ’84, the President and Secretary of State are saying the same thing, and the media is still quoting them without backgrounding it and saying, “However, according to a May 1983 House report, etc.” So one of the problems is we do not do our homework.

That’s the thing — most people making these claims haven’t done their homework.

Although the stories I mentioned earlier — like Russia using rape as a weapon of war, kidnapping children, or the Bucha massacre — have been discredited or lacked evidence, they are still widely used and repeated. For example, the rape story was splashed across the front pages of Western media. But when it turned out to be false and the main person promoting it was fired, that fact was barely mentioned — maybe buried on the back pages or glossed over in the middle of a segment.

Similarly, the story about Russia kidnapping children made the front pages, but when it became clear that no concrete evidence was ever provided, that part was hidden in the middle of articles or ignored entirely. The Bucha massacre also dominated headlines, yet the fact that some international organizations have still not been provided with sufficient proof is rarely mentioned — or only brought up in passing.

And it’s not just Ukraine. The same pattern occurred with the Syrian chemical weapons attacks. The original accusations made global headlines, but when whistleblowers from international organizations later revealed evidence suggesting the attacks were staged or misrepresented, their voices were either omitted or mentioned quietly, far from the spotlight.

The core issue is perspective. People think this kind of propaganda is something new simply because they don’t know the true history of the world. It’s not new. And when people say we’re “turning into the Soviet Union” because of propaganda, they reveal how little they actually understand.

Even during the Cold War, Soviet propaganda was nothing compared to what the West was producing. In terms of scale and effectiveness, Western propaganda was far more powerful — and still is. The only difference is that we won the Cold War, which meant we got to write the history books and shape the narrative people now live in.

This is what I call the “World of the Naive” — the mental space most people live in. We are not turning into the Soviet Union with all this propaganda. We were far worse than the Soviet Union even back then. You just didn’t realize it, because the propaganda was so effective.

We won the war, and we wrote the story: that the Soviet Union was the big, bad propagandist, and we — the West — were the noble truth-tellers fighting for freedom and democracy.

History of World War 2

I’ve touched on this same subject in relation to World War II. We also won that war, and as the victors, we got to write the history books and shape the narrative surrounding it.

Just like with the Soviet Union and the Cold War, I’m not saying the Soviets didn’t use propaganda and lies — the same goes for the Nazis. In fact, in some ways, the Nazis were even more effective than both the West and the Soviets when it came to propaganda.

What’s rarely mentioned, however, is that the West — specifically the U.S. and Britain — invented the first modern propaganda machine during World War I. It was from this model that the Nazis later learned.

When people think of propaganda, they immediately think of the Soviet Union, the Nazis, and Joseph Goebbels. But what they often overlook are the real pioneers of modern propaganda and narrative control: the Creel Commission, Edward Bernays, Walter Lippmann, John B. Watson, and B. F. Skinner.

The 20th century American journalist Walter Lippmann epitomized this view, calling the masses “the bewildered herd” and suggesting that one of the main functions of the media is to put this herd in its proper place as passive spectators, not active participants, in the organization of a society. Or as Chomsky explains this elitist ideology is built on the notion that:

 

“…that the mass of the public are just too stupid to be able to understand things. If they try to participate in managing their own affairs, they’re just going to cause trouble. Therefore, it would be immoral and improper to permit them to do this. We have to tame the bewildered herd, not allow the bewildered herd to rage and trample and destroy things.”

― Noam Chomsky, Media Control

 

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.

― Edward Bernays, Propaganda

 

‘Watson’s Utopia, the implied authority of experts was institutionalised in the form of a technocracy managed by behavioural scientists’. Watson wanted religion, the antithesis of science, to be ‘outlawed”. When conditioning failed to cure what Watson termed the ‘hopelessly insane, or incurably diseased’, the physician ‘would not hesitate to put them to death’. According to Buckley, ‘there would also be no mercy’. This has echoes of the Nazi Goebbels. Watson’s ideal community would not recognize words like, ‘right, wrong or punishment.’

― K. W. Buckley

 

Now that we know how positive reinforcement works, and why negative doesn’t, we can be more deliberate and hence more successful, in our cultural design. We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled, though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That’s the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement—there’s no restraint and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behave—the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises.

― B.F. Skinner, Walden Two

These are the creators of our Western world — people we’re not taught about in school, yet they played a key role in shaping the “World of the Naive” that I’ve been speaking about.

How many of you have even heard of them? John B. Watson, for example, is considered the father of behaviorism. Despite essentially inventing modern behaviorism, he’s so little known that there are hardly any widely recognized quotes from him.

Here’s an example of one of his better-known experiments.

How many of you knew about the Little Albert experiment? These are the people who created the world of propaganda and narrative control — the “World of the Naive” that most people live in today.

The Little Albert experiment showed that people can be conditioned and programmed. Later, this was combined with Freudian psychology — and let’s not forget that Edward Bernays, known as the father of public relations, was Sigmund Freud’s nephew. Add to that the behavioral conditioning discovered by figures like John B. Watson and B. F. Skinner, and you can see how these tools were developed and used to manipulate public perception.

Now, regarding World War II: yes, the Nazis were masters of propaganda — that’s true. But they learned it from the West.

Britain also made extensive use of propaganda during World War 1, and Hitler, who once famously stated “Propaganda, propaganda, propaganda. All that matters is propaganda”, was intrigued by the success of the allied war propaganda. Explaining the effect such propaganda had on him, Hitler wrote:

 

“But it was not until the war that it became evident what immense results can be obtained by a correct application of propaganda. Here again, unfortunately, all our study had to be done on the enemy side, for the activity on our side was modest, to say the least… For what we failed to do, the enemy did, with amazing skill and really brilliant calculation. I, myself, learned enormously from this enemy war propaganda.” 

―Adolf Hitler

And Adolf Hitler learned well from us — the West — when it came to propaganda. For those who believe Hitler didn’t lie or think he was somehow “great,” here are some powerful quotes I like to use for all the Hitler fanboys out there.

“Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.”

― Adolf Hitler

“All propaganda has to be popular and has to adapt its spiritual level to the perception of the least intelligent of those towards whom it intends to direct itself.” 

—Adolf Hitler

Our entire world is built on lies, and the U.S. is the best example of this. The people who control this world know the truth about the real world. One of the best examples of how the world is constructed on lies is this excerpt from a speech I found by someone in an American think tank, discussing America and its history of wars.

I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough, and it’s very hard for me to see how the United States president can get us to war with Iran. This leads me to conclude that if, in fact, compromise isn’t happening, then the traditional way America gets to war is what would be best for U.S. interests.

 

Some people might think Mr. Roosevelt wanted to get us into World War II; as mentioned, you may recall we had to wait for Pearl Harbor. Some people might think Mr. Wilson wanted to get us into World War I; you may recall he had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that Mr. Johnson wanted to send troops to Vietnam; you may recall they had to wait for the Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn’t go to war with Spain until the USS Maine exploded. And may I point out that Mr. Lincoln did not feel he could call out the federal army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which is why he ordered the commander at Fort Sumter to do exactly that thing which the South Carolinians had said would cause an attack.

 

So if, in fact, the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war.

Just look at the laughter of the people in the room. They are laughing at all those who believe the official narrative of history. This is the “traditional way America gets to war” — a fact that almost no one knows about.

Trump

In the end, I’d like to mention a little about Trump. First, he is not the one making decisions — he is simply the PR department for the U.S. empire. This idea is acknowledged by people like John Helmer and Brian Berletic, who, like me, subscribe to the “Division of Labor” theory.

Funny enough, I first discovered Brian Berletic through The Duran, since they often featured him on their shows. I also remember watching Alexander Mercouris’s programs, where he couldn’t praise enough the “Dances With Bears” articles by John Helmer. So I actually found out about both of them through The Duran. As I mentioned before, I would love to see The Duran bring back programs featuring Brian Berletic, like in the old days, or host John Helmer for a debate on the “Division of Labor” theory.

Regarding Trump, I’ve already written posts exposing him as the idiot he is. Like both Berletic and Helmer, I think Trump is simply there to sell the empire’s agenda to the public. As Frank Zappa said, “Politics is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex.” Trump spends his time playing golf because he knows his job isn’t to understand what’s really happening or to make decisions — it’s just to read the script the empire gives him and sell it to the gullible public.

Regarding Trump and Epstein — yes, Trump was implicated in Epstein’s wrongdoings. I’ve written before that I don’t think Trump is such a bad person; for one, he doesn’t drink alcohol. He’s what some might call a “pussy hound,” given that he’s had three wives and his current wife is basically a trophy wife. However, I don’t believe there are tapes of Trump doing the kind of “stuff” Epstein did — like in the cases of Bill Gates or Bill Clinton, whom I am almost certain were involved in such things. Still, I can’t be sure Trump didn’t do stupid things when he was young, but in my opinion, it’s unlikely. That said, just because he may not have done those things doesn’t mean he wasn’t implicated, which I’ve mentioned before based on the work of Whitney Webb.

We also need to remember that Trump’s mentor was Roy Cohn, a Jewish mobster who allegedly gave Trump ideas for his book Trump: The Art of the Deal. Roy Cohn was a predecessor to Epstein in organizing orgies and procuring altar boys from Christian churches. As I wrote before Epstein Island existed the Christian Church serves the role of procuring children for the rich and powerful — and that’s why so much of this horrible stuff is linked to the Christian Church.

All of this was explained in a great video I posted earlier.

33:21

Roy Cohn is our fourth Blue Suite partygoer and was deeply connected to all of them through his law practice. To put this into perspective, as an attorney, Roy Cohn had as clients at different times:

• Lewis Rosenstiel, another Blue Suite partygoer, the former bootlegger turned legitimate booze merchant, and ex-husband to Susan Kaufman, the woman at the beginning of this video.

• Cohn was also very closely associated with and represented for a time Donald Trump, and by many accounts was also his mentor. Roy Cohn could be associated with giving Trump the idea for his famous Art of the Deal, as Cohn operated on an intricate system of deals and blackmail, which he learned from his mentor, a childhood friend’s father, Gene Pope Senior.

• Cohn was also the attorney for Francis Spellman, the Archbishop of New York and Cardinal of the Holy See, and as a reminder, one of the four powerful men in the Rosenstiel blue suite.

According to Gene Pope Junior, Cohn’s childhood friend, Cardinal Spellman was a critical power broker in mid-century New York, with Pope claiming that he had an ultimate say on who got appointed to bureaucratic roles in the city government. Rumors also spiraled that he was secretly gay. According to Cardinal Spellman’s biographer John Cooney, the churchman’s homosexuality was essentially an open secret, with rumors of him seducing young altar boys spiraling around the community and sources claiming that he had his favorite young priests. Spellman bragged about his ability to procure young boys from his diocese and would often flaunt his homosexual escapades. His proclivity for homosexual relations was shared by his future lawyer and fellow New York power broker, Roy Cohn. Cohn would be close to Spellman, intrinsically linked to the McCarthy trials, serving as his assistant counsel. I want to remind you all that Spellman was also very close to Hoover, who together legitimized Cohn and McCarthy’s witch trials.

According to Whitney Webb, Cohn was in charge of procuring the young men at these parties, which, with his closeness to Spellman, it would not be a stretch to deduce that he also had a role in this affair given Spellman’s closeness to young altar boys. I’ll let your imagination kind of put those pieces together.

To add one final synchronicity to Spellman’s story: in 1956, Cardinal Spellman ordained one Avery Dulles, John Foster Dulles’s son and Allen Dulles’s nephew, as a Catholic priest and later future cardinal. Much later, the Dulleses were a Protestant family, and Avery, in a strange account, had a revelation to convert to Catholicism, which then turned into his lifelong priesthood thanks to Cardinal Spellman. Allen and John Foster were both working in the Eisenhower administration at this time, and by this point, Cardinal Francis Spellman was adjacent to many CIA activities in Italy, which is important to keep in mind. Strange coincidence, or maybe not so coincidental, we will never truly know. Either way, this incident is indicative of how symbiotic these ruling ties and blackmail circles ended up being for the CIA men, the mobsters, and power brokers.

This short fragment reveals the connection between the Christian Church and the deep state. The fact that members of the Dallas family joined the Christian Church does not shed a good light on the Church itself. Understanding Trump’s deep connections to Roy Cohn, a Jewish mobster specializing in blackmail, gives you another perspective on Trump’s ties to Epstein, who was also Jewish, worked for the mafia and intelligence agencies, and later specialized in blackmail as well. Roy Cohn’s connection to Trump was even mentioned recently by a Japanese politician.

While you may not have much time, I truly hope you will watch the documentary on Mr. Trump by Mr. Roy Cohn, the lawyer who mentored him. I also hope you’ll watch various video feeds to get an idea of what kind of person Mr. Trump is. When you see that, you’ll really understand his character. And you know, at the time of this tariff review, he had a lot of time to spare and was playing golf at the golf course, at the gym. It’s not a conclusion he reached after worrying; he is truly poking fun at the world.

I have provided examples of Trump’s stupidity many times — for example, how he thinks there are aliens on Mars or that Spain belongs to BRICS. I could provide many more. To use the words of Christian Parenti, whom I have quoted often, Trump is “akin to a toddler with a hammer going through the living room hitting stuff.” This was best explained in a quote from recent video with Ambassador Chas Freeman.

– YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

10:49

He(Trump) seems willing to have one meeting a week. He doesn’t read the Daily Report. Apparently, they’re considering creating a mock version of Fox News to present the intelligence in that format on TV, which he does watch. I don’t know how far that project is going.

I will end this post with this quote because it summarizes Trump perfectly: the American administration is considering creating a “mock version of Fox News” to present Trump with briefings because he does not read and spends most of his time playing golf. This is your so-called great 5D genius Trump fighting the deep state — who in reality is “akin to a toddler with a hammer going through the living room hitting stuff.”

I’m sorry for jumping from subject to subject, but it’s all connected. I could write pages and pages about this or talk for hours because all these things are linked.

Anyway thanks to everyone who stuck with me until the end of my post. And, as always… 

“Knowledge will make you be free.”

― Socrates

+

“Knowledge isn’t free. You have to pay attention.”

― Richard P. Feynman

=

“Freedom is not free, you need to pay attention.”

― Grzegorz Ochman

“It’s one thing to question your mind. It’s another to question your eyes and ears. But then again, isn’t it all the same, our senses just mediocre inputs for our brain? Sure, we rely on them, trust they accurately portray the real world around us, but what if the haunting truth is, they can’t? That what we perceive isn’t the real world at all, but just our mind’s best guess?”

― Mr. Robot

Most people’s guesses were wrong because they didn’t do their homework.