发帖
雷达卡
While in Beijing, I noticed the following which raise practical questions. Then I will discuss the relevant institutional economics theory, if any:
- Why does the Ford Foundation (a well-known Rockefeller/CIA front) fund CCER at Beijing University?
- Why does the Ford Foundation fund Unirule?
- Why does Soros (an operative of the Rothschild family and MI6 of Britain) fund Dr. Fan Gang's (the Tsinghua University professor) NERI?
- Why does the Ford Foundation fund the leading Overseas Chinese economics organization and academic journal, at: http://www.china-ces.org/
Is it because they teach the pseudo-economics of "liberal economics" (e.g., that it's perfectly okay if foreigners buy up the entirety of China's economy)?
Does Dr. Lin Yifu of CCER's appointment to the Rothschild/Rockefeller-created World Bank relate to CCER's orientation, and to his publication of a Coca Cola foreign investment advocacy paper?
Some background information asserted: The Jewnited States (as an increasing number term the successor State to the long-deceased Anglo-created United States) is governed by... Jews. As masters of information warfare, they have politicized/weaponized the social sciences (including economics science) in the U.S. through capture of the leading departments and academic journals. The CIA attempts the same in every country.
True economics theory, as the Coca Cola formula, is valuable intellectual property that remains unshared with the general public. Students in China students are fed upon a partly false "liberal economics" which omits the core and true foundation (e.g. population theory; all topics Darwinian except game theory.) For a hard-science parallel, the U.S. is known to have deliberately fed a nuclear blueprint to Iran and North Korea, flawed in ways subtle, so that any machine would malfunction.
Domestically, the intelligence agencies of the Jewnited States implement a "thinktank galaxy" policy - to coverage every discipline, every country of the world, to predict events into the future as far as possible (which is best practice as inferable from the utility function.) Such a thinktank that confines itself to research, I'd term a "normal" thinktank.
Now I will comment on the "weaponization" of thinktanks by the U.S. By planting thinktanks into the capital city of each foreign country, the U.S. adds the following attack functionality:
- Intelligence. It now knows what every country researches, the flow of each policy pipeline prior to reaching the national leadership. (In comparison, blackout ignorance in China of the secretive World Jewish Congress session, or of B'nai B'rith policy. Notice the one-way island flow model in operation.)
- Human capital hijack and organizational hijack. Diplomatic cover to establish social relationships with the academic and ruling elite of target country. Allows black intrigue, e.g. recruit spies; bribe/blackmail personnel; exploit organizational infighting; influence personnel selection - each possible only after the establishment of a social relationship. (Again, China has zero capability to do reverse.)
- Plant ideas and policies into the minds of enemy leaders - see depopulation and NSSM 200. (Again, China has zero capability to do reverse.)
- Pretext to finance CIA operations; normally, counter-intelligence agencies closely monitor fund flows. Altruism provides an excuse to transfer money, e.g. in the so-called Color Revolutions. (Again, China has zero capability to do reverse.)
As cumulative result, the U.S. has socially-engineered new channels to covertly influence the full spectrum of policy in any and every State.
These reasons would explain the unusually prominent role of the Thinktank (as well as similar NGOs) in U.S. influence operations.
京公网安备 11010802022788号
