Externe Ticker

In this episode, Whitney is joined by Marty Bent and Mike Krieger to unpack the recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and the financial instability that has ensued and interrogate the flimsy narratives used to justify, among other things, the SVB bail-out and the shutdown of Signature Bank.

Podcast available early for Unlimited Hangout members and Rokfin subscribers. After a few days, all episodes are free and available on all platforms.

Originally published 03/16/23.

Links Discussed:

• Bank Consolidation graphic
• FTX and the Curious History of Farmington State Bank
• Palantir’s Tiberius, Race, and the Public Health Panopticon
• Elon Musk Is ‘Open’ to Buying SVB, Tesla Investor Says ‘No Thanks’
• SVB collapse: Peter Thiel’s role scrutinized as spark of bank run
• Fed Will Keep Boosting Interest Rates After SVB Failure, BlackRock Says – Bloomberg
• Moody’s Puts First Republic, Five US Banks on Downgrade Watch – Bloomberg
• Why Bank Bail-Ins Will Be the New Bailouts
• New Fed Bank Backstop Has Scope to Inject as Much as $2 Trillion – Bloomberg
• Credit Suisse delays annual report after ‘late call’ from the SEC | CNN Business
• Credit Suisse breach spills info of high-net-worth clients
• Silvergate Bankrupt!! What it Means For Crypto! – YouTube
• The Banks Are FAILING!! SVB Collapse & Everything It Means!! – YouTube
• gabrielShapir0 on Twitter: “”Any buyer of Signature must agree to give up all the crypto business at the bank, the two sources added.”
• Exclusive: U.S. regulator eyes Friday bids for SVB, Signature Bank -sources | Reuters
• “Shocking interview with Barney Frank — pushes back at DFS’ assertion that Signature wasn’t closed due to an anti-crypto animus…” | Twitter
• Goldman Sachs Eyes a Big Payout From Silicon Valley Bank Deal – The New York Times
• What collapse of crypto banks may mean for stablecoins | Fortune Crypto
• Fintech Brex got billions of dollars in Silicon Valley Bank deposits Thursday
• Fintech Firm Brex Brings New Tools To Finance Teams With OpenAI | Crowdfund Insider
• About Us | Brex

Follow Marty
@Martybent
TFTC
TFTC – YouTube
Rabbit Hole Recap – BitcoinTV.com
Bitcoin resources

Follow Mike
@libertyblitz
Liberty Blitzkrieg

Get early access to podcasts by becoming an Unlimited Hangout member.
Find previous episodes on all podcast platforms.
Order Whitney’s book One Nation Under Blackmail. 
Sign up for the weekly newsletter to receive updates on the book, new articles, podcasts, and interviews.

Crypto & the SVB Banking Crisis with Marty Bent & Michael Krieger.

In this video, Whitney delves deep into the WEF’s Partnership Against Cybercrime and how its efforts are aimed at eliminating financial and online privacy to pave the way for CBDCs and complete online surveillance.

Published 03/14/23.

Video available free on Rokfin.

Links discussed:

Main article discussed
Ending Anonymity: Why the WEF’s Partnership Against Cybercrime Threatens the Future of Privacy (Part 2 of series)

A Catastrophic Mutating Event Will Strike the World in 2 Years, Report Says

Former Biden adviser says a digital dollar could “crowd out” private cryptos and improve national security | Kitco News

Ending Anonymity: Why the WEF’s Partnership Against Cybercrime Threatens the Future of Privacy (Part 2 of series)

WEF Warns of Cyber Attack Leading to Systemic Collapse of the Global Financial System (Part 1 of series)

Board of Directors

2020 Carnegie – International Strategy to Better Protect the Financial SystemAgainst Cyber Threats

Partnership against Cybercrime | World Economic Forum

Chainalysis for Crypto Investigations – Chainalysis

About Us – Chainalysis

Tal Goldstein – Agenda Contributor | World Economic Forum

Global Cyber Alliance | World Economic Forum

CIA and Mossad-linked Surveillance System Quietly Being Installed Throughout the US

From “Event 201” to “Cyber Polygon”: The WEF’s Simulation of a Coming “Cyber Pandemic”

Who Is A “Terrorist” In Biden’s America?

GCA Partners. Become a Partner. Global Cyber Alliance

With Grenell Appointment, the Israel Lobby’s Foothold on US Intelligence Grows Even Stronger

National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace

Are You Ready for a Driver’s License for the Internet?

Christopher Painter

Christopher Painter – Center for Internet Security

Chris Painter – Cybersecurity Expert – Stern Strategy Group

Online ID Verification Plan Carries Risks – The New York Times

Chris Painter – The Aspen Institute

Israel Blurs the Line Between Defense Apparatus and Local Cybersecurity Hub – CTech

Get early access to podcasts by becoming an Unlimited Hangout member.
Find previous episodes on all podcast platforms.
Order Whitney’s book One Nation Under Blackmail. 
Sign up for the weekly newsletter to receive updates on the book, new articles, podcasts, and interviews.

The WEF & The End of Online Privacy.

Whitney joined TLAV to discuss her newest article “CIA and Mossad-linked Surveillance System Quietly Being Installed Throughout the US.” Show notes here. Available on Odysee.

TLAV.

Whitney joined Tin Foil Hat to discuss One Nation Under Blackmail and what the digital future might look like.

Audio only version available in podcast apps. Video available here.

Tin Foil Hat with Sam Tripoli.

Launched in 2016 in response to a Tel Aviv shooting and the Pulse Nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, Gabriel offers a suite of surveillance products for “security and safety” incidents at “so-called soft targets and communal spaces, including schools, community centers, synagogues and churches.” The company makes the lofty promise that its products “stop mass shootings.” According to a 2018 report on Gabriel published in the Jerusalem Post, there were an estimated 475,000 such “soft targets” across the U.S., meaning that “the potential market for Gabriel is huge.”

Gabriel, since its founding, has been backed by “an impressive group of leaders,” mainly “former leaders of Mossad, Shin Bet [Israel’s domestic intelligence agency], FBI and CIA.” In recent years, even more former leaders of Israeli and American intelligence agencies have found their way onto Gabriel’s advisory board and have promoted the company’s products.

While the adoption of its surveillance technology was slower than expected in the United States, that dramatically changed last year, when an “anonymous philanthropist” gave the company $1 million to begin installing its products throughout schools, houses of worship and community centers throughout the country. That same “philanthropist” has promised to recruit others to match his donation, with the ultimate goal of installing Gabriel’s system in “every single synagogue, school and campus community in the country.”

With this CIA, FBI and Mossad-backed system now being installed throughout the United States for “free,” it is worth taking a critical look at Gabriel and its products, particularly the company’s future vision for its surveillance system. Perhaps unsurprisingly, much of the company’s future vision coincides with the vision of the intelligence agencies backing it – pre-crime, robotic policing and biometric surveillance.

“Safety” Through Invasive Surveillance Gabriel Network, LinkedIn

Gabriel’s product suite is built around its “smart shield” panic button. The panic button can be activated both manually and remotely and offers two-way communication, a live video feed, instant altering and gunshot detection by acoustic means. However, the panic button is meant to be used in tandem with company’s “threat detection” suite, which includes “smart cameras” that use AI, facial recognition and related technologies to detect not just weapons, but also “fights” and “abnormal behavior” of people in a particular area. Gabriel’s cameras and panic buttons throughout a facility are meant to act as “activation triggers.” The triggering is largely automated and managed by AI. When an “activation trigger” is set off, the Gabriel system then enters any one of its alert modes, which include emergency, panic, silent panic and yellow (which is the alert mode for minor incidents).

As noted elsewhere on the company’s website, Gabriel is looking to expand far beyond schools and houses of worship to retail stores, warehouses, data centers and banks. At these other facilities, it specifically promotes its “abnormal behavior” detection capabilities. One example, given in reference to how its products might be used in the banking sector, states the following as an “abnormal behavior detection example”:

A group of people are loitering in the ATM lobby. Gabriel is activated in silent panic mode and sends alerts with live video to the security operations center and on-site security team. Audio talk warnings begin to broadcast in the lobby. Security arrives to clear the scene.

Another example, this time for the retail sector, notes how Gabriel surveillance cameras would activate alerts when they detect “unusual movements.” Yet another example for warehouses and distribution centers notes how facial recognition functionality could be used to activate “silent panic mode” when a terminated employee is detected on the premises.

https://www.gabrielprotects.com/solutions

One of the hallmarks of the Gabriel system versus other systems, per the company, is its heavy reliance on AI and machine learning. As noted on their website, “we are disrupting the security industry by replacing legacy security systems dependent on human interaction with automated systems that reduce response time, chaos and cost.” That “disruption” is predicated in part on Gabriel’s commitment to “innovation,” which has prompted them to integrate what they call “preventative capabilities” into its platform. The company also notes that they have “already begun integrating [the Gabriel system] with cutting edge technologies such as weapons detection, security drones, robotics and smart cameras.”

There is little further information available about the company’s efforts to integrate their system with security drones and robotics. Many security drones are currently on the market for use in homes, industrial sites and other types of locations, as are security robots, such as the robot “dogs” created by the Hyundai-owned company Boston Dynamics that are currently used by some U.S. law enforcement agencies. This, of course, means that Gabriel’s ambitions in this regard are likely to become reality sooner rather than later. What is worth noting, however, is that drones and robots alike can easily be “upgraded” to wield deadly weapons. With Gabriel’s technology in mind, the Orwellian possibility of having an entirely automated response to various types of incidents, including those arising from the detection of “abnormal behavior,” that could include the use of deadly force no longer seem as futuristic or far-fetched as they once did.

Also important to note is the company’s intended goal of offering predictive policing (i.e., pre-crime) functionalities. They state that: “In the future, we see a security platform [i.e., a future iteration of Gabriel’s products] that can anticipate a mass causality [sic] events based on human behavior, identify mass casualty threats prior to the first action taken, and automate alerting to inform potential victims before any harm is done.” Predictive policing has been a major goal of companies deeply tied to the CIA, as well as Israeli intelligence for a number of years, with the most well-known of these being Palantir.

Gabriel’s systems, once installed, offer complete yet invasive surveillance of civilian areas. While the schools and community centers that Gabriel most often courts have been sporadically targeted by shooters over the past few decades, these are often places that are traditionally uninterested in implementing AI-driven surveillance solutions on their premises. Yet, such places must become “connected” if the future paradigm of complete connectivity between all people and places (e.g., the internet of things, the internet of places, the internet of bodies) is to come to pass. Indeed, this paradigm is necessary to further the connections between the digital and physical worlds that are seen as necessary to usher in the so-called 4th industrial revolution, or 4IR (which itself has been described as the “fusion” of the physical and digital realms).

Notably, Gabriel’s products are meant to form a network equivalent to “the internet of places,” which is a “specialization of the internet of things” that allows buildings to be “instrumentally empowered through sensors, data sharing, and computation.” Gabriel openly touts the “network effect” of its products when they are installed in multiple buildings in the same area, creating a “safe and connected community.” While Gabriel casts this “network effect” as helping to keep entire communities safe, it also benefits the implementation of the “smart city” model, which utilizes the internet of things and ubiquitous sensors and cameras to harvest massive troves of data that are then used to “manage service delivery,” with those services including the deployment of law enforcement.

https://www.gabrielprotects.com/product

The main drivers (and builders) of the “smart city” and “internet of things” paradigms are, of course, Big Tech. It is worth noting that, despite marketing itself as a company aimed at thwarting mass shootings when and before they occur, Gabriel has also been actively courting the “Big 5” tech behemoths of Silicon Valley – Google, Amazon, Meta (formerly Facebook), Apple and Microsoft. Speaking to the Times of Israel last year, Gabriel’s co-founder Yoni Sherizen stated that:

Our product is now being adopted by the banking and financial services sector and we have some pilots with some of the biggest technology companies, the Big 5. So, we’re looking at data centers, corporate offices or campuses, manufacturing facilities for pharmaceuticals and other essential goods… [we’re] protecting a whole variety of different types of spaces.

The Wind Beneath Gabriel’s Wings

While mass casualty events in the United States are dreadful and could likely be mitigated to some extent by technologies like those offered by Gabriel, the company’s deep connections to Israeli and American intelligence agencies, which have been seeking to utilize such technologies for ulterior ends, are a cause for concern.

When I first wrote about Gabriel in 2019, their board of advisors included four individuals. They included Ram Ben-Barak, former deputy director of Mossad and former director-general of Israel’s intelligence ministry; Yohanan Danino, former chief of police for the state of Israel; Kobi Mor, former director of overseas mission for the Israeli intelligence agency Shin Bet; and Ryan Petty, the father of a Parkland shooting victim and friend of former Florida governor (and current Florida senator) Rick Scott. At the time, Petty was the only American on the board.

Since then, Gabriel has been courting American schools, business and other institutions much more aggressively and have added more Americans to its advisory board. These include Bob Pocica, former FBI Special Agent, former Senior Director for Global Security at Pfizer and Senior Advisor to the Chertoff Group (as in former head of the Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff), and Don Hepburn, former CIA executive for 26 years as well as a former FBI Deputy Assistant Director. Also added was Menachem Pakman, who worked as a senior executive for Israel’s Prime Minister’s Office for over 30 years and is an expert in “intelligence, security and counterterrorism.”

https://www.gabrielprotects.com/company

While it is certainly possible that these numerous former officials from American and Israeli intelligence may have no ulterior motive in advising Gabriel, it is important to note that the leaders of Israeli military intelligence and Mossad don’t see it that way. As I’ve detailed in several previous reports, Israel’s Calcalist Tech published a report in 2019 which noted that “since 2012, cyber-related and intelligence projects that were previously carried out in-house in the Israeli military and Israel’s main intelligence arms are transferred to companies that in some cases were built for this exact purpose.” It later states that:

In some cases, managers of development projects in the Israeli military and intelligence arms were encouraged to form their own companies which then took over the [military and/or intelligence] project.

It’s not exactly clear why Israel’s military intelligence and other intelligence agencies decided to begin outsourcing its operations in 2012, though Calcalist Tech suggests the reasoning was related to the difference in wages between the private sector and the public sector, with pay being much higher in the former. However, 2012 was also the year that American hedge fund manager Paul Singer — together with Benjamin Netanyahu’s long-time economic adviser and former chair of the Israeli National Economic Council, Eugene Kandel — decided to create Start-Up Nation Central (SUNC).

As I previously reported for MintPress News, SUNC was founded as part of a deliberate Israeli government effort to counter the nonviolent Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (BDS) movement and to make Israel the dominant global “cyber power.” This policy is aimed at increasing Israel’s diplomatic power and specifically undermining BDS as well as any national or international efforts to hold Israel’s government accountable for war crimes and violations of international law in relation to the Palestinians. The goal is to have other countries become so dependent on Israeli companies, and more specifically technology companies, that they are unable to effectively challenge Israeli domestic or foreign policy.

In 2018, Netanyahu was asked by Fox News host Mark Levin whether the large growth seen in recent years in Israel’s technology sector, specifically tech start-ups, was part of Netanyahu’s plan. Netanyahu responded, “That’s very much my plan … It’s a very deliberate policy.” He later added that “Israel had technology because the military, especially military intelligence, produced a lot of capabilities. These incredibly gifted young men and women who come out of the military or the Mossad, they want to start their start-ups.”

Netanyahu again outlined this policy a year later at the 2019 Cybertech Conference in Tel Aviv, where he stated that Israel’s emergence as one of the top five “cyber powers” had “required allowing this combination of military intelligence, academia and industry to converge in one place” and that this further required allowing “our graduates of our military and intelligence units to merge into companies with local partners and foreign partners.”

This merging of “military intelligence, academia and industry” has also been openly acknowledged by former Mossad Director Tamir Pardo, who stated in 2017 that “everyone” in the Israeli cybertechnology sector is an “alumni” of either Israeli intelligence, like the Mossad, or Israeli military intelligence, like Unit 8200 (Israel’s equivalent of the National Security Agency, or NSA). Pardo even went as far as to say that the Mossad itself is “like a start-up.”

Pardo would know. After leaving his post as Mossad director in 2016, he dove straight into the world of Israeli tech start-ups, becoming chairman of Sepio Systems, whose two CEOs are former Unit 8200 officers. Sepio Systems’ advisory board includes the former chief information security officer of the CIA, Robert Bigman, and former head of the Israel National Cyber Bureau and veteran of Israeli military intelligence, Rami Efrati. Sepio Systems’ cybersecurity software has been adopted by several banks, telecom and insurance companies, including in the U.S. and Brazil.

Now that we’ve established that numerous Israeli tech-focused companies are known to be operating as fronts for intelligence, the question arises of whether Gabriel is one such company. While it is difficult to know for sure, several companies that have been outed as fronts, such as the Jeffrey Epstein and Ehud Barak-connected Carbyne, have been involved in creating and implementing the necessary structure for a “pre-crime” approach to law enforcement in the United States. Gabriel’s vision for a fully automated system that can use predictive analytics of human behavior to stop crimes before they happen is eerily similar to the same vision espoused by Carbyne before their ties to Epstein and Israeli intelligence were outed very publicly in 2019.

The use of “pre-crime”, as detailed in sci-fi epics like Phillip K. Dick’s The Minority Report, has deeply unsettling implications for society, civil liberties and the future of policing. As noted by the British Journal of Criminology, “pre-crime links coercive state actions to suspicion without the need for charge, prosecution or conviction” and is part of a larger trend “towards integrating national security [e.g., intelligence agencies] into criminal justice.” Indeed, as I have noted in my work for many years now, American and Israeli intelligence agencies, particularly their most nefarious components, have covertly been the drivers of “pre-crime” protocols meant to eliminate public dissent since the 1980s, if not even earlier.

How the CIA, Mossad and “the Epstein Network” are Exploiting Mass Shootings to Create an Orwellian Nightmare Israel’s Mossad and infamous Unit 8200 are partnering with the CIA and US tech firms to create an Orwellian pre-crime nightmare.

These early “pre-crime” systems, like those in the works today, have long been dependent on technology as well as mass surveillance as a means of profiling would-be dissidents. The software key to these early iterations was the PROMIS software, which was stolen by Israeli intelligence operatives in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Justice and used to profile and track people as well as cash flows in the U.S. and beyond. U.S. national security officials involved in the Iran-Contra scandal used PROMIS to create the “Main Core” database, still in use today, which lists those Americans deemed “dangerous” in the event of a vaguely defined “national emergency” that could threaten “continuity of government.” As I’ve previously noted, Israeli intelligence played an integral role in the development of Main Core.

Today, pre-crime is already here, though it is currently reserved for special cases as opposed to the main approach of U.S. law enforcement. In 2019, then-Attorney General William Barr formally adopted pre-crime as Department of Justice policy via a program called DEEP (Disruption and Early Engagement Program). Since then, the Biden administration’s War on Domestic Terror framework is largely predicated on pre-crime and aims to pick up where Barr left off. In order to have an effective pre-crime system, one needs the necessary infrastructure. That infrastructure is currently being provided by several companies with overt ties to intelligence, such as Mark43, Carbyne and Gabriel.

Who Is A “Terrorist” In Biden’s America? Far from being a war against “white supremacy,” the Biden administration’s new “domestic terror” strategy clearly targets primarily those who oppose US government overreach and those who oppose capitalism and/or globalization.

Yet, while Mark43 and Carbyne target law enforcement and emergency services, respectively, Gabriel is installing the infrastructure necessary for pre-crime directly into places of business, leisure, learning and worship. Its focus – schools, houses of worship and community centers – are places that would normally not purchase such invasive technology. Yet, Gabriel’s fear-driven marketing focusing on mass shootings (which notably mirrors Carbyne’s own marketing efforts) have prompted some to buy in.

Enter the “anonymous philanthropist” mentioned at the beginning of this article. Per reports, that “anonymous philanthropist” is providing the money needed to place Gabriel’s products in schools, houses of worship and campuses throughout the United States “for free.” As noted by the Israeli outlet No Camels, Sherizen shared that “[the philanthropist’s] vision is to actually cover every single school and synagogue and get everyone on the same platform.”What a boon for Gabriel’s “network effect” and broader pre-crime ambitions.

The anonymity of this “philanthropist” is notable as the term “philanthropist” has been used to launder the reputations of notoriously corrupt and cutthroat businessmen for generations. If one remembers back to the Jeffrey Epstein case, the intelligence-linked pedophile was widely hailed as a “philanthropist” before his covert and illicit activities became more widely known. It also begs the question – what kind of “philanthropist” would want pre-crime surveillance infrastructure in every school in the country? The story supplied by Gabriel’s co-founder could easily be cover for the same intelligence agencies backing Gabriel and related companies and we would do well to better scrutinize the technology being used to study and surveil our children and our communities.

CIA and Mossad-linked Surveillance System Quietly Being Installed Throughout the US.

Whitney joined Redacted to discuss the news about the death of Dana Hyde. Segment starts at 1:26:16.

Redacted.

Available on Rokfin.

AM Wake Up.

There was once a wealthy billionaire philanthropist who owned houses in Palm Beach, New York, and France, as well as a Caribbean Island paradise where he hosted young girls for elite sex parties, far away from prying eyes. Like the infamous paedophile people trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, this Harvard graduate sent his employees into the streets to recruit young girls for him to coerce and molest. One such employee, Stephen Ward, a man who played a central role in the downfall of the British government in the early 60s, reportedly recruited girls from the streets of London for this wealthy man, and even drew him a sketch of a young girl being pleasured by machines in peculiar ways. Also, like Epstein, this wealthy paedophile had significant intelligence ties which ensured he was protected from prosecution. The person I speak of was richer than Epstein and had more properties than Epstein; yet, unlike Epstein he was never caught, charged or prosecuted for any of his crimes, eventually dying of old age in his late nineties.

This is the story of George Huntington Hartford II, a friend of Hod Dibben and Stephen Ward, and a billionaire who was closely related to the intelligence-linked propaganda creators who were behind the invention of James Bond.  

George Huntington Hartford II – The Original Jeffrey Epstein Annigoni and Steele’s forgeries of Huntington Hartford’s signature from the night at Esmeralda Gullan’s Montrose Club – Evening Standard – 18 December 1954

Sitting at a table at Esmeralda Gullan’s Montrose Club one evening in the mid-1950s was a young actress who went by the name Marjorie Steele. She wasn’t just an actress, she was also a master forger who, on the night in question, was reportedly competing with the artist Pietro Annigoni to see who could best reproduce her husband’s signature. Steele was her stage name, with her married name being Huntington Hartford. Marjorie had married into a very wealthy family: her husband was George Huntington Hartford II, who was born on 18 April 1911 in New York City and had inherited his vast wealth from his grandfather, George Huntington Hartford I. When Huntington Hartford was just 6 years old he began receiving an annual income of $1.5 million. His grandfather had created the concept of chain grocery stores after taking over the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company (A&P) and had amassed a great fortune. Huntington Hartford II’s father, Edward, was not as interested as his brothers in the creation of excessive wealth and slowly distanced himself from the wider family, once declaring that at least “one Hartford ought to be a gentleman.” George’s mother, Henrietta, was also unlike the rest of the family and this led to a persisting rift. Edward’s brothers had refused to help their sibling financially, and eventually Edward went so far as to break off contact with them. Edward would also do the same with his own children before his death in 1922. Josephine Bryce, George’s sister, said before her death in 1992, “I don’t think Hunt ever saw him at all.” If the absence of his father wasn’t bad enough for George, his mother also negatively impacted his psychological development.

Henrietta Huntington Hartford was a domineering mother and George was her favourite child. He became the focus of most of her attention, and his sister later described her mother as smothering him in “a cocoon of mother [sic] love.” In a lengthy article published in Vanity Fair on the life of George Huntington Hartford entitled “Hostage to Fortune” on 12 June 2010, it was said that Henrietta would still lean across the dinner table when George was a teenager to cut his meat for him. That article, which contained quotes from a dishevelled 93-year-old George Huntington Hartford, also notes that he “scowled” at the memory of his mother, telling the reporter, “She was domineering, very domineering.” She sent Hartford away to school at St. Paul’s in New Hampshire where George was reportedly bullied constantly by the other students for being from “new money.” He stated, “I was very innocent, 12 years old, and I was sent to a very horrible place. My mother should never had done it.” While making the latter statement, Huntington Hartford is also noted as having raised his voice in distress at the memory. It was very clear from the early life of George Huntington Hartford II that his development had been stunted in many ways by the absence of his father and the overbearing nature of his mother. It is also very clear from his later life that he had kept much of that hatred and anger for his family hidden inside.

George Huntington Hartford II and Marjorie Steele, pictured 3 days after their 1949 wedding. Fort Worth Star Telegram – Sunday 18 Dec 1960

In 1931 Huntington Hartford eloped with his first wife, Mary Lee Epling, the daughter of a dentist from West Virginia, a decision which apparently caused his mother to throw herself onto the floor and weep. The pair were regularly found mingling with other members of American high society, but the marriage came to an early end in 1939 after his wife left him for the actor, Douglas Fairbank Jr. This was mainly due to Huntington Hartford chasing skirt, but also because he had impregnated a 23-year-old chorus girl named Mary Barton. Unfortunately for Mary Lee Epling, Douglas Fairbank Jr. himself was a notorious rascal and would become a future attendee of Horace Dibben’s elite sex parties. Huntington Hartford had reportedly “floated the idea” of his mother adopting Mary Lee Epling so that he “might keep her as a sister after their divorce.”

George Huntington Hartford II pictured alongside his first wife Mary Lee Epling – July 1986 – Vanity Fair

Huntington Hartford graduated from Harvard University in 1934, where he studied English literature. Only a couple of years after graduation he bought a sailing ship named The Joseph Conrad, a rare square-rigger sailboat that he had purchased from famed writer and adventurer Alan Villiers. Huntington Hartford soon became an avid sailor, taking part in ocean races such as the one reported on 28 August 1937, an event where he and Walter S. Gubelmann raced from Newport, Rhode Island, to the Bahamas.

After graduating from Harvard, Huntington Hartford went to work for his uncles at A&P’s company headquarters. However, his uncles were apparently keen to make George’s entry into the family business difficult. They put him in the statistical department of the company where he oversaw the tracking of the sale of bread and pound cake. Quickly becoming disenchanted with the experience, George took a day off to attend the Harvard/Yale football game. His alma matter lost and George Huntington Hartford also lost his position within the family firm. By 1942, Huntington Hartford was investing in property in Santa Monica, purchasing a house built by an opera singer in Runyon Canyon during the war in 1942. In 1948, Hartford also launched a modelling agency in Los Angeles and New York so that he could “be with girls” and it is here where his employees began picking up young girls off the street for him to sleep with. Lisa Rebecca Gubernick, who wrote a biography of George Huntington Hartford II entitled “Squandered Fortune,” stated, “Hartford believed that if he bought enough and built enough, he could convert those boldfaced mentions in the society columns to lasting fame,” positing that the A&P heir hoped to build a cultural empire. Indeed, throughout the 1940s and 50s, Huntington Hartford attempted to make a name for himself in the art scene, but the incoherence of his vision meant that all his grand projects eventually failed.

By this time he was becoming known as a patron to the arts, which continued to be the case when Hartford had met his second wife, the young Marjorie Sue Steele, who was recorded in the New York Times as being a “former night club cigarette girl.” He had met Marjorie while she was selling cigarettes at Ciro’s night club in Los Angeles, and he had enticed her into a relationship by purchasing her merchandise. His ruse worked and by all accounts she became the favourite of his four wives he had during his lifetime. At the time that Huntington Hartford began wooing Marjorie Steele, she was already engaged to Charlie Chaplin’s son, with the legend of silent movies himself being the one to advise her to leave his own son and marry the wealthy Huntington Hartford instead.

George Huntington Hartford II pictured with Marjorie Steele – Courtesy of the July 1986 edition of Vanity Fair

In the 1950s, Huntington Hartford began purchasing properties in New York City, Palm Beach, and New Jersey. He also purchased the famous Hollywood estate known as “The Pines”, a London town house, a property in France, as well as buying a house on Hog Island in the Bahamas. He later purchased Hog Island entirely in 1959 and renamed it Paradise Island, soon attempting to turn it into a haven for illicit elite sex parties involving underage girls. He even gave Paradise Island its own flag which was shaped like a “P,” a symbol he also wanted to put on the moon as a symbol for “world peace.”

The decade of the 1950s were seen as the most productive years of his life. Bolstered by Marjorie’s ambitions as an actress and a painter, he began investing in the movie industry, produced one of his wife’s more successful movies in 1951, opened a theatre in Hollywood, and founded what was described as an “artists colony.” During these busy years, he found time to write an adaptation of Jane Eyre for Marjorie, which had a short run on Broadway and eventually flopped after Marjorie pulled out of the project because “she just decided it would hurt her reputation as an actress.” To that, Huntington Hartford had stated, “I think she was right.” Hartford began investing in all manner of grand projects during this era, all of which were to be failures under his leadership. This was also to be the fate of his marriage to Marjorie, which was heading for divorce by the end of the 1950s.

Huntington Hartford, Ivar Bryce and James Bond

By 1960, Huntington Hartford’s marriage to Marjorie was coming to an end, and he was celebrating by organising elite sex parties, as well as becoming a regular at Hod Dibben’s sordid London-based events. At the famous, sometimes satanic themed, sex parties held by Hod Dibben and Mariella Capes, aka Mariella Novotny, George Huntington Hartford mingled with the elites of London, gangsters such as the Kray twins, as well as many of the main characters involved in the Profumo Affair, an event which saw the downfall of the British government. One of the people who sometimes attended these gatherings was Stephen Ward, who was to become the main patsy in the Profumo scandal, resulting in his death by overdose while in custody during one of the most high profile court cases Britain had ever seen. Douglas Thompson mentions Huntington Hartford’s relationship with Stephen Ward and Horace Dibben in his book, “Stephen Ward: Scapegoat,” stating:

Throughout the 1950s, employees would approach young women on the street on his [Hartford’s] behalf. In London, Stephen Ward, sketchpad in hand, did that for him. He also sketched a drawing of a girl being pleasured ’round the world’ by a machine for Huntington Hartford, who gave it to a friend of Kim Waterfield. The billionaire American liked girls in the flesh. As did the producer Harry Alan Towers, who was invited to a London party thrown by Huntington Hartford. There, with Stephen Ward and Hod Dibben, was Mariella [Novotny].

Commenting on Marjorie Steele, Thompson also states:

The first of his four wives was Marjorie Steele, an aspiring actress. When they married in 1949, she was a teenager (Huntington Hartford liked prime).

The latter statement was partly false, as Marjorie Steele was actually the second of Huntington Hartford’s wives, however, he was well known for liking “prime”, with Thompson going on to say:

As it was, George Huntington Hartford, one of the world’s richest men and a fan of Hod Dibben’s sex parties, found 18-year-old Mariella a little on the old side.

In fact, Stephen Ward’s attempt to entice Huntington Hartford into Mariella Novotny’s bed chamber opened-up a very dangerous can of worms, which eventually contributed to Ward’s untimely death, something we’ll explore more later in this series.

One of the most interesting associates of Huntington Hartford was his brother-in-law, a man named Ivar Bryce. Born John Felix Charles Bryce in 1906, Ivar’s father had made his fortune dealing in guano while his mother had worked as a painter with a side job writing detective novels. During World War I, to escape potential Zeppelin attacks, an eleven-year-old Bryce was sent to Cornwall. There, on a Cornish beach, Bryce met a young Ian Fleming and the two boys formed an enduring friendship. Fleming and Bryce attended Eton College together and later went on to co-publish a magazine called The Wyvern, where Bryce’s mother used her connections to persuade famous artists such as Welsh painter Augustus John to contribute drawings. The magazine was also used as a far-right propaganda tool, and at one point they even published an article praising the British Fascist Party.

Ivar Bryce, the only foreign national who served in the American OSS.

During World War II, Bryce began working for William Stephenson, who was the head of the British Security Coordination (BSC) operating out of New York. The BSC was an offshoot of MI6, which was setup by Winston Churchill to investigate enemy activities, prevent sabotage of any British interests in the Americas, and to positively influence American sentiment towards the British. They used many underhand methods to achieve their goals and Bryce was charged with stirring up trouble between the United States of America and their various Latin American neighbours, initially by using the threat of Nazi infiltration to force specific American policy actions. In Thomas Mahl’s book published in 1998, entitled, “Desperate Deception: British Covert Operations in the United States, 1939-44,” it states:

Bryce worked in the Latin American affairs section of the BSC, which was run by Dickie Coit (known in the office as Coitis Interruptus). Because there was little evidence of the German plot to take over Latin America, Ivar found it difficult to excite Americans about the threat.

To remedy American disinterest in the potential Nazi infiltration of Latin America, Bryce created fake propaganda, which successfully helped to sour relations between the US and Cuba. In his biography, You Only Live Once, Bryce writes about an early operation to undermine the Cuban-American relationship via the creation of a map, which was intended to be given to US Congress as evidence that Cuba was helping the Nazis set up secret bases in their country. Bryce writes:

Sketching out trial maps of the possible changes, on my blotter, I came up with one showing the probable reallocation of territories that would appeal to Berlin. It was very convincing: the more I studied it the more sense it made… were a genuine German map of this kind to be discovered and publicised among… the American Firsters, what a commotion would be caused.

In this instance, the ruse was carried out successfully and became a catalyst for Congress’ decision to dismantle what remained of their neutrality legislation which went on to pave the way for a more acrimonious relationship between the US and their Cuban neighbours. During World War II, Ivar Bryce built a property in Jamaica and his friend, Ian Fleming, who was then the personal assistant to the director of British naval intelligence, Admiral John Godfrey, had decided that he would also live in Jamaica and write full time after the war. In 1945, Bryce helped Fleming find some land and a house outside Oracabessa, with Fleming calling his newly found retreat “Goldeneye” – the name of one of his projects during the war.

In 1950, Ivar Bryce married into the Huntington Hartford family and wed Josephine Huntington Hartford. Like George Huntington Hartford II, his sister, Josephine Bryce, had inherited wealth from their grandfather. Yet, unlike George, she invested it well, concentrating on owning racehorses and becoming very successful in her own right. During the late-1950s, Ivar Bryce, Ian Fleming, and George Huntington Hartford also began producing films together. In April 1953, Fleming had published a novel entitled Casino Royale, which introduced his readers to a British secret agent, serving Queen and country, who went by the name James Bond. The book was successful and soon Fleming began working with Ernest Cuneo to develop scripts for James Bond’s cinematic debut. Cuneo had been an important, if not vital, figure in the operations of the aforementioned BSC during World War II. He also admitted to passing information about American decision-making onto British spies, during a time where the Brits were intent on manipulating US actions. Cuneo stated:

Given the time, the situation, and the mood, it is not surprising however, that BSC also went beyond the legal, the ethical, and the proper. Throughout the neutral Americas, and especially in the U.S., it ran espionage agents, tampered with the mails, tapped telephone, smuggled propaganda into the country, disrupted public gatherings, covertly subsidized newspapers, radios, and organizations, perpetrated forgeries—even palming one off on the President of the United States—violated the aliens registration act [sic], shanghaied sailors numerous times, and possibly murdered one or more persons in this country.

Xanadu or Bust

In April 1959, the film journal Kinematograph Weekly reported that:

Producer Kevin McClory and financier Ivar Bryce, who head Xanadu Productions, are planning to build their own studio in the Bahamas. 

The Bahamian government was keen to see a film production company establish itself on one of their 3000 islands. They were quick to offer the company tax cuts and other incentives under their Encouragement of Industry Act to entice Bryce and McClory to invest in the Bahamas. Kevin O’Donovan McClory had originally met Ivar and Josephine Bryce during a visit to their villa on Providence Island in the Bahamas—the villa itself is called Xanadu—to discuss collaborating on a film called “The Boy and the Bridge.” The Sunday Mirror reported on the match in September 1959, stating that:

The upshot was that Bryce went into partnership with Kevin–Bryce’s money and Kevin’s know-how–to make a film.

Also in April 1959, Ian Fleming wrote a letter to McClory concerning potential James Bond movie ideas, with that letter also being used in a 1963 court case between Bryce and McClory after their business relationship eventually broke down. However, in August 1959, McClory and Bryce were still on agreeable terms and were reportedly about to start work on their new studio in the Bahamas.

Basing the production company and much of the development of the James Bond franchise in the Bahamas made sense for many reasons. The Huntington Hartford children had both purchased homes in the Bahamas, with George’s “Paradise Island” being located very close to Ivar and Josephine Bryce’s Xanadu villa. But the main reason for Bond being based in the Bahamas was McClory himself, who claimed that he was responsible for a large part of Ian Flemings novel, Thunderball, being set in the Bahamas. McClory claimed in the previously mentioned 1963 court case that Bryce and Fleming had tried to oust him as the producer of the proposed Bond film. Eventually, like the relationship between McClory and Bryce, the plans to build a studio in the Bahamas began to unravel.

George Huntington Hartford had promised that his redevelopment of Hog Island into “Paradise Island” was to see the creation of a “dignified vacation resort.” In 1960, the New York Times reported that the island at Nassau in the Bahamas was to be a place for “artists and writers, socialites, and diplomats, teachers and scientists, sportsmen and students” in an atmosphere of “cultural enjoyment.” But Huntington Hartford was going to have to work hard to make his Paradise Island vision a reality, especially if he was to attract the right crowd. In November 1962, the project was described as:

The most elaborate resort primping for its first full winter of operation is the $23,000,000 Paradise Island project of Huntington Hartford. Just 15 minutes across Nassau Harbour by special boat, this holiday complex encompasses a French restaurant, a 52-room hotel, lavish tropical gardens, a swimming pool and superb tennis courts.

When the island’s Ocean Club finally opened in 1962, elites jetted in from all over the globe, with over a thousand people reported to have attended Paradise Island’s official launch party. But by March 1964, Huntington Hartford’s island resort was experiencing problems with crime after gunmen held up a group of tourists who were visiting Nassau and on their way to the Paradise Island resort. Four men were reported to have stopped the taxi after ramming it with their vehicle and were said to have stolen the belongings of the taxi’s occupants. At the time, the tourists were travelling back from a night at the Bahamian Club, Nassau’s only gambling casino at the time. The taxi driver also told the police that the bandits all “sounded like Americans.” Even though the robbers managed to get away with only around $1,000 in cash, their haul contained some extremely pricey jewellery—including a diamond ring worth $250,000—and their heist saw them net items totalling in excess of $750,000, which was equivalent to over $7 million in today’s money.

As it was with every other endeavour which Huntington Hartford undertook, he soon became disinterested in his Paradise Island project. By October 1964, his resort was up for sale. The press reported statements by Huntington Hartford’s broker, a man named Johnny Maschio, admitting that the island had never been profitable, blaming the 52-room hotel for limiting the venture’s profitability, saying:

You can’t pay for men like Pancho Gonzales, the island tennis pro, and Gary Player, the golf pro, with 52 paying guests.

The 700-acre property, which Huntington Hartford had originally purchased from a Swedish Industrialist named Dr. Axel Wenner-Gren in 1959, was finally reported to have been sold seven years later. Huntington Hartford didn’t get the $32 million which he originally wanted, with the resort eventually selling for around $14 million instead.

A Man About London Town

Many wealthy elites, such as George Huntington Hartford, had significant and close ties to various members of different national intelligence agencies during this period. Many of these agencies were still evolving in terms of the scope, scale, and style of their operations throughout the 1950s and 1960s. American and British intelligence agencies were not fighting their Soviet foe publicly and, instead of taking certain actions themselves, they were often found utilising front organisations such as the BSC to coerce their allies into making certain decisions.

George Huntington Hartford II – From July 1986 edition of Vanity Fair

Central to the ideological war between East and West during this era was the battleground of London. The Cold War was rarely fought in the open, and in major capital cities such as London, spies representing all sides were conducting deals in the shadows. This put the night clubs of London on the front lines of an information war, which had the power to sour international relations, or potentially spark wide-reaching international incidents. This era of spy-games was made much more dangerous by the dawning of the nuclear-age, with everyone involved believing in the risk of nuclear warfare, mutually assured destruction, and the potential extinction of life on Earth.

To gain access to sexual encounters with young women and girls, men like Huntington Hartford attended these secretive elite sex parties based in London and exposed themselves in more ways than one. While his vast inherited wealth and his many significant and powerful connections afforded Huntington Hartford some protection, the only benefit that these not-so-private events had for the wealthy billionaire was that they offered him the opportunity to fulfil his carnal desires. However, for the intelligence agents and their associates, these sordid events became a prime place to gather compromising information on powerful people, which could then be used against them later. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that organisers of elite sex parties such as Horace Dibben and George Huntington Hartford II, were useful allies for compromise operations run by the various intelligence agencies, whether they knew it or not. Like Horace Dibben, Huntington Hartford himself gave his companions access to a real underworld of hidden sexual subversion, which many people still think is fantasy.

However, this particular era of sexual compromise operations was coming to an end. The people involved were naive to believe that they could control such a complex blackmail operation indefinitely. Soon, a group of much more serious and sinister predators were slowly surrounding the people who thought they occupied the top of the intelligence food chain. There was a new wave of spies coming to prominence who were active among the melting pots of both London and Washington DC; people such as Tom Corbally were skulking around the American and English capitals and soon would begin to enact the scandal of the decade and bring about the downfall of the British government. Yet, it wasn’t only the British government which these intelligence agents intended to coup—they were also looking over the Atlantic, towards America, and John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

George Huntington Hartford II – From July 1986 edition of Vanity Fair

Soon, this investigation will go deep into the actual Profumo Affair and the intelligence linked characters who made it happen. As for George Huntington Hartford, he became a drug addict and lost nearly all his fortune. He spent the last years of his life lamenting his many negative childhood experiences, bed bound and disgruntled. He eventually died in the Bahamas at the age of 97.

The Original Jeffrey Epstein.

Whitney joins Mark on Bombthrower TV to discuss her book, the merger between organized crime and global intelligence agencies, the World Economic Forum datamining your brainwaves – taking control over your own mind and the battle for the fate of humanity.

Bombthrower TV.

For decades, New Age guru Barbara Marx Hubbard preached a futurist gospel of “conscious evolution” guided by “love and light.” Yet, at the same time, in stark contrast, Hubbard also touted Malthusian population control. If Hubbard called for the human population to be culled, then how could she have genuinely floated her dreams of conscious evolution sincerely upon the “self-actualization” mantras of the Human Potential Movement or the “co-creation” ethos of her New Age homilies?

While Hubbard’s advocacy for population control contradicts the benevolent rhetoric of her New Age spiritualism, her Malthusianism cohesively aligns with her championing of transhumanism. As I historicized in a previous article entitled Barbara Marx Hubbard: Godmother of Transhumanism and Synthetic Spirituality, transhumanism was conceptualized by Julian Huxley as the second phase of eugenics, which would artificially enhance Darwinian evolution by merging human biology with machines. In fact, according to Darwin’s autobiography, his theory of evolution by natural selection, which inspired his cousin Francis Galton to develop the pseudo-science of eugenics, was conceived as the biological consequence of growing populations competing for limited resources in a Malthusian ecology:

“I [Darwin] happened to read for amusement ‘Malthus on Population,’ and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed.  The result of this would be the formation of new species. Here then I had at last got a theory by which to work.”

In brief, Malthusianism is the bedrock of Darwinism, which is the foundation of eugenics, which is the cornerstone of transhumanism. Put another way, transhumanism encompasses both the Malthusian-sustainable control of population quantity and the Darwinian-eugenic control of population quality by means of technocracy. 

Thomas Malthus, Charles Darwin, Francis Galton, and Julian Huxley.

In my first installment in this series, I documented how Hubbard, bankrolled by Rockefeller “philanthropy,” teamed up with Abraham Maslow’s Eupsychian Network, including the Esalen Institute, to push trans-eugenic evolution through partnerships with the HeartMath Institute, which propagates transhumanist neurofeedback wearables that are programmed to induce synthetic spiritual bliss. In this current installment, I will explain how Hubbard’s vision for “conscious” transhuman evolution is inseparable from her Malthusian outlook on human population growth and sustainable ecology. More specifically, I will expose how:

1. Hubbard championed Malthusian population control policies advanced by the environmentalist forecasts of the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth and the sustainable development initiatives of United Nations (UN) Agenda 2030.
2. Hubbard collaborated with World Economic Forum (WEF) globalist, Maurice Strong, who spearheaded UN Agenda 21’s sustainable development program, and Club of Rome member Mikhail Gorbachev, who co-created the Earth Charter “sustainable development” initiative in partnership with Strong.

In future installments of this series, I will reveal how Hubbard’s Malthusian environmentalism was shaped by her spiritual muse, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin; her kindred “psychological mutant,” Jonas Salk [2]; and her longtime financial benefactor, Laurance Rockefeller. I will also unveil how Hubbard’s affiliations with the World Future Society, the Human Potential Movement, and the Foundation for Conscious Evolution were connected to networks of alleged pedophiles and sexual abuse cults.

Hubbard and the “Riders of the Pale Horse”

The following quote, which has been widely circulated as a purported excerpt from Hubbard’s 1993 Book of Co-Creation, declares that “one-fourth” of humanity will need to be culled in order to usher in a utopian New World Order:

“[o]ut of the full spectrum of the human personality, one-fourth is elected to transcend and one-fourth are destructive, defective seeds. In the past they were permitted to die a natural death. Now, as we approach the quantum shift from the creature-human to the co-creative human―the human who is an inheritor of god-like powers―the destructive one-fourth must be eliminated from the social body. Fortunately, you are not responsible for this act. We are. We are in charge of God’s selection process for planet Earth. He selects―we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, Death.”

To be sure, this passage cannot be found within the pages of Hubbard’s Book of Co-Creation. However, The Mail Archive, which records “archived postings” and “active mailing lists,”logs an email exchange in which Hubbard reportedly acknowledged that this passage was excerpted “from a manuscript which has not been published.” According to The Mail Archive, on “Thursday, November 04, 1999,” Hubbard replied to an email from a Dave Hartley, who had shared the misattributed passage with his email list:

Dear Dave: whoever you are, this quote is taken completely out of context from a manuscript which has not been published. The passage you refered [sic] to referred to the thought that we do not need to go through the Armageddon scenario that was predicted in the book of Revelation. The whole purpose of the Book of Cocreation [sic] is to say that the human species has the freedom to avoid the massive destruction predicted. The meaning of that particular passage, which I never published, because I do not believe it at all, came from the possiblity [sic] that if there is to be any further massive destruction on this earth, it will not be perpetrated by humans, but by some other force.

I personally do not believe this, have not published this, will never published it. My whole life is dedicated to bringing greater peace and gentleness to the human race.

This quote has been used by a small minority of people seeking to damage the reputations of many people and I ask you to release it, tear it up. IT is not viable. I totally refute it, and ask you to be kind enough to do the same.

With appreciation for your concern, Barbara Marx Hubbard

Email from Barbara Marx Hubbard to Dave Hartley, The Mail Archive

According to this email, Hubbard took ownership of the infamous passage while simultaneously disavowing it. Although she “totally refute[d]” the quote, emphasizing how she “never published” it, she did not deny ever writing it; rather, she admitted that she had written it in “a manuscript which has not been published.” Indeed, she even tried to rescue “the meaning of that particular passage” by suggesting that the passage emphasizes how the Malthusian “destruction” of the human population would “not be perpetrated by humans, but by some other force,” and only if humankind abdicates its “freedom to avoid the massive destruction predicted.” Obviously, this is contradicted by Hubbard’s use of the personal pronoun “we” in the active-voice construction of the final sentences, which proclaim, “[w]e are in charge of God’s selection process for planet Earth. He selects―we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, Death.”  

Notice here that she also did not outrightly reject the premise that some form of Malthusian depopulation, whether voluntarily or by means of “some other force,” would be a necessary precondition for the conscious evolution of the human species. In fact, this theoretical dilemma, which posits that humans must rein in population growth or else suffer “massive destruction” from “other forces” of ecological catastrophe, is the crux of Malthusian theory. In the 1803 edition of An Essay on the Principle of Population, economist Thomas Malthus enumerated that “(1) Population is necessarily limited by the means of subsistence. (2) Population invariably increases where the means of subsistence increase, unless prevented by some very powerful and obvious checks.” Based on these “Principles of Population,” Malthus called for “preventive checks” on overpopulation in order to avert “massive destruction” from “other forces” of ecological catastrophe, including “famine,” “plague,” and “pestilence.”

To be sure, this email exchange between Hubbard and Hartley cannot be verified. Under the “Original Message” header, the email addresses are “protected”: “From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] . . . To: [EMAIL PROTECTED].” Furthermore, at the very top of the email thread is a heading that reads “Caveat Lector,” which basically translates as “reader beware,” indicating that the information contained therein may not be accurate.

If this email is not fabricated, and Hubbard did in fact write the passage, then her genocidal vision of Malthusian-eugenic population reduction, even if only drafted in an unpublished manuscript, cannot be reconciled or spirit-washed with any amount of benevolent rhetoric she touted. That she would draft such a genocidal proposition at all, even if she disavowed it later, reveals a window into the darker undercurrents behind her dreams of conscious evolution, especially since she never outrightly denounced the need for depopulation. 

It is worth noting that, in The Revelation: Our Crisis Is a Birth (The Book of Co-Creation), which is the book that is supposed to contain the infamous quote in question, there is a passage that reads as if it could be a revised version of the notorious “pale horse” quote:

“at a time of Quantum Transformation, the momentum of past activities forces those activities to overshoot the mark. ‘Be fruitful and multiply’ goes too far and becomes overpopulation. ‘Preserve human life’ goes too far and results in undesirable prolongation of creature/human existence. ‘Give food and shelter to the people’ becomes the overindustrialization, pollution, inflation, and resource depletion by the developed world.  . . .

‘Be fruitful and multiply’ now becomes ‘Consciously conceive children who will be given the opportunity of optimum development.’ 

‘Preserve all life’ now becomes ‘Avail yourself of the opportunity for chosen death, and chosen extended life.’ Thanatology and gerontology enter the scene. Death can be chosen by those who have finished their work on Earth. The purpose of advanced medical technologies is not to maintain creature/human bodies in a semivegetative state. It is to be used by those minds that are motivated to do new work on Earth and especially in the new environments of outer space, to extend life, change bodies, and eventually build new bodies accustomed to the new conditions of universal life, whatever they may be.  . . . 

‘Give food and shelter to the people’ now becomes ‘Activate the creative revolution–building new worlds on Earth, new worlds in space,’ an environment of resources capable of meeting the needs of all members of that body. The population overgrowth on Earth must cease. Only those who choose to live on, shall. The others will voluntarily go to their rest. This is the new condition toward which the magnificent achievements of the past have taken you” [1].

Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Revelation: Our Crisis Is a Birth (The Book of Co-Creation) (Sonoma, CA: Foundation for Conscious Evolution, 1993).

Notice that this passage from the Book of Co-Creation refers to a “Quantum Transformation” while the unpublished passage refers to a “quantum shift.” Notice also that both passages call for human population to be culled; the unpublished passage proclaims that “one-fourth [of humankind] must be eliminated from the social body” while the Book of Co-Creation declares that “[t]he population overgrowth on Earth must cease. Only those who choose to live on, shall.” The only real difference between these passages is that the unpublished excerpt glorifies how Hubbard and her evolutionary “riders of the pale horse” will selectively cull the population while the Book of Co-Creation prophesies that the “unfit” will voluntarily cull themselves from the human population. Although the rhetoric in the Book of Co-Creation is less menacing than the rhetoric in the unpublished excerpt, the former nonetheless asserts the Malthusian prognosis that human population must be culled in order for the human species to consciously evolve into the New Age. 

To be fair, it is possible that the unpublished passage is actually a counterfeit. But even if it is a fabrication, there are multiple other excerpts from Hubbard’s writings, as you will see, in which she promotes Malthusian means of population control. 

Malthusian Limits to Growth: Hubbard and the Club of Rome

Hubbard’s Malthusian overpopulation theories were partly inspired by the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome’s Project on the Predicament of Mankind. In fact, in Hubbard’s Book of Co-Creation, there are multiple passages which warn of Malthusian “limits to growth” that could lead to ecological catastrophes [1]. She also met personally with Club of Rome Co-Founder, Aurelio Peccei [2], who prompted the World Economic Forum to adopt the Malthusian tenets of the Limits to Growth at the World Economic Forum’s Third Annual Meeting in 1973.

The Limits to Growth, Source: Club of Rome

Established in 1968, the Club of Rome is a globalist non-governmental organization (NGO) that convenes meetings between heads of states, members of royal families, business leaders, international financiers,  academic scholars, laboratory scientists, and administrators of global governance institutions, such as the UN, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Modeled after the “Round Table” structure of the Bilderberg Group, the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA), and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Club of Rome facilitates meetings where delegates plan the global economy through public-private stewardship of the world’s natural and human resources in accordance with the Malthusian ecology of  sustainable development. Club of Rome member André Hoffmann is also a trustee of another Round Table NGO, the WEF, which is advancing the Great Reset to usher in public-private stakeholder sustainability for the technocratic Fourth Industrial Revolution.

In 1972, the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth published the results of computer-simulated forecasts calculated by a team of scientists recruited from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The Club of Rome’s MIT team was led by Dennis Meadows, who is a member of the WEF. Another central architect of the Club of Rome’s Project on the Predicament of Mankind was MIT Professor Jay W. Forrester, who was commissioned by the Club of Rome to apply his System Dynamics theory to design computer models that would graph population growth, resource consumption, and environmental pollution forecasts, all of which provided the basis for the Malthusian thesis of Limits to Growth. While working at MIT, Forrester programmed the World One computer, which modeled a prediction of the Malthusian collapse of civilization in 2040. According to Big Think “2020 is the first milestone envisioned by World One.  . . . ‘At around 2020, the condition of the planet becomes highly critical.'” In several publications and speeches, Hubbard concurred with the World One computer forecasts as she predicted that 2020 would be the “shift” point for a “new norm.”

Dennis Meadows | World Economic Forum (weforum.org)

At the same time, Hubbard’s Book of Co-Creation explicitly invokes the Club of Rome’s Malthusian “limits to growth” rhetoric. In a chapter titled “The Journey,” she writes, “[o]ne more doubling of the world population will destroy our life-support system. Our Mother will not support us if we continue to grow in numbers! We must stop.  . . . The so-called ‘population crisis’ is a crisis of our planetary birth. The limits to growth on Earth shift us from procreation to co-creation” [1]. Note here how Hubbard asserted that human population has reached a Malthusian “limits to growth” which will render “Mother Earth” incapable of sustaining life unless we collectively curtail “procreation.”

The Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth is not only Malthusian in principle, but a survey of its bibliography reveals that it is also backed by extensive citations from an array of Malthusian-eugenicists and affiliated institutions that have been dedicated to population control. These include:

1. Jospeh J. Spengler: a eugenicist who contributed to the League of Nations World Population Conference, which was orchestrated under the leadership of Malthusian–eugenicist Margaret Sanger.
2. Frank Notestein: an American Eugenics Society (AES) member, who was the founding director of the Population Division of the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA); an “Organizer” of the Second UN World Population Conference; anda president of both the Population Association of America and the Population Council. 
3. Alexander Morris Carr-Saunders: a secretary of the Research Committee of the British Eugenics Education Society and a protégé of eugenicist Karl Pearson, who was himself a protégé of the founding father of eugenics, Francis Galton.
4. The Population Reference Bureau: an international NGO that advances Malthusian population control programs through partnerships with the UN Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA); the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; the Population Council; and the Population Association of America, which was founded by AES President Henry Pratt Fairchild and AES Co-Founder Frederick Osborn, who was also a president of the Population Council. 
5. Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment: a book written by Paul Ehrlich (author of the Population Bomb) and John P. Holdren (US President Barack Obama’s White House Science Czar), both of whom postulated Malthusian population control policies, including the spiking of drinking water with sterilants and the imposition of a government-issued “long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin. . .and might be removable, with official permission.”

Reinventing Prosperity: Managing Economic Growth to Reduce Unemployment, Inequality, and Climate Change (Vancouver: Greystone Books, 2016).

In 2016, Jørgen Randers, who was another captain of the MIT team that produced Limits to Growth, co-authored another Malthusian “Report of the Club of Rome.” Titled Reinventing Prosperity: Managing Economic Growth to Reduce Unemployment, Inequality, and Climate Change, this “Report,” which reasserts the Malthusian forecasts of Limits to Growth, declared that “the poor world should seek to improve the lot of its population by using whatever means necessary,” including “follow[ing] the example of China and seek[ing] to limit their populations, not with a one-child policy necessarily but through improved education and health, more easily available contraception―and ideally, by paying a bonus to those families who have had fewer than two children” [3].

Not only were the Malthusian-eugenics of Limits to Growth adopted rhetorically by Barbara Marx Hubbard, but she also met personally with the co-founder of the Club of Rome. In her 1989 autobiography, The Hunger of Eve, Hubbard relayed how she “had met Aurelio Peccei, head of the club [of Rome], in Bucharest in 1972 at a World Futurist Congress” [2]. Hubbard disagreed with Peccei’s outlook on the extent to which civilizational growth must be curtailed to avoid ecological catastrophe. However, she nonetheless concurred with Peccei that environmental resource consumption must be curbed to at least some degree in order to avoid the ecological catastrophes forecasted in Limits to Growth. 

Aurelio Peccei, Source: Club of Rome

In fact, Hubbard promoted the Committee for the Future’s “Choiceful Future,” which “accepted the Limits to Growth position of the necessity for conservation of nonrenewable resources, for decentralization, diversity, self-sufficiency, use of appropriate technology, and respect for nature, the environment and all people as members of our own body” [2]. To put it another way, Hubbard assimilated Peccei’s push for the rationing of limited “nonrenewable resources” while she also synthesized his environmental “conservation” with her own call for sustainable economic development through innovative “use[s] of appropriate technology.”

Similarly, Hubbard also affirmed that “[t]here was much that was positive and right about” the Limits to Growth thesis even though she was critical of the Limits to Growth “advocates” who resolved that ecological catastrophes could only be averted by means of ultra-Malthusian checks on the global population-growth/resource-consumption ratio. She stated that:

“the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth . . . considered earth [sic] a finite system with fixed resources and counselled us to adapt to the current limitations, or even to ‘return’ to a simpler stage of life as proposed by the deep ecologists. There was much that was positive and right about this perspective: restoration of the environment, decentralization, self-sufficiency, re-location of industry, energy efficiency, non-money economies, the barter system, cooperatives and the rebuilding of community. However, many of its advocates denied even the possibility of a concurrent and complementary, and equally natural, development of a new environment beyond our biosphere.” [2]

The Club of Rome Logo

Again, Hubbard assimilated the Club of Rome’s policies concerning the “restoration of the environment” through resource conservation while she also synthesized the Club of Rome’s policies with her own call for sustainable development through outer-space technologies that can enable the “development of a new environment beyond our biosphere,” thereby increasing the global population-growth/resource-consumption ratio.

In The Book of Co-Creation, in a chapter titled “Revelation,” Hubbard expounds on the ways in which “resource shortage” and “overpopulation” can be transcended with “‘postnatal’ technologies . . . such as astronautics, genetics, longevity, cybernetics, robotics and nanotechnology” that can be utilized to capitalize on “the universal environment beyond the biosphere”: 

“[t]he meta-crises of limits began: resource shortage, overpopulation, alienation, confusion, malaise about the future, disconnection with the past. Experts with an Earthbound perspective advocated a return to the simpler past, an adaptation to limits, a program of maximum conservation, and no growth. At the same time, some futurists wrote of a paradigm shift from self-centeredness to whole-centeredness. And some evolutionaries proclaimed the extended gospel of ‘postnatal’ technologies, to be developed within the womb of Earth for use after birth in the universal environment beyond the biosphere, such as astronautics, genetics, longevity, cybernetics, robotics and nanotechnology.” [1]

Barbara Marx Hubbard, Conscious Evolution: Awakening the Power of Our Social Potential (Novato, CA: New World Library, 1998).

In sum, Hubbard affirmed the Malthusian premises of the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth, and she believed that human population growth should be regulated accordingly. At the same time, she believed that Malthusian population control should be complemented with transhumanist technological innovations which would enable humans to efficiently steward interplanetary resources at sustainable rates of consumption.

Malthusian “Sustainability”: Hubbard, Strong, Gorbachev Maurice Strong (L), Mikhail Gorbachev (R)

On top of adopting the Malthusian tenets of the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth, Hubbard collaborated with Maurice Strong, who was instrumental in setting up the UN Environmental Program (UNEP), coining the term “sustainable development,” and launching UN Agenda 21, which has since been revamped as Agenda 2030. Hubbard also collaborated with a cohort of New Age Soviets during the political rise of the first and only President of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev [2], who was a Club of Rome member who partnered with Strong to set up the Earth Charter global sustainability project in conjunction with the launch of Agenda 21. Altogether, Hubbard’s Malthusian outlook on “limits to growth” and “sustainable development” was evidently shaped by her connections to Strong and Gorbachev, who played pivotal roles in ushering in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are now pillars of the WEF’s Great Reset for the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

The 8 UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

Strong served alongside Hubbard on the World Future Society’s (WFS) Global Advisory Council. Under the directorship of Hubbard and Strong, the WFS’s flagship publication, The Futurist, printed at least one issue that advocates for “sustainable lifestyles,” including “sustainable consumption habits,” for a “sustainable economy” in a “sustainable future.” In this 2014 issue of The Futurist, an article titled “Demographics, Consumption, and Climate Change” reports that “[m]odels for climate-change scenarios need to dig beneath population-growth projections to understand their potential impact on the environment. While it’s true that more people consuming more resources will have more impact, it’s where the population growth is happening that matters.” Of course, Strong was one of the founding fathers of Neo-Malthusian sustainable development.

The 17 UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDGs)

In 1972, the same year that the Club of Rome published its Malthusian treatise in Limits to Growth, Strong led the UN Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE), which resulted in the formation of the UNEP where he became its first executive director. Then, in 1987, Strong, who was also a member of the WEF Foundation Board, became a member of the UN World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) where the term “sustainable development” was coined in the “Report of the WCED,” which contains 298 references to “population.” Five years later, the Club of Rome officially adopted the term “sustainable development” in its publication of Beyond the Limits: Confronting Global Collapse, Envisioning a Sustainable Future, which is the sequel to Limits to Growth. That same year, in 1992, Strong led the UN Earth Summit Conference in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, resulting in the kickoff of UN Agenda 21, which established “sustainability” as one of the 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that are now revamped as the 17 Agenda 2030 SDGs. It is important to note here that SDG 5.6, which “[e]nsure[s] universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights,” is explicitly guided by the Neo-Malthusian “family planning” tenets of the Program of Action of the UN’s 1994 International Conference on Population and Development.

The First Global Revolution – Club of Rome

In Hubbard’s 2001 Emergence: The Shift from Ego to Essence, she echoed the Malthusian overpopulation catastrophism and sustainable environmentalism touted in both the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth treatises and the UN’s environment and population conferences: “[y]ou hit a definitive limit to growth in your current mode” in which “[t]here are no adult Universal humans who have been through the transition from a high-technology, over-populating, polluting world at the edge of destroying its own life-support systems to a new world that is sustainable, compassionate, and life-enhancing” [4]. Later in the same chapter, Hubbard writes, “[w]herever they have the choice, women are shifting from massive procreation to co-creation. We have reached a limit to population growth on Earth. One more doubling of the population will take us over ten billion. We will have fewer children―whether by choice or catastrophe is the only question” [4]. In other words, for Hubbard, sustainable development encompasses not only the elimination of environmental pollution, but also the Malthusian limitation of human population growth. 

Based on this sustainable-Malthusian equation, human population itself can be equivocated to a form of pollution that must be expunged from the planet, which is essentially what the Club of Rome proclaimed in The First Global Revolution. Published one year before the UN set up Agenda 21, this “Report by the Council of the Club of Rome,” which calls for global “sustainable development,” contains a section titled “The Common Enemy of Humanity Is Man,” declaring that: 

“[i]n searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

Stated differently, since humans are the cause of pollution, “humanity itself” can be equivocated to the greatest environmental pollutant which is the “real enemy” of the planet; in turn, environmental pollution must be prevented by eradicating human pollutants from the population.

Mikhail Gorbachev (L), Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands (Center), Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands (R)

Shortly after the launch of Agenda 21 at the UN Earth Summit, Strong partnered with Club of Rome member Gorbachev to launch Earth Charter, which combined Gorbachev’s Green Cross International with Strong’s Earth Council to form a global sustainable development initiative that would buoy UN Agenda 21 projects. It should be noted that Strong and Gorbachev were introduced to each other by Club of Rome and Bilderberg Group member, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, who is the daughter of Bilderberg Founder, Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. A former Nazi stormtrooper, Prince Bernhard was the “honorary sponsor” of the Third Annual WEF Meeting where Peccei presented the Club of Rome’s Malthusian Limits to Growth to the WEF, which is now bolstering the UN’s SDGs through its Great Reset projects, including “Environmental, Social, and Governance” (ESG) scoring schemes designed to penalize companies that fail to comply with SDG benchmarks. In brief, the Gorbachev-Strong sustainability alliance was orchestrated to operate a crucial pivot point in the global governance nexus of the UN, the Club of Rome, the Bilderberg Group, and the WEF; and Hubbard had ties to this nexus through Gorbachev, Strong, the UN, and the Club of Rome.

Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Hunger of Eve: One Woman’s Odyssey Toward the Future (Eastsound, WA: Island Pacific NW, 1989).

Hubbard’s ties to Gorbachev stem from her collaborations with Soviet New Agers during the 1980s. According to her autobiography, The Hunger of Eve, in 1985, the Director of the Center for Soviet-American Dialogue, Rama Vernon, who was a yoga instructor, swayed Hubbard to travel to the Soviet Union. While visiting the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics (USSR), Hubbard met with a leader in the Soviet “citizen diplomacy movement,” Joseph Goldin, who enthusiastically discussed prospects of Soviet-American “co-creation” aimed at achieving the utopian futurist visions of her mentor, R. Buckminster Fuller [2], who is cited in the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth. Hubbard was even “given buttons that said ‘Co-creator’ in English and Russian, with a diagram of the evolutionary spiral” [2].

A couple years later, in 1987, Hubbard met at the: 

“Cosmos Hotel . . . with Gennadi Alferenko, who was the founder of the Foundation for Social Inventions in the Soviet Union, and Rustem Khairov, who was working with Yevgeny Velikhov, the special science advisor to Gorbachev. We were planning the next major symposium, to be held in March, 1987, in Moscow entitled ‘A New Way of Thinking in the Nuclear Age — Social Innovations for the Third Millennium.” [2]

The next year, Hubbard “was amazed and delighted when on December 7, 1988 Gorbachev addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations, calling for ‘the kind of cooperation that could more accurately be termed co-creation and co-development'” [2]. Notice here that, according to Hubbard, both she and Gorbachev invoked the “co-creation” rhetoric of “conscious evolution.”

Hubbard went on to praise Gorbachev as a preeminent global leader who could “be our co-creative partner in restoring the environment . . . and expanding outer space peacefully”:

“I thought of Gorbachev as a political Sputnik. When Khrushchev put up Sputnik, he surprised us, and we responded with Apollo. If we recognized that the Soviet Union need not be our enemy, but could be our co-creative partner in restoring the environment, freeing people’s creativity and expanding outer space peacefully, what would happen over here?  . . . It could usher in the greatest age of cooperation and co-creation on a global scale that has ever been seen on earth [sic]. I felt that this is what we are preparing for now.” [2]

Emphasizing the globalist, environmentalist, and futurist affinities between herself and Gorbachev, Hubbard reported that even UN Assistant Secretary General, Robert Muller, who authored the UN’s World Core educational curriculum, highlighted how she and Gorbachev shared kindred visions of “co-creating” global sustainable development enterprises dedicated to “restoring the environment” and “expanding outer space”: “Robert Muller, former Assistant General of the United Nations called me up and said, ‘Barbara, you are the person in this world who sounds most like Gorbachev'” [2]. It is worth noting here that Gorbachev’s close advisors, including Hubbard’s comrades, Velikhov and Goldin, also collaborated with the Esalen Institute, which, along with Hubbard, was part of Abraham Maslow’s transhumanist Eupsychian Network.

Esalen Catalog (Sep. 1990 – Feb. 1991)

To sum it all up, Hubbard endorsed the sustainable development directives of UN Agenda 21, and she was connected to two of its most powerful architects: Gorbachev and Strong, who were leading figures at the epicenter of the global governance nexus of the UN, the Club of Rome, the Bilderberg Group, and the WEF. Simply put, Hubbard played an influential role in the historical development of UN Agenda 2030’s Neo-Malthusian SDGs, which are now being instituted across the globe through the WEF’s Great Reset for the Fourth Industrial Revolution and other means.

Malthusian Globalization: The UN, the State of the World Forum, and the Round Table Oligarchy

The liaisons between Hubbard, Gorbachev, and Strong were not limited to their associations through the Center for Soviet-American Dialogue and the World Future Society [2]. Hubbard also crossed paths with Strong and Gorbachev through the UN and the State of the World Forum (SWF). In brief, Hubbard not only echoed Strong and Gorbachev in their “co-creative” advancement of the sustainable development initiatives of the UN, the Club of Rome, the WEF, the WFS, and the SWF; she also worked directly with the SWF and the UN to push the MDGs and SDGs of Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 respectively.

In 2016, Hubbard addressed the UN High Level Forum on the Culture of Peace where she gave a speech at a panel titled “Enhancing Synergy between Sustainable Development Goals and 8 Action Areas of the UN Program of Action on the Culture of Peace.” During this speech, she pontificated that “the Culture of Peace adds a dimension to the SDG goals, a vision. Inherent in the Culture of Peace movement is a vision of a new world. The SDG goals are more or less key items as to how to get there.” Emphasizing how “[c]risis is a driver for evolutionary breakthrough,” Hubbard asked, “[h]ow do we enhance SDG basic goals with the actions for a culture of peace?” In brief, Hubbard worked directly with the UN to advance the SDG agenda that was set in motion by her fellow WFS Board Member, Maurice Strong, who spearheaded the UNCED, the UNEP, the UN WCED, the UN Earth Summit, and UN Agenda 21. 

Both Strong and Hubbard also participated in the State of the World Forum, which was formed and led by Mikhail Gorbachev. The SWF’s “Mission” statement declared that the State of the World Forum was committed to “building a global coalition” of “stakeholders” who would “participate with partners worldwide in a spiritual renaissance to keep pace with humanity’s scientific and technological advancement, believing that humanity must be as committed to ecological sustainability as the generation of wealth; global governance as national sovereignty; and to a compassionate society as much as to the global flow of capital.” Stated differently, the SWF’s mission aimed to usher in a global “stakeholder capitalist” economy regulated by “sustainable development” provisions from technocratic world governance institutions, such as the UN and the WEF, propped up by evolutionary beliefs in a futurist “spiritual renaissance.” 

Modeled after the WEF, the Bilderberg Group, and the Club of Rome, the State of the World Forum was structured as a globalist Round Table NGO. Like its Round Table predecessors, the SWF brought together delegates from national governments, multinational companies, corporate foundations, UN agencies, and a host of other Round Table NGOs, such as the WEF, the Club of Rome, and the Council on Foreign Relations. In contrast with its Round Table predecessors, the SWF was unique in that its participants included a remarkable number of “Religious & Spiritual Leaders,” including an array of New Agers and futurists, many of whom were also Hubbard’s associates.

Hubbard’s New Age and futurist comrades included the following SWF participants:

• John Naisbitt served on the Chairman’s Council of the SWF. He also served the Global Advisory Council of the World Future Society along with Hubbard and Strong.

John Naisbitt, Source: Charlie Rose

• Lynne Twist served on the SWF San Francisco Coordinating Council. Both she and Hubbard were Fellows of the World Business Academy, and she also “closely collaborat[ed]” with Hubbard’s Birth 2012 Campaign [5]. 

Lynne Twist at the 2019 Conscious Capitalism Annual Conference , Source: Conscious Capitalism, Inc.

• Hazel Henderson was a member of both the Club of Rome and the SWF International Coordinating Council. Both she and Hubbard were Fellows of the World Business Academy, and she was also one of Hubbard’s evolutionary “[c]olleagues and teachers of conscious evolution,” according to The Book of Co-Creation [1].

Hazel Henderson, Source: Earth Charter

• Deepak Chopra was listed as one of the SWF’s “Religious & Spiritual Leaders.” Both he and Hubbard were Fellows of the World Business Academy, and he was an “ally” of Hubbard’s Birth 2012 Campaign [5]. Chopra praised Hubbard as “the voice for conscious evolution of our time.”

Deepak Chopra

• Michael Murphy spoke on an SWF Panel titled “Human Intelligence and Evolution.” Murphy is a founder of the Esalen Institute, which was part of Abraham Maslow’s Eupsychian Network along with Hubbard. Esalen’s Soviet-American Exchange Program collaborated with Gorbachev’s close advisors, including Hubbard’s Russian “co-creators,” Velikhov and Goldin [2]. 

Michael Murphy, Source: Esalen Journal

• Stanislav Grof spoke on an SWF Panel titled “Legacy of Wisdom.” In The Book of Co-Creation, Grof is noted as one of Hubbard’s “[c]olleagues and teachers of conscious evolution” [1].

Stanislav Grof

• Jean Houston was listed as one of the SWF’s “Religious & Spiritual Leaders.” In Birth 2012 and Beyond, Houston is recorded as an “ally” of Hubbard’s Birth 2012 Campaign [5]. Additionally, Both she and Hubbard were Fellows of the World Business Academy.

Jean Houston, Source: Conscious Connection, consciousconnectionmagazine.com

In addition to all of these New Age and futurist “co-creators” who have bolstered Hubbard’s gospel of conscious evolution, other SWF participants included numerous top-level administrators of UN agencies that have been propagating Malthusian population policies in conjunction with sustainable development initiatives. Some of these UN figureheads, who were commissioned as delegates to the SWF, also collaborated with Hubbard.

For instance, the Director-General of the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Federico Mayor, served as a co-chair of the SWF; and he also spoke at the UN High Level Forum on the Culture of Peace where Hubbard gave her speech promoting Agenda 2030’s SDGs. Additionally, UN Assistant Secretary General, Robert Muller, served on the SWF International Coordinating Council. As Assistant Secretary General, Muller served under UN Secretary General Kurt Waldheim, who was previously a Nazi Wehrmacht officer. According to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Muller was ” instrumental in the conception of . . .  the UN Development Programme” (UNDP) and the “UN Population Fund” (UNFPA); and he ” helped” Maurice Strong “orchestrate the first-ever UN Conference on the Human Environment.” In a blurb on the back cover of Hubbard’s autobiography, Muller exalted Hubbard with the following accolades: “[i]f I have ever met a person who is fully conscious of her responsibilities toward the earth, humanity and the cosmos, it is certainly Barbara Marx Hubbard. She is a true 21st century woman” [2]. 

Robert Muller (L), Kurt Waldheim (R)

Another UN delegate to the SWF was Nafis Sadik, who was the Secretary General of the 1994 UN International Conference on Population & Development, which stipulated the Neo-Malthusian family planning policies that guide Agenda 2030’s SDGs. Other UN delegates to the SWF included UNEP Executive Director Elizabeth Dowdeswell, UNESCO Director-General Koichiro Matsurra, UNDP Director Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, UNDP Administrator Mark Malloch Brown, and UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Executive Director, Carol Bellamy.

These UN agencies, which partnered with the SWF, have all worked to advance the SDGs. At the same time, according to the executive producer of the SWF, the final State of the World Forum was convened “in conjunction with the UN Millennial Summit [sic],” which established the UN MDGs that are now revamped as the SDGs. Evidently, the UN-SWF alliance, which encompassed Hubbard’s circle of New Age futurists, was instrumental in laying the groundwork for the Agenda 2030 SDGs that are now being accelerated by the WEF’s Great Reset for the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Not only has the WEF taken up the SDG mantle of the UN and the SWF, but the State of the World Forum also hosted several top officials of the World Economic Forum along with other high-ranking Round Table globalists, including prominent members of the Club of Rome and the Council on Foreign Relations. For instance, Club of Rome member Wouter van Dieren and Club of Rome President Ashok Khosla were “Additional Speakers” at the SWF. Khosla is also a member of the WEF, and he has served as an advisor to the UNDP, the UNEP, and the UN WCED, the latter two of which were spearheaded by Maurice Strong, who was a WEF Foundation Board Member and a “Featured Speaker” at the SWF. Another SWF “Featured Speaker” was WEF Trustee Marc Benioff while WEF member George Soros was a “Distinguished Guest” of the SWF. Additionally, CFR member Stephen Rhinesmith served on the SWF International Coordinating Council, and he “conducted a session on global leadership” for the WEF’s Young Global Leaders program, which recruits national leaders to adopt SDG initiatives. Rhinesmith was also the Chairman of the Board of Advisors of the Esalen Soviet-American Exchange Program where Hubbard’s “co-creators,” Velikhov and Goldin, were Russian liaisons. 

It is worth noting here that the SWF was sponsored by Time Warner, which was bankrolled by its largest shareholder: WEF member Ted Turner, who has been a vocal proponent of population control. On the “Supporters” page of the State of the World Forum’s website, which is archived in the Wayback Machine, there was a quote from Turner warning that “[t]he population problem and environmental destruction that is going on in the world will eventually lead to our demise if it is not reversed.”

Altogether, the SWF helped launch the UN MDGs, which became the SDGs, by bringing together representatives from the UN, the WEF, and the Club of Rome, the latter of which propagated the “limits to growth” theories that paved the way for the SDGs. At the same time, Hubbard and her cohort of New Age “evolutionaries” were positioned in the middle of this sustainability nexus between the SWF, the UN, the WEF, and Club of Rome. In sum, the SWF yoked together Hubbard and her New Age “co-creators” with UN representatives and Round Table globalists, including Strong and Gorbachev, who laid the groundwork for the UN SDGs. This was done in order to advance the Club of Rome’s Malthusian sustainable development policies through the UN MDGs that have been revamped through Agenda 2030, which is currently being bolstered by the WEF’s Great Reset.

Caveat Lector 

In response to my first installment in this investigative series on Hubbard, several of her colleagues have critiqued my report, arguing that I unfairly represented Hubbard’s character. These Hubbard apologists have suggested that she was well intentioned, but that she was taken advantage of by globalist oligarchs, who hijacked her ideas and co-opted her image to usher in a technocratic New World Order under a veneer of New Age spirituality. 

To be sure, with all due respect, neither this nor my previous article is intended as a judgment of Hubbard’s personal character. Rather, this investigative series aims only to document her involvement in the transhumanist and Malthusian-eugenic agendas of the UN-Round Table oligarchy. While it may be possible that Hubbard was naïve to the machinations of her comrades at the UN, the Club of Rome, the SWF, and the WEF, it is hard to believe that she was totally ignorant of the techno-fascist ambitions of many of her associates. 

But even if you’re convinced that Hubbard was unwittingly beguiled by these international oligarchs, it cannot be ignored that she cooperated with the top brass of some of the very same Round Table NGOs and global governance institutions that are now at the epicenter of the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Beyond her liaisons with the UN-Round Table syndicate, Hubbard explicitly championed transhumanism and Malthusian sustainable development, which are the crux of the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Regardless of whether Hubbard was gullibly seduced by unsavory elitists, or whether she willingly lent her New Age ethos to trailblaze for the technocratic enterprises of globalist oligarchs, it cannot be denied that Hubbard’s writings and speeches explicitly call for transhumanism and Malthusian population control on several occasions. 

In the next installments of this series, I will dig deeper into the key influencers behind Hubbard’s Malthusian-eugenic transhumanism. These include Jonas Salk, Laurance Rockefeller, and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. I will also unveil how Hubbard’s affiliations with the World Future Society, the Human Potential Movement, and the Foundation for Conscious Evolution were connected to networks of alleged pedophiles and sexual abuse cults.

References:

[1]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Revelation: Our Crisis Is a Birth (The Book of Co-Creation) (Sonoma, CA: Foundation for Conscious Evolution, 1993).

[2]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Hunger of Eve: One Woman’s Odyssey Toward the Future (Eastsound, WA: Island Pacific NW, 1989).

[3]  Graeme Maxton and Jørgen Randers, Reinventing Prosperity: Managing Economic Growth to Reduce Unemployment, Inequality, and Climate Change (A Report to the Club of Rome) (Vancouver: Greystone Books, 2016).

[4]  Barbara Marx Hubbard, Emergence: The Shift from Ego to Essence (10 Steps to the Universal Human) (Charlottesville, VA: Walsch Books, 2001).

[5]  Barbara Marx Hubbard and The Welcoming Committee, Birth 2012 and Beyond: Humanity’s Great Shift to the Age of Conscious Evolution (USA: Shift Books, 2012).

Barbara Malthusian Hubbard: From Limits to Growth to UN Agenda 2030.

At the height of the Cold War, in a country experiencing the final throes of a post-war economic boom, one strange man went on to play a central role in a scandal that brought down the British government. In a master class of how to get away with grand espionage, Hod Dibben coasted through danger seemingly without any fear. The night clubs of London, which have been the focus of our attention so far, are all under new ownership after a series of tragic deaths of their previous owners and hostesses. As always, with anything Horace Dibben did during this period, elite sex parties and sadomasochistic orgies were a key part of what would eventually develop into the Profumo Affair.

Constance Capes and the Mysterious Mr. Atherley

Stella Marie Capes was born on 9 May 1941 in Sheffield, Yorkshire, to an unmarried mother, Constance Capes. Although she was born Stella Marie Capes, the name she chose to use most often before she met Hod Dibben was Mariella Capes. To understand why “Mariella” Capes went by so many different names—including Mariella Novotny and Henrietta Chapman— it is worth revisiting a little-known anecdote concerning her mother, Constance Capes. 

Mariella’s mother was born in Grimsby in 1903 and was involved in a very curious and well-documented case in 1927 concerning a man who had also used multiple identities. Constance was twenty-four-years-old when she went to work as a secretary for a fascinating fraudster named Mr. Reginald Winterburn Atherley. She was described in a Daily Mirror article dated 5 October 1927 as a “pretty North-country typist” with the article describing how she had “several strange experiences while she was acting as Mr. Atherley’s secretary at the Four Winds caravan in Thirsk.” Constance Capes described in her own words what occurred when she arrived in Thirsk after corresponding with Mr. Atherley: 

“The salary he proposed was small, but he said he would give me shares in his business. I knew that Four Winds was a caravan, but I did not know it was his permanent head-quarters. After I had worked four days with Mr. Atherley at the Four Winds I felt compelled to leave.

In the first place, it seemed a little too much to expect a typist to work by day, and sometimes by night, in a caravan situated in a field far from town. When I had been at Four Winds two days a curious incident occurred which made me doubtful. It was on Sunday, September 18 when Mr. Atherley came to my lodgings and told me that he had seriously injured a man with his car. He urged me to return to the caravan, which I did. At the Four Winds he got me to type a letter to a woman in Southport stating that Mr. Winterburn was dying, and if she wished to send him a message it would be delivered to him on regaining consciousness.

I then received the amazing request to sign the letter as Mr. Winterburn’s private secretary. (I must explain that Mr. Atherley sometimes called himself Mr. Winterburn. On the Tuesday he astonished me by asking me to sign most of his letters for him. I told him that I could not put my name to some of his correspondence, and remarked that I thought I had better leave. In consequence of this I left his service the same day. Of course, I received no salary, but I was really glad to be away from Four Winds. Although I was in need of a job, I think I acted for the best in leaving, and I am sure every typist would have done the same.” 

Constance Capes had had her first run-in with a conman at the Four Winds caravan and it garnered her a lot of attention. The curious case of Mr Winterburn Atherley and the Four Winds caravan received a lot of coverage in the Daily Mirror, so much so that Atherley complained to the newspaper via his solicitors that the reports about him were both libellous and defamatory. But it was not only a lone typist, Constance Capes, who was standing up for the truth, as there had been a number of fraudulent incidents involving the illusive Mr. Atherley, including with Captain Denis Ewart Bernard Kingston Shipwright, a former-MP who took it upon himself to confront the conman on a station platform, with the conversation being described as both “heated and futile.”

Source: Daily Mirror, 1927

In response to Miss Capes recollections of her employment making the pages of one of the most popular newspapers at the time, Mr. Atherley’s solicitor sent her a demand, ordering her to return a notebook in which she had taken shorthand notes of Mr. Atherley’s business letters. Constance was lauded publicly for her response, with the plucky young lady stating: 

“Re Note Book. I regret being unable to accede with your request, as the book referred to, containing Mr. Atherley’s note, is my property, a fact of which he is aware.” 

Many other victims of Atherley’s fraudulent behaviour contacted the newspaper after they read the Winterburn/Atherley stories, giving their own experience of this conman. This level of publicity was probably something which a lowly typist such as Miss Capes enjoyed. In the same year that Constance exposed Reginald Winterburn as the fraudster he was, the audacious conman was sentenced on four charges including the assault of a lady named Beatrice Gray, impersonating the police, doing malicious damages to a police cell, and obtaining a driving licence after previously being disqualified. In court, Winterburn described himself as the “Mysterious Mr. Atherley, the super publicity agent” and when the magistrates were leaving to consider their verdict, he offered to read his life’s history to the court and even went on to sing a hymn for the baffled onlookers.  

Did the extravagant real-life adventures of Reginald Winterburn inspire the daughter of Constance Capes towards a similar destiny? Not much else is known about Mariella’s mother, except that she never married and the fact that Christine Keeler, the wily central figure in the Profumo Affair, who was a friend of Mariella Capes, referred to Mariella’s mother as “a whore.” However, no evidence yet exists that Constance Capes engaged in such activity. Mariella was born two years into World War II and her mother was never married. Given the time period, that could have been enough for any lady to receive a negative reputation. Yet, Mariella herself would have no qualms about being involved in the sorts of activities which could lead to such name calling. 

On 7 October 1940, Mariella’s mother is noted as “Miss Constance Capes” in the Daily Mail Newspaper while attending the wedding of her sister, Alice Capes. Roughly eight months later, Constance Capes gave birth to one of the most famous vixens of the 20th century. The next time Constance Capes was to be mentioned in the British press was in the Daily Telegraph on 6 June 1961. In that article, Constance and Hod Dibben are reported as meeting with Mariella as she arrived into Southampton on the Queen Mary after multiple intelligence agencies had coordinated to smuggle her out of the US.

The Hod Couple

By 1958, Mariella Capes was cast in the Folie Bergère London revue—a form of theatrical entertainment consisting of short sketches, songs, and dances—called Ah, Quelle Folie, at age 17. On 30 January 1958, it was announced in The Stage magazine that the French revue was heading for the West End. The Folies Bergère was a cabaret music hall which was located in the 9th Arrondissement in Paris. It had opened in 1869 and was famed for featuring raunchy nude cabaret, something which England in the late 1950s was still not quite ready for culturally speaking. 

Mariella Capes in her ‘Ah Quelle Folie’ costume, Source: Daily Mail

Jules Borkon who was representing the owners of the world rights of the official Folies Bergère announced that James Laurie was to present the show in London, with rehearsals were planned for March of 1958. Laurie would have to delay the production by a few months as he also had another curious international project to deal with first. In April 1958, it was reported in the Stage that: 

“In July, Mr. Laurie is going to Australia to present his wife, Rosina Raisbeck, on a three-month concert tour and in the autumn he has plans for presenting an American opera star behind the Iron Curtain.” 

By June, the revue of Ah, Quelle Folie, had begun receiving negative attention from one of the highest offices in the United Kingdom. The Daily News newspaper based in London reported that: “Changes have been ordered by the Lord Chamberlain’s office in the Folies Bergere revue, Ah, Quelle Folie, due to open tonight at the Winter Garden Theatre, Drury Lane.” The demand had come on the opening night of the show on 28 June 1958, and, if the necessary changes were not made, the show would not be allowed to continue. James Laurie would be quoted as saying: “We’ve made minor modifications mostly concerning the nudes.” One of those nudes was a very young Mariella Capes, who was still a minor. She was also to be used to advertise the raunchy cabaret, with a picture of her adorning page 2 of the Daily Mirror and an accompanying paragraph describing her “Edwardian strip-tease” and referring to Mariella Capes as “half-dressed in a coral pink negligee.” 

By August 1958, the People newspaper was describing the Folies Bergère dancers as “Angry chorus girls” after James Laurie demanded that they commit to “pack drills” to improve their performances after the girls were found to be going to “so many parties and getting so little sleep that their dancing was suffering.” Just two months later, the Daily Herald was reporting on the flagging act under the headline: “Nude-show man denies close-down,” describing the act as costing £40,000 to produce and insisting that James Laurie denied that the show was closing, the reporter, Mike Nevard, states: 

“Mr. Laurie is thinking about the girls. And if audiences don’t come up to scratch in the near future, girls like Mariella Capes will be trooping to the nearest employment bureau.” 

The show was noted in the latter article as running for only four months before it flopped. Yet, Mariella Capes was hardly heading to an employment bureau in search of work. Instead, she was soon to wed none other than Hod Dibben, who would later make Mariella Capes one of the most famous women in the world. 

In an article entitled “Club Boss To Wed Waitress”, the Sunday Mirror on 24 January 1960 continued with the bizarre plugging of the life and times of Horace Ronald Dibben. On this occasion, reporter Matt White was sent to find out about Horace Dibben’s new young lady-friend. After giving a brief recap of how Hod had previously made his former ward Patsy Morgan-Dibben into a charming young lady, White writes:

 “Patsy Morgan-Dibben, the girl who was the subject of his first experiment and added his name to her own, left him three years ago – after he made her into the Hostess with the Mostest in London’s West End. Patsy’s Successor is blonde, Czech-born Mariella Capes. Dibben met her six weeks ago when he advertised for girls to work in his new Mayfair club, The Black Sheep.” 

The story of how Hod and Mariella met is hard to take seriously and was likely told to the media in order to obfuscate the true nature of their first encounter. Per this narrative, Mariella had apparently gone for her job interview at the Black Sheep because she thought they needed dancers. She was soon to discover that they needed waitresses rather than dancers. However, the article goes on to state: “She was so short-sighted she was unable to see customers trying to attract her attention.” It was also reported that Hod’s business partner fired Mariella as a result, after which point she went weeping to Horace Dibben. Hod, being a “gentleman,” told her that he’d like to marry her. She had already said yes, but it is then reported that Dibben bought Mariella a pair of spectacles so she could see him properly. The article reads: 

“She blinked at him, took in his mutton chop whiskers and said:- ‘I still love you. And I can’t wait till March. Let’s get married right away.’ So the date was brought forward to next Friday.” 

The article only gets more tongue in cheek, with Hod Dibben being quoted as saying: 

“By giving her those glasses, I’ve opened the world around her. Mariella will tour hairdressers and beauty salons until we find a hair-style and make-up which suits her best. She will be taught to sing – her voice is good, but needs training – and there will be lessons in deportment and fashion.” 

A picture of Mariella Capes ran alongside the article, showing her biting the temple tip of her brand new spectacles.  The Daily News in London reported the shotgun wedding of Mariella Capes and Horace Dibben on Saturday 30 January 1960, in a small piece entitled: “Bride of 18 moves into a mansion.” There it was reported that Horace Dibben had bought her a “40-room, sixteenth-century mansion near Pentworth, Sussex.” The previous article is also the first time in which Horace Dibben’s son from his first marriage is mentioned, stating: “By his previous marriage Mr. Dibben has a son who is 12 years older than his bride.”  On the same day, the Daily Mirror also printed an article about the wedding which describes Mariella Capes as an: “Eighteen-year-old ex-Folies nude.” 

Horace ‘Hod’ Dibben kisses his bride, Mariella Capes, on their wedding day in 1960, Source: Spartacus International

This story of how the happy couple met may appear trite to us now, but it seemed to resonate with publications and readers around the world, with various articles about their romance appearing even in American local newspapers in places such as Arizona, Tennessee, and Indiana, to name a few. One article on 1 February 1960 in the Yuma Daily Sun and Arizona Sentinel stated that the couple had giggle fits at their wedding ceremony, with the article reporting on how the priest (referred to as “the preacher” in the American newspapers) warned them: “This is a serious occasion. You’ll have to leave if this doesn’t stop.” It was also said that Mariella, who was wearing a 200 year-old engagement ring given to her by Hod, was devastated when their spectacular multi-tiered wedding cake turned out to be stuffed with sawdust. It appeared that a lot of their wedding pomp was, in fact, just for show.  

Ward, Dibben and Sugden – The Society Sexmen

Hod Dibben and Mariella Capes soon became a serious partnership, a force to be reckoned with, but it would be a friend of theirs who made their fetish sessions an enterprise with the power to take down a government. For many people, Stephen Ward, often referred to as the “society osteopath”, is remembered as the unlucky patsy in the “Profumo Affair”, an extremely well-documented sex scandal which resulted in the downfall of the British government.

Stephen Ward was the son of Canon Arthur Evelyn Ward who was, until his death in 1944, the Canon of Rochester Cathedral. Stephen Ward studied to become a doctor of osteopathy in America, attending the University of Minnesota. Yet, one of Dr. Stephen Ward’s many notable talents was sketching. During his lifetime of sketching, Ward would sketch portraits of the Duke of Edinburgh, Princess Marina, Lord Snowden, the Duke and Duchess of Kent and many others. Ward may have been close to Hod and Mariella and a definite sex addict, though he wasn’t a big fan of Dibben’s satanic-themed sex parties which were being held for London’s elite.

Stephen Ward with central Profumo figure Christine Keeler, right, and two friends, Source: Daily Mail

Horace Dibben was unconventional in almost every possible way, as was his relationship with Mariella Capes. They would also forge some very unconventional relationships after they were officially wed. In Douglas Thompson’s book, Stephen Ward: Scapegoat, Hod Dibben is mentioned on numerous occasions, with the author quoting a business partner of Hod’s, Mary Sykes, who stated: 

“There wasn’t much not to like about Stephen [Ward] – he pursued his interests without any shame. As, of course, did Dr. Ward’s close friend Hod Dibben, who had three custom-made leather suits: two in black, one in faded red. He said the leather intensified the pleasure when he was caned or, preferably, birched. It was so pleasant he didn’t mind too much the chafing of the suits between his legs: ‘not so bad, if you use lots of talc – Johnson’s baby powder is best.’” 

Thompson follows this rather revealing quote by writing: 

“The pink-bottomed Dibben was the charming raconteur of White Horse Street. He spoke highly of the teenager he married at Caxton Hall on 29 January 1960: ‘She ties me to a chair in my leather suit, whips me and then makes me watch her screwing someone else.’ Exquisite excitement, he announced, adding: ‘I’m showering her with gifts – nothing is too good for this wonderful girl.’”

Thompson goes on to write: 

“The only thing his bride (we’ll call her Mariella, for brevity) never got up close and intimate with was the truth about herself. Stella Capes, aka Mariella Capes, aka Maria Novotny, aka Henrietta Chapman is up there as a wonder of the world. She had a name for all seasons, a kink for all takers, an explanation for everything.”

The same book would also quote the renowned London gangster Bobby McKew and his experience with Mariella Capes, stating: 

“‘The only thing that was consistent about Mariella,’ said Bobby McKew, who knew her well, ‘was that she wore her hat at all times – she never took it off. Once I was having a drink with this rather upper-class chap, who told me he was meeting his new girlfriend, Henrietta Chapman. Would I like to meet her? I thought nothing of it and went with him and there was Mariella. I said: “Hello, Mariella.” She smiles sweetly: “Oh, I’m so sorry. I’m Henrietta. You’re the third person this week to make that mistake – we must look very alike.” She was superb. She was sitting there smiling and wearing the hat she’d been wearing the night before when I saw her stark naked at an orgy. She was a one. She was certainly special – she was meant to be the President of some-where’s daughter but it was all bollocks, she was from Sheffield. But she turned everybody on, everybody upside down.” 

For such a young lady, it seemed like it was second nature for Mariella to wrap very wealthy and powerful men around her little finger. The latter quote from Bobby McKew came with an anecdote of how she had once “put a needle through the window cleaner’s bollocks when he tried to fuck her,” also noting that the window cleaner was an “associate of the British Security Services” and had admitted that “he thought it was worth the risk.”

Douglas Thompson again quoted Bobby McKew in relation to the sex parties which Hod Dibben ran: 

“‘He had a tough war, all these men in the skies did. That sort of thing makes you want to get on with life quickly – Hod just did it at double time. For a [Plymouth] Brethren boy, he certainly ran the most elaborate sex parties in London. You never knew who you might see there. Black magic and men in masks and peacocks wandering around were all at parties organised by Hod, not Stephen Ward. Stephen went to some of the parties but he wasn’t organising them. For many of us, it was curiosity. They were going on all over town but Hod’s were special, he had something for everybody.’” 

Mariella Capes and Hod Dibben in 1960, Source: Daily Mirror

Hod Dibben always had a keen eye on whatever was happening at his parties. Even when Gypsy Riley, the partner of infamous London gangster Billy Hill, went to the toilet at one of Hod’s gatherings, she was met with Hod’s eye’s watching her through spy-holes. Bobby McKew would later recant: “You couldn’t get up to anything without Hod seeing. Even having a pee.” 

Stephen Ward and Hod Dibben became thick as thieves, so to speak, with the pair meeting up regularly in Knightsbridge and maintaining close connections with Dr. Teddy Sugden who, whereas Ward was known as the “society osteopath”, Sugden was the “society abortionist”. These three men were assisting the elites of London with everything from illicit hookups and sex gatherings, all the way to elaborate satanic-themed sex parties and secret abortions, they knew everyone’s secrets. Edward “Teddy” Charles Sugden was rumoured to perform 15 abortions a day during a time when abortions were illegal in Britain. For many of the gangland pimps, Teddy was a miracle worker, renowned for being able to abort a baby and get the girls back to work almost immediately. These three men had burrowed out a niche for themselves, Hod Dibben as the master of ceremonies, Stephen Ward as a high flying pimp, and Sugden as the clean-up crew for any unwanted pregancies. But none of these men could have gained any of this power if it wasn’t for the girls and long-queues of paying punters. 

Sugden was another very strange character. He was said to have two distinguishing features; one being that half his face was paralysed which apparently left him looking as though he was always smiling; and the other was that he was sexually aroused by girls committing sex acts on reptiles. Mariella described him as a “150-guinea man” and Lillian Pizzichini claims in her book, The Novotny Papers, that: 

“His illegal abortion clinic specialized in society ladies, actresses and whores pimped by gangsters who ran Soho. He guaranteed that he could get them back to work within the day.” 

The latter book also claims that the night before her wedding to Hod Dibben, Sugden asked Mariella if he could watch while she simulated sex with a python. Although there are other witnesses to back-up the claim that Sugden had such serpentine peccadilloes, it is also clear for most researchers that Mariella told as many falsehoods as she told truths. For such a young lady, Mariella Capes had a lot of very strange associations and experiences. However, once she had married Hod, her experiences only became more profound, more protracted, and more Profumo.

The main reason why most of the characters in this series ended up dead or disappeared seems to be their common connection, the London night clubs that they were involved with or frequented. One thing was certain in London during the late-1950s, the gangland villains were taking over the town. Hod Dibben had moved his operation over to the Black Sheep and soon-after the Kray twins bought a stake in Esmeralda’s Barn. It was the first time that the gangsters of the East End of London had started to overtly move into the West End scene. In fact, you couldn’t own a club in London by the early 60’s if you weren’t paying protection money to one of the many organised racquets. The only group with enough power during this era to trump the gangland villains were the intelligence agencies, and they were about to play their hands and take control of the London scene. 

As for Mariella Capes, she would eventually meet a very unusual and sad end, drowning in jelly, we’ll investigate that soon.

Black Hand – A Match Made in Hell.

Whitney joined Robert Breedlove to discuss the National Security State, Jeffrey Epstein’s case, and corruption at the highest levels.

Available on YouTube and in podcast apps.

What is Money with Robert Breedlove.

Whitney joins Redacted to discuss the latest news about Epstein.

Available on Rumble.

Redacted.

In this episode, Whitney speaks to Alan MacLeod of Mintpress News about his recent investigations that explore the increasing fusion of social media companies, and more broadly Big Tech, with the National Security State.

Originally published 2/09/23.

Podcast available early for Unlimited Hangout members and Rokfin subscribers. After a few days, all episodes are free and available on all platforms.

Links discussed:

Twitter
The Federal Bureau of Tweets: Twitter Is Hiring an Alarming Number of FBI Agents

Facebook
The Military Origins of Facebook
Meet the Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

Palantir
How A ‘Deviant’ Philosopher Built Palantir, A CIA-Funded Data-Mining Juggernaut

In q tel
In-Q-Tel: The Central Intelligence Agency as Venture Capitalist

Google
National Security Search Engine: Google’s Ranks are Filled with CIA Agents
Inside the secret network behind mass surveillance, endless war, and Skynet
23andMe CEO Anne Wojcicki: the Ex-Wife of Sergey Brin’s Life and Career

Rumble
Narya and Peter Thiel Lead Investment in Rumble – Rumble

Tik Tok
The NATO to TikTok Pipeline: Why is TikTok Employing So Many National Security Agents?

Eric Schmidt
Henry Kissinger and Eric Schmidt on the Perils of Military Brinkmanship in the Age of AI

Graphika
Graphika: The Deep State’s Beard for Controlling the Information Age

Various links

• SOCOM and US Air Force Enlist Primer to Combat Disinformation
• Air Force research: How to use social media to control people like drones | Ars Technica
• To Fight Disinformation, We Need to Weaponise the Truth – PrimerAI
• ASPI – The Gov’t-Funded Conspiracist Think Tank Now Controlling Your Social Media Feed
• Revealed: The Former Israeli Spies Working in Top Jobs at Google, Facebook and Microsoft
• US military studied how to influence Twitter users in Darpa-funded research | Social media | The Guardian
• US – UK Intel Agencies Declare Cyber War on Independent Media
• Social Media in Strategic Communication

Follow Alan
Twitter
Instagram
Alan Macleod – MintPress News

Learn more about RSS

Get early access to podcasts by becoming an Unlimited Hangout member.
Find previous episodes on all podcast platforms.
Order Whitney’s book One Nation Under Blackmail. 
Sign up for the weekly newsletter to receive updates on the book, new articles, podcasts, and interviews.

Social Media & the National Security State with Alan MacLeod.

Whitney joined MintPress for this special report explaining the internal workings and goals of the World Economic Forum.

MintPress News.

Whitney Webb joins Scott Creighton to discuss her new series of books One Nation Under Blackmail, the history of Jeffrey Epstein’s rise to power, his influence, the WEF, ChatGPT and the normalization of Artificial Intelligence.

Available on Bitchute.

Scott Creighton.

Whitney joined The Glenn Beck Radio Program to discuss the WHO’s newly elected chief scientist and the moves Big Tech is making in tracking your every move — and even the eye movements of your children.

Available in podcast apps. Episode title: ‘Sub-Optimal’: Biden Caves to China, Allows Spy Balloon to Fly Over Sensitive Nuclear Sites

The Glenn Beck Radio Program.