As you all know, I have not been one to believe that the tides are turning. But lots of people think they are. They cite many victories, in court, in the streets, with family and friends.
The fact that the agenda has not sent out a second wave of horror and fear propaganda is also rather telling to these folks. Where is the next pandemic? What happened to Covid’s diabolic never-ending run of mutations, what happened to Monkey Pox? What happened to Disease X?
Yes, all this could still happen, but it seems there have been more false starts—starts that didn’t go anywhere. But if so, you would think they wouldn’t have put them out there just to not have them continue. It’s been rather weird, like an electrical storm you see on the horizon with its threatening lightning strikes, but it never gets close enough to warrant closing the cellar door.
How about CBDCs? And the Digital IDs? You hear a lot about these, but nothing that is concretely happening to implement them. Is it happening in other places? Australia? Germany? The UK? Of course, a lot is said about it, on YouTube, and in alt media. Lots of talking heads, but how imminent is it? Actually, I won’t dwell on this, I have no doubt all of this is coming, but has the dragon been wounded? Even a little bit? Has this march into oblivion been slowed down?
Maybe there is no wounding of the general juggernaut of world rule by the schmucks who are claiming power. Although even that sacrosanct organization may have suffered from shell damage. Wasn’t DAVOS not all that they expected this past year? Hasn’t there been some pretty obvious whiplash from some leaders in their little club? How about the UN and the “sustainable development” circus? How is that going?
Anyway, I digress. Although the health of the world agenda, including all of these projects I mention, are all part of it, Covid, and pandemics in general, are the specific topics of this article.
I don’t buy any of this talk of victory for a New York minute.This is like cancer, you can’t claim victory until it is ALL gone, every last scrap of it. Remissions are nice, but if you’ve still got cancer in your body somewhere, it is only a time-out. I feel that this is similar. Even if one cell survived, it would start multiplying again and wouldn’t stop until it was big and gnarly and spitting out all the garbage this monster has been known to spit out. So, I don’t buy it…but…
Is it possible that at least one battle was won? Maybe, but just because they have pulled the troops back doesn’t mean they didn’t still take the city and got essentially what they stormed in for. I may still say that is a possibility. I mean, what did they want as a consequence of their Covid campaign? Did they want 100% compliance, with billions of sheep bowing down to them? Did they want everyone locked up in their own little cage, ala 1984, each of us in a squalid apartment with just a giant TV in the middle of it so Big Brother could blab at us all day long? If that is true, then indeed the psyop failed, because they didn’t get that—at least not yet.
But what if they got this: a toxic injection placed in billions of people worldwide that will kill untold millions over the course of about 20 years? Not only that, but the injection will render another untold millions sterile. Do the math here: how many people would need to be sterilized over 20 years to reduce the population worldwide by 1 billion? 2 billion? What other havoc could such a death jab wreak? What untold horrors are yet to overcome us? Your guess is as good as mine. Think zombies here, think soulless ghouls, think humans with no empathy, think lost humanity.
And that’s just the physical consequences. What about the psychological success they have had with the Covid campaign? Sure, many participants have shot them the bird regarding more boosters, and have ignored more threats of losing jobs over vaccine resistance. Sure, the courts have ruled in Canada that the illustrious leader here performed a no-no with his reckless enactment of the Emergency Act, and as a result, lawsuits are flowing into the courts. Does all this mean that no one fell for the psychological operation? That no one was mentally affected by the lockdowns, the masks, the closure of schools, churches, and other institutions? Does it mean that we have all recovered from the trauma of those three years, and mentally and emotionally we are just back to square one—all normal again?
If anyone reading this knows anything about hypnosis, they probably understand what hypnotic suggestion is all about. It is real, folks. What has been altered subliminally in our unconscious minds could be quite formidable. We are being programmed for better performance in future projects the agenda has in store for us. Most of the shrews reading this are safe from this brainwashing (hopefully) because we closed our eyes during the deadly meteor storm perpetrated by the fear-mongering agenda (watch The Day of the Triffids to understand that reference!) But those out there who got caught up in it and drank the delayed-reaction Kool-Aid—are all like sleeper spies from the Cold War, soon to be re-activated at some future date to continue complying with TPTB’s bidding.
Here I go again. I am supposed to be entertaining the possibility that the Covid psyop failed, not suggesting evidence to prove its great success. Sorry. Well, maybe it didn’t go as well as they wanted it to go. It does seem there was a lot more gas in the tank and that they could have pushed it a bit further than they did. They were doing pretty well, but they just fizzled out. Maybe they did expect more people to get vaxxed, maybe that was a disappointment. They sure looked like they were going for the whole enchilada with all their “you’ve GOT to get vaccinated!!” hoopla. Maybe they got too much pushback from us shrews. So many angry shrews showed up pretty quickly. And the shrews that were already on the scene, who were not surprised with all these shenanigans to begin with, just got louder and louder. Sure, not many sheep flipped, but some did. Their booster campaign is floundering (in my opinion, only because they turned the heat down, or off entirely).
So maybe they did get nicked a bit. Maybe a few arrows penetrated the armour, and they backed off a step or two. Maybe we did surprise the bastards with our resolve, tenacity, wit, and refusal to play the game.
According to Lowkey, The Daily Wire is funded by Express VPN, which is sole-owned by Kate Technologies, which is owned and run by Israeli billionaire Teddy Sagi “who donates millions for the transport of Israeli soldiers.”
He branded himself as an independent, right-wing journalist and commentator who rose from the bottom to now run one of the most well-known conservative media outlets in America. But The Daily Wire‘s Ben Shapiro is anything but a grassroots phenomenon.
Danny Haiphong spoke with YouTube’s “Lowkey” recently about Shapiro’s true background as an Israeli billionaire-funded golden boy whose right-leaning media empire never would have been possible without lots of funding from the one percent.
“Israel has established networks or journalists that it works with,” Lowkey explains in the interview, which you can watch below. “There’s a plethora of operations being launched to subjugate different media platforms all the time by Israel and its proxies all around the world.”
“In the case of Ben Shapiro, you have an interesting convergence here of independent media-sphere being hijacked by pro-Israel interests. Ben Shapiro is essentially an Israeli military asset.”
(Related: First he attacked her for her Christian faith. Now, Ben Shapiro has fired Candace Owens from The Daily Wire.)
Ben Shapiro, an Israeli psy-op
The canning of Owens by Shapiro certainly took the former by surprise as in her last episode, she indicated that she was planning to film another. This points to there being an ideological reason for her sudden removal, and that reason has to do with her position on Israel.
According to Lowkey, The Daily Wire is funded by Express VPN, which is sole-owned by Kate Technologies, which is owned and run by Israeli billionaire Teddy Sagi “who donates millions for the transport of Israeli soldiers.”
The current CEO of Kate Technologies, which funds The Daily Wire, is a veteran of the Israeli intelligence Duvdevan Unit that disguised itself as Palestinians before running into a hospital in Gaza and assassinating several people.
“When you look at the trajectory of Ben Shapiro’s career, far from being a grassroots expression of organic groundswell as an independent journalist, what you actually have is a long line of billionaires who have funded his push,” Lowkey explains, calling it a “psychological operation that works lock-in-step with Israeli objectives, but also with the U.S. government – especially under the Trump years.”
Before the founding of The Daily Wire, Shapiro was funded by Robert Shillman, a tech billionaire on the board of the Friends of the IDF – “the largest organization which funnels hundreds of millions of dollars every year from the United States directly into the Israeli occupation forces,” Lowkey says.
Shapiro’s earnings came from Shillman in the pre-Daily Wire years, and today, of course, come from the multi-million-dollar Daily Wire empire he runs, which is also funded by the pro-Israel lobby.
“Ben Shapiro has constantly positioned himself as delivering the propaganda necessary to achieve particular objectives for Israel’s policies,” Lowkey maintains, presenting evidence, some of which has been scrubbed from the internet.
“This is the mainstay of the Zionist movement: the genocidal depopulation of Palestine and a constant war of attrition against the indigenous population.”
Shapiro has played a key role in perpetuating the Zionist movement through his media empire and even prior. And he would not have had this ability, or still have it today, were it not for constant cash infusions from Zionist sources.
“We currently have to operate a trilateral security state: the complete immersion and the complete welding of Britain, the United States, and Israel – and that’s a security relationship,” Lowkey says.
Lowkey discusses so much more about Zionism, what it means, and how Shapiro and The Daily Wire continue to push its demographic replacement agenda in the Middle East – be sure to watch the full interview above.
By Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany at Koç University in Istanbul working on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory. Follow Tarik on X @tarikcyrilamar
Earlier this month, a district court in Kiev announced its findings in a case that had dragged on since 2015, handing down sentences to five former officers of the long-dissolved ‘Berkut’ police unit. The ex-police grouping became internationally known during the 2013/14 protests which culminated with the violent ‘Maidan.’
Charged with involvement in the shooting of anti-government protesters by snipers in the center of the Ukrainian capital on February 20, 2014, four of the accused – three of them in absentia – were found guilty and sentenced to terms between five years and life. One was acquitted.
Politically, this was, or should have been, Ukraine’s single most important trial since independence in 1991. The judges closed – at least for now as appeals have already been announced – the country’s attempt to come to terms judicially with the darkest moment of what has been called a “revolution,” as well as a “coup”: the fall of the government of former President Viktor Yanukovich under pressure from initially peaceful – then violent – street protests and Western meddling. The events producing regime change and geopolitical re-orientation unfolded over three months, but the killing of almost 50 protesters that February was a crucial tipping point.
The case quickly became known as the “snipers’ massacre” or the “Maidan massacre.” The shootings were squarely blamed on Yanukovich and his administration and seemed to rule out domestic compromise and confirm Western and Ukrainian pro-insurgent narratives, casting the crisis as a national and democratic freedom struggle against a corrupt and oppressive regime beholden to Moscow. Neither the disproportionate role of an aggressive and manipulative Ukrainian far right nor the ruthless geopolitics of the West had a place in this framing. Within days after the killings, a last attempt to stop the spiral of escalation by an internationally mediated agreement failed, Yanukovych fled to Russia, and Moscow’s troops were on the move in Crimea.
Then things got worse. Clashes between Kiev’s new government and rebels in Donbass evolved into an initially intense, then mostly slow-burn, regional civil war, including limited Russian interventions. The best chance for peace, the 2015 Minsk 2 Agreement, was sabotaged systematically by Kiev and its Western supporters, and, after February 2022, Ukraine became the theater of a proxy war of the collective West against Russia. The West and Ukraine are now likely to lose this conflict at immense cost in lives and wealth, mostly to Ukraine. International tension is extremely high, trust has evaporated, and meaningful communication is almost impossible.
Ukraine and the world could be in a much better place if the last days of February 2014 had played out differently, allowing for the compromise already negotiated between Ukraine’s government and the insurgents to take hold. The Maidan Massacre was not the only but the single most important shove toward an ever-widening conflict, especially as the dominant Western narrative about the killings has remained the same, blaming only the old regime and rejecting any challenge to the narrative as a pro-Russian “information war.” Here was the perfect story, in short, to emotionally legitimize not only support but uncritical backing for Kiev, the rejection and sabotage of any concessions to Ukraine’s domestic rebels in the East, and vilifying any effective cooperation with Moscow.
But what if we were not told the truth about the killings? That is the key claim advanced by Canadian-Ukrainian political scientist Ivan Katchanovski. Katchanovski (who also recently exposed the scandal around the honoring of a Waffen-SS veteran by the Canadian parliament) has long argued that “the Maidan massacre was a false-flag mass killing of … protestors and … police in order to seize power in Ukraine. It was conducted with the involvement of oligarchic and far-right elements of the Maidan opposition using concealed groups of Maidan snipers in Maidan-controlled buildings.”
The rich detail of Katchanovski’s findings cannot be reproduced here, but three points should be noted: Snipers belonging to the insurgents’ side started shooting at the police on the morning of February 20; key positions, such as in the Hotel Ukraina and a conservatory, from which these policemen were attacked and later Maidan protesters as well, were and remained under the control of insurgent units (not the police); and after 9.00 am, protesters, too, were shot by insurgent snipers (again: not by the police).
In sum, two things happened, according to Katchanovski’s findings: Insurgent snipers first shot at the police to provoke an escalation, and then, in addition, even killed protesters – that is, those on their own side. At the same time, Katchanovski does not rule out the possibility that the police also shot protesters. But his careful analysis of video and other evidence shows that many victims, likely the majority, were targeted by insurgent shooters.
Katchanovski has come to these conclusions through years-long, rigorous, and exhaustive forensic research, as summarized in his peer-reviewed article “The ‘Snipers’ Massacre’ on the Maidan in Ukraine” in Cogent Social Sciences, an academic journal published by Taylor and Francis. He has not been the only one reaching such or similar results, but his work is the most thorough and important independent investigation. Clearly, that is why, due to its political implications, he has had to withstand being smeared as a “conspiracy theorist” and pro-Kremlin information warrior; his work has been censored; and he has suffered severe retaliation by attempts at professional and social marginalization and the pseudo-legal confiscation of his family’s property in Ukraine.
Ukrainian courts are not politically independent. Judges, whatever their own views or professional ethics, work under the threat of ostracism and violence from Ukraine’s far right (at least). And yet, as Katchanovski has pointed out, buried in the million-word findings of the recent verdict, the court has recognized several facts that confirm his interpretation of the Maidan Massacre, including the following: four police officers were killed and 39 wounded by insurgent snipers; snipers shot from buildings under insurgent control; and it cannot be ruled out that eight victims were killed and 20 injured by “unknown” perpetrators who were not from the police.
While Katchanovski is to be admired for his research and steadfastness, what is especially important here is that the long backlash against his research is a symptom of something larger that is badly amiss in both Ukraine and the West. Even now, the Ukrainian information war outlet Euromaidan Press, for instance, still combines a personal attack on Katchanovski with disinforming its readers, claiming that the verdict somehow contradicts his findings (which are, by the way, badly misrepresented).
The opposite is the case.
This is just the latest example of a deep culture of disinformation and self-disinformation that has taken root in the West. While Western elites may well lie deliberately much of the time, substantial parts of the Western media, it seems, have come to not only believe these lies – or those of favorites, clients, and allies – but to defend them with a vigor that betrays psychological investment.
The emotionally-charged reality denial around Hillary Clinton’s richly-deserved defeat in the US election of 2016 (“Russiagate”), the bizarre doublethink regarding Western forces (and/or Ukraine) blowing up Nord Stream (thereby committing an act of war among “allies” and of eco-terrorism), Israel’s “right to defend itself” interpreted as the permission to commit crimes against humanity with Western support – all are instances of a form of collective self-indulgence. Too many people in the West still claiming to be the world’s “value” guardian practice lying and lying to themselves as if it were their special birthright.
Yet these lies and fiercely guarded illusions corrupt individuals and politics, polarize societies, disrupt international relations and, last but not least, cost lives – thousands, tens of thousands, and, in the case of Ukraine by now, hundreds of thousands. Conflict is a normal part of human life, and, to some extent, inevitable.
Driving yourself insane with dishonesty is not. And it certainly does not help keep the peace.
The Washington Post has a new article out explaining why it and other mainstream media outlets have been citing the Gaza Health Ministry as a source on the daily death toll from Israel’s ongoing bombing campaign, noting that the ministry has an established track record of reporting such deaths truthfully and accurately.
“Everyone uses the figures from the Gaza Health Ministry because those are generally proven to be reliable,” Human Rights Watch’s Omar Shakir told the Post. “In the times in which we have done our own verification of numbers for particular strikes, I’m not aware of any time which there’s been some major discrepancy.”
This point is inconvenient for Israeli apologists — including the president of the United States — who’ve been suggesting in recent days that the Gaza death count is untrustworthy on the basis that the Gaza Health Ministry operates under Hamas governance.
“I have no notion that the Palestinians are telling the truth about how many people are killed,” Biden told the press on Wednesday, adding, “I have no confidence in the number that the Palestinians are using.”
Adam Taylor, the author of the aforementioned Washington Post article, correctly notes that Biden’s statements are a bit odd given that his own State Department considered Gaza’s Ministry of Health reliable enough to cite their death counts in its own reports as recently as a few months ago.
What changed? The information interests of the US empire changed.
When I drew attention to all this on Twitter a few hours ago I immediately started getting comments from Israel apologists dismissing the information I was providing because Human Rights Watch is bad and unreliable and because The Washington Post is bad and unreliable, in order to defend their belief that the Gaza Ministry of Health is bad and unreliable.
These are the tactics of people who have lost the argument. They understand that the soaring death counts from Israel’s ongoing massacre of Palestinians in Gaza is devastating to the information interests of the side they support, so they need to make up fairy tales about how The Washington Post, Human Rights Watch and the US State Department have been engaged in a years-long conspiracy to make Israel look bad.
Which is of course not to say that anyone should ever believe claims made by The Washington Post or Human Rights Watch on blind faith — I’ve had major criticisms of both of these institutions myself over the years. Believing they’re infallible would be as misguided as believing they’re always lying.
This is exactly the point I’m trying to make here: it’s not about the source, it’s about the strength of the argument. Attacking the source instead of attacking the argument is what people do when they can’t attack the argument. It’s a standard ad hominem.
A lot of people think an ad hominem is when you say something that hurts the feelings of somebody you disagree with, but that’s not what that term refers to. An ad hominem is when you attack the character or motives of the person making the argument instead of attacking the argument itself; it’s a fallacious debate tactic designed to move the conversation away from the pursuit of truth and facts to just dismissing someone’s claims because you don’t like them. It can be entirely appropriate to interrogate someone’s motives and character when that’s the only information you’ve got to work with and is relevant to the conversation, but when it’s used as a substitute for addressing evidence and argumentation it’s a fallacy.
And that’s the only tool Israel apologists seem to have in their toolbox these days. It’s exactly what they are doing when they accuse you of being a “terrorist supporter” or an “anti-semite” when you criticize Israel; they cannot address your actual criticisms because Israel’s actions in Gaza are indefensible, so they attempt to malign your character or your motives to shut down the debate and keep people from listening to you.
The “you can’t trust those death counts because they come from the health ministry of an enemy government” line can be used in literally any war against literally any enemy. People who care about facts don’t look at what governmental loyalties a source has, they look at whether the institutions in question have a track record of being reliable or not, and whether its claims are supported by evidence.
You’d have to be a complete idiot to look at the photos and videos showing entire city blocks reduced to rubble in an area known to be packed full of children and not assume that there is a massive number of civilian deaths in Gaza right now. As Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp recently noted, dramatic increases in death counts in Gaza correspond directly with Israeli government statements about having increased the number of bombs dropped. This is what you would expect to see if the ministry was accurately reporting deaths.
Israel apologists are doing everything they can to minimize and justify Israel’s crimes in every way possible, because if westerners start looking objectively at the crimes themselves they will cease consenting to this horrific genocidal massacre that western governments are fully supporting.
They don’t have truth on their side, and they don’t have morality on their side, so all they can ever do is attack the sources of the ideas and information that are opening people’s eyes to the criminality of Israel and its Western allies.
“They were very humane towards us,” she said in an interview on Israeli state radio. She also added that one Hamas fighter told her, ‘We’re not going to kill you. We want to take you to Gaza.’ Once released, Porat also claimed that the Israeli government gave her a specific script of talking points that she refused to go along with.
Mnar Adley
Oct 28, 2023
We were told Hamas killed 1400 Israelis on October 7, that they carried out rapes and torture of civilians en masse and, of course, that they beheaded babies.
These claims are being used to justify Israel’s bombardment of Gaza – the world’s largest open-air prison. Israel’s bombing of the strip, where over 50% of the population are children, has cost the lives of more than 5,000 people and left more than one million homeless.
Recent events surrounding the Gaza conflict have prompted questions about the accuracy of reported actions attributed to Hamas and Israel’s military response. A closer examination reveals a complex and, at times, conflicting narrative.
On October 7, initial reports suggested that Hamas had killed 1,400 Israelis, conducted mass rapes and torture, and even beheaded babies. These claims were cited as justification for Israel’s deadly bombardment of Gaza.
However, skepticism has emerged about the accuracy of these claims, as details remain unclear. The mainstream corporate media has largely adopted the narrative of the Israeli government, placing the blame squarely on Hamas. Nonetheless, emerging evidence from within the Israeli military and media has challenged that narrative.
One critical point of contention is the official list of Israeli casualties. Israel released a list of its dead on October 23, revealing that over 48% of those listed were soldiers or armed police on active duty, not civilians. Additionally, it has become evident that members of armed settler militias were also among the casualties.
Survivor testimonies, such as that of Yasmin Porat, suggest that Hamas captured civilians as bargaining chips to end the illegal siege on Gaza and secure the release of some of the 5,300 Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli prisons, many of whom are women and children. Porat noted that Hamas treated her and others humanely, with an expressed intention to transport them to Gaza.
“They were very humane towards us,” she said in an interview on Israeli state radio. She also added that one Hamas fighter told her, ‘We’re not going to kill you. We want to take you to Gaza.’ Once released, Porat also claimed that the Israeli government gave her a specific script of talking points that she refused to go along with.
The situation escalated when Israeli police and military arrived and initiated heavy gunfire and even tank shell attacks. Several Israeli testimonies now claim that they were fired upon by Israeli military and police rather than Hamas.
This approach appears consistent with the “Hannibal Directive,” an Israeli military policy dating back to 1986 that prioritizes preventing the capture of Israelis by enemy forces, even at the cost of their lives. This directive implies that Israelis might be killed rather than allowed to fall into the hands of Hamas.
The Hannibal Directive was certainly used on October 7, when Hamas overran an Israeli military base at the Erez Crossing. Brigadier General Avi Rosenfeld, the commander of the base, called in an airstrike on his own position, even as he and countless others were stationed there and still fighting Hamas. This was reported by Amos Harel in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz.
During the events of October 7, Hamas fighters managed to escape their Gaza prison using paragliders to reach Israeli military bases. They did kill and take Israelis captive. However, questions linger as video footage reveals Israeli police standing beside a truck and firing at approaching Palestinian fighters, raising doubts about the initial assumption that Hamas was attacking civilians at a festival.
The claims of “beheaded babies” made headlines on various news outlets, including CNN. The source of this claim was the Israeli channel i24 News, but it later emerged that the source was David Ben Zion, an extremist settler known for inciting race riots against Palestinians. A Haaretz investigation previously found that i24 News functions as a proxy for the Netanyahu family, with directives coming straight from the Israeli Prime Minister’s office at times.
Subsequently, the Israeli military distanced itself from these claims, CNN retracted the story, and the White House acknowledged a lack of evidence. Similarly, the case of Shani Louk, an Israeli tattoo artist initially reported by the Israeli government as having been raped and killed, took a different turn when her mother confirmed that she was safe in Gaza and was being treated in a hospital for a head injury.
The complex and evolving narrative surrounding the October 7 events has raised doubts about the justifications for Israel’s brutal military response in Gaza. As the situation continues to unfold, it becomes increasingly apparent that the true story of that day may not be as straightforward as initially portrayed.
Mnar Adley is an award-winning journalist and editor and is the founder and director of MintPress News. She is also president and director of the non-profit media organization Behind the Headlines. Adley also co-hosts the MintCast podcast and is a producer and host of the video series Behind The Headlines. Contact Mnar at mn**@mi***********.com or follow her on Twitter at @mnarmuh
By the looks of it, based on all the evidence and revelations that have come out since the initial event, the Hamas false flag attack against Israel is exactly what Israel needs and wants in order to commence its second great genocide, this time against the entirety of the roughly 2.3 million Palestinian people currently living in the Gaza Strip.
The first great genocide was Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “vaccines,” which were plunged into billions of arms under the guise of fighting a global “pandemic.” The second involves the political nation-state known as Israel – this is not true Israel as defined by the Holy Bible, by the way – expanding its occupied territory into the sliver of land along the coastline known as the Gaza Strip.
“Critical thinking is crucial when talking about Israel since the U.S. government, media and the majority of Americans fawn over Zionists like horny 80s teenage boys around any girl who paid attention to them,” reports The COVID Blog about the trickery behind the agenda of what is best described as fake Israel (more on that in Revelation 3:9).
“It’s already difficult existing in a country where two cults (MAGA and LGBTV) control more than 80% of the population. But both cults worship the same Zionist god, rendering truth an entity with no homeland.”
(Related: Remember those “confirmed pictures” of beheaded Israeli children that fake president Joe Biden said he personally saw? They don’t exist.)
Fake Israel is an empire of lies that controls Western governments, media, finance
It turns out that fake Israel is an occupying force that while it is still fulfilling scripture prophetically, is not the true chosen people of God. After all, the place openly and proudly admits to being a safe haven for Zionist pedophiles and sexual predators who need to “escape criminal prosecution in the U.S. or elsewhere.”
“And we must put off the Talmudic Rabbinic tradition of metzitzah b’peh – when infant boys get their penises sliced with razors, and a male religious leader orally sucks the blood off,” The COVID Blog further explains in graphic detail about what goes on in the dark underbelly of fake Israel.
“It is what it is – bloody baby [perversion] in the name of their god.”
With that out of the way, it cannot go unnoticed that both major political parties in the United States, as well as pretty much all major media outlets, “support Israel” to the extent that none of them would dare ever share these truths publicly – because to do so, they claim, is “antisemitic.”
That label serves as cover – because who wants to be called an antisemite? – to shut people up who correctly point out these and other ugly truths about the occupying regime over there that keeps Palestinians locked in the open-air concentration camp known as Gaza, which is barred from receiving any kind of aid because fake Israel has blocked off the entire territory with a massive wall.
“The point is that if Palestinians in Gaza want Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC), it must be smuggled in from Egypt via underground tunnels because Israel blocks off the entire perimeter; and Palestinians have zero freedom of movement,” The COVID Blog explains.
“Thus it’s interesting how Palestinians (‘Hamas,’ or is it ‘Hezbollah’) allegedly and somehow got military-grade weapons into Gaza to allegedly attack Israel when they cannot even get a 3-piece meal with mashed potatoes into Gaza.”
Whether it is CNN or Fox News, all major media outlets are systematically ignoring these glaring facts as they publish hilariously fake propaganda videos like the ones shown here.
Do not be deceived.
The latest news about the Israel-Palestine conflict in the Middle East can be found at Prophecy.news.
People are going insane, in the same way they went insane after 9/11. In the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, there was this shrieking emotional intensity which saw critical thinking go out the window and saw people’s minds consumed with a rabid lust for Muslim blood.
That, okay, all those other wars were based on lies and resulted in disaster, but that couldn’t possibly be the case for this current war.
Here are the top ten dumbest things the propagandists of the US-centralized empire try to get us to swallow.
1. That the US war machine has been surrounding its top two rivals China and Russia with war machinery as an act of defense, rather than an extremely provocative act of aggression.
2. That the war in Ukraine simultaneously (A) was completely unprovoked, and (B) just coincidentally happens to massively advance US strategic interests and therefore should be funded as much as possible.
3. That, okay, all those other wars were based on lies and resulted in disaster, but that couldn’t possibly be the case for this current war.
4. That your country’s foreign policy is determined by your official elected government, even though the foreign policy remains the same regardless of who is in office.
5. That it is only by pure coincidence that your nation’s population remains in a perpetual 50–50 deadlock which prevents anyone’s votes from changing the status quo, and the status quo just happens to be perpetually frozen along lines that hugely advantage the rich and powerful.
6. That the only reason anyone could possibly be critical of the most dangerous impulses of the world’s most powerful and destructive government is if they are a secret agent working for the enemies of that government.
7. That the western empire which spent the last two decades murdering Muslims in the Middle East suddenly cares very deeply about the Muslims in China.
8. That Putin invaded Ukraine solely because he is evil and hates freedom, and that the empire is pouring weapons into Ukraine because it loves Ukrainians and wants to protect their freedom and democracy.
9. That foreign propaganda and influence operations are significantly manipulating the way westerners think and vote, but the plutocrats who fully control all the most influential platforms in the western world are not.
10. That we need to be worrying about tyrannical enemies in Beijing and Moscow, instead of tyrannical enemies a lot closer to home.
While many still have not realized it, we are at war. The aggressors are government intelligence and security agencies that have turned their weapon of choice — information — against their own citizens.
The 1976 Church Committee investigation (chaired by Senator Frank Church) exposed how the CIA had corrupted the media by paying journalists to promote the agency’s narratives.
The program, called Operation Mockingbird, was officially dismantled, but while the operational name may have been retired, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest the CIA never discontinued its media influence.5
The United Nations is also deeply engaged in fighting the “‘infodemic’ of misinformation,“11 and has enlisted a cadre of “rapid response” fact checkers to counter undesirable views, wherever they appear.
Nothing is happening by accident. It is all part of a movement toward a global totalitarianism centered on the control and suppression of populations. But to get there, they must control the flow of information. Truth-tellers cannot be tolerated because, again, there are billions of us, and only thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of them.
In 1967, the CIA’s covert use of the National Student Association to spread countermessages to communism was revealed by a college dropout named Michael Wood.2 The revelation sent shockwaves through the U.S., and as journalists started to pull at the strings, the the CIA’s covert propaganda operations unraveled.
Journalists discovered that the CIA had set up nonprofit foundations to funnel taxpayer money into philanthropic foundations that then sent the CIA’s “donations” to organizations that had joined the CIA’s payroll to promote government-sponsored propaganda
These included youth organizations and student groups, church groups, public radio and news organizations. Sen. Wayne Morse, D-Ore., slammed the CIA’s covert propaganda activities, arguing the agency had created a “credibility chasm” within public opinion — a gap that could not and would not be bridged unless the government made clear that it would “fill the chasm with the truth”
The CIA was never reined in and is more involved in propaganda activities today than ever before
While many still have not realized it, we are at war, and the aggressors are government intelligence and security agencies that have turned their weapon of choice — information — against their own citizens
The video above features a 1967 CBS special report titled “In the Pay of the CIA: An American Dilemma,”1 hosted by Mike Wallace. It examines how the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was secretly paying students, labour organizations, broadcasting networks and other organizations to do their bidding.
CBS News correspondents interview several of the people who at the time had received secret CIA payments and the implications these activities have for the American way of life.
Gloria Steinem, for example, who headed the Independent Research Service, was paid by the CIA to send American students to attend and represent American values at communist youth festivals overseas, as was Philip Sherburne, former president of the National Student Association.
A Condensed History
The National Security Act of 1947, signed by President Truman, created the CIA, the National Security Council, the Office of Secretary of Defense and the U.S. Air Force.3 As explained by the Office of the Historian,4 the Act “was a major reorganization of the foreign policy and military establishments of the U.S. government.”
The CIA was an outgrowth of the World War II era Office of Strategic Services and several small post-war intelligence organizations, and as noted by Wallace:
“Since the beginning, the CIA has suffered a personality split, because in addition to intelligence, the Security Act of 1947 orders the CIA to ‘perform other functions and duties as directed by the President and his National Security Council.’ That phrase has become a sort of blank check, authorizing CIA excursions into everything from simple propaganda to the overthrow of unfriendly governments.“
Wallace goes on to explain how the CIA ended up with fingers in so many pies. First, it set up several nondescript nonprofit foundations, the function of which was to funnel taxpayer money from the CIA to other, real foundations involved in real-world philanthropy.
However, in return for CIA funds, these foundations “agreed to become conduits for central intelligence,” and funnelled the exact dollar amounts received on to other organizations that, in the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s, joined the CIA’s payroll to promote government-sponsored propaganda.
“The CIA has corrupted the stream of truth, objectivity and academic learning,” Sen. Wayne Morse told CBS News, “and it must be removed from all activities, except the very limited activity of what we know as intelligence activity, the field of spying and espionage.”
Another senator, Eugene McCarthy, was also critical of the CIA’s use of students and church groups to manipulate public opinion. He said that he felt there was “empire building” going on within the CIA — a statement that rings all the more true today.
Sen. John Stennis, member of the CIA Watchdog Subcommittee, defended the CIA’s actions, reminding the CBS audience about the climate in which the agency was founded. In 1954, the U.S. Congress passed a bill outlawing communism, and the CIA was protecting American liberty and democracy.
Former CIA director Allen Dulles defended the agency’s behavior as well, citing the need to manage the threat of communism. The counterargument presented by critics was that by using covert propaganda techniques, the U.S. government was using the same strategies as the enemy, thereby undermining the idea of America being a country dedicated to free speech and the diversity of ideas.
At the end of the day, the overarching message of the CBS News report was that the CIA needed to change with changing times, clean up its act and get out of the covert propaganda business, as its interventions were harming the American image of being a free and open country.
Operation Mockingbird Is Alive and Well
Unfortunately, the CIA was never reined in, and its propaganda activities have only expanded and become more sophisticated over time. The 1976 Church Committee investigation (chaired by Senator Frank Church) exposed how the CIA had corrupted the media by paying journalists to promote the agency’s narratives.
The program, called Operation Mockingbird, was officially dismantled, but while the operational name may have been retired, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest the CIA never discontinued its media influence.5
In fact, we have evidence the CIA is controlling mainstream media to this day, and it is doing so with unprecedented efficiency, as it can now push its narratives out through the three global news agencies, which are responsible for crafting and curating most of the news disseminated worldwide.
The only thing that has changed is the CIA’s narrative. Whereas in the past it was dedicated to undermining communism, today, the CIA is a disinformation fountainhead for an un-elected global Deep State that is hellbent on implementing a technocratic, totalitarian One World Government, the tyranny of which makes communism pale in comparison.
The CIA is now neck-deep in a global psychological operation (psyop) to ensure the successful implementation of The Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution — two terms that describe different aspects of the same agenda of enslavement. And the CIA is not alone in this endeavor.
The FBI is also in on the action, as are most of the world’s intelligence agencies. They are all pushing the same Great Reset and Fourth Industrial Revolution narratives, the aim of which is the technocratic control of the global population. That is why we are seeing the same narratives playing all over the world including the Orwellian argument that we must censor to protect democracy.
A New Type of War
While many still have not realized it, we are at war. The aggressors are government intelligence and security agencies that have turned their weapon of choice — information — against their own citizens.
And, while the organizations doing the CIA’s dirty work may have changed, the basic organizational structure is the same as it was in 1967. Taxpayer money gets funneled through various federal departments and agencies into the hands of non-governmental agencies that carry out censorship activities as directed. As recently reported by investigative journalists Alex Gutentag and Michael Shellenberger:6
“The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) are non-governmental organizations, their leaders say.
When they demand more censorship of online hate speech, as they are currently doing of X, formerly Twitter, those NGOs are doing it as free citizens and not, say, as government agents.
But the fact of the matter is that the US and other Western governments fund ISD, the UK government indirectly funds CCDH, and, for at least 40 years, ADL spied on its enemies and shared intelligence with the US, Israel and other governments.
The reason all of this matters is that ADL’s advertiser boycott against X may be an effort by governments to regain the ability to censor users on X that they had under Twitter before Musk’s takeover last November.
Internal Twitter and Facebook messages show that representatives of the US government, including the White House, FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), as well as the UK government, successfully demanded Facebook and Twitter censorship of their users over the last several years.”
Censorship by Proxy
What we have now is government censorship by proxy, a deeply anti-American activity that has become standard practice, not just by intelligence and national security agencies but federal agencies of all stripes, including our public health agencies.
September 8, 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s injunction banning the White House, the surgeon general, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI from influencing social media companies to remove so-called “disinformation.”7
According to the judges’ decision,8 “CDC officials provided direct guidance to the platforms on the application of the platforms’ internal policies and moderation activities” by telling them what was, and was not, misinformation, asking for changes to platforms’ moderation policies and directing platforms to take specific actions.
“Ultimately, the CDC’s guidance informed, if not directly affected, the platforms’ moderation decisions,” the judges said, so, “although not plainly coercive, the CDC officials likely significantly encouraged the platforms’ moderation decisions, meaning they violated the First Amendment.”
Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, the U.S. government is not acting alone. Governments around the world and international organizations like the World Health Organization are all engaged in censorship, and when it comes to medical information, most Big Tech platforms are taking their lead from the WHO. And, if the WHO’s pandemic treaty9 is enacted, then the WHO will have sole authority to dictate truth. Everything else will be censored.
YouTube to Ban All Types of Medical ‘Misinformation’
YouTube, for example, which censored medical information that went against CDC guidance during the COVID pandemic, recently announced it is committed to eliminating virtually all medical “misinformation” that contradicts the WHO:10
“While specific medical guidance can change over time as we learn more, our goal is to ensure that when it comes to areas of well-studied scientific consensus, YouTube is not a platform for distributing information that could harm people.
Moving forward, YouTube will streamline dozens of our existing medical misinformation guidelines to fall under three categories – Prevention, Treatment, and Denial.
These policies will apply to specific health conditions, treatments, and substances where content contradicts local health authorities or the World Health Organization (WHO) … Here’s what the framework will look like:
Prevention misinformation: We will remove content that contradicts health authority guidance on the prevention and transmission of specific health conditions, and on the safety and efficacy of approved vaccines. For example, this encompasses content that promotes a harmful substance for disease prevention.
Treatment misinformation: We will remove content that contradicts health authority guidance on treatments for specific health conditions … Examples include content that encourages unproven remedies in place of seeking medical attention for specific conditions, like promoting caesium chloride as a treatment for cancer.
Denial misinformation: We will remove content that disputes the existence of specific health conditions. This covers content that denies people have died from COVID-19 …
In applying our updated approach, cancer treatment misinformation fits the framework — the public health risk is high as cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, there is stable consensus about safe cancer treatments … and it’s a topic that’s prone to misinformation.
Starting today and ramping up in the coming weeks, we will begin removing content that promotes cancer treatments proven to be harmful or ineffective, or content that discourages viewers from seeking professional medical treatment.”
The UN’s War on Misinformation
The United Nations is also deeply engaged in fighting the “‘infodemic’ of misinformation,“11 and has enlisted a cadre of “rapid response” fact checkers to counter undesirable views, wherever they appear.
The UN has also partnered with private businesses, telecommunications companies, civil society groups, media and individual journalists to combat misinformation.
The UN secretary-general António Guterres’ has even gone on record saying “hate speech” is a “weapon of war” that must be brought under control to achieve the UN’s peacekeeping aims. In July 2022, he made the following remarks to the Security Council, clearly demonstrating that the UN views censorship as a necessity for world peace:12
“The United Nations must play a more deliberate role as an information actor in conflict environments. We must be seen as a trusted source of information by providing engaging, factual content, facilitating inclusive dialogue, demanding the removal of harmful speech, calling leaders to account and promoting the voices of peace and unity.”
Just what is “harmful speech”? Why, anything that counters the globalist narrative — “the voices of unity” — of course. In classic Orwellian doublespeak, UN leadership is calling dissent (i.e., “hate speech”) “a weapon of war,” when in reality, censorship is the weapon.
This kind of rhetoric tells you that we are in fact at war, and the public has been declared the enemy of the globalist cabal, the members of which have infiltrated all the key national agencies and international organizations now being used to browbeat us into compliance with a slave agenda.
In the video above, under-secretary-general for the UN’s global communications talks about how “social media is being weaponized to provoke the worst in human nature” (there’s that war lingo again), and how the UN is “pushing Big Tech” to “bring balance to our information systems.”
In other words, Big Tech is being pushed to give the technocrats a battlefield edge by eliminating the “weapons” of everyday people (who greatly outnumber them), namely their voices.
While globalists and technocrats would have you believe that censorship is all about protecting people by making sure everything they see is accurate and truthful, the exact opposite is actually happening. The Deep State players (whether they recognize themselves as belonging to that exclusive club or not) are the ones spreading false information to lull you into compliance with an agenda that is so utterly horrifying that no sane, rational person would ever go along with it.
I’m talking about The Great Reset, the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, the 2030 Agenda and the One Health agenda. These and several other terms all refer to one comprehensive, worldwide plot to create a global slave society under the rule of a centralized world government run by un-elected technocrats.
Everything we have seen and experienced over the last three years is part of that agenda, including the global push for vaccine mandates. It is no surprise then, to find out that 14 of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals involve compulsory vaccinations. As noted in the August 2021 issue of Globalization and Health:13
“Immunization directly impacts health (SDG3) and brings a contribution to 14 out of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), such as ending poverty, reducing hunger, and reducing inequalities. Therefore, immunization is recognized to play a central role in reaching the SDGs, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).”
Nothing is happening by accident. It is all part of a movement toward a global totalitarianism centered on the control and suppression of populations. But to get there, they must control the flow of information. Truth-tellers cannot be tolerated because, again, there are billions of us, and only thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of them.
Once the technocratic system of control is fully in place, 24/7 surveillance and artificial intelligence-driven algorithms will keep people in check, but until then, the globalists need our cooperation to install and implement the prerequisite surveillance and control systems. Keeping people from understanding the big picture is the greatest weapon in their arsenal.
There is also plenty of evidence indicating they’d prefer to have far fewer of us around, and preventing you from accessing truthful information about health and medicine will ensure you get and stay sick (which is profitable for them) and ultimately die sooner rather than later (which is the goal).
Once you understand the grand plan, you can see how it’s being implemented in stages, and why all this censorship is needed, from their point of view. At that point you have a decision to make: Go along with their program to own you and all of your descendants, in perpetuity, or take ownership of your own life and peacefully move in the opposite direction, toward decentralized, uncensored, privacy-based systems of all kinds.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
We are in the middle of a world-changing war. This is no ordinary war, however. Most of the victims of this warfare aren’t even able to identify it as war, nor do they understand that they are combatants in it. It’s called fifth-generation warfare, and I’m here to tell you all about it.
We are in the middle of a world-changing war right now.
Oh, I don’t mean the war in Ukraine, the one that all the media are asking you to focus your attention on. Yes, that conflict continues to escalate, and every day there are new stories about provocations and threats that could lead to a nuclear exchange . . . but that’s not the war I’m referring to.
No, the war I’m talking about is an even broader war. A war that is taking place everywhere on the globe, even as I speak, and that involves virtually everyone on the planet, young and old, male and female, military and civilian. It is the war of every government against its own population and every international institution against free humanity.
This is no ordinary war, however. Most of the victims of this warfare aren’t even able to identify it as war, nor do they understand that they are combatants in it.
It’s called fifth-generation warfare, and I’m here to tell you all about it.
I am James Corbett of The Corbett Report and this is Your Guide to Fifth-Generation Warfare
What Is Fifth-Generation Warfare?
What is fifth-generation warfare, anyway? And, come to think of it, what were the first four generations of warfare?
WILLIAM S. LIND: This city and every capital in the world is completely oblivious to the fact that it is caught up in a change in warfare so great that it not only makes our current defense and foreign policies obsolete, it essentially makes obsolete the whole framework within which we think about defense and foreign policy.
[. . .]
The change is what I call the rise of fourth generation war and this is specifically the fourth generation of modern war. [. . .] We now think of foreign affairs and defense within the framework of the nation-state. Armed forces are designed to fight other state armed forces. But that reality is changing.
[. . .]
What’s happening around the world today in more and more places is that state armed forces find them find themselves fighting not other state armed forces, but fourth-generation forces. Non-state forces.
In a nutshell, Lind et al.’s thesis is that the “modern age” of warfare began with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which, Lind opines, “gave the state a monopoly on war.” From that point on, modern warfare went through three generations, namely:
First-generation warfare: the tactics of line and column, developed in the era of the smoothbore musket;
Second-generation warfare: the tactics of indirect fire and mass movement, developed in the era of the rifled musket, breechloaders, barbed wire and the machine gun; and
Third-generation warfare: the tactics of nonlinear movement, including maneuver and infiltration, developed in response to the increase in battlefield firepower in WWI.
This, according to Lind and his co-authors, brought us to the late-20th century, when the nation-state began to lose its monopoly on war and military combat returned to a decentralized form. In this era—the era of fourth-generation warfare—the line between “civilian” and “military” become blurred, armies tend to engage in counter-insurgency operations rather than military battles, and enemies are often motivated by ideology and religion, making psychological operations more important than ever.
But, some argue, we have now entered a new era of warfare, namely fifth-generation warfare.
There is still much debate about what defines fifth-generation warfare, how we know we’re engaged in it, or even if it exists at all (Lind, for one, rejects the concept). Various scholars have made their own attempts at defining fifth-generation warfare (5GW), like Dr. Waseem Ahmad Qureshi, who identifies it as “the battle of perceptions and information,” or Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui of the People’s Liberation Army, who write of the era of “Unrestricted Warfare” in which “a relative reduction in military violence” has led to “an increase in political, economic, and technological violence.”
But for the purposes of this editorial, I’m not interested in that debate. In fact, we’re going to use a decidedly non-academic definition of fifth-generation warfare from an Al Jazeera article as our starting point: “The basic idea behind this term [5GW] is that in the modern era, wars are not fought by armies or guerrillas, but in the minds of common citizens.”
There are two important things to note about this definition. The first is that fifth-generation warfare is not waged against either standing armies of nation-states or guerrilla insurgents but against everyday citizens. The second is that this war is not being fought in a battlefield somewhere, but in the mind.
I will expand the definition somewhat to include the fact that this war is being waged at all levels, not just the mental. The gist of it is this: Fifth-generation warfare is an all-out war that is being waged against all of us by our governments and the international organizations to which they belong. It is being waged against each and every one of us right now, and it is a battle for full-spectrum dominance over every single aspect of your life: your movements and interactions, your transactions, even your innermost thoughts and feelings and desires. Governments the world over are working with corporations to leverage technology to control you down to the genomic level, and they will not stop until each and every person who resists them is subdued or eliminated.
The most incredible part of all of this is that so few know that the war is even taking place, let alone that they are a combatant in it.
The best way to understand this war is to look at some of the ways that it is being waged against us.
Information Warfare
Stop me if you’ve heard this before, but this is an infowar and the powers-that-shouldn’t-be are engaged in “a war for your mind.”
Of course, you have heard of “Infowars” if you’ve been in the alternative media space for any length of time. And for good reason: information warfare is an absolutely essential part of the war on everyone that defines fifth-generation warfare.
The most obvious way to understand this is to look at the actual military forces that are engaging in psychological operations against their own citizens.
“A letter from the Nova Scotia government sent out to residents to warn about a pack of wolves on the loose in the province was forged by Canadian military personnel as part of a propaganda training mission that went off the rails.
“The letter told residents to be wary of wolves that had been reintroduced into the area by the provincial and federal governments and warned the animals were now roaming the Annapolis Valley. The letter, which later became public, sparked concern and questions among residents but was later branded as ‘fake’ by the Nova Scotia government which didn’t know the military was behind the deception.
“The training also involved using a loudspeaker to generate wolf sounds, the Canadian Forces confirmed to this newspaper.”
Guys, let that sink in for a second. They created a fake letter from the government, put it out there saying that there’s dangerous wolves, and they set up loud speakers in the area projecting out wolf noises!
This isn’t just research, you know. This isn’t just a training exercise. They’re actively engaging in this psychological operation to scare people using loudspeakers.
But it’s not just out-and-out military operations by soldiers dressed up in camo fatigues that are part of this fifth-generation infowar. In the war on everyone, the establishment uses every means at its disposal to manipulate the public’s perception.
RICHARD STENGEL: Basically, every country creates their own narrative story. And, you know, my old job at the State Department was what people used to joke as the chief propagandist job.
We haven’t talked about propaganda. I’m not against propaganda. Every country does it and they have to do it to their own population and I don’t necessarily think it’s that awful.
. . . who were retained by the WHO in 2020 to identify celebrity “influencers” who could be used to amplify the scamdemic messaging.
ANNOUNCER: The One World Together At Home event showcased a Who’s Who of top music stars and celebrities, who came together over the weekend for a special broadcast of music, comedy and personal messages, all in gratitude to those around the world on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic.
MATTHEW MCCONAUGHEY: So what can we do? We’ve got to take care of our health workers and we’ve got to buy them time by taking care of ourselves.
ANNOUNCER: The event was led by the World Health Organization and the non-profit group, Global Citizen.
Perhaps the most insidious part of the fifth-generation infowar is that it has become so normalized that everyone knows it is happening, but no one thinks of it as warfare. Of course everything is “advertising” and “propaganda.” And of course it’s being used to manipulate our behaviour. That’s just how the world works, isn’t it?
But we ignore the real nature of the infowar at our own peril. After all, I have often observed that this is a war for your mind and that the most contested battlespace in the world is the space between your ears. You might have thought I meant that metaphorically, but actually, I mean it quite literally. Which brings us to . . .
Neurological Warfare
If you listen to Dr. James Giordano speak without listening to what he’s saying, you get the impression he is merely an articulate, well-informed scientist who is passionate about his research. When you dolisten to what he’s saying, however—or even just look at his PowerPoint slides, like the “NeuroS/T for NSID” slide—you realize that he is Dr. Strangelove. Or, if not Dr. Strangelove himself, then at least Dr. Strangelove’s spokesman.
But it’s not nuclear Armageddon that motivates Giordano, it’s what he calls “weapons of mass disruption”—the various technologies for neurological intervention that the US military and militaries around the world are developing.
These include (in Giordano’s well-rehearsed patter) the “drugs, bugs, toxins and devices” that can either enhance or disrupt the cognitive functions of their target, like the “high CNS aggregation” nanoparticulates that, according to Giordano, “clump in the brain or in the vasculature” and “create essentially what looks like a hemorrhagic diathesis.” As sci-fi as this sounds, he insists these nanoparticulates (and many, many other horrific neurological weapons) are already being worked on:
JAMES GIORDANO: The idea here is that I can get with something called high CNS aggregation material that is essentially invisible to the naked eye and even to most scanners because it is so small that it selectively goes through most levels of filter porosity. These are then inhaled—either through the nasal mucosa or absorbed through the oral mucosa. They have high CNS affinity. They clump in the brain or in the vasculature and they create essentially what looks like a hemorrhagic diathesis; in other words, a hemorrhage predisposition or a clot predisposition in the brain. What I’ve done is I’ve created a stroking agent, and it’s very, very difficult to gain attribution to do that.
I can use that on a variety of levels, from the individual to the group. Highly disruptive. And, in fact, this is one of the things that has been entertained and examined to some extent by my colleagues in NATO and to those who are working on the worst use of neurobiological sciences to create populational disruption. Very, very worried about the potential for these nanoparticulate agents to be CNS aggregating agents to cause neural disruption.
And just in case you didn’t get the point, you’ll notice he illustrates his slide with an image of a human brain in the crosshairs of one of these neurological weapons. There’s nothing hard to understand about the picture that is being painted here: we are at war with an enemy who is literally targeting our brains.
But yet again, it isn’t just the literal use of neurological weapons by conventional militaries in conventional warfare settings that we—the largely unwitting combatants of the fifth-generation war on everyone—have to worry about. As my listeners already know, avowed technocrat Elon Musk is trying to sell his Neuralink brain chip technology to the hipster crowd as a cool and sexy way to upgrade your cognition . . . or so that the coming AI godhead will have mercy on us. Or something like that. Anyway, you should totally stick the Neuralink in your head at your earliest opportunity! And definitely don’t ask any questions about why so many of the macaque monkeys and other test animals that Neuralink was using as test animals in their “brain-machine interface” experiment have dropped dead.
To anyone not yet a victim of the information warfare operation designed to prepare humanity for the coming transhuman dystopia, all of this sounds insane. But for those who have fallen for the infowars psyop of the enemy, these types of mind-altering technologies are exactly as advertised: exciting opportunities to “upgrade” the feeble biological wetware we call our brain.
But if you think you can avoid the biological aspect of the fifth-generation war by simply avoiding the brain chip, you’re out of luck. You’re also going to have to deal with . . .
Biological Warfare
The biowarfare narrative is, understandably, back at the forefront of the public consciousness in recent years, not just because of the scamdemic but also because of the questions being raised about the US-backed Ukrainian biolabs and whatever work they may or may not be doing on Russia’s doorstep.
This picture, for example, comes straight from Army.mil, which was only too happy to brag as recently as last July [2021] that US soldiers were conducting “hands-on training and field training exercises with Ukrainian troops in laboratory and field environments” that included ensuring the readiness of “deployable mobile laboratories.” Nothing to see here, folks. (Perhaps the only surprising thing about the article is that they haven’t scrubbed it from their website . . . yet.)
Yet, once again, if we are only thinking of biowarfare in conventional military terms, we neglect the much, much wider operation to manipulate, control and weaponize all aspects of our environment, our food supply and even our genome itself for the purposes of the ruling oligarchs. This fifth-generation biological warfare being waged against us includes:
The mRNA and DNA and genetically-modified adenovirus vector “vaccines” that have been “normalized” over the past two years and which, as the miraculously “lucky” companies that bet it all on this technology like to brag, is re-programming the “software of life.”
The push toward synthetic, lab-based “food” that is being funded by the usual eugenicist billionaires and which threatens to sever humanity from the natural abundance of the earth, make us dependent on an increasingly shrinking number of companies for our food supply, and, ultimately, to drive us toward a Soylent Green-style future.
I’m sure you can fill in the blanks with myriad other examples of the attacks upon the world’s air, water and biome that constitute this unconstrained fifth-generation biological war being waged against us.
When and if you do put the pieces of this puzzle together and seek to warn people en masse that they are under attack, your ability to resist this agenda will be predicated on your ability to use your accumulated resources (your wealth) to foster communities of resistance. Don’t worry, though; the enemy has that domain covered, too. . . .
Economic Warfare
Given the events of recent weeks, even the sleepiest of the sleepy now realize that we are in a period of economic warfare.
This war, too, has its conventional aspects. On the 2D board, we’ve seen the NATO empire launch its Weapons of Financial Destruction at Russia in recent weeks, and, exactly as predicted, it has resulted in the consolidation of a convenient geopolitical bogeyman bloc and a gigantic loss of faith in the international monetary system itself. And, also as predicted, it has supplied the “Problem” and “Reaction” needed for the technocrats to present their pre-determined “Solution” of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). Just ask Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock:
The war will prompt countries to re-evaluate their currency dependencies. Even before the war, several governments were looking to play a more active role in digital currencies and define the regulatory frameworks under which they operate.
This is not merely a battle between nation-states or even competing power blocs. This is a battle being waged by every authoritarian power structure and every government (but I repeat myself) against their own citizens for control of the most important resource of all: their wallets.
Yes, we are seeing the beginning of a truly world-historic moment: the collapse of Pax Americana, the death of the dollar reserve system, and the beginning of an entirely new monetary paradigm, the “Central Bank Digital Currency” system of programmable money that will be able to algorithmically control when, how and if you are allowed to transact in the economy at all. We only have to look to recent events in Canada to understand what this will look like.
This perfect control of humanity down to the level of being able to witness and, ultimately, to allow or disallow any transaction between any individuals at any time, represents the apotheosis of technocracy and one of the key objectives of the fifth-generation war itself. As this nightmare comes closer and closer to reality, all seems hopeless.
But then again, that’s exactly the point. . . .
The Real War
I could go on. And on and on and on. But hopefully you get the point by now: There is a world war happening right now. It is a fifth-generation war (or whatever you want to call it). It is being waged across every domain simultaneously. It is a war for full-spectrum dominance of every battlefield and every terrain, from the farthest reaches of the globe (and beyond) to the inner spaces of your body and even to your innermost thoughts. And it is a war on you.
Recognizing this, the task we face seems nearly insurmountable. How are we to fight back in a war that the majority of people don’t even recognize is taking place? How do we fight back against an enemy that has spent decades refining its weapons of economic and military and technological and biological control? How do we fight back in a war that is not taking place on two fronts or even three fronts, but in every domain and battlespace simultaneously?
Framed like this, our prospects do indeed appear hopeless. But therein lies the key: our perception that it is our duty to “fight back” against the enemy in their war on their battlefield on their terms of engagement is itself a narrative frame. And that narrative itself is a weapon that is being wielded against us in the battle for our minds.
You’ll allow me space here to quote myself at length because this is a point I have made many times before, perhaps most notably in my conversation on “The Anatomy of the New World Order” that I had with Julian Charles on The Mind Renewed podcast ten years ago:
I’m intrigued by the idea that we’ve been given false templates to follow in terms of solving our problems—one being to “fight our enemies”—templates provided for us through so much social conditioning and the media. Here, the idea is that we must find the heart or the head of the organization and somehow kill that person or that group, or whatever it is; eliminate that, and everything will magically turn to the better!
Thinking in broad terms, that false template appears in virtually every science fiction dystopia you’ve ever seen: if it turns out well in the end, it’s only because they have managed to decapitate the Head of the Beast, whether it be The Lord of the Rings or Tron, or any such movie. I think that’s fundamentally and completely the wrong way to look at it, because at the end of the day the particular individuals who may or may not be holding the ‘Ring of Power’ are replaceable. Indeed, there are very many people who would be chomping at the bit to get into that position of power should that old guard be swept away for whatever reason.
I think what’s needed is a more fundamental revolution: not of overthrowing a specific instantiation of this idea, but of overthrowing the idea altogether. And that can only come, I think, from building up an alternative system to which people actually want to apply themselves. I think we have to detach ourselves from this system that we’ve been woven into. Unfortunately that’s probably as difficult to do as that analogy would make it sound, because we are so woven into the fabric of society that it’s difficult to imagine extricating ourselves from all these processes.
We rely for so many of our daily needs on this vast, unwieldy corporate system that ties into these very organizations that pull the strings of governmental institutions, that it can seem quite overwhelming. How can a single individual affect this? But I think we have to look for any and every possible point at which we can start to detach ourselves from those systems of control, and to start to reassert some kind of independence. That can be an extremely small thing like, just for example: instead of buying groceries at the grocery store, perhaps buy them at a farmers’ market, or at least some of your groceries. Or perhaps you could grow them yourself in a vegetable garden. Something of that sort is a tiny thing on the individual level, but I think it’s the only thing in the long run that can lead to the type of society we want to bring to fruition. Again, I think it’s small things like that, if we start to apply ourselves with diligence and perseverance, that will eventually be able to overthrow this. But, unfortunately, as I say, we are on the cusp of this scientific revolution which makes scientific dictatorship possible, so unfortunately we don’t necessarily have generations of time. That gives a time perspective to all this—I won’t say it’s a time bomb—but you get the idea. We don’t have a lot of time to waste.
We have a choice. Either we continue going into this technological, corporate matrix—which involves even things like buying the next generation of iPhone, which they’re already saying is going to have its own fingerprint scanning technology, and all of these corporate, military, Big Brother elements to it that we’re willingly signing up to every day of our lives, and actually paying money for—or we start to create alternative structures which don’t rely on that system. It’s a choice that we have to make in our lives, I would say more quickly than has been apparent at any other time in human history.
My regular viewers will understand what I am proposing here: the creation of a parallel society. We will not achieve this by asking for more scraps from the master’s table, or by gently complying as we are herded into ever more constrictive technological pens, or by thinking that we can win this war by engaging the enemy in their controlled domain. We can only achieve this by creating our own table, our own economy and our own communities of interest. This will require the long and difficult task of increasing our independence from the authoritarian systems in every domain: the information domain, the food domain, the health domain, the monetary domain, the mental domain and every other contested battlespace in this all-out, fifth-generation war.
Easier said than done, of course. But there is no alternative.
Some will say “But won’t they come after that parallel society?” as if that is a rebuttal to what I have laid out here. The point is that you are already the target of the enemy in a war that most people but dimly understand is happening. Yes, the enemy will come after you. But they are already dominating you in more ways than any one person can fully understand. That does not stop just because you comply with their demands or take part in their system.
We must stop playing their game. We must stop fighting their war. We must stop ceding our power, our authority, our time, our attention, our energy and our resources to engaging the enemy in their terms in their battlefield.
We must create our own parallel society on our own terms.
And so we rediscover an old piece of wisdom. To paraphrase: “Fifth-generation warfare is a strange game. The only winning move is not to play.”
An editor at Radio New Zealand has been suspended and is under investigation for the time-honored practices of providing balanced and factual reporting, writes Tony Kevin.
Australian Broadcasting Company journalists edit incoming feeds from Reuters and other wire services all the time. They add context, link to previous stories, and add Australian-relevant material. The problem is, this person in RNZ was adding such context from the “wrong ‘side.’”
Violent Maidan coup in Ukraine, 2014. (Wikipedia)
By Tony Kevin in Canberra Special to Consortium News
June 13, 2023
On FridayThe Guardian Australia website carried a news report, with a follow-up piece on Monday, whose implications for free speech are profoundly disturbing.
They concern a Radio New Zealand, or RNZ, broadcasting employee — unnamed, but everyone in the small New Zealand broadcasting world will soon know who it is — who has been placed on leave while their professional conduct is investigated. Obviously, a career hangs in the balance.
The malign ghosts of Orwell’s 1984 stalk this story.
‘Russian Garbage’
This unnamed person in RNZ committed the cardinal sin of “inappropriate editing” of incoming Reuters news feeds on the war in Ukraine to insert “Russian garbage” in the contemptuous words of Paul Thompson, chief executive of RNZ. That is to say, they drew on Russian news sources to insert balancing pro-Russian material to the incoming Western news agency feeds.
The Guardian tells us that in fact accurate information about Ukraine was added to the Reuters copy:
“The articles in question made a range of amendments: adding the word ‘coup’ to describe the Maidan revolution; changing a description of Ukraine’s former ‘pro-Russian president’ to read ‘pro-Russian elected government’; adding references to a ‘pro-western government’ that had ‘suppressed ethnic Russians’; and on several occasions adding references to Russian concerns about ‘neo-Nazi elements’ in Ukraine.”
And more truth was added to the story, The Guardian says:
“In one article, a paragraph was added reading: ‘The Kremlin also said its invasion was sparked by a failure to implement the Minsk agreement peace accords, designed to give Russia speakers autonomy and protection, and the rise of a neo-Nazi element in Ukraine since a coup ousted a Russian-friendly Ukrainian government in 2014.’
Another added that Russia launched its invasion ‘claiming that a US-backed coup in 2014 with the help of neo-Nazis had created a threat to its borders and had ignited a civil war that saw Russian-speaking minorities persecuted.’”
This, it seems, is an offence not to be countenanced any longer in New Zealand. “An RNZ spokesperson, John Barr, said in a statement after the first article came to public attention that ‘RNZ is taking the issue extremely seriously and is investigating how the situation arose,’” the newspaper wrote.
The Guardian, in its effort to “correct” the story, says: “Ukraine says these claims are discredited Kremlin propaganda … The anti-corruption movement was peaceful and had widespread public support. Yanukovych fled to Russia months later after his security forces shot dead more than 100 unarmed protesters.”
The RNZ executive Thompson was “gutted” to learn what has been going on under his watch. We read that 250 past published articles have been gone through “with a fine tooth comb” to investigate and counter such offensive inserted material, and thousands more are being reviewed.
Sixteen such offending articles have been found and warning commentaries added to them. Investigations continue while the staffer remains indefinitely suspended. The responsible minister is being briefed. Clearly, these editors have not delved very deeply into the Ukraine story.
Luke Harding’s Involvement
Both Guardian articles carry a tagline that says “Additional reporting by Luke Harding.” This should be a key warning to everyone in New Zealand’s and Australia’s broadcasting world, indeed in the entire English-speaking world.
Luke Harding at the Nordic Media Festival, 2018. (Thor Brødreskift / Nordiske Mediedager/ Wikimedia Commons)
Harding carries a formidable reputation as an inveterate anti-Russian British journalist with alleged strong links to the U.K. anti-Russian disinformation system and even to MI6, the U.K.’s secret intelligence service.
He was heavily involved in the Julian Assange affair and in the now discredited campaign to label former U.S. President Donald Trump as under Russian control. He is known as a leading Western disinformation warrior.
Normal Editorial Practice
Australian Broadcasting Company journalists edit incoming feeds from Reuters and other wire services all the time. They add context, link to previous stories, and add Australian-relevant material.
The problem is, this person in RNZ was adding such context from the “wrong ‘side.’”
The ABC has long been exposed as an obedient servant of the U.S.-dominated Five Eyes intelligence network and runs along approved anti-Russian and anti-Chinese editorial lines. RNZ, by contrast, is still widely respected in New Zealand. But it committed the sin of allowing counter-perspectives to be heard on the responsibility for the present tragic war in Ukraine.
Rendering of the “Five Eyes” intelligence network that includes Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the U.K., the U.S. (@GDJ, Openclipart)
Read the two Guardian articles to see what exactly Harding in London and his colleagues in U.K. disinformation appear to be objecting to. It sends a strong message across the Tasman Sea, from New Zealand to the Australian media world: We watch every word you say and every word you write.
Cancelled for the Same Thought Crimes
The examples of journalistic misconduct identified in the two articles match exactly research and opinions on the historical context and causes of the war in Ukraine and mounting Russia-West tensions that I have been trying to express publicly in Australia as an expert former senior diplomat since the publication of my book Return to Moscow in 2017.
As a result, I have been cancelled, unpersoned, silenced — dropped down the Australia Broadcasting Company memory hole, never to be allowed on its airwaves again.
An innocuous interview I conducted from Moscow with Paul Barclay for the respected ABC program “Big Ideas” in February 2022 was “disarchived” — yes, you read it right — a few weeks later, under pressure from unidentified critics.
Ukraine is Losing
The war in Ukraine now winds steadily towards its inevitable pro-Russian denouement. Russia clearly has the military edge and this will not change now. Billions of dollars worth of supplied U.S./NATO equipment continue to be destroyed in combat.
In suicidal offensives ordered by the doomed Zelensky regime in Kiev, an estimated half a million Ukrainian soldiers have been killed or crippled since February 2022. [Exact casualty figures are very hard to come by]. Many more proxy warriors will die in the coming weeks as this brutal war of attrition demanded by the U.S. and NATO continues to destroy what is left of poor Ukraine.
Australians and New Zealanders with naïve faith in the professional integrity of their national broadcasters will continue to be insulated from these tragic truths.
Fortunately, for those who dare to read them, there are now plenty of accessible reliable sources of alternative perspectives on Russia-West relations and the pivotal importance of the war in Ukraine in transforming the world. This world now looks very different from outside the Western laager. We are in the midst of huge global changes.
But, thanks to the likes of Harding and his Anglo-American friends, we won’t find such information anywhere on the ABC or RNZ. We Antipodeans in the colonies will be the last to know.
Tony Kevin is a former Australian senior diplomat, having served as ambassador to Cambodia and Poland, as well as being posted to Australia’s embassy in Moscow. He is the author of six published books on public policy and international relations.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
“Psychiatric treatment and psychiatric drugs are the common denominators of the growing number of shootings and other acts of violence, which are soaring right along with the soaring prescribing of psych drugs.”
If we want to stop the mass shootings, we need to strictly regulate the psychiatric medications that are causing them.
“Psychiatric treatment and psychiatric drugs are the common denominators of the growing number of shootings and other acts of violence, which are soaring right along with the soaring prescribing of psych drugs.” Killers on Psych Drugs
Here’s a question that every American should be able to answer: What percentage of the killers—that have carried out mass shootings across the United States—were on powerful psychiatric medications?
a—1%
b—25%
c—50%
d—75% or more
Why don’t we know the answer to this question? Doesn’t the United States have more mass shootings than any country in the world?
Yes, it does.
And aren’t these shootings the source of great suffering and anxiety?
Yes, they are.
And don’t most people genuinely want to know why these lone gunmen feel compelled to kill innocent people?
Yes, they do.
Then, why don’t we know? Why—after more than two decades of these bloody incidents—do we still not have a definitive, thoroughly-researched answer to this one simple question: How many of these mentally-disturbed killers were on dangerous psychiatric medications?
Instead, the media pursues a line of inquiry that fails to reveal anything even remotely conclusive about the gunman’s actions. If “white supremacy” or “Nazi ideology” impacted the killer’s decision to go on a deadly shooting spree in Texas, then why didn’t he target a black community center or a Jewish synagogue? Wouldn’t that have been more consistent with his alleged ideology?
Yes, it would have been, which suggests that his alleged ideology is a symptom of his fragile mental condition not the primary factor driving his behavior. The reason these people go on crazed killing sprees is because they are ‘damaged goods’ not because they are ideologues. There’s a big difference.
So, why does the media keep harping on this silly the idea that the killer’s behavior was effected by his feelings about “white supremacy” or “Nazi ideology”? It’s ridiculous, after all, the killer was not white himself nor were his victims racially targeted. They were merely random passersby strolling through a shopping mall. In other words, there is no evidence to support the case that is being made by the media. But—here’s the thing—the media doesn’t care about evidence because their real goal is to advance a political agenda aimed at linking violent fanatical behavior to race-based uber-nationalism. What they are trying to do, is make a subliminal connection between the erratic behavior of a ruthless killer and the sincerely-felt patriotism of many Trump supporters. The media has been hammering away at this same theme for over six years culminating in the January 6 fraud. This is just the latest iteration of the same tedious political psy-ops.
If the journalists were serious about investigating this latest bloody incident, they’d try to find out whether the killer had been on the FBI’s radar before the onslaught took place. (as so many mass killers have been in the past.) Was he? Was Mauricio Garcia on the list of potential “domestic terrorists” compiled by the FBI?
We’ll probably never know, because that would expose the inner workings of the nation’s premier law enforcement agency which would undoubtedly cause considerable embarassment. So, the FBI is going to circle the wagons and make sure that never happens, which means that a good portion of the truth about this event will probably remain concealed forever. Even worse, we can expect that the media will continue to push their wacky theory that Garcia was a “non-white white supremacist” regardless of the fact that the claim makes no sense at all. Here’s how analyst Michael Tracey sarcastically summed it up:
If a non-white person is a “white supremacist,” does that mean he believes in his own innate racial inferiority? @mtracey
Leave it to Tracey to expose the imbecility of a meme that defies reason but to which the media clings like the Holy Grail. It’s actually shocking that anyone can take this type of verbal hucksterism seriously when, in fact, the whole “non-white white supremacist” thing is one of the most absurd concoctions of all time. It’s pure gibberish.
So, where should we look for answers? Where can we find rational explanations for these sporadic acts of violence?
There’s only one place we can look; at the mental state of the person who committed the crime. That’s where we have to start. If we want to understand what drives a man to kill random people in a school or shopping mall, we need to know something about the psychology of the perpetrator. Fortunately, volumes have been written on this subject by respected professionals who have researched the topic, studied the data, and drawn their own informed conclusions. Take a look:
Close to 17% of Americans are taking psychiatric drugs with side effects such as acting aggressively, being angry, or violent and acting on dangerous impulses...
Psychotropic drugs are hardly helping when their side-effects include worsening depression, new or worsening anxiety, agitation or restlessness, panic attacks, new or worsening irritability, acting aggressively, being angry, or violent, acting on dangerous impulses, an extreme increase in activity and talking (mania), and other unusual changes in behavior or mood.
“Rather than helping the individual, psychotropics alienate, and push them into more and more potentially dangerous behavior,” states the president of the Florida chapter of CCHR, Diane Stein.
This situation was so egregious that in 2004, the Federal Drug Administration issued a “black-box” label warning indicating that the use of certain antidepressants to treat major depressive disorder in adolescents may increase the risk of suicide, homicide, and other acts of violence.
A study entitled Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Towards Others… declared … In the 69-month reporting period we identified 484 evaluable drugs that accounted for 780,169 serious adverse event reports of all kinds…. The violence cases included 387 reports of homicide, 404 physical assaults, 27 cases indicating physical abuse, 896 homicidal ideation reports, and 223 cases described as violence-related symptoms.”“Psychiatric Drugs and Side Effects – The Unseen Hand Behind Violence in America“, Citizens Commission on Human Rights
It all sounds very serious, doesn’t it? It sounds like something that policymakers should be aware of so they can tighten regulations on these potentially-lethal medications. It also sounds like something that pharmaceutical industry would try to keep out of the newspapers so people don’t see the connection between these drugs and the mayhem they produce. Simply put, the truth is being hidden for power and profits. What else is new? Here’s more background from another article:
A growing number of school shootings and other shooting rampages were committed by individuals under the influence of, or in withdrawal from, psychiatric drugs known to cause mania, psychosis, violence and even homicide. Consider this list of 13 massacres over the past decade or so, resulting in 54 dead and 105 wounded – and these are just the ones where the psychiatric drugs are known. In other cases, medical records were sealed or autopsy reports not made public or, in some cases, toxicology tests were either not done to test for psychiatric drugs or not disclosed to the public….
Given the growing list of shooters who were on psychiatric drugs, given the fact that 22 international drug regulatory agencies warn these drugs can cause violence, mania, psychosis, suicide and even homicide, and given the fact that a major study was just released confirming these drugs put people at greater risk of becoming violent, CCHR International asserts: “Any recommendation for more mental health ‘treatment,’ which [inevitably] means putting more people and more kids on these [psychiatric] drugs, is not only negligent but considering the possible repercussions, criminal.” (“The Real Lesson of Columbine: Psychiatric Drugs Induce Violence”
So, why aren’t we addressing the elephant in the room? Is there any doubt that the gunman at the Dallas-area shopping mall was mentally-unstable, probably had some history of counselling and treatment, and may have been on powerful psychiatric drugs? If you were a professional journalist, isn’t that where you would start your investigation rather than trying to cobble together some far-fetched theory based on photos of Nazi memorabilia on an isolated social media post?
We are told repeatedly by the media and the pundits on cable news that ‘guns are the problem’, but isn’t the case against powerful psychiatric meds equally compelling? It’s worth noting, that guns don’t fire themselves and that, typically, guns are not fired into crowds unless they are wielded by unstable, deranged people who—more often than not—have some traceable mental history in which they were diagnosed, counselled and treated. All we want to know is which medications they were prescribed so we can better monitor their use in order to protect the public. Unfortunately, the media is unwilling to provide this information due to a fundamental conflict of interest. They are paid by the drug companies. Here’s more from an article at the American Psychiatric Association:
A link between several types of psychotropic medications and violent behavior toward others has been documented in a recent study…
In a study published in the December 15, 2010… They found that during the study period, 780,169 serious adverse events of one kind or another had been reported for 484 drugs and that of those serious adverse events, 1,937 had been acts of violence. They defined a violent event as any case report containing one or more of the following items: homicide, physical assault, physical abuse, homicidal ideation, or violence-related symptom….
“In addition, antidepressant drugs showed consistently elevated risk, even when compared with antipsychotics and mood stabilizers. . . .”
Paul Fink, M.D., an expert in the study of violent behavior and a past APA president, commented. “I can tell you that as a psychiatrist who has practiced for a long time, I was unaware that [varenicline and antidepressants] had been linked with violence toward others. . . . Psychiatrists and mental health professionals need to be aware of this association.” The study had no outside funding.” Several Medications Linked to Violent Acts
Keep in mind, normal, well-adjusted men who are happily married and gainfully employed, do not commit random acts of homicidal violence. These are people who have serious psychological problems, who may have sought professional help, and who have (oftentimes) been prescribed various psychiatric medications.
These medications—while beneficial to many—can result in excessive violence in a small percentage of users. The public needs to know about these drugs so they can balance their benefits against the risks to public safety. So far, there has been no admission that these risks even exist. Instead, all the blame has been placed on guns which has merely fueled greater distrust of both the media and the political establisment. In fact, most gun owners now believe that the politicians are not interested in public safety at all but merely use it as platform for promoting their own narrow interests. Ostensibly, those interests now include the repeal the second amendment followed by the disarming of the American people. That’s the goal and most gun owners know that’s the goal. Here’s one last clip from a letter to the editor titled Psychiatric Drugs are Behind the Violence by Doug Dale:
As Congress, surrounded by armed guards, metal detectors, chain link fence and paramilitary forces, debates infringing on the constitutional right to bear arms by private citizens, isn’t it time they actually address the root cause of these mass killings?
These events were unheard of until the FDA began approving more psychiatric drugs several decades ago. From 2004 to 2009, researchers accessing the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System revealed that 1,537 cases of violence were linked to 31 different types of psychiatric drugs.
Other professional studies concluded that patients didn’t have homicidal ideation until after taking these drugs. From 1992 thru 2017, 37 school shootings have been linked to these medications. In a report submitted to the Senate in 2014, it was estimated that 90% of school shooters were using antidepressants. Obviously, it’s not a person’s mental health, but the drugs that cause this violence.
The pharmaceutical lobby contributes hundreds of millions of dollars to congressional members that craft federal laws. Who will deny that these drugs are the root cause of the mass killings? Will it be uneducated political groupies drinking the gun-control elixir, politicians taking campaign contributions from the pharmaceutical lobby, the pharmaceutical industry and/or the doctors peddling this poison to the public, and if so, why?…
In 2001, a drug manufacturer removed a cholesterol drug from the market because it was linked to 31 deaths. We are way past that number in mass killings.
Congress needs to ban gun ownership from anyone being prescribed these drugs, then, at the least, make it a federal crime to write new prescriptions going forward. To do otherwise, one can only conclude that Congress could care less about how much collateral damage they cause.
If we want to stop the mass shootings, we need to strictly regulate the psychiatric medications that are causing them.
*
This article was originally published on The Unz Review.
Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.
He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
All images in this article are from TUR
The original source of this article is Global Research
An Australian university has unearthed millions of Tweets by fake accounts pushing disinformation on the Ukraine war, Peter Cronau reports. The sample size dwarfs other studies of covert propaganda about the war on social media.
Rally for Ukraine outside the White House in Washington, Feb. 27, 2022. (Mike Maguire, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
A team of researchers at the University of Adelaide have found that as many as 80 percent of tweets about the 2022 Russia-Ukraine invasion in its early weeks were part of a covert propaganda campaign originating from automated fake “bot” accounts.
An anti-Russia propaganda campaign originating from a “bot army” of phony automated Twitter accounts flooded the internet at the start of the war.
The research shows that of the more than 5 million tweets studied, 90.2 percent (both bot and non-bot) came from accounts that were pro-Ukraine, with fewer than 7 percent of the accounts being classed as pro-Russian.
The university researchers also found these automated tweets had been purposely used to drive up fear amongst people targeted by them, boosting a high level of statistically measurable “angst” in the online discourse.
The research team analysed a massively unprecedented 5,203,746 tweets, sent with key hashtags, in the first two weeks of the Russian invasion of Ukraine from Feb. 24. The researchers looked at predominately English-language accounts. A calculated 1.8 million unique Twitter accounts in the dataset posted at least one English-language tweet.
The results were published in August in a research paper, titled “#IStandWithPutin versus #IStandWithUkraine: The interaction of bots and humans in discussion of the Russia/Ukraine war,” by the University of Adelaide’s School of Mathematical Science.
The size of the sample under study, of over 5-million tweets, dwarfs other recent studies of covert propaganda in social media surrounding the Ukraine war.
The little-reported Stanford University/Graphika research on Western disinformation, analysed by Declassified Australia in September, examined just under 300,000 tweets from 146 Twitter accounts.
The Meta/Facebook research on Russian disinformation reported widely by mainstream media, including by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) a fortnight later, looked at only 1,600 Facebook accounts.
Reports on the new research have appeared in only a few independent media sites, and on Russia’s RT. The ground-breaking study exposing a massive anti-Russia social media disinformation campaign has been effectively ignored by Western establishment media, showing how stories that don’t fit the desired pro-Western narrative are routinely buried.
Disinformation Blitz Krieg
The Adelaide University researchers unearthed a massive organised pro-Ukraine influence operation underway from the early stages of the conflict. Overall, the study found automated “bot” accounts to be the source of between 60 to 80 percent of all tweets in the dataset.
The published data shows that in the first week of the Ukraine-Russia war there was a huge mass of pro-Ukrainian hashtag bot activity. Approximately 3.5 million tweets using the hashtag #IStandWithUkraine were sent by bots in that first week.
In fact, it was like someone had flicked a switch at the start of the war as pro-Ukraine bot activity suddenly burst into life. In that first day of the war the #IStandWithUkraine hashtag was used in as many as 38,000 tweets each hour, rising to 50,000 tweets an hour by day three of the war.
By comparison, the data shows that in the first week there was an almost total absence of pro-Russian bot activity using the key hashtags. During that first week of the invasion, pro-Russian bots were sending off tweets using the #IStandWithPutin or #IStandWithRussia hashtags at a rate of only several hundred per hour.
Given the apparent long-range planning for the invasion of Ukraine, cyber experts expressed surprise that Russian cyber and internet responses were so laggard. A researcher at the Centre for Security Studies in Switzerland, said: “The [pro-Russian] cyber operations we have seen do not show long preparation, and instead look rather haphazard.”
After being apparently left flatfooted, the #IStandWithPutin hashtag mainly from automated bots, eventually fired up a week after the start of the war. That hashtag started appearing in higher numbers on March 2, day 7 of the war. It reached 10,000 tweets per hour just twice over the next two days, still way behind the pro-Ukraine tweeting activity.
The #IStandWithRussia hashtag use was even smaller, reaching only 4,000 tweets per hour. After just two days of operation, the pro-Russian hashtag activity had dropped away almost completely. The study’s researchers noted the automated bot accounts “likely used by Russian authorities,” were “removed likely by pro-Ukrainian authorities.”
The reaction against these pro-Russian accounts had been swift. On March 5, after the #IStandWithPutin hashtag had trended on Twitter, the company announced it had banned over 100 accounts using the hashtag for violating its “platform manipulation and spam policy” and participating in “coordinated inauthentic behaviour.”
Later that month, the Ukraine Security Service (SBU) reportedly raided five “bot farms”’ operating inside the country. The Russia-linked bot operators were reportedly operating through 100,000 fake social media accounts spreading disinformation that was “intended to inspire panic among Ukrainian masses.”
Ukrainian security forces unearthed a pro-Russian automated “bot army” operating out of an apartment in March 2022. The raid found 100 sets of GSM-gateways, left, and 10,000 sim cards, right, operating 100,000 fake bot accounts. (SBU)
Unfiltered Research
The landmark Adelaide University research differs from these earlier revelations in another most unique and spectacular way.
While the Stanford-Graphika and Meta research was produced by researchers who have long-term deep ties to the U.S. national security state, the Adelaide University researchers are remarkably independent. The academic team is from the university’s School of Mathematical Science.
Using mathematical calculations, they set out to predict and model people’s psychological traits based on their digital footprint.
Unlike the datasets selected and provided for the Stanford/Graphika and the Meta research, the data the Adelaide University team accessed did not come from accounts that had been detected for breaching guidelines and shut down by Meta or Twitter.
Adelaide University campus, in Australia, 2008. (Pdfpdf, Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons)
Joshua Watt is one of the lead researchers on the university team, and is a Master of Philosophy candidate in applied mathematics.
He told Declassified Australia that the dataset of 5 million tweets was accessed directly by the team from Twitter accounts on the internet using an academic license giving access to the Twitter API.
The “Application Programming Interface” is a data communication software tool that allows researchers to directly retrieve and analyse Twitter data.
The fake tweets and automated bot accounts had not been detected and removed by Twitter before being analysed by the researchers, although some were possibly removed in Twitter’s March sweep.
Watt told Declassified Australia that in fact many of the bot accounts behind the 5 million tweets studied are likely to be still up and running.
Declassified Australia contacted Twitter to ask what action they may have taken to remove the fake bot accounts identified in the University of Adelaide research. They had not responded by the time of going to press.
Critical Tool in Info War
This new research paper confirms mounting fears that social media has covertly become what the researchers call “a critical tool in information warfare playing a large role in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.”
The Adelaide University researchers tried their best to be noncommittal in describing the activities of the fake Twitter accounts, although they had found the vast majority – over 90 percent – were anti-Russian messages. They stated: “Both sides in the Ukrainian conflict use the online information environment to influence geopolitical dynamics and sway public opinion.”
They found the two main participating sides in the propaganda war have their own particular goals and style. “Russian social media pushes narratives around their motivation, and Ukrainian social media aims to foster and maintain external support from Western countries, as well as promote their military efforts while undermining the perception of the Russian military.”
While the research findings concentrated on automated Twitter bots, there were also findings on the use of hashtags by non-bot tweeters. They found significant information flows from non-bot pro-Russian accounts, but no significant flows from non-bot pro-Ukraine accounts.
As well as being far more active, the pro-Ukraine side was found to be far more advanced in its use of automated bots. The pro-Ukrainian side used more “astroturf bots” than the pro-Russians. Astroturf bots are hyper-active political bots that continuously follow many other accounts to increase followers of that account.
Social Media Role in Boosting Fear
Crucially, the University of Adelaide researchers also investigated the psychological influence the fake automated bot accounts had on the online conversation during those early weeks of the war.
These conversations in a target audience may develop over time into support or opposition towards governments and policies – but they may also have more instant effects influencing the target audiences’ immediate decisions.
The study found that it was the tweets from the fake “bot” accounts that most drove an increase in conversations surrounding “angst” amongst people targeted by them. They found these automated bot accounts increased “the use of words in the angst category which contains words related to fear and worry, such as ‘shame,’ ‘terrorist,’ ‘threat, ‘panic.’”
By combining the “angst” messaging with messages about “motion” and geographical locations, the researchers found “the bot accounts are influencing more discussion surrounding moving/fleeing/going or staying.” The researchers believe this effect may well have been to influence Ukrainians even away from the conflict zones to flee from their homes.
The research shows that fake automated social media “bot” accounts do manipulate public opinion by shaping the discourse, sometimes in very specific ways. The results provide a chilling indication of the very real malign effects that mass social media disinformation campaigns can have on an innocent civilian population.
Origins of Twitter Bot Accounts
The researchers report that the overwhelming level of Twitter disinformation that was anti-Russian was from bots “likely [organised] by pro-Ukrainian authorities.”
The researchers asserted no further findings about the origin of the 5 million tweets, but did find that some bots “are pushing campaigns specific to certain countries [unnamed], and hence sharing content aligned with those timezones.” The data does show that the peak time for a selection of pro-Ukrainian bot activity occurred between 6pm and 9pm across U.S. time zones.
Some indication of the origin and the targeting of the messages could be deduced from the specific languages used in the 5 million tweets. Over 3.5 million tweets, or 67 percent, were in the English language, with fewer that 2 percent in Russian and Ukrainian.
In May 2022, the National Security Agency (NSA) director and U.S. cyber command chief, General Paul Nakasone, revealed that the Cyber Command had been conducting offensive Information Operations in support of Ukraine.
“We’ve conducted a series of operations across the full spectrum: offensive, defensive, [and] information operations,” Nakasone said.
U.S. Cyber Command training exercise at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, 2011. (Fort George G. Meade Public Affairs Office, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
Nakasone said the U.S. has been conducting operations aimed at dismantling Russian propaganda. He said the operations were lawful, conducted through policy determined by the U.S. Defense Department and with civilian oversight.
Nakasone said the U.S. seeks to tell the truth when conducting an information operation, unlike Russia.
U.S. Cyber Command had deployed to Ukraine a “hunt forward” cyber team in December to help shore up Ukraine’s cyber defences and networks against active threats in anticipation of the invasion.
A newly formed European Union cyber rapid response team consisting of 12 experts joined the Cyber Command team to look for active cyber threats inside Ukrainian networks and to strengthen the country’s cyber defences.
The U.S. has invested $40 million since 2017 in helping Ukraine buttress its information technology sector. According to U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, the investments have helped Ukrainians “keep their internet on and information flowing, even in the midst of a brutal Russian invasion.”
Wars &Lies in Our Pockets
With the rise of the internet, war and armed conflict will never be the same. Analysts have noted that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has ushered in a “new digital era of military, political and economic conflict” being manipulated by “laptop generals and bot armies.”
“In all dimensions of this conflict, digital technology plays a key role – as a tool for cyberattacks and digital protest, and as an accelerator for flows of information and disinformation,” wrote analysts at the Heinrich Boll Stiftung in Brussels. “Propaganda has been a part of war since the beginning of history, but never before could it be so widely spread beyond an actual conflict area and targeted to so many different audiences.”
Joshua Watt, one of the lead researchers on the University of Adelaide team that conducted the landmark study, summed it up: “In the past, wars have been primarily fought physically, with armies, air force and navy operations being the primary forms of combat. However, social media has created a new environment where public opinion can be manipulated at a very large scale.”
“CNN brought once-distant wars into our living rooms,” another analyst stated, “but TikTok and YouTube and Twitter have put them in our pockets.”
We are all carrying around with us a powerful source of information and news media – and also, most certainly, disinformation that’s coming relentlessly at us from influence operations run by “bad actors” whose aim is to deceive.
The science of modern propaganda arguably got its start over a century ago during World War I when a young Edward Bernays was recruited to help sell the conflict to a reluctant American populace, after which he took what he’d learned on that front and folded it into a lifetime of work on the study of mass-scale psychological manipulation. That was when propaganda, as we know it today, came into being, with the scientific method applied to the task of refining techniques for manipulating large-scale human behavior using modern media distribution. Those methods have been in research and development this entire time, and have advanced at least as much as our other instruments of warfare have advanced since World War I. But that wasn’t the beginning of mass-scale psychological manipulation by the powerful. That has been going on since the dawn of civilization.
Dr. Robert Malone, an outspoken critic of the COVID-19 vaccines, discussed his new book “Lies My Government Told Me” with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in a recent episode of “RFK Jr. The Defender Podcast.”
According to Malone, U.S. Americans for the last three years have been subjected to “military-grade information warfare — capability and technology that was designed for our opponents for military warfare outside of the U.S. — that has been turned on American citizens.”
Malone told Kennedy, I know “that’s a lot of words, some strong words, but I think that’s really what we have here.”
Kennedy and Malone discussed the “psychological operations” employed by the U.S. government during the COVID-19 pandemic and earlier in U.S. history that relies on fear and propaganda messaging as tools of social control.
Malone said the information warfare regarding the U.S. government’s response to COVID-19 appears to have been largely deployed through the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
“What’s been deployed has been basically the technology and capabilities that were designed to respond to terrorism, but they’ve been deployed against the likes of you, me and Dr. McCullough and so many others,” Malone said.
In his book, Malone explains how during the COVID-19 pandemic DHS “defined misinformation, disinformation and malinformation as a form of domestic terrorism.”
“They made this odd kind of logic jump where they spoke about basically the January 6th events and domestic violence,” Malone said, “and then they linked that to vaccines and vaccine hesitancy and stated in alert that they anticipated there would be domestic violence associated with protests against the masks and the vaccine mandates — and that that should be responded to as terrorism.”
“I strongly suspect that they had intelligence and reacted to the trucker protest as it was developing as another domestic terrorism act.”
“So in 1976, President Carter’s CIA director, said, ‘We are not going to infiltrate the U.S. press anymore’ and they acknowledged that it was illegal,” Kennedy told Malone.
“But the following year, Carl Bernstein did an article for Rolling Stone in which he said there’s at least 400 of these reporters still out there [that are on the CIA’s list] … [and] in 2014, President Obama made it legal once again for the CIA to propagandize Americans,” Kennedy added.
Malone responded by saying in his book he discusses how Obama has been a “major voice” championing the logic that the protection of democracy requires censorship. “And Mr. Biden, no surprise, seems to also be a strong advocate for this position,” Malone said.
Both Kennedy and Malone said they found Desmet’s theory to be a relatively accurate analysis of human psychology and behavior.
According to Kennedy, the CIA has a long history of “working on this” by exploring questions such as, “How do you get large groups of people to behave? How do you get social groups — societies — to do what you want, to accept authoritarian control?”
Malone said he considered Twitter to be a “military-grade weapon that is designed and powered with some of the capabilities for crowd control, for crowd management, for crowd motivation, for crowd direction.”
At the end of the interview, Malone told Kennedy that one of the things he found most troubling during the COVID-19 pandemic was the “substitution of hope for science” that was “reinforced through this weaponized propaganda.”
Malone said:
“We were basically trained to accept an unlicensed, unsafe, non-effective medical product based on no science — on hope — and trained into us through this well-developed system of propaganda, censorship, information control and everything else.
“What it means for the future is grim unless folks pay attention.”
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.
WARNING: Graphic footage: Fox News host Tucker Carlson rips the sexual exploitation of children and the media for ignoring Balenciaga child ‘bondage’ ad controversy on ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight.’
Facebook’s parent company Meta has acknowledged the discovery of several clusters of fake accounts and pages believed to be linked to individuals “associated with the US military,” according to the company’s latest adversarial threat report published this week.
“Although the people behind this operation attempted to conceal their identities and coordination, our investigation found links to individuals associated with the US military,” the company said in a blog post on Tuesday.
The influence campaign was discovered earlier this year and in total Meta removed 39 Facebook and 26 Instagram accounts, as well as 16 pages and two groups, all for violating the company’s policy against “coordinated inauthentic behavior.”
The social media giant admitted that the large-scale operation ran beyond those several dozen accounts and across many other internet platforms, including Twitter, YouTube and Telegram – as well as major Russian social networks VKontakte and Odnoklassniki. It seemingly attempted to downplay the discovery by insisting that the “majority of this operation’s posts had little to no engagement from authentic communities” and highlighting similar “deceptive campaigns” by China and Russia.
Meta’s acknowledgement substantiates a bombshell investigation by the Washington Post that revealed the Pentagon was forced to launch a “sweeping audit of how it conducts clandestine information warfare,” after a variety of social media accounts, which its operatives used to target foreign audiences in elaborate psychological warfare efforts, were exposed.
The takedown of the influence network was initially highlighted by researchers at Graphika and the Stanford Internet Observatory, which back in August published a report about online networks allegedly pushing “pro-Western,” anti-Russia and other politicized narratives.
While the original study did not pin blame for the fake accounts on any particular actors, two officials later told the Post that US CENTCOM – the combatant command which oversees forces in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia – “is among those whose activities are facing scrutiny” for its influence operations.
At the time, CENTCOM refused to comment on whether any of the suspicious accounts were created by its personnel or contractors, but one official claimed such behavior would “absolutely be a violation of doctrine and training practices.”
“Our citizens should know the urgent facts…but they don’t because our media serves imperial, not popular interests. They lie, deceive, connive and suppress what everyone needs to know, substituting managed news misinformation and rubbish for hard truths…”—Oliver Stone