Episode 359 – The Secrets of Silicon Valley: What Big Tech Doesn’t Want You to Know

by | Jul 5, 2019 | Podcasts | 55 comments

Once a sleepy farming region, Silicon Valley is now the hub of a global industry that is transforming the economy, shaping our political discourse, and changing the very nature of our society. So what happened? How did this remarkable change take place? Why is this area the epicenter of this transformation? Discover the dark secrets behind the real history of Silicon Valley and the Big Tech giants in this important edition of The Corbett Report.

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).

Watch this video on BitChute / DTube / Odysee / YouTube or Download the mp4


Silicon Valley. Nestled in the southern San Francisco Bay Area of Northern California, the Valley is not just a geographical location. It’s an idea. It’s an expression of the urge to digitize all of the information in the world, and to database, track and store that information. And as we are now beginning to learn, the result of that digitization of everything is a world without privacy. A world where our ability to participate in public debate is subject to the whims of big tech billionaires. A world where freedom is a thing of the past and no one is outside the reach of Big Brother.

For many, this is just a happy coincidence for the intelligence agencies that are seeking to capture and store every detail about every moment of our lives. It is just happenstance that the information-industrial complex now has enough information to track our every move, listen in on our every conversation, map our social networks, and, increasingly, predict our future plans. It is just a series of random events that led to the world of today.

But what the masses do not know is that Silicon Valley has a very special history. One that explains how we came to our current predicament, and one that speaks to the future that we are sleepwalking into. A future of total surveillance and total control by the Big Tech billionaires and their shadowy backers.

These are The Secrets of Silicon Valley: What Big Tech Doesn’t Want You to Know.

You’re tuned into The Corbett Report.

Once known as “The Valley of Heart’s Delight,” the Santa Clara Valley was a bucolic, agrarian area known for its mild climate and blooming fruit trees. Until the 1960s, it was the largest fruit-producing-and-packing region in the world.

Today there are few reminders of the valley’s sleepy farming past. Now dubbed “Silicon Valley,” it is home to many of the world’s largest technology and social media companies, from Google and Facebook to Apple and Oracle, from Netflix and Cisco Systems to PayPal and Hewlett-Packard. It is the hub of a global industry that is transforming the economy, shaping our political discourse, and changing the very nature of our society.

So what happened? How did this remarkable change take place? Why is Silicon Valley the epicenter of this transformation?

The answer is surprisingly simple: WWII happened.

The influx of high-tech research and industry to the region is the direct result of the advent of WWII and the actions of one man: Frederick Terman.

Frederick was the son of Lewis Terman, a pioneer of educational psychology at the Stanford Graduate School of Education. An avowed eugenicist, Lewis Terman popularized IQ testing in America, helping to conduct the first mass administration of an IQ test for the US Army during America’s entry into the First World War.

Frederick Terman attended Stanford, earning an undergraduate degree in chemistry and a master’s degree in electrical engineering before heading to MIT to earn his doctorate in electrical engineering under Vannevar Bush. This connection came into play at the outbreak of World War II, when Bush—now heading up the US Office of Research and Development, which managed nearly all research and development for the US military during wartime—asked Terman to run the top-secret Radio Research Laboratory at Harvard University. There, Terman directed 800 of the country’s top researchers in the emerging field of electronic warfare. Their work included the development of some of the earliest signals intelligence and electronic intelligence equipment, including radar detectors, radar jammers and aluminum chaff to be used as countermeasures against German anti-air defenses.

The Valley as we know it today was born in the post-World War II era when Terman returned to Stanford as dean of the School of Engineering and set about transforming the school into the “MIT of the West.”

STEVE BLANK: Terman, with his war experience, decided to build Stanford into a center of excellence on microwaves and electronics, and he was the guy to do it. The Harvard Radio Research Lab was the pinnacle in the United States of every advanced microwave transmitter and receiver you could think of. And what he does is he recruits eleven former members of the radio research lab and says, “You know, we really don’t have a lab, but congratulations! You’re all now Stanford faculty!” “Oh great, thanks.” They joined Stanford and they set up their own lab: the Electronics Research Lab for basic and unclassified research. And they get the Office of Naval Research to give them their first contract—to actually fund in the post-war Stanford research into microwaves. By 1950, Terman turns Stanford’s engineering department into the MIT of the West, basically by taking all the war innovative R&D in microwaves, by moving it to Stanford, by taking the department heads and key staff.

SOURCE: Secret History of Silicon Valley

With the military research funds flowing into the region, Terman began transforming the San Francisco Bay Area into a high-tech research hot spot. In 1951, he spearheaded the creation of Stanford Industrial Park—now known as Stanford Research Park—a joint venture between Stanford and the City of Palo Alto to attract big technology corporations to the area. The park was a huge success, eventually luring Hewlett-Packard, General Electric, Kodak and other important technology firms, and cementing Silicon Valley as a nexus between Stanford, big tech and government-sponsored research.

And this connection was not tangential. As researcher Steve Blank writes in his own history of Silicon Valley’s military roots:

“During the 1950s Fred Terman was an advisor to every major branch of the US military. He was on the Army Signal Corps R&D Advisory Council, the Air Force Electronic Countermeasures Scientific Advisory Board, a Trustee of the Institute of Defense Analysis, the Naval Research Advisory Committee, the Defense Science Board, and a consultant to the President’s Science Advisory Committee. His commercial activities had him on the board of directors of HP, Watkins-Johnson, Ampex, and Director and Vice Chairman of SRI.  It’s amazing this guy ever slept. Terman was the ultimate networking machine for Stanford and its military contracts.”

It is no secret that Silicon Valley has thrived since the very beginning on Pentagon research dollars and DoD connections. From William Shockley (a rabid eugenicist who spent WWII as a director of Columbia University’s Anti-Submarine Warfare Operations Group and who is sometimes cited as Silicon Valley’s other founding father for his work on silicon semiconductors) to the Stanford Research Institute (a key military contractor that had close ties to the Advanced Research Projects Agency [ARPA]) the US Defense Department has had a key role in shaping the development of the region.

The Stanford Research Institute (SRI) was spearheaded by Terman and created by the trustees of Stanford University in 1946. From its inception, the SRI was instructed to avoid pursuing federal contracts that might embroil Stanford in political matters. But within six months it had already broken this directive, pursuing contracts with the Office of Naval Intelligence. In the 1960s, at the same time that the institute’s Artificial Intelligence Center was creating “Shakey,” the “first mobile robot that could reason about its surroundings,” SRI was targeted by Vietnam War protesters for its contract work with ARPA, the Pentagon arm devoted to developing cutting edge technology. The pressure caused Stanford University to formally cut its ties with SRI in the 1970s, but the institute’s military-funded research did not stop there.

The Stanford Research Institute was to become the second node in the ARPANET, the Pentagon-created packet-switching network that gave birth to the modern-day internet. The first message ever sent between two computers was sent on the ARPANET between a computer at UCLA and one at SRI.

It was the head of ARPA’s command and control division, Robert Kahn, who set up the first experimental mobile network (known as “PRNET”) around Silicon Valley and formed the initial satellite network (“SATNET”) that connected the early internet internationally. In 1973, Kahn enlisted the help of Vint Cerf, an assistant professor at Stanford University, to develop—as a Department of Defense project—the TCP/IP protocol suite that would help make the internet possible.

In a recent panel discussion hosted by DARPA, the latest moniker for what was originally ARPA, Vint Cerf admitted that the entire ARPANET project was dictated by the Pentagon’s needs for a command and control system that would be responsive to military requirements:

VINT CERF: The internet was motivated by a belief that command and control could make use of computers in order to enable the Defense Department to use its resources better than an opponent. In that particular case—Bob in particular started the program at DARPA in the early 1970s—[we] realized that we had to have the computers in ships at sea, and in aircraft, and in mobile vehicles, and the ARPANET had only done dedicated, fixed . . . You know, machines that were in air-conditioned rooms connected together—you know, roughly speaking, dedicated telephone circuits. So you can’t connect the tanks together with wires because they run over them and they break, and the airplanes, they’ll never make it off the ground, you know, you can see all . . . So this led to the need for mobile radio communication and satellite communication in a networked environment.

The question about global nature here is easily answered. At least I thought we were doing this for the Defense Department, which would have to operate everywhere in the world. And so it could not be as a design that in some way was limited to CONUS, for example. And it also could not be a design that depended at all on the cooperation of other countries allocating, for example, address space. I mean, the sort of silly model of this is if we use country codes to indicate different networks . . . different network identifiers. Imagine that you’ve got to invade country B and before you do that you have to go and say, “Hi, we’re gonna invade your country in a couple of weeks and we need some address space to run another call system.” Yeah, you know, it probably wasn’t gonna work. So we knew it had to be global in scope.

SOURCE: From ARPAnet to the Internet, Web, Cloud, and Beyond: What’s Next?

One of the first demonstrations of the protocol—a 1977 test involving a van equipped with radio gear by SRI that is now dubbed the birth of the modern internet—even simulated “a mobile unit in the field, let’s say in Europe, in the middle of some kind of action trying to communicate through a satellite network to the United States.”

But while direct investment in this technological revolution suited the purposes of the Pentagon, the US intelligence community was pursuing other, more covert avenues for harnessing the incredible potential of Silicon Valley and its surveillance technologies. With the advent of the Cold War and the increased tensions between the US and the USSR in a new, highly technological game of “spy vs. spy,” the funding for research and development of cutting edge technology was placed under a cover of national security and classified.

BLANK: But in the early 1950s, the Korean War changes the game. Post-World War II—those who know your history—we basically demobilized our troops, mothballed our bombers and our fighters, and said, “We’re going to enjoy the post-war benefits.” 1949, the Soviets explode their first nuclear weapon. The Cold War, with the Korean War, becomes hot. All of a sudden, the United States realizes that the world’s changed again, and spook work comes to Stanford.

The military approaches Terman and asks him to set up the Applied Electronics Lab to do classified military programs, and doubles the size of the electronics program at Stanford. They said, “Well, we’ll keep this separate from the unclassified Electronics Research Lab.” But for the first time it made Stanford University a full partner with the military in government R&D.

SOURCE: Secret History of Silicon Valley

The arrival of intelligence agency investment money created a new relationship between the government and the researchers in the Valley. Rather than directly hiring the technology companies to produce the technology, consumer electronics would increasingly be regulated, directed, overseen and infiltrated by government workers, who could then use that technology as the basis for a worldwide signals intelligence operation, directed not only at the militaries of foreign countries, but at the population of the world as a whole.

Now cloaked in a shroud of national security, the government’s role in the development of Big Tech has been largely obscured. But, if you know where to look, the fingerprints of the intelligence agencies are still visible on nearly every major company and technology to emerge from Silicon Valley.

Take Oracle Corporation, for instance. The third-largest software corporation in the world, Oracle is famed for its eponymous database software. What many do not know is that the “Oracle” name itself comes from the firm’s first customer: the CIA. “Project Oracle” was the CIA codename for a giant relational database that was being constructed on contract by Ampex, a Silicon Valley firm. Assigned to the project were Larry Ellison, Bob Miner and Ed Oates. Although Project Oracle “was something of a disaster” it did lead Ellison and his partners to spin off Oracle Corporation, which to this day gets 25% of its business from government contracts.

Or take Sun Microsystems. Founded in 1982, the Silicon Valley software and hardware giant’s flagship Unix workstation, the “Sun-1”, as ComputerWorld explains, “owes its origins rather directly to a half-dozen major technologies developed at multiple universities and companies, all funded by ARPA.” Sun was acquired by Oracle in 2010 for $7.4 billion.

But to an entire generation growing up today, this is ancient history. Sure, the intelligence agencies and the Defense Department were involved in the founding of these Silicon Valley stalwarts. But what about the Silicon Valley of today? What does this have to do with Google or Facebook or PayPal or the Big Tech giants that have become synonymous with computing in the age of the internet?

The modern era of Silicon Valley began in the 1990s, when the advent of the World Wide Web brought the full potential of the computing revolution into homes across America and around the globe. This was the era of the dotcom bubble, when small start-ups with no business plan and no revenue could become million-dollar companies overnight. And behind it all, steering the revolution from the shadows, were the intelligence agencies, who helped fund the core technologies and platforms of the modern internet.

One of the first problems confronting early users of the web was how to search through the dizzying array of personal web sites, corporate web pages, government sites and other content that was coming online every day. In order for the web to turn from a playground for tech geeks and hobbyists into a ubiquitous communication tool, there would need to be a way to quickly sort through the vast amount of information available and return a relevant list of websites to lead users to useful information. Early iterations of online search, including personally curated lists of interesting sites and primitive search engines that relied on simple keyword matching, failed to live up to the task.

By happy coincidence, the problem of cataloguing, indexing, sorting and querying vast troves of information was one that the intelligence agencies were also working on. As the masses of data flowing through the internet gave rise to the era of Big Data, the NSA, the CIA and other members of the US intelligence community recruited the best and the brightest young minds in the country to help them store, search and analyze this information . . . and those searching for it. And, as usual, they turned to Stanford University and the Silicon Valley whiz kids for help.

Google—as the now familiar story goes—started out as a research project of Larry Page and Sergey Brin, two graduate students at Stanford University. Unsurprisingly, one does not have to dig very deep to find the connection to the Defense Department. DARPA—the current name of the oft-rebranded ARPA—was one of the seven military, civilian and law enforcement sponsors of the “Stanford Digital Libraries Project,” which helped fund Page and Brin’s research. DARPA was even thanked by name in the white paper where the idea for Google was first laid out: “The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine.”

Less well-known is the “Massive Digital Data Systems” project spearheaded by the US intelligence community and funded through unclassified agencies like the National Science Foundation. As an email introducing the project to researchers at major US universities in 1993 explains, it was designed to help the intelligence agencies take “a proactive role in stimulating research in the efficient management of massive databases and ensuring that I[ntelligence] C[ommunity] requirements can be incorporated or adapted into commercial products.”

As Jeff Nesbit—former director of legislative and public affairs for the National Science Foundation—detailed in a revealing 2017 article for qz.com on Google’s true origin:

“The research arms of the CIA and NSA hoped that the best computer-science minds in academia could identify what they called ‘birds of a feather:'[sic] Just as geese fly together in large V shapes, or flocks of sparrows make sudden movements together in harmony, they predicted that like-minded groups of humans would move together online.[. . .]

“Their research aim was to track digital fingerprints inside the rapidly expanding global information network, which was then known as the World Wide Web. Could an entire world of digital information be organized so that the requests humans made inside such a network be tracked and sorted? Could their queries be linked and ranked in order of importance? Could ‘birds of a feather’ be identified inside this sea of information so that communities and groups could be tracked in an organized way?”

The project dispersed more than a dozen grants of several million dollars each to help realize this goal of tracking, sorting and mining online behavior in order to identify and categorize communities and track groups in real life. And one of the first recipients of this grant money? Sergey Brin’s team at Stanford and their research into search query optimization.

From its very founding and continuing right through to the present day, Google has maintained close ties to America’s intelligence, military and law enforcement apparatuses. As with all matters of so-called “national security,” however, we only get a window into that relationship from the public and declassified record of contracts and agreements that the tech giant has left in its wake.

In 2003, Google signed a $2.1 million contract with the National Security Agency, the US intelligence community’s shadowy surveillance arm that is responsible for collecting, storing and analyzing signals intelligence in foreign intelligence and counterintelligence operations. Google built the agency a customized search tool “capable of searching 15 million documents in twenty-four languages.” So important was this relationship to Google that when the contract expired in April 2004, they extended it for another year at no cost to the government.

In 2005, it was revealed that In-Q-Tel—the CIA’s venture capital arm and itself the perfect encapsulation of the intelligence agencies’ relationship with Silicon Valley—had sold over 5,000 shares of Google stock. It is not exactly clear how the CIA’s venture capital firm ended up with 5,000 shares of Google stock, but it is believed to have come when Google bought out Keyhole Inc., the developer of the software that later become Google Earth. The company’s name, “Keyhole,” is a none-too-subtle reference to the Keyhole class of reconnaissance satellites that the US intelligence agencies have been using for decades to commit 3D imaging and mapping analysis. Keyhole, Inc. worked closely with the US intelligence community and even bragged that its technology was being used by the Pentagon to support the invasion of Iraq. To this day, the CIA itself describes Google Earth as “CIA-assisted technology” on its own page dedicated to “CIA’s Impact on Technology.”

In 2010, details of a formal NSA-Google relationship began to emerge, but both parties refused to divulge any further information about the relationship. Subsequent reporting suggested that Google had “agreed to provide information about traffic on its networks in exchange for intelligence from the NSA about what it knew of foreign hackers.” More details emerged from a Freedom of Information Act request in 2014, which revealed that Sergey Brin and Eric Schmidt were not only on a first name basis with then-NSA chief General Keith Alexander, but that Google was part of a “secretive government initiative known as the Enduring Security Framework,” and that this initiative involved Silicon Valley partnering with the Pentagon and the US intelligence community to share information “at network speed.”

The Enduring Security Freedom initiative is just one window into how Big Tech can reap big dollars from their relationship with the NSA. In 2013, it emerged that the participants in the PRISM program—the illegal surveillance program which allowed the NSA backdoor access to all information and user data of all of the Big Tech companies—were reimbursed for the program’s expenses by a shadowy arm of the agency known as “Special Source Operations.”

MARINA PORTNAYA: The entire process reportedly cost PRISM participants millions of dollars to implement each successful extension, and those costs, according to US documents, were covered by an arm of the NSA known as “Special Source Operations.” According to The Guardian newspaper, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden has described Special Source Operations as the “crown jewel” of the agency that handles all surveillance programs that rely on corporate partnership with telecoms and internet providers to access communication data. Now, this revelation is being considered evidence that a financial relationship between tech companies and the NSA has existed. And as The Guardian newspaper put it, the disclosure that taxpayers money was used to cover the company’s compliance costs raises new questions surrounding the relationship between Silicon Valley and the NSA.

SOURCE: NSA Paid Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo To Spy On You

The PRISM program itself proves that the military and intelligence agency ties to modern day Silicon Valley do not end with Google. In fact, every one of the Silicon Valley stalwarts that dominate the web today have similar ties to the shadowy world of spooks and spies.

In June 2003, the Information Processing Techniques Office—the information technology wing of DARPA that had overseen the original ARPANET project in the 1960s—quietly posted a “Broad Agency Announcement” to its website to request proposals for an ambitious new project. Labeled “BAA # 03-30,” this “proposer information pamphlet” requested proposals from developers to build an “an ontology-based (sub)system” called LifeLog that “captures, stores, and makes accessible the flow of one person’s experience in and interactions with the world.”

The idea, which seemed somewhat fantastic in 2003, was that users of LifeLog would wear a device that would capture and record all of their transactions and interactions, physical movements, email and phone calls, and a variety of other information. The LifeLog would be presented to users “as a stand-alone system to serve as a powerful automated multimedia diary and scrapbook,” but, as the announcement goes on to reveal, the data collected would be used to help DARPA create a new class of truly ‘cognitive’ systems that can reason in a variety of ways.”

If it had gone ahead, LifeLog would have been a virtual diary of everywhere that its users went, everything they did, everyone they talked to, what they talked about, what they bought, what they saw and listened to, and what they planned to do in the future. It immediately drew criticism as an obvious attempt by the government to create a tool for profiling enemies of the state, and even supporters of the plan were forced to admit that LifeLog “could raise eyebrows if [DARPA] didn’t make it clear how privacy concerns would be met.”

But then, without explanation, the announcement was withdrawn and the project was dropped. DARPA spokesman Jan Walker chalked the cancellation up to “A change in priorities” at the agency, but researchers close to the project admitted that they were baffled by the sudden stopping of the program. “I am sure that such research will continue to be funded under some other title,” wrote one MIT researcher whose colleague had spent weeks working on the proposal. “I can’t imagine DARPA ‘dropping out’ of such a key research area.”

The cancellation of LifeLog was reported by Wired.com on February 4, 2004. That very same day, a Harvard undergrad named Mark Zuckerberg officially launched “TheFacebook.com,” the first incarnation of Facebook, which collects vast amounts of data on its users, offering them the promise of “a powerful automated multimedia diary and scrapbook,” but, as has become more and more evident in recent years, using and selling that data for ulterior motives.

But it is not just this interesting coincidence that connects Facebook to DARPA. Once again, the money that helped “TheFacebook” go from a Harvard “student project” to a multi-billion user internet giant involved a relocation to Silicon Valley and copious injections of venture capital from intelligence-connected insiders. Facebook moved to Palo Alto, California, in 2004 and received its first investment of $500,000 from Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal. But the real money, and the real interest in Facebook, arrived in 2005, in the form of a $12.7 million investment from Accel Partners and an additional $1 million from Accel’s Jim Breyer. Breyer, it turns out, had some interesting connections of his own.

NARRATOR: First venture capital money totaling $500,000 came to The Facebook from venture capitalist Peter Thiel, founder and former CEO of PayPal. He also serves on the board of radical conservative group Vanguard DAC. Further funding came in the form of $12.7 million dollars from venture capital firm Accel Partners. Accel’s manager, James Breyer, was former chair of the National Venture Capital Association. Breyer served on the National Venture Capital Association’s board with Gilman Louie, CEO of In-Q-Tel, a venture capital firm established by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1999. This firm works in various aspects of information technology and intelligence, including, most notably, nurturing data mining technologies. Breyer has also served on the board of BBN Technologies, a research and development firm known for spearheading the ARPANET, or what we know today as the internet.

In October of 2004, Dr. Anita Jones climbed on board BBN along with Gilman Louie, but what is most interesting is Dr. Jones’ experience prior to joining BBN. Jones herself served on the board of directors for In-Q-Tel and was previously the director of defense research and engineering for the US Department of Defense. Her responsibilities included serving as an advisor to the Secretary of Defense and overseeing the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

This goes farther than just the initial appearances. DARPA shot to national fme in 2002, when knowledge of the existence of the Information Awareness Office (IAO) came to light. The IAO stated its mission was to gather as much information as possible about everyone in a centralized location for easy perusal by the United States government, including but not limited to: internet activity; credit card purchase history; airline ticket purchases; car rentals; medical records; educational transcripts; driver’s licenses; utility bills; tax returns; and any other available data.

SOURCE: Facebook CIA connection

It should come as no surprise, then, that the ex-director of DARPA, Regina Dugan, was hired by Google in 2012 to head its Advanced Technology and Projects group, and that she was then hired by Facebook in 2016 to head their “Building 8” research group focusing on experimental technologies like brain sensors and artificial intelligence. Nor is it a surprise to learn that DARPA is already working to weaponize Facebook’s Oculus virtual reality technology for fighting cyberwar.

Nor is it a surprise that Facebook seed money investor Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal, developed Palantir—a data-mining and analysis tool used by the NSA, FBI, CIA and other intelligence, counterterrorism and military agencies—from PayPal’s own fraud-detection algorithm. Or that In-Q-Tel was one of the first outside investors in the Palantir technology, which has gained notoriety in recent years for “using War on Terror tools to track American citizens.”

Nor is it a surprise to learn that Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google and current technical advisor to Google parent company Alphabet, is now the chairman of the Pentagon’s “Defense Innovation Board,” which seeks to bring the efficiency and vision of Silicon Valley to the Defense Department’s high-tech innovation initiatives.

Nor is it surprising that Schmidt, in addition to being a member of the elitist Trilateral Commission, is on the steering committee of the Bilderberg Group, a cabal of financiers, industrialists, high-ranking public officials, military brass and royalty that has been meeting annually in nearly total secrecy since 1954. Nor is it surprising that the Bilderberg Group now counts a number of Silicon Valley stalwarts among its ranks, from Schmidt and Thiel to Palantir CEO Alex Karp and former Electronic Frontiers Foundation chair Esther Dyson.

In fact, it would be more surprising to find a major Silicon Valley company that was not connected to the US military or to the US intelligence agencies one way or another. This is not an accident of history or a mere coincidence. The very origins of the internet were in shadowy Pentagon programs for developing the perfect command and control technologies. From the earliest attempts to form electronic databases of information on counterinsurgents in Vietnam right through to today, this technology—as Yasha Levine, author of Surveillance Valley: The Secret Military History of the Internet, explains—was intended to be used as a tool of warfare against target populations.

YASHA LEVINE: To understand what the internet is and what the internet has become, you have to go back to the very beginning. Back to the 1960s, when the internet was being created by the Pentagon. Back then, America was a relatively new global empire facing an increasingly chaotic and violent world. There was the Vietnam War—that was central—but the US was facing insurgencies all around the world, from Latin America to Southeast Asia. It was also facing an increasingly volatile and violent domestic environment. You had the anti-war movement. You had militant black activism. You had groups like The Weather Underground that were setting off bombs seemingly daily in cities all across the country. You had race riots in major cities.

And America’s paranoid generals looked at this, right, and they saw a vast communist conspiracy, of course. They saw the Soviet Union expanding globally, underwriting insurgencies all around the world, backing countries that were opposed to America. At the same time they were underwriting opposition movements in America, and they saw this as a new kind of war that was happening. This is not a traditional war that you could fight with traditional weapons. This is not a war that you could drop a nuke on. It was not a war that you could send a tank division into, because the combatants did not wear uniforms and they did not march in formation. They were part of the civilian population of the conflict that they were taking part in.

So it was as a new kind of war and new kind of global insurgency. And in certain rarefied circles in the military, people who were familiar with the new kind of computer technology being developed, they believe that the only way to fight and win this new war was to develop new information weapons—computer technology that could: ingest data on people and political movements; that could combine opinion surveys, economic data, criminal histories, draft histories, photographs, telephone conversations intercepted by security services; and put that all into databases that could allow analysts to perform sophisticated analysis on it and run predictive surveys. The idea was you have to find out who the enemy is and isolate it from the general population, and then take that enemy out. And at the time some even dreamed of one day creating a global system of management that could watch the world in real-time and intercept threats before they happened in much the same way that America’s early warning radar defense system did for hostile aircraft.

This is the general background from which the internet emerged. Today the counterinsurgency origins of the internet have been obscured. They’ve been lost for the most part. Very few histories even mention it, even in a little bit. But at the time that it was being created in the 1960s, the origins of the internet and the origins of this technology as a tool of surveillance and as a tool of control were very obvious to people back then. At the time people did not see computers and computer networks as tools of liberation or utopian technologies, they saw them as tools of political and social control—and that specifically included the ARPANET, the network that would later grow into the internet.

SOURCE: Yasha Levine: Surveillance Valley: The Secret Military History of the Internet

The internet was never intended as a tool of liberation. It was from its very inception intended to be a tool for tracking, surveilling and, ultimately, controlling a target population. And in the volatile environment of the 1960s, that “target population” quickly morphed from the Viet Cong counterinsurgents into the American public itself and anyone else who could pose a threat to the Pentagon’s ambitions at home or abroad.

Seen in the light of this history, recent developments on the internet make more sense. Silicon Valley did not spring out of the California soil by itself. It was carefully seeded there by the military and intelligence agencies that require this technology to fight the information warfare of the 21st century.

The Department of Defense did not announce in 2003 that they were going to “fight the net” as if it were an enemy weapons system because they were afraid the internet could be weaponized by their enemies. They knew it was already a weapon because they themselves had weaponized it.

The US government is not afraid of the Russians and their ability to “undermine American democracy” by purchasing thousands of dollars of advertising on Facebook. They were the ones who envisioned a LifeLog system to observe and control the population in the first place.

The Pentagon does not fret about the security vulnerabilities of the internet. It exploits those vulnerabilities to develop some of the most destructive cyberweapons yet unleashed, including the US/Israeli-developed Stuxnet.

And, as the next generation of networking technologies threatens to add not just our Facebook data and our Google searches and our tweets and our purchases to the government’s databases, but actually to connect every object in the world directly to those databases, the military is once again at the cutting edge of the next internet revolution.

SEAN O’KEEFE: Internet of Things is penetrating an ever0wider swath of daily life and the global economy. Our good friends and helpful proliferators of information at Wikipedia define the Internet of Things as the network of physical objects—things embedded with electronics (software sensors, network connectivity)—which enables these objects to collect and exchange data. Essentially it allows objects to be sensed and control remotely, creating an integration between physical world and computer systems. Think smart grid: energy systems related to each other to maximize efficiency and all tied to that objective. Internet of Things is transforming modern business, leveraging embedded sensors, connectivity, digital analytics, and the automation to deliver greater efficiency and effectiveness on a wide range of market fronts.

The military has been a leader in developing many of the Internet of Things component technologies, but can do more to leverage the benefits of Internet of Things solutions. The broader national security establishment also faces unique challenges in adopting Internet of Things technologies ranging from security and mission assurance to infrastructure and cost constraints and cultural hurdles. Now, in September, just a couple of months ago, the CSIS Strategic Technologies Program released a report: Leveraging the Internet of Things for a More Efficient and Effective Military, which outlines how the military can adopt lessons from the private sector to take advantage of these broader benefits of Internet of Things.

SOURCE: Leveraging the Internet of Things for a More Efficient and Effective Military – Opening Keynote

From the earliest days of networked computing—when the ARPANET was still just a twinkle in its engineers’ eyes and famed ARPA computer scientist J. C. R. Licklider was writing memos to his colleagues in Palo Alto updating them on his vision for an “Intergalactic Computer Network”—to today, when DARPA scientists are plotting military uses for the Internet of Things,the technology underpinning the US government’s plans for full-spectrum dominance of the cyber world has advanced by leaps and bounds. But the vision itself remains the same.

In this vision, every person is tracked, their conversations recorded, their purchases monitored, their social networks mapped, their habits studied, and, ultimately, their behaviours predicted, so that the Pentagon and the spies of Silicon Valley can better control the human population. And, with the advent of technologies that ensure that every item we own will be spying on us and broadcasting that data through networks that are compromised by the intelligence agencies, that vision is closer than ever to a reality.

And there, helping that vision to come to reality, are the giants of Big Tech who were founded, funded, aided and, when needed, compromised by the spooks, spies and soldiers who desire complete control over the cyber world.

This is the secret of Silicon Valley. In a key sense, the Big Tech giants are the Pentagon and the intelligence community. The DoD and the intelligence agencies are the Big Tech giants. It was this way from the very dawn of modern computing, and it remains this way today.

We should not be surprised that the world of the internet—the world bequeathed to us by the ARPANET—is increasingly looking like an always-on surveillance device. That was what it was intended to be.

Yet the public, blissfully unaware of this reality (or willfully ignorant of it) continues to record their every move in their Facebook LifeLog, flock like birds of a feather to ask their most intimate questions of Google, and feed their personal data into the gaping maw of the PRISM beast.

It may be too late to pull back from the brink of this always-on, always-surveilled, wireless networked precipice . . . but until we look squarely at the facts showing that Big Tech is a front for the US government, we will never hope to escape the silicon trap that they have laid for us.


  1. ” The Terrorism Information Awareness, or TIA, data-mining initiative was eliminated by Congress – although many analysts believe its research continues on the classified side of the Pentagon’s ledger.”

    I thought it was the “Total Information Awareness”>? Any road, it’s totally terrible. Facebook/lifelog are evidently of a piece, the former being an entree to the latter. I would like to imagine the people use the webs to educate themselves (look at the freely available lessons at fast.ai, for instance) but, no, the dumbing down and the snowflaking and incestuous amplification of FB, etc. (ectoplasm, ect.?) preclude the typical person investing time in actual learning, exacerbated by an utter lack of basic skills with which to do so. K12 used to be about learning these basic skills, at least to a much larger degree. Now it’s more about “schooling” in the sense of “going with the herd”…the herd of lemmings. Oh, wait, didn’t Corbett do a video that the whole lemmings thing was a myth?


    Har!~maybe there’s hope for dem lemmings!

  2. See Dave Emory, or hear him:

    Born of the same overlapping DARPA projects that spawned Agent Orange, the Internet was never intended to be something good. Its generative function and purpose is counter-insurgency. ” . . . . In the 1960s, America was a global power overseeing an increasingly volatile world: conflicts and regional insurgencies against US-allied governments from South America to Southeast Asia and the Middle East.

    But there is more!

    Germany’s vast state bureaucracy and its military and rearmament programs, including the country’s growing concentration camp/slave labor system, also required data processing services. By the time the U.S. officially entered the war in 1941, IBM’s German subsidiary had grown to employ 10,000 people and served 300 different German government agencies. The Nazi Party Treasury; the SS; the War Ministry; the Reichsbank; the Reichspost; the Armaments Ministry; the Navy, Army and Air Force; and the Reich Statistical Office — the list of IBM’s clients went on and on.

    ” ‘Indeed, the Third Reich would open startling statistical venues for Hollerith machines never before instituted — perhaps never before even imagined,’ wrote Edwin Black in IBM and the Holocaust, his pioneering 2001 exposé of the forgotten business ties between IBM and Nazi Germany. ‘In Hitler’s Germany, the statistical and census community, overrun with doctrinaire Nazis, publicly boasted about the new demographic breakthroughs their equipment would achieve.’ . . . .

    “Demand for Hollerith tabulators was so robust that IBM was forced to open a new factory in Berlin to crank out all the new machines. At the facility’s christening ceremony, which was attended by a top U.S. IBM executive and the elite of the Nazi Party, the head of IBM’s German subsidiary gave a rousing speech about the important role that Hollerith tabulators played in Hitler’s drive to purify Germany and cleanse it of inferior racial stock. . . .

    FTR #1076 Surveillance Valley, Part 2: Mauthausen on Our Mind


    • I was wondering what confused me about “Radio Free America.” Then I got it: “Voice of America” + “Radio Free Europe.” aha

  3. One has to wonder if IPFS has any questionable connections. At face value, it seems like a good concept. As did Social Media.
    Thanks James for the research you did on this and sharing it with us.
    PS: For anyone interested, @27:48,the song you hear is “Sixtyniner” by Boards of Canada from the album Twoism.

  4. Like many have said, this ranks with “How/Why Big Oil Conquered the World”.

    I watched this one on the big screen at home, theatre style.
    I’m glad I wasn’t in a movie theatre, because at points I couldn’t help but throw out loud some expletives. It would have made this an ‘R’ rated video.
    Of course, YouTube might do that anyway, like they did with Corbett’s WW1.

    • I gotta think that some of these websites and news agencies that said “The Corbett Report” was fake news would be extremely embarrassed if they get a whiff of this 43 minute documentary “The Secrets of Silicon Valley: What Big Tech Doesn’t Want You to Know.

      Here is James Corbett taking a 6 minute video stroll by what looks like part of an old Japanese Castle.
      He says, among other things, “It’s official: The Corbett Report is fake news and the most unreliable source in the media. So says Le Monde and dozens of other “fake news checking” websites that are telling the masses what to think, and what they shouldn’t even look at in the first place. Aren’t you glad you’re not one of the masses?”

  5. Great job James and Broc. I always enjoy Broc’s video editing ability paired with James’ research and narration. The scope of this topic is overwhelming. There is so much to be said about this, and although this documentary was thorough and broad, covering the origins of the big tech-U.S. government connection and where it is today, I’m sure the documentary could have gone on for several hours and still wouldn’t have covered everything.

    • Hey there scpat, thank you so much for the kind words about my editing! I genuinely appreciate it mate.

      And of course a huge thanks as always to every single subscriber who makes this important work a reality. This simply is not possible without your continued support.

      From the bottom of my heart, thank you so much to everyone.


      • Glad to hear it. I notice these things! High attention to detail and overall very professional production. Glad to be supporting you guys.

      • Broc,
        You earned a special film editing award by the hypercritical, cynical critics!
        “A Badge of Honor”

        Some great praises on your work!
        For example:
        “…one of the slickest videos…ever…”
        “…Ooh! It was a nice video! So we know that it took a lot of money to make it!….”

  6. Great video!

    I won’t repeat myself completely, but I should point out how they say a lot of the funding that aided the rise of Silicon Valley came from pension plans.

    The last time I checked pension plans in my local area, their top investments were big tech, big pharma, and big banks, just like Clint Richardson clearly shows in The Great Pension Fund Hoax.

    • Thanks so much for referring us back to your January 2018 comment, Camille.

      Over the past few days I’ve been watching “The Great Pension Fund Hoax” and have been stunned to realize the enormity of this scam. I hadn’t understood any of this when, several decades ago, I wrote a few articles for a Wall Street magazine about pension fund managers and investors.

      What Richardson explains in his four-hour doc makes perfect–and scary–sense: Thousands of government pension funds across the US (well, the world) are investing billions of dollars in millions of shares of mega-corporations. These investments give them voting rights. Thus, these government entities, via their shareholder votes, effectively control the major corporations, not vice versa.

      Their votes could be used to get corporations to clean up their act in many ways, but they usually aren’t, Richardson points out. Instead, governments compromise themselves by investing in equities and other holdings of corporate wrongdoers or of private rating agencies (like Moody’s). Using numerous examples, Richardson demonstrates the corrosive collusion that exists between the (often behind-the-scenes) decision-makers in these public and private spheres.

      BTW, you can see the exact number of shares each government pension fund owns in its top ten investments each year by obtaining a copy of its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). Sometimes all the details are available on a pension fund’s website. Camille is right: among all government pension funds’ top 10 investments in 2009 and 2010 were the largest tech companies, the biggest banks, and often pharma companies. The same was true for their international holdings.

      Another astounding thing I learned from this instructive video is that, because a government–be it at the state, county, or municipal level–is considered “the employer” of every government pension fund, it is actually we the taxpayers who end up matching each government employee’s contributions to the funds.

      Sometimes these employer contributions exceed one-to-one matches by many orders of magnitude. One state’s CAFR of a decade ago showed that the government employer (read: taxpayers) was contributing 6,800 times more than were the employees to the pension fund’s investment portfolio.

      Richardson also shows how reports of “underfunded” pension plans are lies; huge market gains in the funds’ investments are overlooked in these gloom-and-doom reports. In fact, whatever the government (employer) contributes to these funds NEVER GOES TO THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. It remains in the fund.

      Perhaps sometime James will research this subject, draw his usual incisive conclusions, add a sensible solution or two, and produce (with Broc) a podcast on this hoax that WEALTHY governments around the globe are perpetrating on POOR taxpayers and on POOR government employees, whose hopes that their promised pensions remain intact are being dashed by the lie called “underfunded” plans.

      • Thanks ya’ll.
        In my opinion, the Pension Funds are an insidious timebomb of incredible magnitude.

      • NEWS – July 8, 2019 – Investopedia

        How $1 Trillion in Real Estate Bets Threaten a New Great Recession

        …Big U.S.-based institutional investors, notably pension funds, now have about $1 trillion in real estate, or roughly 10% of their portfolios, according to a report in Business Insider….

        From my perspective,
        Add to the above…

        The quantity of Corporate debt is at astounding historic levels.
        Pension funds have all this dough invested in guys who are in hock up to their eyeballs.


        The currency wars. The currency wars (mixed with Trade Wars) are becoming over the top.

      • Thanks for your comments, as always, HRS. The government (public) and corporate (private) pension funds are all “of a piece,” aren’t they?

        Would like to clarify that at the end of my second-to-last paragraph, I meant to write this: “In fact, whatever the government (employer) contributes to these funds NEVER GOES TO THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WHEN THEY RETIRE. It remains in the fund.” (The addition of “WHEN THEY RETIRE” is necessary in order for the point of this sentence to make sense.)

        • CQ, what a thoughtful comment. Thank you for spelling it out for people! Hopefully your excellent review will entice others to take the time and consider what is presented.
          I don’t know if you’ve seen but Clint also put together one hell of a vaccine documentary years back.
          Lethal Injection: The Story Of Vaccination https://youtu.be/7hITYIT02rA

          HomeRemedySupply, I think it would be great it we could use this timebomb to free the world from these manipulating forces. Thank you for sharing the article. What could possibly go wrong there?!

          I just asked James in the comments for the last Questions for Corbett if he would look into this pension fund situation.

          • Camille, thanks, I did discover the vaccine doc by going to Clint’s YouTube channel, though haven’t had time to watch it yet. I will. Have watched most if not all of the other “vaxx doxx” (made-up term) that are out there.

            Thanks, too, for asking James in the RIGHT PLACE (namely, the last Q4C) if he will cover the pension fund mess in the depth it deserves and in the way that only he can pull it off (not too lengthy, for the soundbite set, but chockful of the usual trenchant analysis). I’ll go check out your request now.

      • The New War – “The Quiet War”

        I think that we are in a new War, but we are seeing its shadows.
        It is being played differently. And lots of players are on the field.
        I keep going back to Corbett’s Episode 320 – Echoes of WWI: China, the US, and the Next “Great” War and his follow-up Q&A.

        The complexity of world events masks where we are going and what is happening.
        There are so many aspects…
        Technocracy & Silicon Valley, Iran, China, Russia, oil, currency and trade wars and sanction wars, banks folding or in jeopardy (e.g. China & Deutsche Bank), corporate debt at stellar levels, the international reach of corporations, pension funds tied into the game, national economies hanging by the edge… …the moving pieces are so intertwined.

        Even in this article Yasha Levine states: “…This is not a traditional war that you could fight with traditional weapons.
        This is not a war that you could drop a nuke on….”

        Mike Malone has a recent 17 minute video where he mentions war…
        Inside The Battle For the Next Global Monetary System – Facebook Libra vs Central Banks

        Anyway, whether one wants to call it a war or not, it doesn’t matter. Things are changing very fast with all kinds of “quiet conflicts”. Some folks are liable to get burned when the dust settles.

        • More on “the quiet war”…
          In late June, Andreas M. Antonopoulos gives a talk. Mike Maloney refers to this talk.

          QUOTING the video description…
          “What should we make of Facebook’s Libra whitepaper? Will it survive to become a production network? Why is Silicon Valley coming for banking? Does it change anything about the regulatory environment faced by open public blockchains?”

          Libre Not Libra: Facebook’s Blockchain Project
          (43 entertaining minutes)

        • There was an aspect which I did not mention above that is intertwined with where we are going and what is happening in this New War.


          • Yes, food.
            Whoever owns and controls the food supply and the water supply controls everything. Whatever system of “money” we end up with is secondary and irrelevant by comparison.

          • HomeRemedySupply, absolutely! And, as I’ve shown in my work, Silicon Valley, and it’s tentacles, are driving this Synthetic Biology takeover of the food system, and every other system they can.

            I was a guest on a show the other night talking about this food takeover. It was a great time, and while it is lengthy, I do recommend people give it a listen. I’ve gotten great feedback on it all.


            I’m looking forward to what James is working on on this topic. I heard him mention it at the end of NWNW, right? Should be good.

  7. James you are a true marvel!

    Not only is the sheer breadth of material you produce on an almost daily basis breathtaking, but it’s the nature of this output that is truly remarkable. The delivery, polished, precise, drilling directly to the heart of the matter with style and eloquence.

    All of the ultra-sophisticated software systems set up by the CIA/NSA/military et al. which are described in this feature video, that were meant to ferret out evil enemies so they could be stopped in their tracks before causing any harm to the U.S. are all well and good.

    And all the software set up to track every action, transaction and control every human being on this planet is also all well and good.

    But what good are they at ferreting out government insiders that are conspiring to commit terrorist acts such as 9/11 and other inside terrorist acts and insurgencies across the globe?

    The biggest threats to societies around the world are not the bogeymen terrorists that this maze of machines and software are designed to track, but rather the architects of these machines and software themselves!

    • “The biggest threats to societies around the world are not the bogeymen terrorists that this maze of machines and software are designed to track, but rather the architects of these machines and software themselves!”

      Well said.

  8. Thanks James and Broc.

    Excellent timing as I had just organised a 5G get-together with some friends next week. Hopefully the EMF meter I ordered will arrive in time. This video will make an excellent addition to your 5G one.

    Your mentioning of Sun and Oracle together also made me put some though into the Java programming language. It’s one thing having a world wide network of devices that act as a spy grid but if all the devices speak different languages then you have the tower of babel problem.

    Java was developed by Sun back in 1991 and latter acquired by Oracle. It’s objective was to create a language that would allow a developer to write code once and have it run without changes on any device “Write once, run everywhere (WORE)”. They even gave TVs as an example of target devices. Odd considering that most of Sun’s business came from the corporate sector, not consumer devices. Makes more sense now with the IoT and Android running a derivative of Java.

    OK, Steve Jobs didn’t really get with the whole Java program but he is the deadest* of the lot.

    *Yeah, I know it’s not a real word, but at least it’s not ect!

    • Interesting tidbit about JAVA.

      Back in the late 90’s and early 2000’s, from my bookstores in the North Texas region, I was literally selling tens of tons of Computer Manual books every week. (Java, Oracle, C++, etc.)

      Often, we would just roll out a pallet of manuals (weighing close to a ton) onto the retail floor. The guys were like women in a clothing store, climbing over each other to grab a $50 or $80 dollar computer manual which they could pay $5 for. One customer told me a whole wall in his garage had stacks of computer books from our store.

      • Yes, I never did figure out why putting the word “Computer” on the front of a book raised the price by $50.

  9. Also, with the latest news from California, is it too much to hope that the whole damn valley sinks into the ocean?

  10. I tweeted (@mechoed) an advertisement for this fantastic work, and included in that tweet a reference to what I consider the greatest tech talk of all time, by Moxie Marlinspike, before I’d watched more than 5 minutes of the report.

    I encourage you to watch that Moxie video. Its a bit technical (IT):


    I am fairly certain the MM was not aware of the deep DoD connections to Silicon Valley which JC beautifully documents, but he shows the effective correlation. So, its an independent voice on the same topic, from a slightly different perspective; Crypto-Wars, CypherPunks, Surveillance, Social Democracy, Mobile Phones, False Choices, No Network Effects, Expanding consequences of no-choice choices, Google Analytics, Total Information Awareness, the emergence of Google, Fiber Optic Splitters, Narrative Control, and more.

    Great work, as ever, James,


  11. Another excellent, concise documentary pulsing with the talent of two dudes who make it look easy. What a great team.

    I personally benefit from the transcript, aiding my comprehension and reinforcing my memory. Assuming James is doing double-duty by transcribing excerpts from outside sources, many thanks, it is much appreciated.

    One thing I wonder, are Misters Blank and Levine acquainted with the other hidden histories as revealed by Antony Sutton and/or Mr. Quigley, which gives further horror to the original intent of this technology?

  12. Fantastic work Mr. Corbett!

    I really appreciated the historical overview and the insight that the CIA, NSA, and other departments of the government are basically still involved in Internet surveillance and development.

    I say this because when I took a technology and culture class in college, I was taught and left with the impression that DARPA basically “gave over” or “gifted” the world the Internet backbone over to the private sector and basically was moving on to bigger and better things.

    Of course, this is buncombe I was taught since after viewing your insightful presentation it is clear that they are still involved and never really left entirely the technology and are still intimately involved in its use and development.

    Appreciate your work greatly…keep it coming. 🙂

  13. Absolutely awesome work.
    I’ve been noticing that virtually everything that widely gains a reputation as an empowering tool of the people, a grass roots movement of the people, an information leak of the people or a rights-defending organization of the people has a certain increasingly recognizable CIA-scripted tinge to it.

  14. So this is the reason why the safety of electronics is so bad.

    Military suppression of health problems

    The health effect of radio-waves has been suppressed by the military as they needed radar and communication.

    My theory: The military invented the fake-safety requirements: microwaves should not produce too much heat. And they not directly damage whole molecules like x-rays (ionizing radiation). And thus with this trick the military could ignore all other potential public health problems. At the same time ignoring exposing military personal to nuclear tests.

    Since most electronics has been developed with the support of the military, the industry used the same fake safety requirements.

    Clear examples of health damage with non-ionizing radiation

    The same military is using non-ionizing radiation as a weapon of suppression. As it can cause pain in the skin of people, while the power is at a level that is not dangerous if we look only at the heat. The pain is caused by the nerves that are triggered by the radiation. Something that is of course impossible within the fake safety standard.

    Some other details about microwave health problems from the military:

    Joseph Coatney, a former U.S. Navy radar technician who developed ataracts, won an out-of-court $131,000 settlement from six radar manufacturers, according to his attorney, John Sweeney of Sweeney & Pafundi in Westlake Village. CA. Sweeney related the following details of Coamey’s story to Microwave News ( http://www.microwavenews.com ):
    Beginning in September 1969. Joseph oamey. then 18-years-old, sewed aboard the USS Springfteld, a guided missile cruiser. For two years. Coamey was regularly exposed to radiation from surface, air-search and fire-control radars. Six years later, at the age f 24, Coatney was diagnosed as having bilateral, posterior, subcapsular cataracts and subsequently had corrective surgery. There was no history of cataracts in Coatney’s family.
    In 1981, while researching government reports in an effort to find out the cause of his cataracts, Coatney received an anonymous telephone call from a Food and Drug Administration employee. She said that she was contacting him out of personal concern for his condition. She told Coatney that his eye problems were common to many military persomel exposed to radar-radiation. She also put him in touch with the Radar Victims Network, then led by Joe Towne, who himself had developed cataracts and other ailments.

    Some of the health effects may be top-secret

    Thanks to the released documents from the CIA/KGB, we now know that they were interested in this topic.
    Here are some documents that show exactly how certain damage is caused:

    Effects of non-ionizing radiation

    The effects of superhigh-frequency EM radiation on Electrophoretic mobility of erythrocytes

    Some of the damage is caused by the forced movement of calcium and sodium ions through the membranes of the cells. The force is caused by the electrical field of the EM-wave. This already happens with low intensities.

    Place where I keep a list of these problems


    • zyxzevn,
      Excellent information. Thanks!

  15. I’m curious, James, you mention Apple, but don’t outline its involvement. Likewise Microsoft. Perhaps, you could include their respective roles in this. Thanks. Otherwise, an excellent production and very revealing.

  16. t.e.k.

    Cool idea! I like the way you think.

    As a Corbett subscriber, I say without a doubt, “Go for it.”

    If I am wrong, Corbett will correct me. But I will lay fantastic gambling odds that it is a sure bet.

    In the past, I have placed paid ads at online media promoting “The Corbett Report”. Many folks mirror Corbett’s videos and point viewers towards this website. Occasionally, I will print off some signs that just say “CorbettReport.com” and post them at various places. I never asked Corbett for permission…I am a free thinking person.

    As a sidenote:
    You can always present “Questions For Corbett” (QFC) at his most recent QFC. In fact, I believe on a far past QFC someone asked James about copying/mirroring Corbett’s videos. As I recall, Corbett is very much fine with it, but prefers that folks acknowledge the original source of “The Corbett Report”.

    His intent is for the information to get out there.
    That is one aspect about Corbett which I really admire…his intent, his purpose. His intent is “not to be famous” or to be the “alternative media guru”. His intent is to help mankind. Very clean flows. I think we all recognize that quality in Corbett.

    Here is the most recent QFC, which came just after a brief vacation with his family…
    What’s Your Endgame? – Questions For Corbett #045
    Go to the 11:44 mark of the video. It correlates with your question.

  17. Funny enough I will have an announcement on this front in the near future. Please hold on for that announcement.

  18. WAR
    (the quiet war)

    Something which impacted me and was a real highlight take-away from this Corbett/Broc video…

    Yasha Levine, author of Surveillance Valley: The Secret Military History of the Internet, explains that this technology was intended to be used as a tool of warfare against target populations.

    QUOTES from transcript above…
    …this was a new kind of war that was happening.

    This is not a traditional war that you could fight with traditional weapons.
    This is not a war that you could drop a nuke on. It was not a war that you could send a tank division into, because the combatants did not wear uniforms and they did not march in formation. They were part of the civilian population of the conflict that they were taking part in.

    So it was as a new kind of war and new kind of global insurgency…

    …the only way to fight and win this new war was to develop new information weapons….

  19. Fyi – American Intelligence Media has put out a video criticizing this video

    • Thanks kevin.g

      Gosh! It reminded me of the gossip mongers gathering together after Sunday’s Southern Baptist Church service was over.

      The strained hyper-criticalness got so overloaded until it became silly sad.
      I guess they wanted a 4 hour documentary, not a digestible 43 minutes.
      It is very, very, very evident that the couple has never seen previous episodes of the Corbett Report. This couple definitely did not do their research/homework on The Corbett Report.

      Starts about the 13 minute mark…
      ”…We saw a really slick video done by the Corbett Report on Silicon Valley…
      …Ooh! It was a nice video! So we know that it took a lot of money to make it!
      And then James “Cole-bear” reads the script. I am not sure if James put this together or if he was paid, maybe, by some Facebook people that are trying to polish up Mark Zuckerberg’s reputation. That’s what I read out there – that he is spending millions of dollars trying to do…”

      (The couple talks about subliminal behavior modification, how do you get people to remember the narrative you want them to remember. And what is omitted. Emphasis on omissions. What Corbett did not mention.)

      ”…Look at the overall scene. Corbett Report. This is one of the slickest videos he has ever done!… …he told some truths… …3/4 was true but 25% is missing… …who’s paying for the video?!…”

      ”…I would love to have a conversation with him, because I don’t think he writes this stuff….”

      (The last line cracked me up, royal. It took awhile to stop laughing.)

    • Interesting. I hadn’t heard of them before.

      They didn’t empress me much and I switched off around about the part where they outlined their solution as going to King Trump to beg for some breadcrumbs…

      • I hear ya. They certainly did not impress me either. I also stopped listening.

        My personal take is that this website is devoted to the “Vote Even Harder” crowd, the category of audience which has an unshakable faith that Trump is working to clear the swamp, and that with enough political petitioning “solutions” will be forthcoming.

        And that “solutions” aspect was another complete miss in their critique of The Corbett Report. I couldn’t believe it when they said that Corbett offers no solutions. “Solutions” is a whole category here at the Corbett Report.

        Here they are accusing Corbett of not properly doing research (e.g. he can’t even navigate search engines), yet they can’t even get the basics correct in their evaluation because they never researched. Most of their false accusations are of the very ilk they are guilty of.

        From the get-go, I noticed that they don’t provide transcripts/links and sources which back up their generalizations and evaluations of things.

        I gotta suspect that this couple is losing web traffic, not gaining web traffic.

        (Oh…as a matter of full disclosure…I am with the deep, deep, far underwater deep state and work full time as a troll and have 500 sock-puppet handles, all devoted to pulling down Trump.)


    Because there are lots of comments from a range of Corbetteers under this video, I selected it as the place to ask you all an important question.

    This question comes to me from a retired US Army Special Forces counter-terrorism and intelligence officer. He will be making a presentation at a think tank in a few days and has asked for my ten best ideas for “saving America.”

    May I count on you guys to help me? You know how the deep state works. You aren’t fooled by the false divide and the chaos created by the powers that shouldn’t be. You not only come up with solutions to creeping totalitarianism and Technocracy (one and the same thing), but you actively implement your ideas.

    So, if each of you would please throw out one or two concisely worded solutions, I’ll pull them together into a coherent “10 best ideas for saving America” list for my friend.

    (By the way, for years he has been trying, both on the ground and in government circles, to “save” the ethnics in Burma/Myanmar from the Burmese military and from Western and Chinese land-and-resource grabs.)

    One more thing: My friend needs this list in his hands in 48 hours, so if you would like to contribute your ideas, the sooner the better, please.


    (James, I trust it’s okay with you if I make this one-time request? Thank you for providing the platform! Who knows what will come of this, when the think tank staff hears my friend’s speech. I’ll try to get him to mention The Corbett Report and its amazing members and contributors!)

    • Here is my 2 cents…

      “Accurately informing others is a first step towards bettering conditions.”
      “Encouraging others to do the same is another step.”
      “Repeating the message” is paramount in any awareness campaign.

      • Thanks, HRS. Your tips definitely come from your experiences: You do all of those three things very well — all the time.

    • MPB, I received two email notifications from you; THANK YOU! Liked both comments. Only one, though — the shorter — shows up on the site.

      Yes, everyone has a different concept of “what’s wrong” and what needs “fixing.” Having a Top 10 list doesn’t really prove anything, does it? Especially when the majority of propaganda-led sleepwalkers might cite AGW as the worst offender!

      I agree with you there’s a strong possibility that the unnamed think tank already buys into technocracy’s wonders, even if they don’t recognize it by that name.

      Nonetheless, for what it’s worth, here’s my current #1 solution: Key to saving the people of any nation (or state or city or family) from collapsing in on itself is to start with the basic premise that each of us is a free-born individual with inherent rights to self-government, reason, conscience, liberty and life (mental and physical). In other words, we’re not cogs in a collective nor are we subject to the dictates of so-called “leaders.”

      My #2 solution: Another basic premise to inculcate in all minds, young and not-so-young, is that, as natural-rights-holding individuals, we have a duty to think for ourselves and be curious about/skeptical of every so-called authority, tradition, institution, and system — from the education (read: early indoctrination) system to political institutions to textbook publishers to the news media to the entire health care (nay, disease-encouraging) industry (which revolves around the off-base notion that our bodies control us, instead of vice versa) to orthodox and/or superstitious religious creeds and doctrines.

      In other words, let’s stress the importance, from day one of life on earth, of not being stupid, gullible, credulous, ignorant, mindless – all tendencies that lead us into being complacent, apathetic, unquestioning = EASILY DUPED! Each of us must learn the importance of defending ourselves against deception (either from another’s lure or our own inner voice). We can’t afford to believe and practice false laws, hypotheses, theories, beliefs, opinions, whether they’re ignorantly or fraudulently or maliciously heaped upon us!

      In a nutshell, everything that comes to us for acceptance is in the purely mental realm. It is limiting, selfish, unjust thoughts, not things, that we’re battling.

      So, we may try to tackle some or all of the issues that MBP cited in her long comment, from Epstein and his ilk to eugenicists, from the NWO to GMOs, from toxic Frankenfoods [don’t forget vaccines] to debasing, time-wasting entertainment, from infantilized victimization to waiting for a savior.

      But none of those issues will EVER go away until we’re smart, sensible, sane, unselfish, brave, and decent enough to genuinely want (and DEMAND!) to know the highest, purest truth about everything that comes to our attention and seeks entrance into our consciousness.

      If we, as individuals, refuse to listen to or live with lies of any sort, then I’d say we have what it takes to turn the tide from Deep State-dominated imperialism and its attendant trickery to non-aggression, non-interventionism, even isolationism (meaning: MYOB-ism!).

  21. The Lone Gunmen – Pilot Episode – …more than 9/11 airplanes, but also personal data harvesting

    Walter, one of our ‘North Texans for 9/11 Truth’ Group members, sent out a link to the full video episode of this particular “Lone Gunmen” in response to the group’s chats about Chuck Norris, Corbett Report, et al on Shoestring’s 911blogger.com entry Hollywood and 9/11: The Movies and TV Dramas Resembling the Terrorist Attacks That Were Being Produced in September 2001.

    About a minute into the opening of the episode, the mega advanced computer corporation’s announcement party was interrupted by a loud Lone Gunmen’s voice:
    “How about a new age of invading your customer’s privacy?!”
    …”I mean tell us the truth! How the Octium is secretly designed to keep tabs on the user.”
    “…It’s got a…so they can upload your files onto the internet and your…and your….”


    I believe this pilot episode first aired March 4, 2001.
    For the era (prior to Snowden or Wikileaks or other whistleblowers), this type of data collection would seem like a radical conspiracy theory to the normal person.

  22. (Mid-July Amazon has been having a big sale.)

    NEWS – Reuters – Tuesday July 16, 2019
    Amazon offers $10 to Prime Day shoppers who hand over their data

    Amazon.com Inc has a promotion for U.S. shoppers on Prime Day, the 48-hour marketing blitz that started Monday: Earn $10 of credit if you let Amazon track the websites you visit.

    The deal is for new installations of the Amazon Assistant, a comparison-shopping tool that customers can add to their web browsers. It fetches Amazon’s price for products that users see on Walmart.com, Target.com and elsewhere.

    In order to work, the assistant needs access to users’ web activity, including the links and some page content they view. The catch, as Amazon explains in the fine print, is the company can use this data to improve its general marketing, products and services, unrelated to the shopping assistant.

    The terms underscore the power consumers routinely give to Amazon and other big technology companies when using their free services…

    …Bennett Cyphers, a technologist at the nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation… “But in the U.S., there aren’t really restrictions on what you can do with this kind of data.”

    …Amazon’s combination of tools still pales in comparison to data collection by Alphabet Inc’s Google, which has tracking pixels on most web pages….

  23. – LINKS –

    “Brain machine interface in action with just a wristband”.
    (Thanks to Corbett Member “taoss” )
    VIDEO – https://jwp.io/s/ohqXcQeV
    This tech was developed by the same guy who developed Microsoft’s “Internet Explorer”.

    You Are Being Groomed by Amazing Polly

    Elon Musk Wants To Give you A Bluetooth Brain! by Jason Bermas

    5 Stars Do People Realize They Are Creating Their Own Overlords? by TruthStreamMedia – Aaron & Melissa Dykes

    Eugenics tie in – Octium’s comment (7 minutes)
    From Silicon Valley to the Georgia Guidestones
    Corbett Report member Octium connects the dots between two seemingly disparate Corbett reports: one on silicon valley and the other on the Georgia guidestones. So who is William Shockley, what does he have to do with the guidestones, and what does this all have to do with eugenics and computers? Find out in today’s intriguing exploration.

  24. I strongly recommend viewing the following video.
    (22 minutes – a CSPAN clip) GOOGLE & the Senate Judiciary subcommittee.

    Dr Robbert Epstein does behavioral research and has studied Google’s search “optimization” techniques.
    His insights and research reaffirm what we know or suspect.
    A Senate Judiciary subcommittee held a hearing on Google and its censorship policy July 16, 2019. Epstein testifies.

    (While much of the testimony revolves around elections and voting, what I find interesting is the PROPAGANDA TECHNIQUES used by Google. – HRS)

  25. Another incredible production! Most impressive and incredibly eye opening and important history here.

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member