To Kill a Mockingbird, or Keep It Alive?

How David DePape doesn't exist but we so want him to be real

First, they make you willing to hate. It’s us or them! If they’re not with us, they’re against us! Then it’s easy to sell you a lie. You’ll believe anything if it casts shade on whatever you hate, or whoever you think hates you.

Or they’ll leach off your compassion. You can’t be a kind or loving person if you support/don’t support X, Y, or Z. But I am a loving person! you say. And in the silence that follows, they let you conclude that to remain a loving person in their eyes, you have to support or abandon X, Y, or Z.

That was Operation Mockingbird 1.0. If you don’t have the courage to be a social outcast or the compassion to love your enemies, you are merely a tool of cultural change in the hands of those who have an agenda but no goodwill for you personally.

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee was published in 1960. No one has ever done a really good job of explaining what the title means, though the main character Scout is told, “It’s a sin to kill a mockingbird,” which seems like a clue. Mockingbirds imitate other birds, often sing for hours, and can acquire a repertoire of 200 separate “songs” over a lifetime.

Some years ago, in my old neighborhood in the Bay Area, a neighbor inadvertently trained a generation of local mockers to imitate his overactive car alarm. He bought a new car without an alarm, but for the next few years you could hear the mockingbirds' imitation persist, slowly gaining improvised passages and becoming modified here and there, other bird's songs being folded into the auto security mix. By the time I moved away several mockingbird generations later, the original car alarm song had been amended with with Stellers' jay squawks, the descending whistles of our local white-tailed kits, and clicks sounding remarkably like a barn owl's.

As far as I can tell, no one has reported a mockingbird learning the Nokia waltz ringtone, but it's almost certainly just a matter of time. A mockingbird's song is an echo of the chorus of sounds that surround it.

So according to the character of Atticus, Scout’s father, to kill a bird that repeats what it hears from the whole community of birds (or car alarms) is a sin. That is the bird that embodies the essence of the community. A mockingbird is an avian newspaper, reflecting back every voice and every song from every member, great or small.

As with the car alarm above, if you add your own sounds to what the mockingbird hears daily, that will enter the bird’s daily song. The CIA Mockingbird operation was to pay (and later coerce) members of the media to promote news items and talking points in order to shape opinions and change the culture. Essentially, this is killing the mockingbird by diluting and replacing the original, authentic voices in the community with plastic imitations of the real thing. One silenced voice, like the accused man Tom Robinson’s, diminishes the whole, just as in this passage from John Donne’s Meditation XVII:

So what does David DePape have to do with mockingbirds? Pour yourself a beverage and settle in for some pure theorizing as well as a lot of cold, hard genealogy facts.

There’s a Mockingbird 2.0.

Remember the 2018 video of all the talking heads around the country reading the same script? That link will take you to an amusing callout by NBC of the Sinclair Media Group mashup (dozens of lockstep news anchors chanting in unison in a parody of Operation Mockingbird), where the NBC host even slips in the word “mock” in his own disingenuous commentary.

What the NBC news hosts are doing is performing a reverse psyop on their viewers. They are still using Trump as the focal point of hate, but that’s how they get the attention of the audience; having snagged them with the hate bait, the anchors can drip a little soft truth in their ears: that replacing the authentic voices of an independent media with the scripted homogeneity of the Sinclair group news outlets is a bad idea. And dangerous to our democracy.

This is what I call Mockingbird 2.0. It is essentially a reverse psyop (psychological operation), that uses the same tactics as the original op, but this time to deprogram the viewers and invite agreement that independent thinking is a good thing (I hope you spotted the irony there).

Mockingbird 1.0 relied on outrageous, scary events (authored by our own government) to shape narratives and craft social consent. I remember my own red-blooded patriotic response to the first Iraq war, walking into open churches, praying for our armed forces, giving my toddlers American flags to wave. Psyoped into approving a war I knew nothing about, and wouldn’t have consented to if I knew more.

Beginning with Columbine, the false flags got more personal, to bring fear right into our homes and families and rend our hearts. There was 24 hour coverage of “natural” disasters. The media also gaslit and villainized those politicians and celebrities that opposed them, to discourage us from questioning their narrative. So what is Mockingbird 2.0 doing to reverse this? Besides making Trump the willing “villain” of the piece?

It’s a little early to forecast the end of this operation, but we’ve already seen false flag shootings at schools where the various narratives are confused and conflicting. New data contradicts original data from the scene. News articles present the heart-rending tragedies…except the families don’t appear in the public record, or there are too many conflicting or alternate records to make a secure identification.

Mockingbird 2.0 is also imitating events from Mockingbird 1.0, such as the Uvalde school being torn down, just as the Sandy Hook school and neighborhood were demolished after the Mockingbird 1.0 traumatic false flag event. But strangely, details continue to emerge in an inorganic way that casts doubt on all the other “facts.” I think this is deliberate, a reverse psyop to encourage people to think actively and question the media-driven narrative.

Take David DePape. I’m a genealogist, so I went on a hunt for his past. I found him in one record in San Francisco, and in a couple of Bay Area news stories. David appears in this 2008 article as the father of Gypsy Taub’s three children. Here is David DePape’s one residential record:

Note that the database stops at 1993, and David’s birth year is given as 1980. If that’s not a typo, David is unlikely to have been an adult when he lived at this address. I found Oxane “Gypsy” Taub at the same address in the same database.

First, since when did a teenager or youngster get his own listing in a residential record? Was he the renter? Did he have his own phone number? Did he live there without parents? We are told in this article that Gypsy’s sons are named Daniel and Nebosvod, and her daughter is Inti Gonzalez.

Gypsy Taub is an incredible piece of work; one might say, a magnum opus, in fact. A fiction. In one article she claims to have met David DePape in Hawaii in 2000, in another she claims to have married him (this article seems to have disappeared, as I can’t find it now). If she met him in 2000, perhaps they used time travel to both be living at the same apartment in San Francisco in the 1990s.

I looked up all the listings for this address and found some anomalies; a reverse lookup using the address does not turn up Taub or DePape. That is a HUGE red flag and suggests there have been database additions that don’t belong there. Also, there are several listings at this address in the same database with Russian and Chinese names whose residential histories also do not add up. It’s possible that one or more apartments at 338 32nd Ave. in the Richmond District of San Francisco were at one time accommodation addresses for…dare I say it? Russian, Chinese, and US operatives?

My search also led me to the 1980s arts community of Los Angeles. One of Gypsy’s numerous residential records shows her listed at a four bedroom house in the Van Nuys area, along with David Taub and David’s mother, artist Cynthia A. Ebin-Taub (now known at Cynthia A. Ebin), among many, many others.

Side note: David Taub was a CalTech microbiology graduate in the early 90s (the same record above also lists his residence years at CalTech). He was mentioned in this article about CalTech’s famous “Ditch Day” in 1988. Here is his LinkedIn profile. He’s a math professor at a Swedish university now, with publications on cryptology and mathematics in his CV. He has also published a dystopian novel. Anyone want to ask David and his mom about Gypsy?

But back to the DePape story: it just gets more hilarious. Now we get the "info" that he's been renting a room from Malcolm Lubliner, famous artist and photographer who was part of the LA art scene exactly when David Taub's mom, Cynthia A. Ebin, was earning her art degree and becoming a noted artist. Golly gee. They both list Otis Art Institute in their CVs. It’s not a stretch to say these two denizens of the 1970s-80s L.A. arts community must have known each other; perhaps Ebin took Lubliner’s classes. Here he is, teaching in the 60s in the same Van Nuys neighborhood where the Taub family later surfaces.

So why is Lubliner putting his reputation on the line for David DePape? Malcolm Lubliner, a famous artist and photographer, rents a room to a nut case with violent tendencies during the shutdown. Um, highly doubtful. Yet this well respected man put his own safety and his life's work and reputation on the line to offer a room to this insane homeless degenerate. That's either incredible disinterested generosity or a logical disconnect; it will require some fancy footwork with the narrative to make it sound even remotely plausible.

Every detail added to this story makes it more fantastic, like a whack-a-mole game for researchers. It’s so bizarre and deliberately confusing that it resembles the Uvalde false flag, where every new interview contradicts previous statements, and every person mentioned has a dubious history and/or connections to those who have.

I’m as sure as I can be that the story of Paul Pelosi’s attacker is false, as well as a false flag (a cover story to distract from true events). Those promoting this story, or treating it as factual, are either deluding themselves or the public. It falls apart at every effort to get at the facts. There’s no there there, as Gertrude Stein famously said of Oakland, CA. The quotation might well apply to San Francisco. The mockingbirds in this San Fransisco tale are imitating car alarms and ambulances. There are no true voices left. We should ask ourselves why.

###