Larry Romanoff writes at Blue Moon Of Shanghai from a pro-China viewpoint. How Does China Evaluate and Choose its Leaders? Understanding China’s University System is representative of his output, a detailed examination of China’s system for cultivating leadership across sectors, and comparisons to the West that paints China as clearly superior.
A fascinating aspect of China is how their elites look to the West are assume that Jews are the ruling class. 2009’s Currency Wars by Song Hongbing triggered a minor panic in the Western press for its frank discussion of Jewish control of Western financial systems. Derided as a “conspiracy theory,” Hongbing’s tracing of the history of the Rothschild banking dynasty is a forbidden topic in the West, and has always gotten a similar reaction to discussions of George Soros’ financial and political influence today – you can say that the Koch Brothers control the Republican party and the Right, but you can’t mention George Soros’ influence on the Democratic party and the Left – because George Soros is Jewish, and a goyim discussing Jewish power is, by definition, an “anti-semitic conspiracy theory.”
But of course the Chinese have no such taboos, and it makes Jews quite nervous.
As it turns out, Jews have become something of an obsession over the past two decades in China. Stores carry how-to books teaching the business secrets of the Talmud, classes in Shanghai claim to provide a Jewish education, and chatty taxi drivers make the money gesture when they find out their fare is Jewish. In 2014, Chinese recycling tycoon Chen Guangbiao made headlines by publicly announcing his ambitions to buy the New York Times. In a TV interview, Chen claimed he would make an ideal newspaper magnate, saying, “I am very good at working with Jews.”
In the early 1990s, China opened itself to the free market, and the attitude toward Jews shifted. “When China began embracing neoliberalism and advocating entrepreneurship, the ‘smart Jew’ who was successful at business became a useful model,” Xun says. “With neoliberalism, being smart, successful, and rich like the Jews became desirable for ordinary people on the streets.”
Larry Romanoff does not seem to be ethnically Chinese, so his article, Today’s Jewish Corporate Heroes – Virgin Births All, takes a more critical tone than the popular Chinese books with titles like, “How To Invest Like A Jew.”
Romanoff casts a suspicious eye toward the careers of some high profile CEO’s, and while not exactly precise in certain details, he clearly notices a real pattern. And while part of the phenomenon he notices certaintly has to do with Jewishness, it is more specific. What Romanoff is noticing is the US Intelligence Community’s tight integration with Silicon Valley and the barely-hidden history of CIA’s role in the creation of the modern World Wide Web and Social Media companies.
What do the following people have in common? George Soros, Elon Musk, Jeffery Epstein, Larry Page, Sergei Brin, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Sanger, Jimmy Wales.
Two things. One, they are Jewish. Two, they condensed from a spiritual mist to almost suddenly become household names, men of immense wealth whose companies exert huge influence on Western society – but men who apparently achieved these enviable heights without the usual necessities of intelligence, education, experience or native talent or, for the most part, good judgment. Have you ever wondered how these men quietly rose to such eminence in spite of their lack of credentials?
Let’s make some corrections: Elon Musk is not Jewish, but ethnically Pennsylvania Dutch. Neither of the founders of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales, are Jewish. It does seem that Jimmy Wales has been specifically lobbied by Israel in the interest of influencing Wikipedia’s coverage of Israeli and Palestinians issues.
But CIA, FBI, and the Israel Lobby have a far more direct way of influencing Wikipedia – they just edit it directly from their desks in Langley, the Hoover Building, and Tel Aviv.
Romanoff’s description of Jeffrey Epstein and his financing by Les Wexner has been covered here, and many other places, for two years now, and Romanoff fully understands the blackmail angle, although Epstein’s financial crimes were likely just as important to his ultimate sponsors. Epstein also boasted of a close relationship with Saudi Arabia’s leader, Mohammed bin Salman, even visiting him in Riyadh on the eve of the 2016 US elections that put a close sponsor of MBS, Jared Kushner, in the White House.
Romanoff expresses some disbelief at the “origin story” of George Soros “breaking the Bank of England.” He points out that Soros is unique in the sense he has been a right-wing boogeyman, and is the only Jewish oligarch Republicans are allowed to criticize – see what happened to Tucker Carlson when he lamented Paul Singer’s predation on American communities and compared Singer unfavorably to Henry Ford. All of these oligarchs have this origin story of an extraordinary individual beating entire institutions through superior intelligence or “hard work,” but is that the reality of how institutions work at that level?
But three men really make Romanoff’s case: Google’s Larry Page and Sergei Brin, and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg. In these cases, you can see the intersection of two potent forces: Jewish nepotism, Jewish media, and the Intelligence Community.
Facebook is a hilariously obvious example, it’s all there in plain sight, but no one wants to see what is right in front of their nose.
Once again, how does a young Jewish kid steal a group networking idea from his friends and, again within six weeks more or less, create a world-leading communication platform? The power behind Facebook that propelled it to its present position, did not come from him. As with Google, Twitter, and other such platforms, an enormous amount of knowledge, influence and financing are necessary for such a result, far beyond the capacity of any one person.
As with the others, Zuckerberg is merely a figurehead, a ‘front man’, deflecting attention from the originators of the project. He was offered a job with excellent pay, the opportunity to appear very wealthy, to further the impression of Jews being geniuses, but has done nothing of import or consequence. All this was financed and stage-managed behind the scenes by his masters, Zuckerberg merely along for the ride. But it works; this little shit is so heavily promoted that he rated a personal audience with Xi Jinping. Confucius must be screaming in his grave.
It’s been long acknowledged that Zuckerberg’s theft of Facebook from the Winklevoss brothers was aided and abetted by Harvard President Larry Summers, himself a major player in the looting of Russia and the installation of the infamous seven Jewish crime lord oligarchs that ruled the country until the rise of Putin.
Lawrence “Larry” Summers, the president of Harvard University when Mark Zuckerberg and his friends (at the time) were founding Facebook, confirmed his dislike of the Facebook-suing twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss as depicted in last year’s film, “The Social Network.”
The Jewish ethnic hostility against the “WASP” Winklevoss brothers comes through loud and clear.
“I’ve heard it said that I can be arrogant. If that’s true, I surely was on that occasion.
“One of the things you learn as a college president is that if an undergraduate is wearing a tie and jacket on Thursday afternoon at three o’clock, there are two possibilities.
“One is that they’re looking for a job and have an interview; the other is that they are an [expletive]. This was the latter case.
“Rarely, have I encountered such swagger, and I tried to respond in kind.”
Another angle is the media; at soon as Facebook was launched, their well established competitor, MySpace, was the subject of a torrent of unflattering hit pieces in the media, negatively comparing it to the newly launched Facebook. The bylines on many of these articles tell the tale, and it is also interesting how racial attacks were used; MySpace was attacked as “ghetto” and some concern trolling article were written, pretending to bemoan a new “digital segregation” while clearly signaling that the only people still using MySpace were blacks.
But even more to the point, it seems the very day that Facebook was launched, the Pentagon made an interesting announcement.
The Pentagon canceled its so-called LifeLog project, an ambitious effort to build a database tracking a person’s entire existence.
Run by Darpa, the Defense Department’s research arm, LifeLog aimed to gather in a single place just about everything an individual says, sees or does: the phone calls made, the TV shows watched, the magazines read, the plane tickets bought, the e-mail sent and received. Out of this seemingly endless ocean of information, computer scientists would plot distinctive routes in the data, mapping relationships, memories, events and experiences.
LifeLog’s backers said the all-encompassing diary could have turned into a near-perfect digital memory, giving its users computerized assistants with an almost flawless recall of what they had done in the past. But civil libertarians immediately pounced on the project when it debuted last spring, arguing that LifeLog could become the ultimate tool for profiling potential enemies of the state.
Researchers close to the project say they’re not sure why it was dropped late last month. Darpa hasn’t provided an explanation for LifeLog’s quiet cancellation. “A change in priorities” is the only rationale agency spokeswoman Jan Walker gave to Wired News.
A “change in priorities” is one way to put it. Another way to put it is “we are now using private sector cover.” Because over the next couple of years, Facebook would implement every feature of the Pentagon’s LifeLog project, but under the guise of a “private company” operating in a “free market.” Facebook went live in January of 2004, just as LifeLog was shutting down.
Then there is Google, which really has all of the same elements.
In fact, Page and Brin were ‘front men’ in a way similar to Jeffrey Epstein, but with far less influence on execution. All you need to do is think. Before the appearance of Google, we had multiple search engines each with its own algorithms and all useful. But a search engine contains enormous potential for the control of information. By amending the algorithm, I can decide which items or articles appear on a search and which are consigned to the dustbin. I can literally control the information you see, and I can ensure there is much that you will never see. I can make all the negative articles about China or Russia appear in the first page of a search, and I can ensure you will never see information about the Jewish atrocities in Palestine. My search engine has the power to almost single-handedly control the available information for the great majority of populations. And thus the attraction.
But in fact, Google was a child of the CIA, funded, planned and financed initially through In-Q-tel, a brainchild of our European Jewish ICG always searching for more and total information control. Eric Schmidt was mostly in charge from the outset; our two students being irrelevant. Again, all we need to do is think. How could two young kids create a search engine – entirely on their own – that would be so perfect, so efficient, as to virtually exterminate all competition in a short time while milking billions from advertisers.
Like Jeffrey Epstein, Larry Page and Sergei Brin were hired for a job, in this case to serve as the front men for a massive (and so far very successful) effort at total information control. They are held up publicly as the stars, are gratuitously made very wealthy, all as part of the plan to disguise the purpose and intent.
Romanoff gets some of the details wrong here, but the basic storyline is correct. The early Google did, in fact, have some technical advantages over its rivals, but the main advantages it had is that is didn’t need to do anything to make money, and it was – like Facebook – provided massive, positive media coverage. At the same time that Google was launched, a competitor, Yahoo, was given increasingly negative coverage, and again, some of the coverage was frankly racist. Negative profiles of Yahoo’s Taiwanese co-founder, Jerry Yang, had some unmistakable racial undertones, often using the same “concern troll” techniques.
In fact, one only needs to read the Wikipedia articles for Yahoo and Google side-by-side. The difference in tone is obvious, but also notice how romantic the early narrative of Google is written, as if it’s a Silicon Valley dream story – every stereotype and trope is there. It reads more like a film script than an encyclopedia entry.
Nothing could compare to Google’s massive, constant, 100% glowing media coverage from before the company was even incorporated. More importantly, very big money was piled up and waiting. CIA’s openly acknowledged venture capital program, In-Q-Tel, sent the signal to investors that Google was a “chosen company.”
The first $100,000 investment in Google came from the legendary founder of the legendary Silicon Valley company, Sun Microsystems, Andy Bechtolsheim. His friend, David Cheriton, a long time Stanford connected technologist, was next, and was quickly followed by Amazon’s Jeff Bezos.
All this, while the romantic story has our intrepid geniuses snapping together computers in the garage.
Larry Romanoff is right to scoff at these transparent cover stories. Anytime you read a Republican complaining that China lacks a “free market,” you should laugh too. None of the important Silicon Valley companies ever operated in a “free market” nor did they compete “fairly” by offering superior goods and services. No, every one of them were set up by the Intelligence Agencies, established Financial Powers, and given massive publicity and favorable coverage by the Mass Media connected to those same Intelligence Agencies and Financial Powers.
As George Carlin famously noted, “it’s a big club – and you ain’t in it.”