How does the New York Times use antitrust stories to increase the powers of the US Security State Agencies?
A growing threat so clandestine that it is accountable to nothing rises unbeknownst to us all. This obscure structure, created for our protection, has escaped its cage and sought unholy unions it was never meant to have.
Sensitive data on virtually all individuals is being permanently stored, which includes temporal-geo location data, relationship maps between people, device fingerprints, router locations, browser fingerprints, and social media entries. Furthermore, a significant portion of the population is being manipulated and censored on a massive scale, and the other half is being trained to ignore it. Lastly, security state officials are transitioning into the news sector, and taking their special interests with them.
A Forbidden Union of Press and Security State
I would like to discuss a software security breech, the likes of which have never been seen, and the ridiculous solution that New York Times authors propose to combat it. The New York Times' union with the intelligence community only results in questionable analysis and blatant servitude to these obscure agencies.
The reader may have heard of the Solar Winds hack, and if you were to follow the sources of those stories, you would end up staring at a loop of New York Times articles. I will briefly summarize those articles.
The Cybersecurity Breech
The hack begins with a product released by JetBrains, a Czech Republic software company in partnership with three engineers with ties to Russian labs. JetBrains clients include Google, Hewlett-Packard, Citibank, Android mobile software companies, Siemens (a supplier of tech in power and nuclear plants), and VMware. JetBrains released a product called, TeamCity, which is a product for testing and exchanging software code before releasing it. The JetBrains product, TeamCity, is used by 79 of Fortune 100 companies, and a total of 300,000 other clients. One of those clients is SolarWinds, a network management software company. The TeamCity exploit resulted in a SolarWinds hack, purportedly by a Russian hacking group. Any number of clients that use TeamCity could have been hacked, but the hackers chose Solar Winds this time.
Now, let’s focus on the SolarWinds hack that resulted in 18,000 of their customers downloading compromised software. “Officials” say that the hackers stopped at 10 federal agencies. Amazon’s internal assessment returned value of up to 250 organizations. In addition, Microsoft’s source code was believed to be viewed by the hackers. Lastly, the Justice Department uses Microsoft Outlook email (high tech choice, Justice Department!), and officials believe that some of their emails have been compromised.
Some believe that what can result from the hack is code being inserted into American electric grids, nuclear facilities and weapons facilities being shut down (which has happened to other countries in the past), the theft of sensitive tax information and medical records, the distribution of Microsoft’s source code to competitors or the use of it to incessantly hack Microsoft products in the future...in fact, the consequences seem to be limited only by the hackers’ imaginations. These consequences are only so dire because SolarWinds (and many of their clients) is a monopoly by most nations' standards, and as a result, their products are insecure while also being widely used (because their clients have no one else to turn to).
Most interesting of all from these articles is that the NYT’s solution for the catastrophe is more internal surveillance from the security state. The New York Times reported that the hackers used American servers. I want to specify that this is a significant claim to be made because it enables the argument that if only the security state were able to better spy on Americans, this hack would not have taken place. I also want to point out that not once was antitrust enforcement introduced by the New York Times. The antitrust solution, which does not infringe on the rights of citizens, is to break up monopolists — an action that would result in more competition, i.e. more secure products and lower prices. In addition, this would result in less concentration of clients with a single product. Breeches would be more difficult for hackers, and less catastrophic when they do occur. It has been well understood for many years now that software companies have been releasing subpar, insecure products to the public because they can — they have little competition. Antitrust enforcement is such an obvious solution to this issue that the loyalties of anyone suggesting otherwise is suspicious.
That is all assuming that the New York Times articles reported on true events. Again, I need to specify that the sources for this information are all New York Times articles, that loop through to each other — that is, one article will source another, and that article will source back to the original — in a circular logical fallacy without deeper sources. This observation is quite fascinating. New York Times serves as the primary source, while sourcing itself. An example of this logic is as follows:
Media: “I saw Bigfoot the other day.”
Me: “How can I believe you?”
Media: “Well, he also saw me.”
A search for deeper sources leads only to statements made by obscure officials from the security state. It has become a redundant tactic of the NYT to allude to 1) obscure security state officials making specific claims, or 2) specific security state officials making vague claims. How convenient.
If this massive hack of SolarWinds and exploit of TeamCity is all true, giving more power to the security state, an incompetent agglomeration of imbeciles that rely on Microsoft Outlook email, is not the solution. If it is false, or at least exaggerated, this was another attempt by the security state to gain more power and infringe on US citizens rights. In either case, whether these articles are true or false, antitrust enforcement and security state checkpoints are long overdue. The fall of Leftist media is long overdue. Too long have Leftist media benefitted from monopolistic corporate America. Too long have leftist media failed to report on the security state’s sins, and pushed the security state’s propaganda at our expense. We have to start asking ourselves what the relationship is between 1) Leftist media, 2) the security state, and 3) monopolistic corporations like Alphabet (Google parent company), Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and many others.
See References for the New York Times articles and a response from JetBrains on their blog along with some related sources for the reader’s outrage.
The New York Times Manipulates Congress in Service of Their Security State Masters
Lets review the misinformation ploy by the security state in the summer of 2020 where the New York Times was their chosen agent. In response to the Trump Administrations’ troop withdrawal plan at the time, the House Committee of Armed Services voted on blocking funds to remove troops. Conveniently just before the vote, the New York Times parroted the baseless claim of Russian-paid Taliban to kill American troops - a claim made by “American intelligence officials”, purportedly. Those actions resulted in the continuation of a very long war, a war with near unanimous support from democratic politicians and security state officials.
Let’s ponder the significance of this story: A single news outlet and a group of anonymous intelligence officials were able to affect a critical, historic vote that would have an international effect.
Now, the story has become richer — the New York Times has removed that article from their records. The news company achieved a desirable outcome and it is not in the company's interest for readers to know the truth. I wonder how many times this has happened, and how many more times it will occur in the future.
A Comprehensive Antitrust Investigation of Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, and Facebook
Possibly the most comprehensive antitrust investigation in history was produced in October of 2020 by the Subcommittee of Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law. Unfortunately, the New York Times, CNN, and other leftist media did not cover the 450 page report on Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, and Facebook and how these giants have siezed digital markets with criminal methodology.
Security State (Incessantly) Oversteps Their Authority
The security state obtained unconstitutional authorization to spy in US citizens via Verizon data collection:
House democrats vote to continue the long war overseas after the bizarre New York Times–intelligence officials partnership produces unverified information:
House democrats favor the spying campaigns of the FBI despite hysterical hypocracy over Trump's FBI:
Greenwald, Glenn. “The Same Democrats Who Denounce Trump...” The Intercept.
Unconstitutional investigation into an individual by the FBI:
 Kelly C. Offield. (2021). "Grand Manipulation - Google Edition." Advocate for Rights and Knowledge of Americans. https://advocate-for-rights-and-knowledge-of-americans-arka.ghost.io/grand-manipulation/
 Moonshot. https://moonshotcve.com/redirect-method/
 Kelly C. Offield. (2021). "Grand Manipulation - Moonshot CVE Edition." Advocate for Rights and Knowledge of Americans. https://advocate-for-rights-and-knowledge-of-americans-arka.ghost.io/grand-manipulation-moonshot-cve-edition/
 Kelly C. Offield. (2021). "Grand Manipulation - Facebook Edition." Advocate for Rights and Knowledge of Americans. https://advocate-for-rights-and-knowledge-of-americans-arka.ghost.io/grand-manipulation-facebook-edition/
 Kelly C. Offield. (2021). "Grand Manipulation - The Agents." Advocate for Rights and Knowledge of Americans. https://advocate-for-rights-and-knowledge-of-americans-arka.ghost.io/grand-manipulation-the-agents/
 The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/15/us/politics/russia-cyberattacks.html
 The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/02/us/politics/russian-hacking-government.html
 The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/russia-cyber-hack.html