Monthly Archives: December 2015

How Big Oil Conquered The World

by DAVID BROWN | | Dec 28, 2015

David Brown

David Brown

I’ve been a happy consumer of James Corbett’s work over the past several years; almost always learning something of value.  I’ve watched in amazement as this –still very young man–  progressed both his content and production value at an astonishing rate.  However, over the past year, I have noticed a leveling-off of the probative quality of his work; and I miss the vigor and detail of his past productions; fearing that in his success, he had lost some of the desire and raw hunger to deliver all he is capable of delivering; reminding me how the first Matrix towered over all those that followed.

While James invested a lot of time and effort on his ‘Century of Enslavement: The History of The Federal Reserve’; and while the production value was excellent, the content was mostly a rehash or an ‘also-ran’ of prior videos done by Bill Still in ‘The Money Masters‘ or G. Edward Griffin in ‘The Creature From Jekyll Island’.

Though I’m sure James hit a home run with many people on his Federal Reserve documentary, I missed the old James Corbett of years past, who brought new information and new insights to important topics. I feared that James had perhaps spread himself a bit too thin; or that success had made him too comfortable.

With his new documentary on Big Oil, however, James is back –if he had ever left—with his best work to date by far. Please sit back and enjoy this probative and informative work by the most exceptional Mr. James Corbett:

Episode 310 – How Big Oil Conquered The World

On the very useful and orchestrated hatred of Muslims

by DAVID BROWN | | Dec 14, 2015

David Brown

David Brown

I cannot and do not dispute any quotes found in the Quran.  I cannot and do not dispute any of the horrible violence committed by Muslims, nor do I condone any of this violence.  I cannot and do not dispute that much or all of this violence can be justified by what is found in the Quran.  The Quran is full of contradictions. There is nice stuff in the Quran and there is violence in the Quran.  The context of which I speak is that most of the violence we see on the world stage today has been financed and supported by the USA and Saudi Arabia and most of the Islamic violence sources from Wahhabism which is spread by the 1,000s of madrasas funded and supported by our major alley in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia.  The USA has funded, trained and armed al-Qaeda and ISIS. This is not my opinion, this is a documented fact.  The USA also supports and protects the major progenitor of this violence, Saudi Arabia.  We also know that Muslims, Jews and Christians have lived and worked side by side in relative peace in Syria for over 200 years until the USA decided they wanted to impose regime change and get rid of Assad.  Why?  Because the House of Saud did not like Assad, and because Assad wanted to build a pipeline that would supply the Western European market which would have cut in on Saudi Arabia’s profits.  There is much more to this story, but we, the USA, need to own our role.  Where do you think all the Christians in Syria came from that ISIS murdered? They were protected by Assad until the USA unleashed its proxy army called ISIS on Syria.  So the reality is that the USA –a Christian nation by tradition–is funding, arming and training those who are killing Christians.  We should be asking why.

Related Videos:

Bush Military Official: The Empire’s Ship is Sinking

Jay Dyer on the Paris Attacks, ISIS, and Anglo-American Support of Radical Islam

Gladio and the Creation of Geopolitical Chaos: “Gangs and ‘Counter Gangs” in Europe, Northern Ireland, Iraq and Now in Syria

Tax-Free Foundations and The Reece Committee

by DAVID BROWN | | Dec 13, 2015

Norman Dodd

Norman Dodd

Below, you will find a fascinating interview with Norman Dodd, chief investigator in 1953 for U.S. Congressman B. Carroll Reece Special Committee on Tax Exempt Foundations (commonly referred to as the Reece Committee).  This interview will give you important insights into the inter-workings, thought-processes and public manipulation by the Carnegie Foundation;  how they and others paid to  alter American history;  and their systematic plans to bring the US into a war no one wanted by compromising the diplomatic machinery of this country with the goal of fundamentally altering the lives of Americans.

Of course the story goes much deeper and involves other Tax-Free and Exempt foundations like the RockefellerGuggenheim and Ford foundations; but this specific investigation provides a unique view into some of our history the compulsory education system has successfully hidden.  If you dig deeper into these tax-free foundations you will discover that not only did they finesse us into wars, design our education system, manipulate and occult our history, but they also created our current medical system.  Like Kathryn (below) –who was shocked at what she found in the minutes of the Carnegie Foundation– most of us believe that these foundations are benign, philanthropic institutions because they have deep pockets and give freely to the likes of PBS and others.  As it turns out this is only a PR ruse to hide their actual agenda; and in fact, this idea was hatched by the “fathers of public relationsEdward Bernays and Ivy Lee as a public relations stunt which has worked rather well since its inception.  Enjoy this little snippet taken from the full text linked below,  as Dodd pulls back the curtain of the ‘Oz Foundation‘ just a bit, showing us the little men hiding behind the curtain, busy in their grand deception backed by truckloads of tax-exempt cash and the ill-gotten goodwill of the America people.

Dodd’s comments on the minutes of the Carnegie Foundation:

“On the arrival of that letter, Dr. Johnson, who was then President of the Carnegie Endowment, telephoned me and said, “Did you ever come up to New York?” I said, “Yes, I did, more or less each weekend.” And he said, “When you are next here, will you drop in and see us?” Which I did.

And again, on arrival, at the office of the Endowment, I found myself in the presence of Dr. Joseph Johnson, the President, who was the successor to Alger Hiss, two vice-presidents and their own counsel, a partner in the firm — a fellow by the name of Cromwell. And Dr. Johnson said (again after amenities), “Mr. Dodd, we have your letter. We can answer all those questions, but it would be a great deal of trouble. We have a counter-suggestion. Our counter-suggestion is that, if you can spare a member of your staff for two weeks, and send that member up to New York, we will give to that member a room in the library, and the minute books of this Foundation since its inception. And we think that, whatever you want to find out or that the Congress wants to find out, will be obvious from those minutes.”

Well, my first reaction was they had lost their minds. I had a pretty good idea of what those minutes would contain, but I realized that Dr. Johnson had only been in office two years, and the vice-presidents were relatively young men, and counsel also seemed to be a young man. I guessed that, probably, they had never read the minutes themselves.

And so, I said that I had somebody and I would accept their offer. I went back to Washington, and I selected the member of my staff who had been a practicing attorney in Washington. She was on my staff to ensure I did not break any Congressional procedures or rules. In addition to that, she was unsympathetic to the purpose of the investigation. She was a level-headed and very reasonably brilliant, capable lady, and her attitude toward the investigation was this: “What could possibly be wrong with foundations? They do so much good.”

Well, in the face of that sincere conviction of Kathryn’s, I went out of my way not to prejudice her in any way, but I did explain to her that she couldn’t possibly cover fifty years of handwritten minutes in two weeks. So, she would have to do what we call “spot reading.” I blocked out certain periods of time to concentrate on. Off she went — to New York. She came back at the end of two weeks, with the following recorded on dictaphone belts.

We are now at the year nineteen hundred and eight, which was the year that the Carnegie Foundation began operations. And, in that year, the trustees meeting, for the first time, raised a specific question, which they discussed throughout the balance of the year, in a very learned fashion. And the question is this: Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people? And they conclude that, no more effective means to that end is known to humanity, than war. So then, in 1909, they raise the second question, and discuss it, namely, how do we involve the United States in a war?

Well, I doubt, at that time, if there was any subject more removed from the thinking of most of the People of this country, than its involvement in a war. There were intermittent shows in the Balkans, but I doubt very much if many people even knew where the Balkans were. And finally, they answer that question as follows: we must control the State Department.

And then, that very naturally raises the question of how do we do that? They answer it by saying, we must take over and control the diplomatic machinery of this country and, finally, they resolve to aim at that as an objective. Then, time passes, and we are eventually in a war, which would be World War I.  At that time, they record on their minutes a shocking report in which they dispatch to President Wilson a telegram cautioning him to see that the war does not end too quickly. And finally, of course, the war is over.

At that time, their interest shifts over to preventing what they call a reversion of life in the United States to what it was prior to 1914, when World War I broke out. At that point, they come to the conclusion that, to prevent a reversion, we must control education in the United States. And they realize that is a pretty big task. To them it is too big for them alone.

So they approach the Rockefeller Foundation with a suggestion: that portion of education which could be considered domestic should be handled by the Rockefeller Foundation, and that portion which is international should be handled by the Endowment.

They then decide that the key to the success of these two operations lay in the alteration of the teaching of American History. So, they approach four of the then most prominent teachers of American History in the country — people like Charles and Mary Byrd. Their suggestion to them is this, “Will they alter the manner in which they present their subject”” And, they get turned down, flatly.

So, they then decide that it is necessary for them to do as they say, i.e. “build our own stable of historians.” Then, they approach the Guggenheim Foundation, which specializes in fellowships, and say” “When we find young men in the process of studying for doctorates in the field of American History, and we feel that they are the right caliber, will you grant them fellowships on our say so? And the answer is, “Yes.”

So, under that condition, eventually they assemble twenty (20), and they take these twenty potential teachers of American History to London. There, they are briefed in what is expected of them — when, as, and if they secure appointments in keeping with the doctorates they will have earned.

That group of twenty historians ultimately becomes the nucleus of the American Historical Association. And then, toward the end of the 1920’s, the Endowment grants to the American Historical Association four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) for a study of our history in a manner which points to what this country look forward to, in the future.”

NOTE: [Emphasis in bold above mine.] See full text of interview below.


Video of the Norman Dodd Interview…

What I know about Muslims

by DAVID BROWN | | Dec 11, 2015

Iran in 1960 - 70s

Iran in 1960 – 70s

I have known many Muslims as friends, fellow students at the university and as co-workers. What I know firsthand is that most all of them were extremely intelligent, well-educated, affable, approachable and friendly. I have spent many an evening with them discussing religion, philosophy, history, and politics and playing chess. All of them were indelibly and unmovably stuck in their religion. None were violent or cruel as far as I am aware. Most had a fundamentally different view of women than most westerners, but some of my best memories are the times I spent with these incredibly intelligent and well-educated Muslims.

I also know that since WWI, the West has been using and abusing Muslims like property of no individual value or consequence. We have removed their sovereign leaders when it pleased us. We have consistently –at will– imposed the cruelest dictators; and redrawn their national boarders without respect to language, culture or religion as though it was our divine right. We have murdered many millions of innocent Muslim men, women and children in cold-blood without a second thought or the slightest tinge of remorse. We have supported the most radical and violent versions of Islam imaginable and spread this radical Islam far and wide for our own geopolitical agenda.

My Muslim friends at the University were terrified of the Shah of Iran and his secret police Savak; both of whom we installed and supported, yet they did not hate me for this and never blamed me.

The solution to the terrorist and the refugee problem is for the West to stop destroying countries in the Middle East like Syria, Libya, Egypt and Iraq and stop installing, arming and supporting dictators like the House of Saud, stop killing innocent Muslims en-masse and stop spreading the most brutal form of Islam the world has ever known called Wahhabism by our continued support of Saudi Arabia.


Related reading on this topic at ClearNFO:

On the matter of Snopes

by DAVID BROWN | | Dec 10, 2015


Finding the Truth

I have found Snopes very useful in the past, but always look at their conclusions with suspicion. Why? Because when I have first-hand detailed and technical knowledge on a topic, I have found their conclusions biased in supporting a particular position. At other times, I have taken the time to do a detailed analysis of a topic and again found that they have slanted the facts or omitted important information, or more often answered the wrong question (straw horse) to fit a presumably predetermined conclusion. However, I still use them for a quick look to see if there is some sort of legitimate controversy that requires a second look.

One technique used to discredit the alternative media is to place partly false stories out on the web for everyone to pick up and repeat; thus providing Snopes and others an easy target in discrediting a vast swath of alternative media pundits. However, I believe that the alternative media are their own worst enemies, since too many lead with headlines designed to attract traffic to their site, rather than focus on a dispassionate spreading of the unvarnished truth. If we are truly searching for the truth, we must at all times be willing to gore our own sacred ox, in the pursuit thereof.

The danger of Snopes in my view is that too many use this one source as the final arbiter of truth. Once Snopes says something is true or false, then the user can comfortably turn off their brain. If only it was this easy!

Wikipedia has some of the same issues, though the motives seem designed to hide or sanitize information based on topic, not based on a singular overarching agenda as in Snopes but representing many agendas.  I use Wikipedia to gather up dates, times, names, places. It is a starting point, but we must always go beyond and search out source documents and view other opinions and fact-claims using the trivium method if we want a clear map of the terrain before us.

Like Snopes, I have found Wikipedia corrupted at times, but to a much lesser extent. Too many of us have an opinion and then go looking for the facts to support our opinion. A better approach would be to use something like the Trivium method in this specific order 1) Grammar: who, what, where and when; 2) Logic: why, without contradiction; & 3) Rhetoric: how to communicate to others.

Unfortunately the Trivium was removed from most education systems some 150 years ago and replaced by the Prussian system which teaches truth by authority and without context, thus our ability to think rationally and critically has been severely diminished and left many of us at the mercy of sites like Snopes.

For more on the Trivium, see John Taylor Gatto and Richard Grove on the Trivium.




by DAVID BROWN | | Dec 10, 2015



Those of us who have studied political history, are well aware of the state’s fear of an armed citizenry; and of the tyrants who first seek to register and then disarmed their subjects at every opportunity to cement their absolute power and control. Today is no different.

Here in the USA, we are fortunate that our founders gave us an unambiguous right to hold and bear arms and that this right shall not be infringed.

So on one level—overlaying all other levels— the state has a natural desire to increase its power, while the citizens have a natural desire to retain their self-determination and therefore reject the growth in the power and scope of the state at their expense. This is one level all people capable of critical thinking can agree. This contest of power can create extreme positions at either end of this battle.

But now –at a lower level—we have the practicality of arming our citizens. So what to do? Shall we allow or require that all citizens hold and bear arms? Some libertarians and anarchists would say it is none of our business and I agree with the spirit of this statement. But I have known certain people who shouldn’t own guns mostly because of a lack of training and more importantly a lack of respect. There are others who have a violent nature and should likewise not be operating a firearm.

Still here in the Good Old US of A we have people who are afraid of firearms and shudder at the sight or even the thought of their neighbor owning such a deadly weapon. It is my opinion that most of this abject fear is the result of ignorance, which can be cured by safety training and a few days at the firing range. What I have found is that most people who are afraid of firearms, tend to become the greatest supporters once they have had the opportunity to actually use a firearm properly. It feels good and is in fact addicting.

And so today we read about certain people –president of Liberty University– saying everyone should be armed; and there is a case in Georgia that supports this proposition: In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition. Crime went to zero. And certainly the historical facts prove that if someone at the San Bernardino Christmas party was allowed to carry a firearm, 11 of the 14 dead would still be alive and 13 of the 17 injured would have been unscathed.

But I am not convinced that everyone should own and/or carry a firearm though I would welcome a move in that direction.

Bottom line is that we all have the right, but I think we should all be trained in gun safety and practice shooting on a regular basis. Should the state require this? Certainly not, nor should the state seek to limit or infringe on our right to hold and bear arms.

9-11: NIST & FEMA, Accessories After the Fact

by DAVID BROWN | | Dec 10, 2015

David Brown

David Brown

While most now understand the official story of 9-11 is a logical and physical impossibility, Richard Grove provides irrefutable evidence (below) that both the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) participated in the criminal cover-up of the attacks on 9-11. This means that the heads of NIST and FEMA are accessories after the fact to murder and should therefore be put on trial for their crimes.  It is important therefore to realize that these institutions CANNOT be trusted and are a real part of the criminal cabal currently taking America apart piece by piece while their masters terrorize the world with murder, mayhem and chaos.

From Richard Grove’s Peace Revolution episode 039:
9-11 BACKDRAFT / Examining the Evidence Ten Years Later

Incontrovertible – New 9/11 Documentary by Tony Rooke

9-11 provided the U.S. Government the perfect opportunity to spread murder, mayhem and chaos across the globe: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan: Dead, Disabled, Displaced or Destroyed – “Democracy” Delivered