American universities are captured by the CIA | Jerm Warfare

0:30Very few people know intelligence has been involved in the education system in the U.S. Absolutely, yeah. I think this is, and that's why they're so effective that they keep, I mean, the intent of a covert operation is for it to be secret and hidden. And often they are successful in, you know, countries around the world and, yeah, increasingly within the United States. And I think there had been a much larger propaganda offensive, and that include the targeting of education. But yeah, it's very subtle, it's very hidden, and that's why it is effective. People don't realize how skewed the American educational system is. And people who go through that system might even scoff at that notion and, you know, think that they're well educated and objective and, you know, their analysis.

1:30And in some way they are well educated, but their worldview has been skewed and they don't realize that. So what you're saying is that the American education system is effectively captured. I would say to a large extent, yeah, I think there are some exception. There are some, you know, professors out there who, who buck the grain and who try and teach certain taboo topics and, you know, critical, genuine, critical thinking and analysis. But I think they face a lot of hurdles and blacklisting and difficulty sustaining their jobs. And now in higher education, you have growing system where they rely more on part-time faculty and adjuncts. So that makes it easier to block less, more independent thinkers by marginalizing them as adjuncts, and they really can't make a living doing that.

2:31So they end up having to leave academia or live a very difficult life. And that's a way of intimidating a lot of other professors into kind of following the company line, as they say. But I mean, when you talk about the education system, just for clarity, what are you talking about? Well, there are different levels. You know, I have the public education system. And I think we're talking about, especially, you know, field of history and political science and international relations, American history. So there's level of the public school system, and then there's the higher education. A lot of my articles have focused more on higher education. And I have a background having worked in higher education, familiarity with higher education and how it operates. And yeah, the particular bias and problem comes in in these fields, teaching a modern American

3:36history, and fields like Russian studies. Those are the areas I think that the CIA has targeted and infiltrated US foreign policy, and especially vis-a-vis Russia, China, Cold War. And that's where, yeah, it's very difficult to teach in a kind of independent line of analysis for any young faculty who wants to, you know, sustain a career in higher education. Say is it about what is taught or about what is not taught? A lot of it is what is not taught, exactly. It's not that the information given to students is false. It's just very one side. And an example I can give, like, you know, I did a book on Barack Obama, and I included, you know, some of the early chapters dealt with his early career, including his time at Columbia, and I did some research on this time as a student at Columbia, and, you know,

4:38there was a discussion, I forget, who said this, it may have been another student, or I think it was one of Obama's professors, because Obama took a course on socialism at, you know, Eastern Europe and Soviet Russia, and it said, you know, it did not present a flattering portrait at all of these systems, and it went over the syllabus, and it was just all books, you know, from dissidents or people who denounce those systems. So I mean, it's very one side. I mean, there is truth in a lot of those critiques, but there is another side. I mean, if you spend time traveling in Eastern Europe or the Soviet Union, you get a perspective from people, you know, I mean Russia, you know, that there is some sympathy for that era. There were some, and I mean, they even celebrate his national holiday, the Russian Revolution, you know, for a lot of the Russians, it was about establishing autonomy, you know, from a foreign country that had exploited Russia and the Tsar's era, and overthrowing the

5:43Tsar's system, and establishing more, you know, autonomy as a nation, and, you know, it was the Soviet Red Army that defeated Nazi Germany, and that's a great source of national pride. And also there is nostalgia, you know, because I spend time in Eastern Europe, and a lot of the older people are nostalgic for the communist era, because, you know, providing things like free education, free housing, and it was, you know, full employment, you know, so not too ideal. I think a balanced education would look at some of the dark side of communism, but also analyze why it's, I mean, the communist system sustained itself for, you know, 80 years, or so, however many years, and there's nostalgia, and there's a, you know, instilled certain pride, and there's also aspects, you know, Eastern Europe had a kind of colonial relationship with Western Europe, and there was an effort more to take control over their national resources, industrialized. And so there was a guiding ideology, a nationalistic aspect, and you don't learn that, and these

6:47courses, like that Obama took, and I've been through those courses myself, it's just like equates Stalinist Russia, or Soviet Union with Nazi Germany, and, you know, focuses on all, it paints the worst possible picture, and that was the quote in the book I have where I think a professor said, you know, presented these societies in the most damning term. It doesn't try to understand them on their own terms, or present any kind of balance, and you know, similar with Maoist China, their book that just, you know, you've traveled in China, the way they presented is just like a dark, you know, Mao is like a monster, and they don't present any contact, you know, historical contact, that China had been colonized, but, you know, neocolonia of Great Britain, and the Chinese Revolution was a source of pride for the Chinese people, just like the Russian Revolution. Yes, there was an underside, there was a lot of bloodshed, you can, should teach about that, but, you know, you should also help understand how those revolutions prevailed, much

7:48like the American Revolution, you know, Father Aint the British, these were society who had faced kind of neocolonialism, I mean, Russia had that too. If you look at Russia under the Tsar, a lot of their economy were dominated by foreign interests, and owned by foreign, you know, companies, and the Russian Revolution was trying to reclaim Russia's economy, I mean, the economy boom, there was a boom with, you know, state-driven industrialization, so they don't cover that aspect, and that's, I think, the infiltration of the CIA, they infiltrate those fields, and they're kind of gatekeepers in the profession who kind of dictate the agenda of the field, and who gets promoted, you know, because they control the top journals, and so they can dictate who gets published in those journals, they have influence over the hiring process, there's a whole way it works, and if you look at the people like at Harvard who dominated those fields of like Russian study, there was a guy Richard Pipes for years with like a dominant figure

8:52in that field, and he had arch-conservative and reactionary views, and he had, I think, he worked for U.S. government agencies, he was an aid to Ronald Reagan, he was, you know, Stonch Cold Warrior, you know, and they said he had a history of the Russian Revolution, and that presented the Revolution a totally negative term, an idealized czar society, the pre-revolutionary era, and, yeah, he had worked for the Reagan administration, he was tied with the team B in the 70s that inflated the Soviet threat to justify, you know, re-arming the United States and tearing up arms control agreements, so he was a Stonch Neoconservative, and his son was a key champion of the Iraq War, he was part of the project of the New American Century, so it's kind of that clique that runs these fields like Russian studies and dictates how it's taught to students, and you see that today, you know, Russia is presented

9:54in a demonized way, in most courses, you know, Putin is presented as a devil, and it's unfettered Russian aggression in this heroic stance for Ukrainian democracy, and if you follow who the professors are at elite schools in this field, they follow that line, just like in the Cold War, they're promoting this hard line anti-communist view and one side of the analysis, and they developed this theory of, you know, Soviet totalitarianism in the Cold War, you had, you know, people like Big New Brzezinski who are key figures influencing U.S. foreign policy also had career in academia and elite Ivy League institution, Brzezinski taught at Harvard like Kissinger and Columbia, and he had developed this model of Soviet totalitarianism that compared it to Nazi Germany and presented again in Soviet Union only the worst possible light without analyzing the ideology, the basis of support within that society, some of the accomplishments,

10:55and there are some books you can read that point of much more positive picture of Russians and people in the Soviet Union what they're trying to accomplish, but those kind of books are never assigned to students, and I know, I mean, I was a student in some fairly elite schools, and it was only much later that I found these books, because you know, hang out and use bookstore and identify more, I guess, dissident circles, so I found these books that were kind of obscure, and it really opened my mind to a different point of view, or less what I feel is more objective analysis, and when I present that to students, they do appreciate it, because they grew up in this environment, this kind of Cold War demonology type environment, and they're used to, you know, only negative, and they want to try and understand those societies on their own terms, and I think that's what the professor should do, help better understanding, and I think that can fuel peace between society, instead of denouncing it, trying to understand that society on its own terms, and then once you

11:58have an understanding, you can develop good relation and accommodation based on mutual understanding, so I feel that education is important toward peace, and I feel that these professors have betrayed their calling, because they're fueling this demonization and hatred, and prejudice. You know, Rousseff Obey, I think, is a sickness like racism, and it fuels this hatred towards Russia that's leading us toward potential nuclear war, and that's led us into this disastrous war in Ukraine, and it's caused millions of lives, and it's been a catastrophe, and I think you can make the same argument about China, they're fueling this, by presenting China in the worst possible light, they're fueling this xenophobia that's running rampant now in our society, and it could lead to future wars. I have come to realize over the years that these single-word descriptors for populations like communists, or capitalists, or socialists, or whatever, these are very

13:02unhelpful and fairly divisive terms, so I try personally not to pigeonhole myself into these terms, because you're right, you only ever get taught the evils of communism, and then when you go to China, it's not this totalitarian hellhole that you're expecting. What you're suggesting also is that this is coming from intelligence, it's by design. Yeah, and those are great points that you're making, and I agree fully with what you're saying, that people who go to those countries don't find a different story from what they're being taught, it's not this dark place, they're regular people there, they have similar aspirations to people in Western country, they want to have a good life for themselves, advance their career, their family, have access to good schools, jobs, et cetera, and they're doing the best they can, they're often proud they're in country, and I think the other aspect is that they idealize

14:07in demonizing those societies, they idealize Western society. Of course, there are problem in China, in Russia, the governments, there are injustices that occur among their governments, there are injustices that occur in our government, in the United States, the United States is the most heavily incarcerated country in the world, and I've covered criminal justice issues at a side job in Oklahoma, and where I live, the state I live, there's horrendous injustices that occur, and a lot of corruption in the judicial system, so draconian sentencing, so, you know, and the analysis of the Brazinski's and like, it just idealized as Western capitalism and democracy, when we have far more. And American exceptionalism, American exceptionalism. And so, and then yeah, as you say, it is by design, because if you look at the, for instance, covert action had an article that I wrote, it was a review of a book by David Price,

15:12who's a professor at West Coast University, who's a great historian, you know, so there are some good people who manage to get in, you know, to good job, like this guy, it's not an Ivy League school, he teaches that, it's a small call, but he's had a good career, anyway, he produced a book on the Asia Foundation and how it funded all these educational program and sponsored professors, and that was a CIA front operation, so that's one way they operate through foundations, and they give subsidies and funding to professors who kind of tow their line, so that's one way, and there seem to be other way that I think their networks at Harvard, at elite universities, like Harvard and Columbia, who have intelligence connections, and they seem to, you know, be the kind of controllers of the profession, as I was pointing out at the beginning, they help establish who gets promoted, who gets the good job, because often they groom students, and then they place them in good universities, and those are often

16:16intelligence-slinged people, and I had the experience, you know, at university, I was teaching the head of the political science department, who had the president of the university, even lists on his website that he's an intelligence consultant, and he was a graduate of Harvard in the Russian Studies field, and then he runs this organization locally, called Committee on Foreign Relations, where they bring in speakers to, like, mid-sized cities, to the, in theory, promote foreign policy debate, but he's actually bringing, like, you know, CIA or NED, National Endowment for Democracy, we're basically promoting the propaganda line of the U.S. government, while it's presented as objective analysis, and he's also bringing those speakers onto the campuses to give talks, so to promote a certain view, and this guy, you know, he was the president

17:19of the university, and he's a very influential guy in, you know, academic world, and he censors anybody, because when I joined that group, I tried to bring in more, you know, some whistleblower, including National Security, whistleblowers, and insiders, who I knew, and he blocked them, and they refused to invite me or publicize any of my books, and I faced a lot of problems in higher education, even though the students were appreciative, and found that they, you know, considered me actually to be fairly objective, because I would try and present different side, studying the Korean conflict. I would spend a lot of time trying to explain a North Korean point of view, which I don't think they do, in many courses, it's just that demonized view of North Korean totalitarianism, and they're the aggressors, and in fact, I reviewed some textbooks that were very influential by quite well-known liberal historians, and they presented the Korean war in that

18:22vein too, just as, you know, North Korea is this dark place, and they were responsible for starting the war, and so I spend a lot of time just trying to understand the North Korean perspective, and I also do give a lot of information on all different sides of conflicts, including the American policy-maker views, so the students actually don't find my analysis bias, like we have student reviews, and they often give very favorable reviews, and they'll say, oh, I appreciate you gave a lot on the Vietnamese side, you know, North Vietnamese Communist side, but I think the other professors are not doing that, they just present this one side in narrative, so that's actually biased, and yeah, I think somehow the intelligence networks are able to control through appointments, and through giving a hard time to any faculty who challenges US foreign policy, they face black listing, so that's part of the game, I think. Yeah, and you've also noted that they omit.

19:29Yes, that I found, I mean, there are tons of books, and to be honest, I didn't have a full understanding of this topic until I started working for corporate action magazine, and I started doing research, a series of articles on political assassination, and started working with a guy, somehow he contacted me, an expert who lives in Austin, Texas, who has studied the JFK assassination as an adamant that Lyndon Johnson played a key role, and I think he has very good evidence, and anyway, I started working with him, so I better understood the top, and he guided me, because there are a lot of books, it's a bit intimidating on that topic, he guided me in some of the good books to read, since you can't read hundreds of books, and as I developed a better understanding, yeah, I had a better understanding how biased academia was, because they continue, they basically ignore all these good books, there are a lot of good books, but they're like, they're not reviewed in the New York Times or the major intellectual journals, and they're small,

20:33kind of off the beat press, so they don't get any attention in mainstream academia, and then, yeah, I think there are these gatekeepers who are committed to the line at Oswald with the assassin, James O'Rake, Hild King, you know, the lone gunman there, because I think if you look into these assassinations, it punctures the myth of American exceptions, and it's always a lone gunman. Yeah, it's very clear that there are these wider conspiracies, that the CIA and FBI were involved at different levels, including the cover-up, and it showed that American democracy is not here, and it relates to what we were discussing earlier, that, you know, we demonize Soviet Russia and China, that they're so under democratic, but if you look deeply at our society, we're not very democratic either, we have these violent coups and violent power struggles, just like in other countries, but that's where these intellectual gatekeepers come in, to preserve the myth of American exceptionalism, and yeah, like after the recent, the example I

21:38gave in the article I wrote, after the, you know, Trump document release, this Harvard professor came out and said, oh, we, these documents further corroborate that Lee Harvey Oswald with lone assassin, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a conspiracy nut, and that's kind of the typical line, this guy is a very influential professor at Harvard, and I mean, I don't have any evidence that he's directly tied with intelligence agencies, but subconsciously, perhaps he knows that to get, you know, sustain that position at Harvard, he's got to take that position, and then there was a Yale historian who won the Pulitzer Prize for a biography of J. Edgar Hoover, and remarkably, she brings up the King assassination, and she mentions, she does cite, because William Pepper was the King family lawyer, and he did the most intense investigation that I think definitively show that James Earl Ray was set up as a Patsy, and he actually uncovered

22:39the whole story, because he got these informants who were in the Memphis City Council on an organized crime, and he was connected with, you know, with J. Edgar Hoover and Clyde Tolson, and he revealed a lot of information to William F. Pepper, and his books are remarkable in really tracing the full details of this conspiracy and how they set up James Earl Ray. So this Yale historian who wrote this critical, it is a critical book on FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, and she won the Pulitzer Prize for history, I believe 2021 or something, you're like that, and she cites Pepper, but she doesn't discuss at all the details about the FBI's role in the King conspiracy, and she basically exonerates the FBI and Hoover, and doesn't implicate him in King's killing. When we have the pepper study that has evidence, you know, beyond, I mean, this is a very strong courtroom case if you're

23:44trying. The evidence is quite overwhelming to implicate the FBI, and yet she leads it out of that history, so students are left without an understanding, and, you know, they have this great education at Yale, they have this famous Pulitzer Prize winning professor, and she studied the FBI and J. Edgar Hoover for a year in a Pulitzer Prize winning book, and they're not going to learn from her how the FBI was involved in the murder of a national hero. So that's just par for the course. And yeah, as you say, it's maybe it's not that they're lying to students, it's that she's leaving out an important part of U.S. history, because if you understand how the FBI was behind King's murder, it raises all sorts of questions like we're raising about American exceptionalism, about the need for, you know, real change in society, not just some mild reform when you have the leading police agency murdering top civil rights activists who violate no laws. So it's a very,

24:52very stark emission, and then they attack, you know, any academic can't get a job. If you investigate that topic, honestly, and uncover all this stuff or relay all this stuff, you won't get a job, it can't be taught, and it never makes its way into the history textbooks. Like, because I review the book by Eric Foner, who's a leading historian at Columbia, has a very good reputation as a historian, as a very liberal guy who wrote these books about slavery and reconstruction in Abraham Lincoln. But in reviewing his text, again, like this Pulitzer Prize winning a story, he leaves out how the FBI was behind King's assassination. I was studying the Huey Long assassination. Huey Long was a very populist, left-wing figure who was challenging Roosevelt from the left in the 36 Democratic Party primary, and was a very popular governor of Louisiana who had to share the wealth program, was going to really tax the rich and redistribute to the poor, and went after the

25:57standard oil company in a state of Louisiana, and he was beloved by the masses of Louisiana, like no other politician ever since, and he was assassinated, and Foner writes that it was this doctor, you know, because the long assassination was like the King in Kennedy. There was this Patsy who was set up to make it look like he was this deranged lone gunman, but it was actually a coordinated plot because Long was probably could be the next president if they didn't assassinate him, and he's going to really challenge the powers that be on the wealthy oligarchs in the country, so they had them assassinated, and the crime scene evidence is clear, his bodyguards killed them, but Foner repeats the lie that this doctor shot him and was the lone assassin. So his book is very biased, and again, it's hard to understand, I mean, whether the intelligence, I don't think he's on the payroll of some intelligence agency, but there are forces at work,

26:58I think that make sure that this kind of skewed history is taught, or that certain pertinent facts are emitted from the dominant texts and the dominant schools. I think there is some evidence that the CIA may have been involved on some level, but the pepper investigation found much more direct link with the FBI in that case, and yeah, in Pearl Harbor, the CIA wasn't yet established because it was established in 47, but yeah, that's another case where historians, even though the evidence is very clear in that case, because I did an investigation myself, I read about 30 books on Pearl Harbor at one point and did an article, and I found very clearly, the evidence was actually incontrovertible that the Army Chief of Staff, George C. Marshall, actually had, he was informed of the Pearl Harbor attack very early in the morning on December 7, 1941, and then this was, you know, Washington DC time, whereas Hawaii where the attacks occurred

28:04is seven hours or eight hours behind in time, so, and they said, and actually he was grilled by an Army commission, and that's why he didn't pick up the scrambler phone, because they had a technology where all you have to do was pick up the scrambler phone and notify the name will commanded in Hawaii of this attack, and they could have prepared their defenses and launched a counterattack and saved the lives of 3,000 Americans who were killed, and he gave an excuse, he admitted, because he sent the message via regular courier, which got to Hawaii, you know, day later, after it was too late, so this is a fact of history, and he was actually asked about this by an Army commission, and he gave the excuse that, well, if I picked up the scrambler phone, the Germans might have found the message, and that was totally irrelevant to his role, you know, and as chief of the Army, his job is to protect national

29:07security, and then you know there's an attack going on your country, you have the duty to inform the proper commanders to stop it, and he didn't do that, and that is simply a fact, however, that is left out of the, it's made like it's some conspiracy theory that Roosevelt knew the dance, when it is a fact that he had that information, and it's also a fact that the Army cryptanalysis division had cracked the Japanese code and knew of the Japanese plans of the dance, and they failed to properly warn the Hawaii naval commanders who were scapegoated, and those, the families of those commanders fought for years to exonerate and restore their public reputation, which Congress eventually did in the late 90s, so I don't find any conspiracy over this, and you can look at the mode of the mode of was clear, that the Roosevelt administration knew the public would never support U.S. intervention in another world war, unless the country

30:10would directly attack, so he had to allow that attack since he had plans to go to war, and he had campaign on an anti-war platform in 1940, so that's just the historical facts, but if you read the folder textbook, or most textbooks, they leave that out of the story, they make like it's some conspiracy theory that Roosevelt might have had a dance knowledge, and they continue to frame it as a surprise attack on America when it was not a surprise attack, and so that's a bias, and it's at all levels of history, whether it's the public primary, or high school history courses, or collegiate, the professors are just as bad, and some of it, I think, is because professors revere FDR for the New Deal, and that era was conservatives who had criticized FDR and said he had misled the public at Pearl Harbor, so they don't want to

31:13associate with a conservative position. That may be one reason why liberal historians still 80 years later are reluctant to cover that topic objectively, and also it points to the pattern, because there was a major cover, obviously, and most people don't know this history, and I didn't know it. From my own education, I had to read, as I said, I read all these books on my own time, and a lot of them are kind of obscure, hard to find books, but the facts are there, and they set up a committee, there's a pattern with the Warren commission, the 9-11 commission, they're all cover-ups, and it goes back, after Pearl Harbor, FDR set up the Roberts commission headed by Supreme Court Justice to basically validate the official position and exonerate Marshall and blame these Hawaiian naval commanders, who actually were not responsible at all, who performed their service honorably, and were not responsible, but the commission was a complete hoax, and actually a member

32:16of the commission spoke out. That's not my assessment. That was the assessment of an admiral named William Stanley, who was appointed to the commission, who had been the US ambassador to Moscow in World War II, and after he retired, he said that commission was the most corrupt commission to that point in American history. It was as crooked as a snake, it was totally rigged. These are his words in his memoir that he published right before his death, and then another top naval officer said that that was the most corrupt and dishonest investigation in American history to that point, so that's a relevant history to understand the pattern with them. The Warren commission cover-up, the 9-11 and they're going to continue until the cycle of corruption is broken. I think knowledge is powerful. More people understood the history and the pattern. They wouldn't go along with these commissions, and they would push to root out this corruption and deception in the government, but that's why these academic gatekeepers come in to keep the public in the dark, and I think

33:18they divert a lot of academia. They don't even cover these topics anymore. I think part of it is that they cover more trivial topics in academia now, so that students don't learn this stuff, and I had a guest lecture when I was teaching at the University of Tulsa. I brought in this great guy named Fred Braffman, who had exposed the secret Warren Laos, and he was a great hit among the student, but when he came to the school, they had to display some faculty books, and they were on the most obscure topics imaginable. He was like, what part of my line would what in the world is going on here? They're writing on these topics that are so obscure, and I mean, who would want to even read? It's great that somebody took all that time to write a book, but if it's on the most obscure topic, only a few people would have any interest in what they uncovered, and that's often what you find in academia. They do these topics of

34:24obscure topics so that they don't have to cover these core issues, and that's, I think, by design as well, and again, you'd have to look at the structure of a promotion, and the structure of universities and the board of trustees and the wealthy interests that control the universities ultimately, and maybe ultimately the ones controlling the type of education that students are having access to. They didn't Harvard launch its own quote-unquote misinformation journal funded by the Ford Foundation, which I think was a CIA front once upon a time. Yes, and that is something to look more into, and I hope that some of these articles I've done would prompt more investigations into this, and I think it was a positive that students at MIT when they had the Israeli genocide in Gaza were starting to investigate the university's role in that genocide, and they should expand their investigation into some of these foundations,

35:29because Ford Foundation had a background as a CIA front. Its goal, I think, was to neuter the intellectual left and discredit intellectual leftist viewpoint. That was, I think, one of the goals of the foundation. That's why the sponsor educated, they had a pattern going well back into the Cold War of sponsoring educational programs that would basically promote the U.S. Cold War position and, you know, critique. They sponsored intellectuals who would criticize more left-wing or more critical of the U.S. military industrial complex to attack them and try and marginalize them. That was actually part of their mission. And yeah, they're funding this journal misinformation studies that it's just like echoing CIA propaganda talking points, like the articles are all about how Russia is trying to infiltrate the media and promote Russian disinformation or stuff about the COVID. And that's another area where academia was really

36:36very authoritarian. I mean, anyone who questioned the COVID narrative was facing what I was describing also those who questioned the premise behind the Cold War, U.S. foreign policies, or trying to present more nuanced analysis of communist or socialist governments, you faced the block listing and they just censored those views. And, you know, more and more has come out and you're an expert on the corruption in the COVID and the, you know, the horror of the vaccines and the corruption of the scientific establishment. So that's a whole other area. And this journal was attacking, you know, people who were criticizing the COVID narrative. And what kind of education is that? Like, it's just like parading state department government propaganda. It's trying to purportedly analyze how these supposed and the various forces are ingraining either pro-Russian or like anti-vaccine views in media or education when those people

37:44are actually being block listed. And as we know, the CIA has had an active misinformation campaign for decades. We know about the operation Mockingbird and how they planted journalists and me. So, I mean, if it was genuinely committed to studying misinformation, it should have tons of articles about the CIA and how they try and propaganda the American public and so misinformation. But that was not discussed at all in this journal. And to me, it showed a decline in American intellectual life because if I was a student, you know, I learned nothing from, I read through the journal and researching that article, I read through about five or six issues of the journal and with complete torture. And, you know, I like to read, but these articles were useless. It was just like state department propaganda. I mean, and that's like how the old Soviet Union, I mean, a negative the Soviet Union, they had no freedom of press and they had this kind of rigid ideological dog corrupted intellectual life because there were no freedom of thought and they intellectuals

38:49just had to pair it with the Communist Party said. And that's what this is like. They're just parroting government propaganda. There's no independent thinking and there's no insights or learning that goes on from reading that. So, I mean, students are being, and I feel sorry for students and their families because they're paying a huge amount of money to send their students to these universities. Now, you know, the cost of education has gone through the roof. And this is what they're getting. They're basically getting these hacks. They're not real, a real intellectual is a probing guy. I would say William Pepper, the great intellectual, you know, he's a lawyer, but he was probing into the, into the real truth behind the king murder and he did some outstanding research. So, that's a real intellectual, you know, and somebody who does that on the academic plane, but this journal is just these, these hacks who repeat government's information and it's feeling this new McCarthyism of blacklisting and ridiculing

39:53anybody who challenged the official line whether on the COVID, whether on US foreign policy toward Russia, etc. And then at the same time, Stanford awarded Netra News for journalism. Meanwhile, Netra News is funded by the NED, which is a CI front. Exactly. And that, that was my point that also the education system is becoming degraded because, you know, a journalism school and I have some training in journalism and so I know what the proper training entails is to learn how to try and be an objective reporter by getting different sources, different sides of the story and that's like kind of what I'm, you know, trying to do in teaching as well and that's what I was trained to do and I think that is the right way to do it, but this is the exact opposite. They're promoting, you know, and you learn in journalism school, the difference between journalism versus propaganda and the difference

40:54into the journalists, you're trying to get different sides of the story and, you know, interview different people, different perspectives, but a propaganda just promotes a certain narrative. So when they come to politics, they're going to just denounce and unfortunately a lot of our media is this propaganda because, you know, CNN will denounce Republicans, Fox will denounce Democrats and that's not real journalism, that is propaganda and they skew all the evidence, you know, to fit their narrative. And that's what this natural news was doing in the case of, it was a Bangladeshi newspaper funded by the National Endowment for Democracy, which is a CIA front operation and it was designed to facilitate regime change in in Bangladesh that over through this woman, Shikasena, who is the granddaughter of the founding father of Bangladesh, who had lied Bangladesh more with China and that was really the issue. I mean, she may have had their flaws as a leader, but the natural news was just a propaganda outlet that published article

41:56after article demonizing her, presenting her in the worst possible light, obscuring the larger international relations context, obscuring the, you know, role that outside powers were applying and stirring these revolts against her and was trying to incite rebellion and hatred against her. And then when the new government took over, that government supported huge human rights violations. You know, they they published all these stories denouncing her human rights record and now she cracked down the student protests, but then when the new government took over and these Islamic gangs were targeting Hindus and pogroms, there was no, they totally left out. There was no articles at all, no outrage because it was a politicized organ of US foreign policy. And then you have this Stanford, this prestigious university giving them this major journalism award when journalists are supposed, the students at the school are supposed to learn not to be

42:57propagandist, but to try and get different sides of the story. So what kind of message are they sending to students and education that they're providing? And then looking into it, I found a CIA link to a lot of the professors there. There was a guy, a G-Walk Shin in the Asian Studies Department, and he was on the board that selected this natural news. And I just went on their website and there was a video of all these talks on the campus. I clicked on one of the talk on Korea and, well, and behold, it's a CIA agent. They bring a CIA agent to discuss the Korean conflict. So students are not getting somebody independent or objective to try and facilitate their understanding. They have a CIA agent. And so I listened to the talk and in the beginning, this guy, G-Walk Shin, the professor there at Stanford, again, who's on the board, he introduced the CIA agent. And then he said something, he said, oh, my friends in the agency said he's the best CIA analyst on Korea.

44:00So I'm like, hmm, why does he have friends of the CIA? He's a Stanford professor. He's bringing a CIA agent to the campus as if he's an objective analyst of the Korean conflict. And then he has all these friends in the CIA who know all about this guy. So that would seem that he's tied to the CIA and then they're awarding the CIA outlet. So that school seems and that gets back to your question at the beginning. I mean, we seem to have direct CIA dominance. And then if you look at other faculty in the international relations department at Stanford, you know, and that's a very, very prestigious university who wouldn't want to study at Stanford or if they have kids, you know, send their kids there, what an honor Stanford. It's a beautiful university has a great reputation. But if you cut beneath the surface, they're not students. They're having these CIA people teaching them. And then, you know, a key member of their international relations department,

45:02there's a guy Michael McFall. He with the US ambassador to Russia. And he's a key figure behind the Russia gate. He's been incestantly promoting this anti-Russia hatred. And he's one of the key champions. This bloody war in Ukraine has cost over a million lives. And which the US has been funding neo-Nazi groups as your show has documented. And then another key faculty there in that department is a guy Larry Diamond, who is the editor of the NED's journal. It's basically a CIA journal that warns about the rise of authoritarianism in the world. But only authoritarianism in Russia among US enemy states. And there's no mention like Ukraine. Well, you know, we know in Ukraine, there was supposed to be elections several years ago. Those have never occurred. And we know that the Zelensky government barred 12 political parties and assassinated the head of the socialist party

46:04in Ukraine's parliament. But somehow that doesn't qualify as authoritarian in this journal. That's a great democracy. Somehow there's no attention placed on Saudi Arabia because that's a staunch US ally, which you know is one of the most authoritarian governments in the world or Egypt. The journal is all about Russia, how bad Russia and China are in some other country like Venezuela, because that's the socialist country. And the US wants to steal their oil so they have to demonize that government. So it's all part of the CIA agenda and these guys are have the top positions at these prestigious universities. And the students are being basically propagandized at those schools. And if you would investigate the faculty at a lot of these campuses, that's what you'll find. I mean, I was a student at Brandeis in the political science. One of the star professors was a guy named Kenan Makia,

47:06who was an Iraqi dissident against Saddam Hussein, who low and behold received funding from the national endowment for democracy because he wrote and he was a key champion of the war in Iraq because he wrote the books, supposedly documenting Saddam Hussein's human rights abuses in the late 90s, early 2000s. And then he was cheerleading for the regime change in Iraq. And I was a graduate student. I went to a talk and he was one of the speakers and he said, American troops will be greedy with sweets and flowers in the rack. And this is a heroic moment for democracy in my country. That's what he said. And you know, there were some Arab students there like scratching their head. And you know, they viewed this guy as an uncle Tom. And then I asked him if he'd ever read Edward Said, who was, you know, a critical of US foreign policy. And was a great scholar of the Middle East and Western attitude toward him. And he kind of scoffed and dismissed Edward Said.

48:08So those are the kind of people that gain appointments in prestigious universities and they're tied with any D CIA and they're propagandizing students and they're presenting very one-sided analysis. And this is going on very widely. You've also noted that the Pentagon has infiltrated the education system. The University of Texas has received $50 million for army robotics and weapons research. MIT $15 million per year or Air Force AI. Georgia Tech Lockheed Martin has got complete access to students and their research. John Hopkins, $828 million in Pentagon grants, including nuclear weapons work. And then another 50 universities involved in nuclear weapons production. Well, yes, yeah, I could say a lot about this. Yeah, and about John Hopkins, that school had been heavily infiltrated by the CIA and intelligence agencies including the

49:12John Hopkins School of International Studies. And actually, I believe the president of John Hopkins at one point was appointed to George W. Bush's top intelligence advisory board. So that school had long been compromised and that's a very prestigious university. And yeah, they're one of the top schools as far as Pentagon contracts and either very prestigious university, MIT, which is called the Pentagon on the Charles and John Hopkins top the list. MIT was students did investigation and found that the robotics department was getting all this money from the Israeli defense force and they were developing drone swarms at MIT. I also found in my investigation of MIT that they were running covert operation in Ukraine war out of MIT that there was a professor Rosemary Wood who was a Russian specialist and I surveyed her scholarship was right out of the CIA playbook, totally demonizing Putin. She wrote these pseudo

50:18scholarly articles demonizing Vladimir Putin, blaming him, the insolent aggressor of the Ukraine war, ignoring all the backstory that I think we've discussed on this show and that I have many article in the covert action magazine about how the CIA was involved, you know, in the Maidan coup. I mean, it's been important in New York time that they had set up 12 bases in Ukraine after the Maidan coup and was helping to provoke the Russians. That, of course, that's a fact. That was left out, of course, of her scholarly work. And what I found is she was running this Ukraine project out of MIT and that there were students, and this was actually openly advertised in the MIT newsletter that there are military veterans who are also students at MIT who are involved in developing a more efficient system for getting weapons to get to the front lines for the Ukrainian military. And this may have had some support from MIT and these were MIT students openly involved in

51:22in that dirty war or these Ukrainian army were killing a lot of civilian in eastern Ukraine, that is, would never report in US media. So they're complicit in more crimes. And then yeah, University of Texas, a lot of these universities like their scientific divisions are getting huge amount of funding from military related industry and the students are put to work on projects for development of military weaponry, whether it's hypersonic weaponry, drones. And I had a student, I was teaching at the University of Tulsa and a student to mine, gained some information about this who was studying the sciences and he and I were doing some investigation together and we were looking into the Oklahoma State University because they had these huge contracts for drone development and then we did interview some people there and professors and they, although some of the professors were nice and were suspicious about it, but officially

52:24they were trying to make it seem like it was all for using drones for civilian purposes and they were kind of underplaying the military aspect but they were getting huge money from the Pentagon related agencies and other military firms to develop drones on their campus and a lot of graduates too and that's the work they were doing was in drone development. So this is just a huge phenomenon and yet there was a report about nuclear weapons 50 school found that there are 50 universities where their schools are involved in research for the development of nuclear weapons and I did an article, there was a small group at the University of Arkansas Fayetteville who had a protest because the company I think it's with an Honeywell is a major military contractor. They put in a lot of money into the engineering division at the University of Arkansas and we're getting students to do research projects that advanced nuclear weapons

53:29development so some students mounted a protest and I covered that and it was a group of people I had worked with on a couple of events before so and they were raising awareness about this and yeah University of Arkansas was one of one part of that network of 50 schools. The biggest was the University of California which I think has long run the nuclear weapon program of the United States are various aspects of it and you know in the 60s what we need is more research on this and protests because in the 60s during the Vietnam War students mounted a lot of protests on their campus and at MIT they succeeded in getting because they found that their campuses were complicit in the war in Vietnam that their professors were developing counterinsurgency strategies like in their political science departments they were connected to the CIA. The MIT political science department like in the Vietnam era had a lot of top CIA people like Walt Rothsdale

54:30taught there he with the advisor to JFK and LBJ and a key hawk on Vietnam and architect of the war they had a guy Lucian Pai who was a CIA analyst you know a specialist on devising counterinsurgency strategies they had a guy Ethiel they'll sell a pool and Max Milliken these were all professors at MIT political science were famous for developing US counterinsurgency strategy and then they had a lot of science laboratory that were producing weaponry used in Vietnam and students started protesting those professors protesting their classes and protesting these labs and at MIT I know they succeed in getting a major lab the Lincoln lab moved off the campus because it is a betrayal the mission of higher education to educate students and try to create a more humane world and not to get students to you know to indoctrinate them to promote these you know nationalistic growing up as we're saying hatred for other countries and to to enmesh them in developing weapon

55:36systems it's antithetical to really the mission of higher education and students in that era amounted a lot of protests and it raised awareness there was also a movement to get the CIA off their campus because CIA also has recruiters on campuses they have professors so that movement needs to regenerate itself and we can try and affect some change in higher education so how it connects together Jeremy correct me if I've got this wrong but you have schools not teaching history properly they're emitting important aspects of our past then you've got universities that are creating fake research and creating journals to deal with misinformation quote unquote but they're actually perpetuating propaganda you've got media outlets that are being funded by CIA linked NGOs and other groups and then you have weapons research that's

56:42quite literally happening at university thanks to the Pentagon creeping in have I got it kind of correct yes you do and I think this needs more attention not so many people are aware of this and I think this is very vital in the destruction of democracy because you know school and education is vital lifeblood of democracy and particularly a free education system and that's not what's going on here yeah it's been corrupted by the military industrial intelligence complex and you know the CIA advances authoritarianism because their whole mission is to you know advance US foreign policy interests and to destroy left wing thinking and ideas and so they it's like McCarthyism on steroids you know they attack instead of engaging in intellectual debate what what should the university should be a for a place where people discuss these issues and debate different side and all our ideas are allowed and students exposed to all different kind of view

57:48not just the view of the US government and what they're doing is is censoring anybody who they consider left of center or critical of the government or critical the COVID narrative they're being purged and they're not allowed into a debate and they use name calling they don't want to even hear out their ideas and debate them they just call them names conspiracy theorists Putin lover Russian he promotes pro-Russian propaganda we can't have him on our campus but in a real education free education system the students are exposed all kind of ideas and there's real engagement in debate with those ideas instead of name calling and that's the method of the CIA they don't you know this this is a authoritarian agency that has an agenda and they use vicious tactics to discredit their enemies they're not interested in debating the merits of an issue because usually they're wrong so and that's what's happening now on our campuses instead

58:49of having debate over these issues you have this name mud slinging name calling and it's poison the intellectual culture environment and a lot of students feel intimidated to even speak out in class various issues because they don't want to be labeled certain ways and young faculty are totally intimidated because they know that to keep their job they have to tow a certain line so this is this is wrong and yeah it's it's part of the destruction of our democracy so in the 1960s students were protesting war now they're protesting not being able to to be the other gender well and that's part of the diversion I think they've elevated these cultural issues above the political economic issues and now the left is somehow associated with these these culture war plashes and some of these issues that are really marginal issues and I mean they

59:52they should be debate and people have a right to you know some people are passionate about that and the free society they have a right to advocate for whatever position they like but I think the the bigger picture that the CIA in the in China manipulate the campus environment they're elevating knees culture war issues side-lying the other issues and totally blacklisting or ostracizing any critical faculty raised critical questions related to political economy and military industrial intelligence complex corruption of of science in the pharmaceutical industry that is not being allowed and they're channeling the angst of youth because youth are often or and I think the the CIA and authority know that youth are always the potential rebellious population because that that's an age where people are coming of aid they're starting to learn about the world they see things are wrong there's a natural inclination toward rebellion at that age so if they channel them into these culture war issues I think that's what they want

1:00:54and I would argue they do that with climate change too because that's a very fuzzy issue and I think you've been on top of that there are a lot of credible scientists not in the pay of the fossil fuels who see climate change as more related to patterns in the sun so and it's a nebulous issue politically these political economic issue there is stuff we can do we have to confront the power structures we have to chain you know reduce the military budget reduce the intelligence agency budget those are very tangible goal that a social movement could pursue and that rebellious youth should mobilize in favor of them and yet getting the military off their campuses but they don't want youth so they channel them into these kind of nebulous issues climate change culture wars and I would even argue that they've held the the Israel Gaza they push that over everything else because the big tick of the military industrial complex is

1:01:55what we're discussing China and Russia the they need China as the enemy and Russia as the enemy to justify these huge military budgets you know Trump is now pushing it to above 1.5 billion it's already a trillion it's already eclipsed a trillion the US military budget and he wants to raise it even further and then the huge intelligence agency and police budgets so I think they'd rather focus on the Israel Palestine since that's a polarizing conflict and that's only a small aspect in the I mean it is a huge amount of aid that the US gives to Israel but it's still a drop in the bucket compared to you know to containing Russia containing China and the big ticket you know as far as the nuclear arms race and in the arms industry so they really don't want the youth questioning the US attitude toward Russia so I think they prefer focus beyond on Gaza is just my opinion but

1:03:01yeah overall and if you look at the Ford Foundation their history that was their goal they infiltrated they even infiltrate student movements to get them to focus on certain issues over others they've done that historically and they also get the protest movement to be counterproductive to to kind of destroy themselves that's what they did in the 60s because you had students for democratic society was emerging as a formidable student organization that could have fundamentally transformed US politics and they were against the Vietnam War you know it was a very progressive organization so the CIA did all kind of dirty tricks they formed a conservative counterpart young American for freedom they infiltrated SDS and formed these violent radical offshoots like weather underground and they sewed division within SDS to weaken it and the weather underground ultimately took the name SDS and destroyed it and they were you know carrying out terrorist activity across the United States and a lot of that was by FBI informants and they created this in California where

1:04:06there was a headquarters of radical movements they created the CIA created the Simbaanese Liberation Army and there's a good book about this and I did a review it was this violent cult like group that was designed to discredit the you know left-wing and progressive movements so they use all kind of dirty tricks whether it's diverting the focus of these movements or trying to destroy them so you know people should be alert to that but the issues are very important I think that we're addressing here and I think that youth movements and social movements should focus on targeting that the military complex and also there needs to be broader awareness of how the education system has been corrupted and taken over by military intelligence agencies and we need to fight for free education that's a lifeblood of democracy okay so Jeremy how can I follow your work well you can follow me at covert action magazine or on sub-stack too hot for the mainstream

1:05:11and I also have a podcast and radio show every Thursday called uncontrolled opposition and I also have a website Jeremy Kuzmerov.com I just want to point out that you have a great first name all right Jeremy Kuzmerov thank you for joining me in the trenches yes