Forum Posts

intel
Jul 29, 2022
In Politics
Source At the 13.26 min mark. #UKColumnNews
UK Government Propaganda Network content media
0
0
1
intel
Jul 27, 2022
In Information Warfare
Source There is so much to analyse in this photograph. #Orwellian
Boris Johnson presents a Sir Winston Churchill Leadership Award to the President of Ukraine content media
0
0
1
intel
Jul 25, 2022
In General
Video Part 1: My Trip Down South [England] Part 2: The effects of "Diversity" Part 3: Isolation, Indoctrination & Intimidation Watch here
The "3 I's" of Propaganda by Laura Towler content media
0
0
1
intel
Jul 25, 2022
In Information Warfare
Online censorship is becoming increasingly normalized as growing restrictions, deplatforming and its other manifestations have become so pervasive that many have simply come to accept it. by WHITNEY WEBB JUL 20, 2022 Online censorship is becoming increasingly normalized as growing restrictions, deplatforming and its other manifestations have become so pervasive that many have simply come to accept it. This “new normal” for free speech is as insidious as it has been gradual, as we are increasingly being trained to accept unconstitutional limitations on what we can express on the websites that dominate online socialization. Like so much of our lives, social interaction has moved online at a rapid pace in the last decade, meaning that restrictions imposed upon online speech have a disproportionate effect on speech in general. The argument that is often deployed to dismiss concerns regarding online censorship is the claim that the dominant social media companies are private, not public, entities. However, in reality, the Big Tech firms that dominate our online lives, particularly Google and Facebook, were either created with some involvement of the U.S. national security state or have become major U.S. government and/or military contractors over the past two decades.(i,ii,iii,iv,v) When it comes to censoring and deplatforming individuals for claims that run counter to U.S. government narratives, it should be clear that Google-owned YouTube, and other tech platforms owned by contractors to the U.S. military and intelligence communities, have a major conflict of interest in their stifling of speech. The line between “private” Silicon Valley and the public sector has become increasingly blurred and it is now a matter of record that these companies have illegally passed information onto intelligence services, like the National Security Agency (NSA), for blatantly unconstitutional surveillance programs aimed at American civilians.(vi) All indications point to the military-industrial complex having expanded into the military-technology-industrial complex. These days, one need only look at important government commissions — such as the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI), headed by former Google/Alphabet CEO Eric Schmidt — to see how this de facto public-private partnership between Silicon Valley and the national security state functions, and its outsized role in setting important tech-related policies for both the private and public sectors. For example, that commission, largely comprised of representatives of the military, intelligence community and the scions of Big Tech, has helped set policy on “countering disinformation” online. More specifically, it has recommended weaponizing Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the express purpose of identifying online accounts to deplatform and speech to censor, framing this recommendation as essential to U.S. national security as it relates to “information warfare.”(vii,viii) There are already several companies competing to market an AI-powered censorship engine to the national security state as well as the private sector. One of these companies is Primer AI, a “machine intelligence” company that “builds software machines that read and write in English, Russian, and Chinese to automatically unearth trends and patterns across large volumes of data.” The company publicly states that their work “supports the mission of the intelligence community and broader DOD by automating reading and research tasks to enhance the speed and quality of decision-making.” Their current roster of clients includes the U.S. military, U.S. intelligence, major American companies like Walmart and private “philanthropic” organizations like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.(ix) Primer’s founder, Sean Gourley, who previously created AI programs for the military to track insurgents in post-invasion Iraq, asserted in an April 2020 blog post that “computational warfare and disinformation campaigns will, in 2020, become a more serious threat than physical war, and we will have to rethink the weapons we deploy to fight them.”(x) In that same post, Gourley argued for the creation of a “Manhattan Project for truth” that would create a publicly available Wikipedia-style database built off of “knowledge bases [that] already exist inside many countries’ intelligence agencies for national security purposes.” Gourley wrote that “this effort would be ultimately about building and enhancing our collective intelligence and establishing a baseline for what’s true or not.” He concludes his blog post by stating that “in 2020, we will begin to weaponize truth.” Since that year, Primer has been under contract with the U.S. military to “develop the first-ever machine learning platform to automatically identify and assess suspected disinformation.”(xi) That the term “suspected disinformation” was used is no accident, as many instances of online censorship involve merely assertions, as opposed to confirmations, that censored speech is part of a nation state-connected or “bad actor”-connected organized disinformation campaign. While those campaigns do exist, legitimate and constitutionally protected speech that deviates from the “official” or government-sanctioned narrative are frequently censored under these metrics, often with little to no ability to meaningfully appeal the censor’s decision. In other cases, posts “suspected” of being disinformation or that are flagged as such (sometimes erroneously) by social media algorithms, are removed or hidden from public view without the poster’s knowledge. In addition, “suspected disinformation” can be used to justify the censorship of speech that is inconvenient for particular governments, corporations and groups, as there is no need to have evidence or present a coherent case that said content is disinformation — one must only cast suspicion upon it in order to have it censored. Further complicating this issue is the fact that some claims initially labeled “disinformation” later become accepted fact or recognized as legitimate speech. This has happened on more than one occasion during the COVID-19 crisis, where content creators had their accounts deleted or their content censored just for broaching issues like the lab-leak hypothesis as well as questions over mask and vaccine efficacy, among many other issues.(xii, xiii) A year or two later, much of this supposed “disinformation” was subsequently admitted to include legitimate avenues of journalistic inquiry and the initial, blanket censorship on these topics was done at the behest of public and private actors alike due to their inconvenience to what had once been the prevailing narrative.(xiv, xv) Primer is only one of several companies seeking to create a world where “truth” is defined by the U.S. national security state, with that rigid definition then being enforced by Big Tech companies with no room for debate. Brian Raymond, a former official for the CIA and the National Security Council who now serves as Primer’s vice president, openly wrote about this in November 2020 for Foreign Policy. In that article, he stated: “Companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google are increasingly working with U.S. defense agencies to educate future software engineers, cybersecurity experts, and scientists. Eventually, once public-private trust is fully restored, the U.S. government and Silicon Valley can forge a united front in order to effectively take on fake news.” (xvi) Particularly troubling is the fact that Raymond’s chief example of “fake news” at the time was the New York Post’s reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop emails, which — well over a year after the fact — has now been confirmed as authentic.(xvii) Having the government, and more specifically the national security state, which has conducted a litany of confirmed disinformation and propaganda campaigns over the years, define truth and reality is hardly consistent with its professed goal of protecting “democracy.”(xviii) Instead, it protects the interests of the national security state itself, whose own interests are tightly interwoven with those of the country’s increasingly entrenched (and enriched) oligarchy. Not only do we have the national security state in a de facto public-private partnership with Big Tech to censor online information — Now, with the recent launch of the Biden administration’s war on domestic terror, we have the same national security state framing “suspected disinformation” and “conspiracy theories” as national security threats. The policy documents that outline this new war note that a major “pillar” of the government’s entire strategy is to eliminate online material that they claim promotes “domestic terrorist” ideologies, including those that “connect and intersect with conspiracy theories and other forms of disinformation and misinformation.” The proliferation of “dangerous” information “on Internet-based communications platforms such as social media, file-upload sites and end-to-end encrypted platforms”, it argues, “[…] can combine and amplify threats to public safety.” The “front lines” of this war are “overwhelmingly private-sector online platforms.” The problem with this framing is that the Biden administration’s definition of “domestic terrorist” used in these same documents is incredibly broad. For example, it labels opposition to corporate globalization, capitalism and government overreach as “terrorist” ideologies. This means that online content discussing “anti-government” and/or “anti-authority” ideas, which may simply be criticisms of government policy or the national power structure, could soon be treated in the same way as online Al Qaeda or ISIS propaganda. In addition, intelligence agencies in both the U.K. and U.S. have moved to treat critical reporting of COVID-19 vaccines and mandates as “extremist” propaganda, despite the fact that a significant percentage of Americans have chosen not to get the vaccine and/or oppose vaccine mandates. In what appears to be the apparent fulfilment of Primer AI executives’ pleas, the Biden administration also underscores the need to “increase digital literacy” among the American public, while censoring “harmful content” disseminated by “domestic terrorists” as well as by “hostile foreign powers seeking to undermine American democracy.” The latter is a clear reference to the claim that critical reporting of U.S. government policy, particularly its military and intelligence activities abroad, was the product of “Russian disinformation,” a now-discredited claim that was used to heavily censor independent media. Regarding “increasing digital literacy,” the policy documents make it clear that this refers to a new “digital literacy” education curriculum that is currently being developed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S.’ domestically-focused intelligence agency, for a domestic audience. This “digital literacy” initiative would have previously violated U.S. law, until the Obama administration worked with Congress to repeal the Smith-Mundt Act, which lifted the World War II-era ban on the U.S. government directing propaganda at domestic audiences. The Biden administration’s war on domestic terror policy also makes it clear that the censorship, as described above, is part of a “broader priority” of the administration, which it defines as follows: “[…] enhancing faith in government and addressing the extreme polarization, fueled by a crisis of disinformation and misinformation often channeled through social media platforms, which can tear Americans apart and lead some to violence.” In other words, fostering trust in government while simultaneously censoring “polarizing” voices who distrust or criticize the government is a key policy goal behind the Biden administration’s new domestic-terror strategy. In addition, this statement implies that Americans not agreeing with each other is problematic and frames that disagreement as a driver of violence, as opposed to a normal occurrence in a supposed democracy that has constitutional protections for freedom of speech. From this framing, it is implied that such violence can only be stopped if all Americans trust the government and agree with its narratives and “truths.” Framing deviations from these narratives as national security threats, as is done in this policy document, invites the labeling of non-conforming speech as “violence” or as “inciting violence” through the fomentation of disagreement. As a result, those who post non-conforming speech online may soon find themselves being labeled as “terrorists” by the state. If we are to accept the “new normal” of online censorship, these efforts to prohibit debate and legitimate criticisms of government policy in the name of “national security” will continue unimpeded. In short order, the First Amendment will be redefined so that it only protects government-sanctioned speech, not the freedom of speech, as was intended. While such measures are often framed as necessary to “protect” democracy, the elimination and imminent criminalization of legitimate speech is the true threat to democracy, one that should deeply disturb all Americans. If the national security state controls and enforces the only permissible narratives and the only permitted version of the “truth,” they will then also control human perception, and — as a consequence — human behavior. Such control has long been a goal of some within the U.S.’ military and intelligence communities, but it is anathema to the values and desires of the vast majority of Americans. If there is no meaningful pushback against the increasing fusion of the national security state and Big Tech, Americans are guaranteed to lose much more than just the freedom of speech, as controlling speech is just the first step towards controlling all behavior. Americans would do well to remember the warning of Benjamin Franklin as the U.S. government moves to criminalize free speech under the guise of protecting national security; “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” ENDNOTES: i Webb, Whitney. “The Military Origins of Facebook.” Unlimited Hangout, 12 Apr. 2021, unlimitedhangout.com/2021/04/investigative-reports/the-military-origins-of-facebook/. ii Ahmed, Nafeez. “How the CIA Made Google.” Medium, INSURGE intelligence, 22 Jan. 2015, medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-google-e836451a959e. iii Feiner, Lauren. “Google’s Cloud Division Lands Deal with the Department of Defense.” CNBC, 20 May 2020, www.cnbc.com/2020/05/20/googles-cloud-division-lands-deal-with-the-department-of-defense.html. iv Novet, Jordan. “Microsoft Wins U.S. Army Contract for Augmented Reality Headsets, Worth up to $21.9 Billion over 10 Years.” CNBC, 31 Mar. 2021, www.cnbc.com/2021/03/31/microsoft-wins-contract-to-make-modified-hololens-for-us-army.html. v Shane, Scott, and Daisuke Wakabayashi. ““The Business of War”: Google Employees Protest Work for the Pentagon.” The New York Times, 4 Apr. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/technology/google-letter-ceo-pentagon-project.html. vi “Commissioners.” NSCAI, www.nscai.gov/commissioners/. vii Interim Report and Third Quarter Recommendations. 2020. viii PrimerAI Homepage.” PrimerAI, primer.ai/. ix “To Fight Disinformation, We Need to Weaponise the Truth.” PrimerAI, 20 Apr. 2020, primer.ai/blog/to-fight-disinformation-we-need-to-weaponise-the-truth/. x AI, Primer. “SOCOM and US Air Force Enlist Primer to Combat Disinformation.” www.prnewswire.com, 1 Oct. 2020, www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/socom-and-us-air-force-enlist-primer-to-combat-disinformation-301143716.html/. xi Forget Counterterrorism, the United States Needs a Counter-Disinformation Strategy.” PrimerAI, 16 Nov. 2020, primer.ai/blog/forget-counterterrorism-the-united-states-needs-a-counter-disinformation/. xii Golding, Bruce. “Washington Post Joins New York Times in Finally Admitting Emails from Hunter Biden Laptop Are Real.” New York Post, 30 Mar. 2022, nypost.com/2022/03/30/washington-post-admits-hunter-biden-laptop-is-real/. xiii Greenwald, Glenn. “The CIA’s Murderous Practices, Disinformation Campaigns, and Interference in Other Countries Still Shape the World Order and U.S. Politics.” The Intercept, 21 May 2020, theintercept.com/2020/05/21/the-cias-murderous-practices-disinformation-campaigns-and-interference-in-other-countries-still-shapes-the-world-order-and-u-s-politics/. xiv Ferreira, Roberto Garcia. “The Cia and Jacobo Arbenz: History of a Disinformation Campaign .” Journal of Third World Studies, vol. 25, no. 2, 2008, pp. 59–81, www.jstor.org/stable/45194479, 10.2307/45194479.f. xv National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism, June 2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/National-Strategy-for-Countering-Domestic-Terrorism.pdf. xvi Webb, Whitney. “US - UK Intel Agencies Declare Cyber War on Independent Media.” Unlimitedhangout.com, 11 Nov. 2020, unlimitedhangout.com/2020/11/reports/us-uk-intel-agencies-declare-cyber-war-on-independent-media/. xvii Webb, Whitney. “Lifting of US Propaganda Ban Gives New Meaning to Old Song.” MintPress News, 12 Feb. 2018, www.mintpressnews.com/planting-stories-in-the-press-lifting-of-us-propaganda-ban-gives-new-meaning-to-old-song/237493/. xviii National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism, June 2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/National-Strategy-for-Countering-Domestic-Terrorism.pdf/. Source: Published in Bitcoin Magazine
THE WAR ON DISSENT content media
0
0
1
intel
Jul 25, 2022
Sudden Invented Adult Death Syndrome Cartoon [SADS] content media
0
0
1
intel
Jul 25, 2022
In Health
Iain Davis accurately predicts the outcome of the BBC's hatchet job: Source Listen to the full analysis here. At 8.40 mins.
UK Column News | BBC Propaganda: Unvaccinated with Prof. Hannah Fry content media
0
0
1
intel
Jul 14, 2022
In Information Warfare
At 23:07 mins - Western Propaganda Flows Around Ukraine Source: https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/uk-column-news-11th-july-2022
BBC and UK Intelligence Propaganda in Ukraine content media
0
0
2
intel
Jun 25, 2022
In Politics
Exercising Discernment and Reclaiming Your Mind in an Era of “Global Hyper-Propaganda” By Merinda Teller, MPH, PhD Weston A. Price Foundation As historians acknowledge, propaganda—and other systematic efforts to influence public opinion—are nothing new. The Roman empire, for example, was famously skilled in the use of opinion-molding techniques, finding many ways to juxtapose its portrayal of Rome as the repre­sentative of “peace, good government, and the rule of law” against a caricature of other societ­ies as “barbaric, lawless and dangerous”—with the implication being that “such people could not but benefit from Roman rule.”1 Classical Romans and Greeks considered the arts of grammar, dialectic and rhetoric the three pillars of critical thought and “free thinking minds”—with the idea being that a person “must master the language of a subject in order to think, and. . . be able to think in order to persuade.”2 To strengthen the third pillar and make their arguments more riveting and persuasive, Greek rhetoricians analyzed successful speeches by “lawyers, demagogues, and politicians”—identifying tactics such as the use of “sonorous and solemn language, carefully gauged humour, artful congeniality, appropriate mixtures of logical and illogical argument, and flattery.”3 It is no coincidence that the Merriam-Webster dictionary lists “spellbinder” as a synonym of rhetorician. Two years into the planet-wide coup d’état4 ushered in by a putative coronavirus, we have entered a new era of “global hyper-propagan­da,”5 facilitated by smartphones and other invasive tools of individual monitoring and con­trol.6 In fact, New York University propaganda expert Mark Crispin Miller suggests that we have been witnessing, since 2020, a carefully planned “propaganda masterpiece”—a “global propaganda spectacle of unprecedented scale and sophistication” so effective that it “prevents people from even looking for the truth.”5 With a large swath of the population con­tinuing to accept tyrannical policies and self-destructive Covid injections, it is evident that “constant, unremitting, one-sided” messaging and the skillful engineering of fear—success­ful propaganda’s hallmarks—have been all too effective. Miller says, “This particular instance of fear-mongering is the most persuasive, the most compelling, the most devastating kind of fear-mongering that’s ever. . . been used in the history of propaganda—and that’s really saying something.” Journalist Caitlin Johnstone, a critic and analyst of “the way power structures use mass-scale narrative manipulation to advance their agendas,” argues that it’s essential to recognize that the powerful “lie to us about everything” and to “snap out of the trance,” though she ad­mits that doing so takes time and effort and re­quires “a deep, sustained curiosity about what’s really going on underneath all the muddled mental chatter.”7 The remainder of this article discusses how propaganda has evolved and thrived in modern times; understanding how it plays out at both the “mass” and individual levels is an important step toward thinking more clearly about the events of 2020 and beyond—and taking stock of what we are up against. Twentieth-Century Pioneers and Critics As sophisticated as the Greek and Roman techniques of persuasion may have been in their day, there is little doubt that twentieth-century communication technologies introduced new and even more powerful opportunities to engi­neer consent and shape “the organized habits and opinions of the masses.”8 A legendary fig­ure in this regard was “Father of Spin” Edward Bernays (1891–1995)—one of the century’s “foremost salesmen of ideas”9—whose post-WWI books helped propel propaganda to new heights. As the twice-over nephew of Sigmund Freud (and the great-uncle of Netflix co-founder Marc Bernays Randolph), Bernays was acutely aware of the influence that could accrue from tapping into the public’s unconscious, famously stating, “Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.” In 1927, communication theorist Harold Lasswell published an influential book Pro­paganda Technique in the World War.10 An interesting historical footnote for our times is the name given to Lasswell’s mass persua­sion model—the “hypodermic needle theory” or “hypodermic-syringe model.” The model (sometimes also referred to as the “magic bullet theory”) was anchored in Lasswell’s conviction that human behavior could be manipulated “in a controlled and conditioned way” by “injecting” the public with “direct, immediate and power­ful” mass media messages (giving new meaning to the phrase “getting under someone’s skin”).11 Nowadays, communication theorists debate whether the “hypodermic effect” is obsolete, with some asserting that modern-day audiences are too “literate” to take media messages at face value.12 Others argue, however, that as informa­tion and communication technologies—and especially social media—have made audiences “actively passive” (“very active in responding to a false message but passive in making choices on whether the message [is] true or false”), the model not only “still holds significance” but is, in fact, resurgent.11,13 Along with its enthusiastic proponents, pro­paganda has always had detractors. World War II historians noted, for example, the influence of Bernays’ ideas on the infamous Joseph Goeb­bels, who had a highly successful twelve-year reign (1933–1945) as the Third Reich’s minister of propaganda. After the war, it did not take long for social critics to draw attention to the parallels between Nazi Germany’s “propaganda industry” and America’s “culture industry.”12 In his 1957 muckraking book The Hidden Persuaders, author Vance Packard wrote that some of his propaganda-creating informants “were so frank and detailed about their. . . operations that. . . I at times wondered if they had become insensitive to some of the anti-humanistic implications of what they were do­ing.”14 More than half a century later, a writer reflecting on Bernays’ legacy suggested that the “brazen” techniques of manipulation launched by Bernays lacked a moral compass and tended to encourage “a patronizing and ultimately cynical view of human nature and human pos­sibilities, one as likely to destroy lives as to build them up.”9 Tools and Agents of Propaganda An extensive entry in the Encyclopedia Bri­tannica notes that propaganda’s agents generally go by socially acceptable names: public rela­tions professional (the term coined by Bernays), researcher, analytic specialist, information specialist, media specialist, opinion manager, lobbyist, psychopolitical analyst and so on.3 Back in the 1950s, Packard had a less sooth­ing expression for these individuals: “depth manipulators.” “[I]n their operations beneath the surface of conscious life,” Packard worried, these manipulators were “starting to acquire a power of persuasion that is becoming a matter of justifiable public scrutiny and concern.”14 According to the encyclopedia, these profes­sional hackers of the subconscious rely on a wide variety of signs and symbols to communicate their messages. Signs may include sounds (for example, words or music), gestures, postures, structures (for example, monuments), items of clothing (such as uniforms) or visual signs. The swastika or hammer and sickle represent two examples of historically potent symbols. Media—whether print, electronic or audio­visual—are the primary channels that modern propagandists use to communicate the signs and symbols they select to manipulate the minds of their target audiences (whom they call “reactors”). Among the various types of media, Encyclopedia Britannica emphasizes that the Internet and television are particularly effective tools of persuasion—especially for large-scale propaganda efforts—providing a “mutually reinforcing” capability to “convey a great many types of signs simultaneously.” With the help of artificial intelligence (AI) and software, smart­phones and other “smart” devices can also tailor propaganda down to the individual level. Controlled Opposition Persuasive public speakers—“front men,” “Trojan horses” or “dummy leaders”—also make effective propagandists, particularly if they are individuals who the target audience is “likely to listen to or appreciate”3 or are “someone everyone can admire.”15 These agents of “controlled opposition”—a form of counter­intelligence propaganda—“pretend to oppose the establishment while covertly serving it,”16 working to “undermine and garble the message of truth and freedom.”15 Capturing the public’s imagination—often through adept use of the “sonorous language,” careful humor and “artful congeniality” so admired by ancient Greece’s spellbinders—con­trolled opposition figures skillfully intersperse propaganda with bits of truth, but “only aspects of the truth that the establishment tolerates,” whereas “truths that the establishment wants the masses to ignore or remain ignorant of are omitted or spoken of as half-truths.”17 As one website puts it, “Controlled opposition gives us amazing nuggets of information, get[s] us [to] follow them like heroes, then ultimately spin[s] us off into la la land.”18 Related to the phenomenon of controlled opposition are the terms “limited hangout”—the “deliberate revelation of some information in order to prevent the discovery of other, more important information” [italics in original]19— and “modified limited hangout” (the mixing of “partial admissions with misinformation”).20 According to the Wikispooks website, “By presenting some true and useful information, a source may gain credibility, which can be put to use later, if a credible source is desired to dis­seminate disinformation” [italics in original].20 As Catherine Austin Fitts (former investment banker and founder of the Solari Report21) explains it: “A ‘limited hangout’ is a partial confession, a mea culpa, if you will, that leaves the es­sence of a crime or covert reality hidden. Because it includes some small part of the truth, the limited hangout is irresistibly attractive to dissidents and political critics whose thirst for such truth makes them jump at the dangled scraps. Once the sys­tem’s watchdogs are busy chewing on the limited hangout, the guilty players can go about their illegal business for a new round of unaccountable, semi-secret mayhem.”22 Johnstone believes it is not possible to ascertain whether someone is controlled opposition or not—and says not to bother trying. Instead of attempting to figure out whether someone is a “hero” or “controlled op­position,” she suggests staying focused on dissecting the narratives being pushed by those in power.16 However, others assert that an influencer’s history, language and behavior—as well as red flags like improbable overnight popularity—can provide tell tale clues. Brain Waves and Entrainment The modern media and technologies that are now so ubiquitous— movies, “smart” TVs, smartphones, social media, search engines and more—facilitate another powerful programming strategy (one that encyclopedias diplomatically leave unmentioned), which can be imple­mented at both the individual and crowd levels: subliminal brain-wave entrainment. Neurofeedback experts explain brain-wave entrainment as “a method to stimulate the brain into entering a specific state by using a pulsing sound, light, or electromagnetic field.”23 When the brain hears a repetitive pattern—whether “a repetitive pattern of words. . . a repetitive cadence of rhythm, or. . . a repetitive acoustic sound” emitted via loudspeaker— “the brain will follow that sound” and “will fall into rhythm with that sound.”24 This “frequency following response” is a natural tendency of the human brain.24 Entrainment builds on modern scientists’ (and politicians’) fascina­tion with the brain—an interest that burgeoned in the late nineteenth century when European scientists began exploring ways to measure the brain’s electrical activity. In 1924, German psychiatrist Hans Berger identified what he called “Berger’s waves”—the brain waves now known as alpha waves—after recording the first human electroencephalogram (EEG).25 Contemporary neuroscientists describe alpha brain waves as “a bridge from the external world to the internal world, and vice versa,” with the hallmark of the alpha brain state being relaxation and “passive attention.”26 Nazi scientists were reportedly “obsessed” with mind control27 and paid close attention to Berger’s brain discoveries. Though they forced Berger into retirement in 1938 and banned him from conducting any further EEG work (Berger committed apparent suicide in 1941),25 there is little doubt that unsettling forms of brain research (much of it later carried out in con­centration camps) remained a top Nazi priority. As explained by scientist Adam Trombly in a 2011 interview with Catherine Austin Fitts, the Nazis were not only aware of the “frequency following response” but “very intentionally acoustically designed” large stadiums “to aug­ment and enhance alpha entrainment”: “[W]hat the German scientist community had discovered was, if you played alpha waves to patients who were having prob­lems with their nervous system or psycho­sis or whatever, or even if they were just anxious, if you played alpha waves to these people they would become calm. Their brains would fall into a rhythm with the alpha waves. . . . They would feel relaxed, and open and therefore more suggestible.”24 In other words, in the alpha brain-wave state of pleasant relaxation that entrainment induces, people become less discriminating—“because that discriminating faculty has kind of been relaxed away”—and thus are more susceptible to subliminal programming. Practitioners of neurofeedback warn that brain-wave entrainment, in some instances, can produce “unwanted side-effects,” including “increased anxiety, convulsions, overwhelming subconscious images, nausea, headaches, dizzi­ness or increased heartbeat,” or “feeling a little unusual.”23 They also warn that the developing brains of those under twenty-six years of age are “more sensitive.” Cell Phones and Other Entrainment Tools The Nazis’ entrainment efforts, as per Trombly, were “very, very primitive compared to what we’re seeing today”—and particularly in the United States, which is as obsessed as Nazi Germany once was with what military personnel refer to as “mind war.”28 Consider a patent approved by the U.S. Pat­ent Office in 1992, titled “Silent Subliminal Pre­sentation System.”29 The system was designed to encode subliminal (meaning “below the thresh­old of audibility to the conscious mind”) audio frequencies with “desired intelligence.” As para­phrased in 2020 by writer Jeremy James—who defines subliminal entrainment as a “long-term and strategic” technique “where sets of affirma­tions build on one another over time to produce deeply held convictions which are impervious to reason”—this patented system would “enable a person’s mind to be hacked and a message of any kind implanted—all without his knowledge.”29 Other related U.S. patents include a 1990 patent for “an apparatus and method for remotely scan­ning people’s brain waves” and a 1998 patent for the use of directed microwave radiation “to produce certain effects” in humans.28 The mass rollout of cell phones and smart­phones introduced further opportunities to in­fluence human moods, thoughts and even bodily functions—in effect operating as psychotronic weapons.28 (Psychotronics—Mind+Device—is “the science of mind-body-environment rela­tionships. . . concerned with the interactions of matter, energy, and consciousness.”)30 The pro­cess of brain entrainment, activist Peter Kirby wrote in 2018, “is fundamental to psychotronic weaponry.”28 Providing a “limited hangout” on this topic, Scientific American published an article back in 2008 titled “Mind Control by Cell Phone.”31 At the time, Nokias were the world’s most popular cell phones and the iPhone had barely been introduced. Explaining that electromagnetic signals from cell phones could alter brainwaves and behavior, the article cited research showing that when cell phones were transmitting, “The power of a characteristic brain-wave pattern called alpha waves. . . was boosted signifi­cantly”—in talk mode, cell phones seemed to be “particularly well-tuned to frequencies that affect brainwave activity.” Scientific American also noted researchers’ professed astonishment that “the effects of the disrupted brain-wave patterns continued long after the phone was switched off.” One of the quoted researchers disingenuously asked, “One wonders if with dif­ferent doses, durations, or other devices, would there be greater effects?” Brain-Machine Interfaces In the twenty-first century, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), established in 1958 by President Eisenhower, has become, with its almost four billion dol­lar annual budget, “the world’s most powerful scientific military agency.”27 DARPA is driving the research agenda for the field known as brain-computer interface (BCI) or brain-machine interface (BMI)—turning efforts to connect the human brain directly with the outside en­vironment into “one of the fastest expanding fields of scientific inquiry.”32 DARPA fund­ing—distributed among defense contractors, universities, university-corporate consortia and startups—is behind “[a]lmost every advance or major technology in the [BCI] field,” with more of the agency’s funding reportedly going to “invasive” interfaces such as brain implants than to “non-invasive” ones.33 It is worth noting that DARPA, which works closely with both the Department of Defense and the Department of Health and Human Ser­vices, played a lead role in the development of the mRNA technology that made its debut with Covid vaccines.34 It has also worked to develop hydrogel nanotechnology and nanotech biosensors that can be embedded under the skin. As subdermal technologies and implantable microchips exit the realm of science fiction,35 there is good reason to worry about the “possibility of misuse of in-body nanotechnology by totalitarian govern­ments,”34 including for mind manipulation, surveillance and financial control purposes. An account in Forbes about BCI “breakthroughs” matter-of-factly reported in 2019 that BCI and mind control were moving “one step closer to becoming reality,” spearheaded by “high profile and powerful corpora­tions” such as Facebook and Elon Musk’s Neuralink, as well as startups like Kernel and BrainCo.36 In a surprisingly honest assessment of these technologies’ dark transhumanist agenda, the Forbes writer noted that BCIs will “allow for the causation to flow. . . from the outside world into our brains,” something “that’s currently better left to a Philip K. Dick or William Gibson novel”: “[T]he intent and direction is clear: hook people up directly to the in­ternet and to smart technology, and not just to permit them to control things remotely, but to influence or even control how they behave. [. . .] And at the same time, the possibility of being ‘connected to AI’ would mean that our actions will flow less from our own judgments and thoughts on what’s in our best interests, and more from what data and algorithms have decided is best for us.”36 Keeping Our Wits About Us In a prescient 2017 blog post about controlled opposition and the “vaccine frame-up,” health freedom advocate and naturopath Rosanne Lindsay described how the two “sides” of the “vaccine debate” often put forth the same message, albeit worded slightly differently: “The frame of The Establishment (CDC) says, ‘Vaccines are safe and effective.’ The controlled opposition says, ‘We are not opposed to vaccines. We just want safe vaccines.’”15 From Lindsay’s perspective, these “value judgments” intentionally exclude any consideration of morality. A less artful—but more moral and evidence-based37—assessment would inevitably lead to a different conclusion, namely, that “‘safe vaccine’ is an oxymoron and a contradiction.”15 One year into the disastrous, genocidal rollout of Covid-19 injec­tions—experimental products with suspiciously secret ingredients and clinical trial data that regulators and manufacturers are trying hard to keep hidden from the public38—Lindsay’s remarks about the “vaccine frame-up” seem even more relevant. As she noted five years ago, the statement “I am not ‘anti-vaccine’” (uttered by some of the celebrity physicians who spoke at the January 23, 2022 “Defeat the Mandates” rally in Washington, DC) smacks of being a “controlled, simulated message”—a “double-negative meant to confuse” rather than a clear statement of principle. At our current historical juncture, as Catherine Austin Fitts explains, much is at stake—with “a smart grid, biometrics, vac­cine passports, digital ID wallets, and digital currency promising to turn into a full-blown social credit system that ends human liberty in the Western world, if we allow it.”39 These mechanisms constitute, in Fitts’ words, an “in­dividualized high-tech trap that is closing in around each one of us.”6 Unfortunately, it is difficult for many people to grasp the reality and power of the propaganda and mind-control technologies that are helping make the global coup go, or to accept the fact that “these technologies are being purposefully used against [each of] us on a routine, daily basis.”28 Fortunately, as activist Peter Kirby puts it, it is still possible for “a relatively small percentage of intelligent and well-informed individuals [to] push the envelope”—and the size of that group is most definitely growing. Michael Lesher of Off-Guardian also re­minds us that while “the essence of humanity is under assault,” the “enemies of humanity have a weak point”—“they do not understand the power contained in each soul that refuses to be duped.”40 SIDEBARS Totalitarianism and Cults: Two Sides of the Same Coin? In October 2020, half a year into the so-called “pandemic,” playwright and satirist CJ Hopkins published a brilliant essay titled “The Covidian Cult,” highlighting “mass conformity to a psychotic official narrative” as a hallmark of totalitarianism.41 Hopkins’ website, appropriately enough, is called “Consent Factory, Inc.” Tracing the parallels between cult leaders and totalitarian leaders, Hopkins pointed out that both use the same techniques—techniques focused on disorienting and controlling the listener’s mind. Somewhat counterintuitively, the fact that the official narrative is frequently “internally inconsistent” and “illogical” strengthens (rather than weakens) leaders’ power, forcing “adherents to attempt to reconcile [the narrative’s] inconsistency and irrationality, and in many cases utter absurdity, in order to remain in good standing with the cult.” The result, says Hopkins, is a sort of mental short-circuiting; eventually, people “give up even trying to think rationally, and just mindlessly parrot whatever nonsensical gibberish the cult leader fills their heads with.” One of the disturbing features of the Covid-initiated push for global totalitarianism, according to Hopkins, is that “instead of the cult existing as an island within the dominant culture, the cult has become the dominant culture,” with those who refuse to join becoming “isolated islands within it” [italics in original]. Fortunately, with truckers now forcing government leaders into hiding, satirists having a field day with beyond-absurd headlines42 and more and more people spotting the holes in the narrative, those “isolated islands” seem to be multiplying. Timeless Rules of Propaganda A couple of years after the appearance of Edward Bernays’ book Crystallizing Public Opinion (1923), Science magazine published a few paragraphs about “propaganda based on psychology,”43 noting that successful propaganda makes use of “simple psychological principles” and “definite rules, well known to the propagandists.” Summarizing those “rules,” the anonymous Science author writing in 1925 advised the following [Note: bulleted format added]: “If you have an idea to put over, keep presenting it incessantly. Keep talking or printing persistently. Avoid argument generally. Don’t admit that there is another side to the question and avoid arousing any associated ideas except those which are favorable. Reserve argument for the small class of people who depend on logical processes, or as a means of attracting attention of those with whom you are not arguing. Connect your idea in every possible way with the known desires of your audience. Remember that desires are more often the basis of the acceptance of ideas than logic. Make your statements clear enough to be understood by your audience. Use direct statement only when you are sure that a basis for acceptance has already been established; otherwise use indirect statement and implications. Use direct statement in such a way that your audience will take it in, but not think too much about it.” Ominously, Science concluded: “For lasting results, aim your propaganda at children and mix it with your teaching.” Five Critical Thinking Recommendations On February 20, 2022, board-certified internal medicine physician Dr. Annie Bukacek shared some thoughts about the “Defeat the Mandates” rally that took place in Washington, DC, on January 23.44 Summarizing Dr. Bukacek’s pre­sentation in Health Impact News, Brian Shilhavy noted Bukacek’s five recommendations for mitigating fear-mongering and using critical thinking, “especially for those authority figures who appear to be on ‘our side.’” In Shilhavy’s words, the five recommendations are as follows: “Be vigilant for an upcoming new and invisible enemy used to scare people into submission. If the corona vari­ants lose the fear factor, they’re going to come up with something else. Be sceptical of any authority figure using the CDC exaggerated death numbers from COVID, that we know are based on improper death certificates and flawed PCR COVID testing. Watch out for anyone promoting an upcoming ‘safe and effective vaccine’ for something even by the exagger­ated CDC numbers has close to a 99 percent survival rate overall, and statistically 100% percent survival rate for the younger generation. Any authority figure who claims to understand the COVID debacle, but ignores the central role of government in this mess, at those individuals you need to take a closer look. Be of good cheer. A COVID positive test does not mean severe illness or death. Scrutinize any authority figure who talks of a positive COVID test as a reason to fear death.”45 Netflix Role in Elite Propaganda The family tree of serial entrepreneur and former Netflix CEO Marc Bernays Randolph includes both Sigmund Freud and Edward Bernays. According to Randolph’s flattering bio on Wikipedia, Randolph had, early on, a “fascination with using computer software to track customers’ buying behavior” and used this interest to fold market research into the Netflix user interface. One of Randolph’s current roles is board member (and investor) of Looker Data Sciences, a “business intelligence” platform owned by Google since 2019. Reed Hastings, Netflix’s other co-founder, is the great-grandson of investment banker and scientist Alfred Lee Loomis, who played a significant role in the development of both radar and the atomic bomb and pioneered EEG techniques for the study of brain waves. Loomis’ son Henry Loomis (Hastings’ grand-uncle), also a physicist, joined his father in researching radar and brain waves and provided Navy radar training at Pearl Harbor during World War II. After the war, Henry worked at the Department of Defense, directed the Office of Intelligence and Research at the United States Information Agency, directed and expanded the Voice of America and served as president of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. In recent years, Netflix’s role as a tool of elite propaganda has become more blatant, with the company signing multi-year deals with the Obamas in 2018 and Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in 2020 to produce films and series. REFERENCES Faulkner N. The official truth: propaganda in the Roman Empire. BBC, Feb. 27, 2011. https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/romanpropaganda_ar­ticle_01.shtml https://www.hamptonroadsclassical.org/trivium Smith BL. “Propaganda.” Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda Catherine Austin Fitts interview – Global financial coup d’état & technocratic slavery that follows. The Last American Vagabond, Dec. 8, 2021. Mark Crispin Miller: “2020 – a propaganda master­piece” (video included). Extremely American, Aug. 3, 2021. Fitts CA. Control is one person at a time. The Solari Report, Jan. 14, 2022. Johnstone C. They don’t just lie to us about wars. They lie to us about everything. Activist Post, Feb. 13, 2022. Borders M. How the centralized media lost its power over the people. Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), Nov. 12, 2018. Gunderman R. The manipulation of the American mind: Edward Bernays and the birth of public relations. The Conversation, Jul. 9, 2015. Lasswell HD. Propaganda Technique in the World War. New York: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co, A.A. Knopf; 1927. Nwabueze C, Okonkwo E. Rethinking the bullet theory in the digital age. Interna­tional Journal of Media, Journalism and Mass Communications. 2018;4(2):1-10. Thompson K. The hypodermic syringe model of audience effects. ReviseSociology, Sept. 4, 2019. What is the hypodermic needle theory? The hypodermic needle theory in a nutshell. FourWeekMBA, n.d. https://fourweekmba.com/hypodermic-needle-theory/ Packard V. The Hidden Persuaders. London: Longmans, Green & Co, 1957. Lindsay R. Controlled opposition in the truth movement. Nature of Healing, May 9, 2017. Johnstone C. How to tell if someone is controlled opposition. CaitlinJohnstone.com, Feb. 11, 2019. Miller MC. What is “controlled opposition”? Read this, then look around. News From Underground, Dec. 2, 2020. WaySide. Controlled opposition. Truth In Plain Sight.com, Mar. 3, 2012. Corbett J. The CIA, the NY Times, and the art of the limited hangout. The Corbett Report, Feb. 2, 2020. https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Limited_hangout https://home.solari.com/ Fitts CA. Will the real economic hit men please stand up? The Solari Report, 2005. https://brainworksneurotherapy.com/what-brainwave-entrainment Fitts CA. Entrainment Technology with Adam Trombly. The Solari Report, August 18, 2011. https://home.solari.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/Solari_Report-Adam_Trom­bly_on_Entrainment-2011-08-18.pdf Sack H. Hans Berger and the electroencephalogram. SciHi Blog, May 21, 2017. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/brain-waves Flores DS. The secret program of U.S. mind control weapons: is it developing in Latin America? Int Phys Med Rehab J. 2018;3(2):145-146. Kirby PA. Your cell phone is a psychotronic weapon of mass mind control. Activist Post, Jan. 22, 2018. James J. Mind Control, Entrainment, and US Patent 5159703. Sept. 11, 2020. http://www.zephaniah.eu/index_htm_files/Mind%20Control%20Entrainment%20and%20US%20Patent%205159703.pdf https://www.psychotronics.org/ Fields RD. Mind control by cell phone. Scientific American, May 7, 2008. Mridha MF, Das SC, Kabir MM, et al. Brain-computer interface: advancement and challenges. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(17);5746. How DARPA drives brain machine interface research. From the Interface, Nov. 22, 2020. https://www.from-the-interface.com/DARPA-funding-BCI-research/ Nelson K. Tiny but toxic: Nanoparticles in vaccines. Wise Traditions. Summer 2021;22(2):77-88. Fitts CA. The injection fraud—It’s not a vaccine. The Solari Report, May 27, 2020. Chandler S. Brain-computer interfaces and mind control move one step closer to becoming reality. Forbes, Sept. 24, 2019. Children’s Health Defense. Read the fine print, part two—nearly 400 adverse reac­tions listed in vaccine package inserts. Aug. 14, 2020. Shilhavy B. Did recent court rulings force the FDA to delay approving Pfizer’s COVID shots for infants? Health Impact News, Feb. 12, 2022. Fitts CA. Control & freedom happen one person at a time with Catherine & Ulrike Granögger. The Solari Report, Feb. 11, 2022. Lesher M. Truth or Covid? (or, “why we know everything they’re telling us is a lie”). Off-Guardian, Jan. 28, 2022. Hopkins CJ. The Covidian cult. Consent Factory, Oct. 13, 2020. This Week in the New Normal #19. Off-Guardian, Jan. 16, 2022. No authors listed. Propaganda based on psychology. Science. 1925;62(1594):xiv. Dr. Annie Bukacek comments on the “Defeat the Mandates” rally. Liberty Fellowship, Kalispell, Montana, Feb. 20, 2022. https://www.bitchute.com/video/mmGhJzGducdT/ Shilhavy B. Montana doctor exposes the “alt doctors” profiting from COVID by promoting fear. Health Impact News, Feb. 25, 2022. This article appeared in Wise Traditions in Food, Farming and the Healing Arts, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Spring 2022 Original Source
Global Hyper Propaganda Campaign content media
0
0
5
intel
May 20, 2022
HOW TO SPOT A FAKESTREAM MEDIA PSYOP / HUGO TALKS content media
0
0
2
intel
May 17, 2022
In Information Warfare
“Everything is a weapon. Even this video.” Source
This unsettling Army recruitment video is a master class in psychological warfare content media
0
0
3
intel
May 17, 2022
In General
Links to the Articles Secret British Black Propaganda Campaign Exposed 17th May 2022
0
0
1
intel
May 16, 2022
How Red is the Little Red School House? Poster content media
0
0
4
intel
May 16, 2022
In What is Propaganda?
By OffGuardian "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate..." - Chomsky This remains true despite the increasingly obvious fact that Chomsky himself is part of that function. What he's describing is the "fake binary". The imposition of the idea that Viewpoint A is the official approved narrative and that Viewpoint B is therefore its antithesis. Points C through Z can therefore be ignored. The fact hidden in plain sight being that both Viewpoint A and Viewpoint B actually reinforce the overarching narrative being sold and both lead to the same place. It's an incredibly effective management tool. A fake binary allows you to not just manipulate the conformist Normies who automatically obey, but also those who consider themselves to be 'anti-establishment', contrarians or 'rebels'. How are fake binaries created? They are often initially introduced by the following methods... 💢 Using the legacy media to widely publicize Viewpoint B while appearing to deny, refute or ridicule it. 💢"Leaking" allegedly confidential documents that "expose" Viewpoint B as the "hidden truth". This is usually done through the legacy media, though it's more effective if you can seed it through the indy media sector. 💢 Creating entities that are tagged as "anti-establishment" but given a mass following, and feeding them Viewpoint B material. Once Viewpoint B becomes a dominant "anti-establishment" view you can afford to sit back and allow the oppositional instinct in human nature to do your work for you, and reinforce the fake binary you created without the slightest awareness this is what is happening. It becomes widely understood that the only solution to the obvious and real evils of Viewpoint A is Viewpoint B. The fact Viewpoint B actually concedes all the same falsehoods contained in Viewpoint A remains unnoticed and anyone pointing this out tends to be attacked by both sides. Fake binaries are a godsend to the opinion-managers. We'll be talking more about this in the near future... Source Read more from OffGuardian
0
1
3
intel
May 15, 2022
In Politics
#HyperRealism Source
Propaganda as Humiliation and Control content media
0
0
2
intel
May 04, 2022
In Information Warfare
Source [at 13 minute mark]
UK Propaganda Network content media
0
0
1
intel
May 01, 2022
In Information Warfare
From Professor Anne Morelli's 2001 book. (Print out. Keep next to your TV) Source
War Propaganda content media
0
1
3
intel
Apr 28, 2022
In What is Propaganda?
Go to https://go.propaganda-exposed.com/
Documentary Mini-series Starts May 4th at 9 PM Eastern content media
0
1
3
intel
Apr 06, 2022
Joseph Goebbels' Famous Propaganda Quote content media
0
0
1
intel
Apr 04, 2022
In General
People Often Ask – “What Books, Tools, Articles, Apps & Resources do you recommend to help people learn about intelligence?” Intelligence 101 have put together this resource list (regularly updated).
Intelligence 101: Essential Resources for Intelligence Professionals content media
0
0
4
intel
Mar 18, 2022
In Information Warfare
by Jerm Warfare Dr. Kees van der Pijl is a political scientist and former professor of international politics at the University Of Sussex. He is known for his critical approach to global political economics, and has published a bunch of books. He has been on my podcast before, in which he chatted about Covid lies. In this conversation, Kees discusses propaganda wars; historical background of Russia and Ukraine; the importance of Crimea and the eastern regions of Ukraine; why NATO are not the good guys; why the US government has blood on its hands; why the West hates Russia; and whether or not Putin is a globalist. This is a long discussion, but well worth the time because he covers a lot of ground. Kees is an absolute gentleman and scholar. Watch the interview here [Edit] Controversy "Van der Pijl has claimed that Israelis brought down the Twin Towers during the 9/11 attacks 'with help from Zionists in the US government'. The University of Sussex started a procedure to investigate accusations of antisemitism and demanded that Van der Pijl would make "a public apology on social media, acknowledging the hurt that your actions have caused and distancing yourself formally from anti-Semitism in any form." and remove the tweet which started the row. Van der Pijl refused to do so and decided to resign from his emeritus status on 14 March 2019." Source
"NATO are the Baddies!" content media
0
0
5
intel

intel

More actions