Isn’t it interesting how after every falseflag-style event, we are invariably treated to a series of mountingly draconian restrictions which end up never being removed, even long after the inciting threat has been dispelled and no longer exists? The Patriot Act clamp-downs which ushered in an era of privacy invasion, including unleashing an unhinged TSA onto unsuspecting Americans, capable of violating them physically in the most sacrosanct ways possible, were never repealed, but rather continue to be renewed each year, despite the fact that ‘Al-Qaeda’ has long ostensibly ceased to exist as a coherent organization. It’s a simple axiomatic fact that power only takes, it never gives—or particularly—gives back anything of itself.
It’s with no surprise that we now learn that the Pentagon plans to use the recent ‘leaks’ debacle to effect an unprecedented clamp-down on social media.
The Pentagon now believes that private chatrooms, like the videogame-centered one at the heart of the leaks, may now need to be ‘monitored’, as they pose an unaccountable risk.
The Biden administration is looking at expanding how it monitors social media sites and chatrooms after U.S. intelligence agencies failed to spot classified Pentagon documents circulating online for weeks, according to a senior administration official and a congressional official briefed on the matter.
The possible change in the intelligence-gathering process is just one potential shift as officials scramble to determine not only how the documents leaked but also how to prevent another damaging incident. -Source
What particularly chagrined the Pentagon was the revelation that Jack Teixeira had been reportedly leaking the documents for far longer than initially thought—in fact, since the very beginning of the Ukrainian conflict in February 2022.
The intelligence community is now grappling with how it can scrub platforms like Discord in search of relevant material to avoid a similar leak in the future, said the congressional official.
Unfortunately, the problem is that U.S. law forbids them from monitoring private chatrooms unless there is already probable cause, which would require a judge’s warrant. But has a minor technicality like that ever stopped the Feds before?
In light of the recent resurgence of, and focus on, free speech, and the concurrent pushbacks against draconian anti-first amendment policies, the globalist governments of the Western order have begun making new strides towards clamping down on both social media and the internet in general. It’s a move disguised under the classic misdirection of “anti-disinformation” campaigns, and the list of politicians and governments calling for increasingly authoritarian attacks on freedom of speech is nearly inexhaustible.
Every country controlled by the globalist autocracy has jumped on the bandwagon. Ireland just announced new legislation which would criminalize reading or possessing any material or content which contains or incites ‘hate speech’—yes, that favorite of nebulous terms of the globalist cretins.
Not only that, but the burden of proof is shifted to the accused, who is expected to prove they didn't intend to use the material to "spread hate". This clause is so radical that even the Trotskyist People Before Profit opposed it as a flagrant violation of civil liberties. Dark times.
One common tactic the ruling class typically employs is to first use smaller, less sovereign nations as test-beds for trial runs of a given unpopular and draconian law. The reason being that, the leadership of such nations has less global power and influence, are easier to coerce, control, blackmail, or bribe into carrying out policies that would normally be abhorrent to their populace.
Then, once it’s been ‘trialed’ in those lesser nations, a campaign is built up to roll the policy out in the larger, main regional and ‘Great Power’ nations, using the previous trial runs as contrived success stories or ‘selling points’ to lobby the policy into existence. They can say, “See, it worked in Ireland, and they’re similar to us, so of course it will work here too!”
Last week, Ron Desantis flew to Israel to sign such a law, one limiting the free speech of Floridians. You read that right, he signed an American law into existence on the territory of Israel, a foreign country. One can hardly imagine a more treasonous act.
One’s thoughts on anti-semitism are immaterial here. No sitting governor of the United States should be signing American laws, particularly ones that limit the basic, fundamental rights and freedoms of expression of American citizens, on the territory of a foreign state. That’s not to even address the tyrannical bill itself, which criminalizes the passing out of “offensive” pamphlets.
This week Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida made a trip to Israel to sign HB 269, a bill that makes it a felony with up to five years in jail for passing out “offensive” flyers or pamphlets. This move has been widely criticized by free speech advocates and legal experts as a gross violation of the First Amendment. The bill states that anyone distributing “any material for the purpose of intimidating or threatening the owner” could be convicted of a felony “hate crime.” While we often write about the “hate speech” rules on Big Tech platforms, this is far worse. This is the state of Florida violating the First Amendment of the United States. -Source
And apparently, this isn’t even the first such bill limiting American rights that Desantis has signed in Israel.
As things go south around us, the only remaining way for the rulers to retain their hold is to consolidate as much control over information as humanly possible. They’re in an all-out sprint towards this goal, and the primary tool in their toolkit is the weaponized concept of ‘hate-speech’ and all its attendant ‘-isms’ and ‘-phobias’.
Take for instance the above DOD contract, which funded a shadowy company named Peraton to help fight “disinformation”, amongst other things. Their unsettlingly vague PR video:
They intimate the ‘invisible war’, clothing their objectives behind obscure euphemisms and whispered constructs, all to disguise the fact that the actual enemy they’re fighting is us.
The gap between media, social media, big tech, and intelligence agencies has narrowed over time. Now more than ever these institutions have totally fused into one revolving door. The ‘Twitter Files’ of recent fame exposed some of this, while other examples continue to made evident:
Hundreds Of Former Feds Have Flocked To Jobs In Big Tech
Google, Twitter, Meta and TikTok’s executive ranks have included over 200 former employees of surveillance government agencies, creating an employment pipeline between the government and Big Tech companies, a Daily Caller investigation found.
The technology companies recruited 248 employees from the DOJ, FBI, CIA and DHS, a LinkedIn search revealed. The hiring occurred mostly between 2017-2022, with several filling top director positions after having decade-long careers in the surveillance agencies. -Source
Virtually every social media company is brimming with “ex”-high ranking intelligence agency officials.
Reed Rubinstein, former deputy associate attorney general under President Trump, told the Daily Caller that Americans should be “concerned” about “terrifying” integration of Big Tech companies and federal agencies.
In what is billed as the DC to Silicon Valley pipeline, it’s become common practice for ex-intelligence agents to stock the departments specifically dealing with the oversight of ‘disinformation’ in all the top Big Tech and social media firms. This can be nothing other than the concerted effort to control the levers of all information available to society at large.
A prominent example below shows Aaron Berman, ex-CIA intel analyst, who transitioned to head of ‘Misinformation Policy’ at Meta, formerly known as Facebook:
Call it a coincidence, but it’s interesting to note that recently, in light of the Bud Light debacle, which saw the elevation of trans ‘star’ Dylan Mulvaney to the face of the brand, many people focused on the revelation that a female woke liberal Gen-Y brand director was single-handedly responsible for the tone-deaf, offkey branding campaign. But what slipped past the radars of many was the little-seen revelation that the CEO of Budweiser’s parent company Anheuser-Busch has a prominent CIA background, openly listed on his resumé.
It does strike one as a little convenient that “former” intel officers appear at the scene of the crime of many of the corporate campaigns sweeping through the nation, whose aim is always some distortion of the social order and which stink of social engineering.
Another of many examples:
But the separation of intelligence and tech continues to narrow unabated. The latest buzz has surrounded the Biden administration’s plan to ‘woo Gen-Z’ers’ and millennials as a key cornerstone of the 2024 campaign push. They have rightly identified TikTok as the current trend-setting and taste-making platform de rigeur, and as such are now hiring flashy, charismatic Zoomers and millennials to not only ‘fight disinformation’ but also spread the pro-Democrat propaganda in the lead-up to the elections.
This effort was first launched a year or two ago when it became evident that some of the establishment’s more coercive tactics for deplatforming inconvenient facts—what they call ‘fighting disinformation’—were not going to fly with the public. The most notorious example came with the spectacular collapse of the wicked witch of disinformation Nina Jankowicz’ newly formed Orwellian ministry of truth called the ‘Disinformation Governance Board’. They realized that such an overt, broad-fronted attack was a tad too heavy-handed to be palatable to the not-as-of-yet-fully-propagandized public, so they turned to more ‘soft measures’.
The newly launched campaign was a grass-roots, astroturfing effort to go behind the backs of the American people by secretly paying White House-appointed influencers to comment on pertinent breaking news stories and ‘refute’ or push back against the Right/Conservative/Republican’s angle at every turn.
This initially and most prominently came to light when the White House enlisted TikTok stars to spread pro-vaccine propaganda.
From New York Times:
LOS ANGELES — Ellie Zeiler, 17, a TikTok creator with over 10 million followers, received an email in June from Village Marketing, an influencer marketing agency. It said it was reaching out on behalf of another party: the White House.
Would Ms. Zeiler, a high school senior who usually posts short fashion and lifestyle videos, be willing, the agency wondered, to participate in a White House-backed campaign encouraging her audience to get vaccinated against the coronavirus?
“There is a massive need to grow awareness within the 12-18 age range,” Village Marketing wrote to Ms. Zeiler’s business email. “We’re moving fast and have only a few available slots to fill, so please let us know ASAP.”
The article goes on to describe the “army” of Twitch Streamers, YouTubers, TikTokers, etc., that the White House enlisted as part of their propaganda campaign. State and local governments also hired their own armies of ‘micro-influencers’ at the local level—people with 5k to 10k followers—paid $1,000 per month to promote pro-Vax propaganda:
Note the irony of the White House readily availing themselves of the “pernicious Chinese threat” of TikTok when it suits their purposes of propagandizing the populace. But when China purportedly uses TikTok for the same, it’s “an attack on freedom, liberty, democracy, sovereignty, interference in our government”, etc., etc. No hypocrisy there at all.
The White House continued to use this tactic on a number of other hot-button issues, puppeteering young, biddable Gen-Z influencers into spreading pro-Biden propaganda, such as this infamous example, where a leading TikTok influencer was paid to explain how Putin’s war was the actual cause of skyrocketing gas prices, not Biden’s doing!
The ditzy mouthpiece above gesticulates her way through an incoherent rendition of Biden scriptwriter’s nonsense about ‘Putin’s horrific war’ in trying to absolve the demented dotard of his treason towards the American public.
In the runup to the November 2022 midterm elections, the Biden team’s strategy was supercharged in order to reach a huge audience of young voters.
One of the key ways the Democrats managed to inflict a humiliating and unexpected defeat on the Repubs in the midterms was their unforeseen strategy of mass mobilizing college campuses (maybe with some ballot harvesting thrown in). Of course, it was a perfectly legal and viable strategy for them, and they’re smart to have utilized it; the Democrats can always sniff out a new well of untapped potential votes like a dowsing rod.
Recently, they’ve gone the extra mile. The latest campaign taking social media by storm has been the two young influencers named Chris Mowrey and Harry Sisson:
They landed on the scene like algorithmically-powered superheroes crouching into a pavement-busting hero shot. All the rage with the Liberal echo-chamber, they’ve unleashed salvo after stultifying salvo of the lowest-hanging-fruit-style pro-Biden and anti-Trump agitprop. After being exposed as paid shills for the DNC, they comically denied it, only to be outed by Twitter’s new community notes feature.
As can be seen above, their employer, Palette Management, was in fact paid hundreds of thousands by the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The boys have even admitted to being fearful of espousing any anti-Democrat views—which they admittedly hold—due to the mass shunning and blowback they’d incur should they ever voice their true opinions. Others have made dutiful note of how much peer-pressure is generated by hyper-partisanship; we are all constantly compelled to side with our ‘clique’ on every divisive issue, lest we face censure from our own.
But the fact is, these two are just the tip of the iceberg. The DNC employs hordes of such ‘influencers’ to agitate on TikTok and elsewhere. For all his faults, it’s thanks to Musk’s Twitter that these facts are now able to be revealed, or at least widely disseminated.
This new Substack piece has come in timely fashion, highlighting the global shift towards totalitarian clamp-down on heterodox content:
It highlights the new U.S. ‘RESTRICT’ Act, first proposed in March of this year, which, “threatens 20 years in prison or a $250,000 fine for accessing blacklisted websites through “virtual private networks,” or VPNs, which are ways to create a private connection between a computer or phone and the Internet.”
Under the EU’s Digital Services Act, large tech companies must share their data with “vetted researchers” from non-profits and academia, which would cede content moderation to NGOs and their state sponsors.
The US’s RESTRICT Act, sponsored by Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), threatens 20 years in prison or a $250,000 fine for accessing blacklisted websites through “virtual private networks,” or VPNs, which are ways to create a private connection between a computer or phone and the Internet.
The EU, Canada, Brazil, Turkey, and many others are all rolling out new laws to regulate what the public can see on the internet. RebelNews, for instance, reported on how Canada’s CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) sent Twitter threatening letters demanding the censorship of certain ‘offensive’ tweets at the pain of ending all business with them, not to mention suing them:
A series of the urgent letters can be read on the RebelNews site.
We’re entering a time of almost complete global distrust, not only of citizens against their government, but of countries against other countries, and crucially, against social media corporations, which act as the distillers of information in society. The latter is happening only now because of a sort of lag, in some of the less-attuned nations, in catching up to the wiles of Western intelligence information control.
For years, countries like Turkey, Brazil, and other border-line Great Powers stood by and watched as debacles like ‘Russiagate’ played out on the world stage. These events led these less experienced countries to finally grasp the power that social media, and the digital distribution of information in general, could have; particularly vis a vis elections and swaying public opinion. This of course coincided with the reach and influence of social media growing in general, which made it increasingly obvious to all but the most compromised nations how this tool was being used by the Western ruling class to control all discourse and political influence.
Russia, for instance, has even made plans to develop its own sovereign internet entirely, for now settling on the creation of an indigenous TCP/IP protocol replacement. Particularly as we head into the AI age, it’s become clearer than ever that the informational domain will be the key battleground of the future. It sounds cliché to say, because it’s such a self-evident bromide mooted about for so long. But the people who it dawned on first likely never suspected the true extent to which it would someday go, the lengths to which cutthroat political parties would abuse every newly-minted tech innovation to eke out all advantages in staking their claim on that ultimate real estate of our minds.
As shown earlier, social media and big tech firms have fused openly with the intelligence apparatus of the government. And one of the deviously cunning ways they do this so effectively is by utilizing an old trick of creating ambiguously ‘official’ fronts to do their dirty work. It’s a trick long mastered by the banking cabal. In establishing their Federal Reserve system, they created an apparatus that is ostensibly ‘official’, and thus given the authoritative cachet of the federal government, yet in reality was byzantinely nested in a Matryoshka doll of private bank mechanisms and hierarchies, making it in effect a privately-controlled entity, despite its ‘official’ trappings.
It’s a very neat trick.
Similarly, the federal government and its attendant intelligence agencies have confected an endless array of official-sounding agencies, who operate under an assumed aegis of governmental authority, yet are actually intimately entwined with a congeries of private interests. Case in point being the vaccine manufacturers who funded the various ‘fact checking’ agencies under some nebulous co-sponsorship with the federal government, giving it the outer veneer of an ‘official’ agency while actually representing very narrowly private interests.
In the end, it doesn’t even matter which direction it goes—whether it’s private interests putting on an ‘official’ front, or vice versa—because the fact is that the two have fused to such an intimate degree that they’re effectively indistinguishable. After all, if hundreds of top intel agency officials now dominate the highest tiers of big tech and social media corporations while secretly under cover, and still taking orders from their previous employment (perhaps even clandestine paychecks as well), then it becomes a futile exercise to attempt to delineate some imaginary fine line between the two. The only important question at that point becomes, who is the ‘gray eminence’ behind the curtain which funds and controls both?
Intelligence agencies are a sort of ancillary appendage of the government. They’re said to report to the president, at least on paper and in theory. Yet there are programs within their highly compartmentalized structures which even presidents are not allowed to know or ask about. So it begs the question, who’s really controlling these policies? What is the source from whence they sprout?
Men like Kissinger spend decades melding through various administrations, completely oblivious to time and the electoral mechanisms which are the foundations of our so-called ‘democracy’. Over the course of their long careers, they develop friendships which supercede those of mere momentary rank or ephemeral sinecure obligations. They form and cultivate interests which transcend the transitory whims of statehoods and fleeting socio-economic trendlines. We can only speculate that they rise to places representing dynastic outlooks which are both more ancient and long term, and which require the delicate husbandry of special custodians not limited by the vagaries of mundane civic concerns. In short, these are people appointed by overseers of grand narratives, arcs and timelines that span centuries, through whose duration many governments, administrations, and institutions pass like sand through a sieve.
To such people, the momentary whims of contemporary laws and governance, such as those of free speech and expression, are but trifles to be brushed aside, or waited out like yellowing leaves on an autumnal tree. And our question, as a society, remains: how to design governance systems which can oppose such trans-generational powers?
If you enjoyed the read, I would greatly appreciate if you subscribed to a monthly/yearly pledge to support my work, so that I may continue providing you with detailed, incisive reports like this one.
Alternatively, you can tip here: Tip Jar
You know what’s interesting?
I live in a pretty Jewish neighborhood in Florida and twice a year, around Christmas and Easter, I get mini books - you could say pamphlets - in the mail evangelizing to Jews about Jesus, usually accompanied with a story of Jewish converts to Christianity.
I wonder if this is now considered “hate speech"?
I notice that all news articles starting with "fact check:" are all fake.