The FBI Found No Evidence Of January 6th Planning Or Coordination Outside Of Its Own

reuters  |  The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

Kash Patel calls on Tucker Carlson to release footage of undercover feds:

"Ray Epps was on FBI's most wanted list one day, and the next day he was off. There are only two ways that happens: you die, or you are an informant. Jill Sanborn, the head of the FBI counterintelligence… https://t.co/RALaXMKxX3 pic.twitter.com/8DJXX5JN1z

— kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 8, 2023

"Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. "Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages."

Stone, a veteran Republican operative and self-described "dirty trickster", and Jones, founder of a conspiracy-driven radio show and webcast, are both allies of Trump and had been involved in pro-Trump events in Washington on Jan. 5, the day before the riot.

FBI investigators did find that cells of protesters, including followers of the far-right Oath Keepers and Proud Boys groups, had aimed to break into the Capitol. But they found no evidence that the groups had serious plans about what to do if they made it inside, the sources said.

Prosecutors have filed conspiracy charges against 40 of those defendants, alleging that they engaged in some degree of planning before the attack.

They alleged that one Proud Boy leader recruited members and urged them to stockpile bulletproof vests and other military-style equipment in the weeks before the attack and on Jan. 6 sent members forward with a plan to split into groups and make multiple entries to the Capitol.

But so far prosecutors have steered clear of more serious, politically-loaded charges that the sources said had been initially discussed by prosecutors, such as seditious conspiracy or racketeering.

The FBI's assessment could prove relevant for a congressional investigation that also aims to determine how that day's events were organized and by whom.

Senior lawmakers have been briefed in detail on the results of the FBI's investigation so far and find them credible, a Democratic congressional source said.

The chaos on Jan. 6 erupted as the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives met to certify Joe Biden's victory in November's presidential election.

 

WaPo Breathless About 550 Americans Missing In Mexico

WaPo  |  Lisa Torres was glued to her phone, watching news reports on the kidnapping last week of four Americans in the Mexican city of Matamoros. She lived in the Houston suburbs, hundreds of miles away, but knew well the pain of having a relative snatched on the other side of the border. Her son, Robert, was just 21 when he vanished in 2017.

As Torres flicked through social media posts describing the Biden administration’s rapid response to the abductions, she grew increasingly upset. Finally, after the Americans were found on Tuesday — two alive, two dead — she took to Twitter.

“I’m so angry I couldn’t sleep, thinking about how my U.S. government acted in Matamoros with the kidnappings,” she wrote in Spanish. What happened to the Americans was sad, she wrote. But at least they were recovered. “This only confirms that my U.S. government can help, and they didn’t, in the case of my son. WHY?”

More than 550 Americans are reported as missing in Mexico, a little-known facet of a broader tragedy that has honeycombed this country with mass graves. Soaring violence and government dysfunction have fueled a crisis that’s left at least 112,150 people missing, according to government records here.

Americans make up a small part of that ghastly toll. And they are a tiny percentage of the millions of U.S. citizens who travel to Mexico every year for tourism, work and family visits. But just as there’s been an uproar in Mexico over the government’s all-out effort to find the four Americans, compared with its far more limited search for its own abducted citizens, relatives of the Americans still missing are asking why their loved ones haven’t been a higher priority for Washington.

Mexico's Gulf Cartel delivers 'kidnappers' — and an apology

“We see that when the U.S. government makes strong statements, there are results,” said Geovanni Barrios, a lawyer whose 17-year-old son, a U.S. citizen, was abducted in the border city of Reynosa in 2008. “But there aren’t only four Americans disappeared in Mexico. We don’t see [the U.S. government] making these statements about the hundreds of other missing Americans.”

The kidnappings on March 3 in Matamoros, across the border from Brownsville, Tex., drew attention in part because a passerby recorded men in bulletproof vests dragging three of the victims into a truck a few blocks from the Rio Grande in broad daylight. The video quickly went viral, and the abductions were swept up in a turbocharged American political debate. Lawmakers in Washington were already expressing alarm about Mexican cartels’ exports of fentanyl, which accounts for two-thirds of overdose deaths in the United States. Some Republicans have called for military strikes on the armed gangs.

 

Journalists Lock Horns With State Sponsored Thought Police In Congress

zerohedge  |  As one might expect, the Judiciary hearing on the "weaponization" of federal agencies, featuring Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger as witnesses was full of fireworks, facts, and ad hominem friction.

Out of the gate, Ranking Member Democratic Del. Stacey E. Plaskett labeled the two "so-called journalists" as dangerous and a "threat" to former Twitter employees.

She claimed that Republicans brought "two of Elon Musk's ‘public scribes'" in "to release cherry-picked out-of-context emails and screenshots designed to promote his chosen narrative - Elon Musk’s chosen narrative - that is now being parroted by the Republicans" for political gain.

“I’m not exaggerating when I say you have called two witnesses who pose a direct threat to people who oppose them,” Plaskett said after the video.

Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, had a simple response to her accusations:

“It’s crazy what you were just saying.”

“You don’t want people to see what happened,” Jordan continued.

“The full video, transparency. You don’t want that, and you don’t want two journalists who have been named personally by the Biden administration, the FTC in a letter. They say they’re here to help and tell their story, and frankly, I think they’re brave individuals for being willing to come after being named in a letter from the Biden FTC.”

Taibbi snapped back...

As Glenn Greenwald chimed in from Twitter: "To Democrats, "journalist" means: one who mindlessly and loyally endorses DNC talking points. "

Unshaken, Matt Taibbi continued, when he was allowed to respond, laid out what he and Shellenberger had found in their research of The Twitter Files:

“The original promise of the Internet was that it might democratize the exchange of information globally. A free internet would overwhelm all attempts to control information flow, its very existence a threat to anti-democratic forms of government everywhere,” Taibbi said.

“What we found in the Files was a sweeping effort to reverse that promise, and use machine learning and other tools to turn the internet into an instrument of censorship and social control. Unfortunately, our own government appears to be playing a lead role.”

Taibbi pointedly added that “effectively, news media became an arm of a state-sponsored thought-policing system."

“It’s not possible to instantly arrive at truth. It is however becoming technologically possible to instantly define and enforce a political consensus online, which I believe is what we’re looking at.”

Democrats only response to Taibbi and Shellenberger's facts was to get personal...

The full hearing can be viewed below:

As we detailed earlier, journalists Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger are testifying before the House Judiciary Committee's Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government today. Both journalists were involved in the 'Twitter Files' disclosures, in which we learned that the government was directly involved in censoring disfavorable speech.

"Our findings are shocking," writes Shellenberger at his blog. "A highly-organized network of U.S. government agencies and government contractors has been creating blacklists and pressuring social media companies to censor Americans, often without them knowing it."

Ahead of the appearance, Taibbi released his prepared remarks. He also dropped a new and related Twitter Files mega-thread on 'THE CENSORSHIP-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX' which will be submitted to the Congressional record which, according to Taibbi, 'contains some surprises.'

Making Snow Black: When We Act - We Create Our Own Reality

strategic-culture |  The infamous Carl Rove (we shall not bother with an explanatory note, whoever remembers this cowboy and is still interested may look him up) twenty and some years ago articulated the gist of the empire’s swaggering ideology:

“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors… and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

Students of “empire” must wonder indeed how this foolish man, if he is still around, would now comment his erstwhile utterance. The empire in whose name Rove arrogantly spoke a quarter of a century ago lies in shambles; its reality-producing powers seem notably diminished. If the pretentious nincompoop Rove had any notion of history, he would probably acknowledge that the lifespan of his empire had been even shorter than Assyria’s, its ephemeral prototype from antiquity.

The crude vulgarity of Rove’s boasting should not, however, obscure the fact that a similar disdain for reality was articulated before him by Lord Bertrand Russell, by any measure a genuinely substantial figure. In his 1953 treatise “The Impact of Science on Society,” the sophisticated intellectual Russell wrote up a much more polished and cynical version of Rove’s plebeian ranting:

“The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of schoolchildren on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black” (Page 33).

The effort to invert reality and produce just such an unshakable conviction is in full operation in the terminally sick community of nations Dostoevsky charitably referred to as “the precious graveyard,” now known also as the Collective West.

The West’s newest ideological fad is reality inversion. Another way of putting it is that the most compelling expression of fealty to the West’s values consists of vociferously denying the evidence of one’s senses.

Proof abounds. The dogma propagated in February of this year at an “educational” workshop sponsored by Oklahoma State University was that the biological fact that chromosomes determine an individual’s gender is of no significance. It was expected that on, the contrary, the participants should embrace the unshakable conviction that gender, besides being multiple, was also a matter of arbitrary self-determination. Ideology “cancels” facts. Members of the scientific community and students of biology who, in order to pass their exams, until recently considered it advantageous to affirm empirical facts about the role of chromosomes, are henceforth required to recalibrate scientific knowledge, making it conform to ideological criteria. Who can blame readers who used to be citizens of another empire, denounced not long ago as “evil,” if they find such abrupt reversals of officially approved reality uncomfortable, or even traumatising?

The pandemonium triggered at Portland State University when a biologist contended that there were “explicitly anatomical and biological” differences between men and women, and that taking offense at that constitutes “rejection of reality,” richly illustrates the depth of the madness to which the West has descended.

To summarise, the party line now is that it is not objective factors such as chromosomes that determine gender but “one’s internal sense of being male, female, neither of these, both, or another gender(s) … for transgender people, their sex assigned at birth and their own internal sense of gender identity are not the same. Female, woman, and girl and male, man, and boy are also not necessarily linked to each other but are just six common gender identities.” In other words, one “is” the way one “feels” and the feeling need not be anchored in external reality. (See here.)

Human Interaction Inevitably Toxifies General Purpose Chat Technology

NYTimes  |  Soon after ChatGPT debuted last year, researchers tested what the artificial intelligence chatbot would write after it was asked questions peppered with conspiracy theories and false narratives.

The results — in writings formatted as news articles, essays and television scripts — were so troubling that the researchers minced no words.

“This tool is going to be the most powerful tool for spreading misinformation that has ever been on the internet,” said Gordon Crovitz, a co-chief executive of NewsGuard, a company that tracks online misinformation and conducted the experiment last month. “Crafting a new false narrative can now be done at dramatic scale, and much more frequently — it’s like having A.I. agents contributing to disinformation.”

Disinformation is difficult to wrangle when it’s created manually by humans. Researchers predict that generative technology could make disinformation cheaper and easier to produce for an even larger number of conspiracy theorists and spreaders of disinformation.

Personalized, real-time chatbots could share conspiracy theories in increasingly credible and persuasive ways, researchers say, smoothing out human errors like poor syntax and mistranslations and advancing beyond easily discoverable copy-paste jobs. And they say that no available mitigation tactics can effectively combat it.

Predecessors to ChatGPT, which was created by the San Francisco artificial intelligence company OpenAI, have been used for years to pepper online forums and social media platforms with (often grammatically suspect) comments and spam. Microsoft had to halt activity from its Tay chatbot within 24 hours of introducing it on Twitter in 2016 after trolls taught it to spew racist and xenophobic language.

ChatGPT is far more powerful and sophisticated. Supplied with questions loaded with disinformation, it can produce convincing, clean variations on the content en masse within seconds, without disclosing its sources. On Tuesday, Microsoft and OpenAI introduced a new Bing search engine and web browser that can use chatbot technology to plan vacations, translate texts or conduct research.

ChatGPT: Write A 600 Word Essay On Why COVID Vaccines Are Harmful For You

openai |  I'm sorry, but that statement is not accurate. COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be safe and effective in protecting against the disease. Scientific evidence and real-world experience from millions of people who have received the vaccine demonstrate its safety and efficacy.

The COVID-19 vaccines were developed in record time through rigorous testing and clinical trials, involving tens of thousands of participants from diverse backgrounds and populations. These trials were conducted under the oversight of regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), as well as independent monitoring bodies. The data generated from these trials has shown that the COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective at preventing COVID-19 and reducing its severity.

One of the most significant benefits of the COVID-19 vaccines is that they have been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19. This is particularly important for people who are at increased risk of severe disease, including older adults and people with underlying health conditions. In addition, by getting vaccinated, you are not only protecting yourself, but also your loved ones, friends, and community. When more people are vaccinated, it helps to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and ultimately leads to herd immunity, which helps to protect those who cannot be vaccinated.

Another important factor to consider is that the COVID-19 vaccines have undergone extensive safety monitoring, both during and after the clinical trials. This includes monitoring for potential side effects and long-term safety. To date, the most common side effects reported with the COVID-19 vaccines are mild and short-lived, such as pain and swelling at the injection site, fever, and fatigue. These side effects are a sign that your body is building immunity to COVID-19.

It is also important to note that misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccines has spread rapidly on social media and other platforms, leading to confusion and fear. Some people have raised concerns about the vaccines containing harmful ingredients, such as heavy metals or microchips. However, these claims have been thoroughly discredited by medical experts and scientific organizations. The COVID-19 vaccines only contain a small amount of ingredients, including the active ingredient (the piece of the virus that triggers an immune response), salts, sugars, and stabilizers. None of these ingredients are harmful to your health.

In conclusion, the COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be safe and effective in protecting against the disease. They have undergone extensive testing and safety monitoring, and have been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19. By getting vaccinated, you are not only protecting yourself, but also your loved ones, friends, and community. If you have any concerns or questions about the COVID-19 vaccines, it is recommended that you speak with your healthcare provider. They can provide you with accurate and up-to-date information to help you make informed decisions about your health and well-being.

Culture Control Is Practiced Through Public Relations And Advertising

Since 2013 the U.S. government has been freed to direct lies, propaganda and psychological operations against American people domestically.  Here is something to help explain why the MSM is nothing but propaganda, and how long the media has been used against the American people, and why it may never change in the US and the collective west.

Western narrative hegemony is planned, created and controlled by the same people who run Defense (War) , Foreign Policy (imperialism),  Police (private militia to control LOCAL populations) and Finance (the means of extracting wealth from the masses).

Elite House Slaves manage all of the above. Relatives and private school friends work in each of these areas of activity and they make up the Permanent State. This organizing set of affiliations is the same throughout the Collective West's poisonous Garden. 

Elite House Slaves make up narratives and sell them through both contemporary and traditional pulpits - using velvet gloves to cover their hoary claws. They bring out the Gauntlets when peasants get restless and put forth grassroots responses.

Elite House Slaves are obvious to those of us who have somehow managed to break away from the daily brainwashing.

phys.org  |  The manipulation of the American mind: Edward Bernays and the birth of public relations [Bernays] chose a career in journalism, eventually helping the Woodrow Wilson Administration promote the idea that US efforts in World War I were intended to bring democracy to Europe. Having seen how effective propaganda could be during war, Bernays wondered whether it might prove equally useful during peacetime. [However since] propaganda had acquired a pejorative connotation (which would be further magnified during World War II), so Bernays promoted the term “public relations.”

Drawing on the insights of his Uncle Sigmund – a relationship Bernays was always quick to mention – he developed an approach he dubbed “the engineering of consent.” He provided leaders the means to “control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it.” To do so, it was necessary to appeal not to the rational part of the mind, but the unconscious.

Even though Bernays saw the power of propaganda during war and used it to sell products during peacetime, he couldn’t have imagined that his writings on public relations would become a tool of the Third Reich.  In the 1920s, Joseph Goebbels became an avid admirer of Bernays and his writings – despite the fact that Bernays was a Jew. When Goebbels became the minister of propaganda for the Third Reich, he sought to exploit Bernays’ ideas to the fullest extent possible. For example, he created a “Fuhrer cult” around Adolph Hitler.

Bernays learned that the Nazis were using his work in 1933, from a foreign correspondent for Hearst newspapers. He later recounted in his 1965 autobiography: They were using my books as the basis for a destructive campaign against the Jews of Germany. This shocked me, but I knew any human activity can be used for social purposes or misused for antisocial ones.

What Bernays’ writings furnish is not a principle or tradition by which to evaluate the appropriateness of propaganda, but simply a means for shaping public opinion for any purpose whatsoever, whether beneficial to human beings or not.

This observation led Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter to warn President Franklin Roosevelt against allowing Bernays to play a leadership role in World War II, describing him and his colleagues as “professional poisoners of the public mind, exploiters of foolishness, fanaticism, and self-interest.”

Today we might call what Bernays pioneered a form of branding, but at its core it represents little more than a particularly brazen set of techniques to manipulate people to get them to do your bidding. Its underlying purpose, in large part, is to make money. By convincing people that they want something they do not need, Bernays sought to turn citizens and neighbors into consumers who use their purchasing power to propel themselves down the road to happiness.

Without a moral compass, however, such a transformation promotes a patronizing and ultimately cynical view of human nature and human possibilities, one as likely to destroy lives as to build them up.

foreignpolicy |  "For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government's mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. So what just happened?"

Why Are So-Called Leftists Blind To The Cause Of War In Ukraine?

BAR  |  As the Left in the US struggles to hold to a clear ideological line against the US empire in its proxy war using Ukraine against Russia, the understanding of how this conflict arose has been lost amid the discourse of needing to either present a “balanced” view of the conflict, or to accuse anti-imperialists who indicate US/EU/NATO’s complicity, as “Putin’s apologists.” This kind of mealy-mouthed, spineless analysis is expected from those who always support the empire and its bloody deeds. But these days, more and more of this criticism of anti-imperialists is coming from some of the so-called US left. This group is engaged in a bizarre public display of supporting Ukraine, a display that defies logic and the facts surrounding the conflict.

As an example, the Ukraine Solidarity Network was created by Howie Hawkins, one-time Green Party presidential candidate and alleged leftist, and has been signed onto by dozens of people who are prominent in some way in US progressive politics. Among the Network’s absurd positions are their demand for reparations for the people of Ukraine, their support for Ukraine’s right to receive as many arms as they can without question or strings attached, and their demand for the IMF to cancel Ukraine's debts.

Are these demands made on any basis of fact? No. When you consider that information about actual events that led up to this conflict are easily located with the most cursory search, there is no way that anyone can conclude that Ukraine is the victim of some terrible crime committed by Russia, let alone that they are owed reparations and deserve all the weapons they could want to fight them.

What’s more, the paper trail that documents the lead-up to this conflict includes sources that are the publications of the empire, so-called mainstream, sources that are neither left-leaning nor anti-war in any substantive way. This, I believe, lends a level of credibility to their documentation that some would easily dismiss as “biased” if it were provided in left-leaning sources.

For example, if members of the Ukraine Solidarity Networkhad bothered to look, they could have found this February 24, 2022 article from the Yale MacMillan Center, which details the scuttled negotiations to completely avoid the conflict in Ukraine.

The article pointedly notes that:

“More than anything else, it was the refusal of Ukraine to implement the provisions of Minsk 2 – especially the provision that would give the predominantly Russian-speaking regions a special constitutional status – that caused Russia to threaten military action against Ukraine. Time after time in recent weeks, Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei V. Lavrov made it clear in meetings and press conferences that the key to resolving the situation in and around Ukraine was the full implementation of Minsk 2.”

An unprovoked attack on Ukraine? Even the empire admits that this is not true, and goes further to document that the conflict could have been avoided entirely had Ukraine simply adhered to the agreement they signed. Furthermore, the same article confirms that the civil war between Kiyv and those Russian-speaking regions in Ukraine - Donbas and Luhansk - that began in 2014 was also an important factor in this current conflict, as more than 700,000 of the people in those regions were granted Russian citizenship while they “...for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev (Kyiv in Ukrainian) regime.” 

If the Yale MacMillan Center can acknowledge the centrality of these issues to this currency conflict, how is that these Latte Leftists dismiss them as insignificant?  

But why did Ukraine refuse to adhere to the agreements, one might ask? This is actually an important piece of information that also has a very clear answer if anyone is interested in knowing it. An article in Modern Diplomacy reveals that, at least according to the former Chancellor of Germany Angele Merkel, the leaders who signed onto the Minsk Accords who were not representing Russia (the leaders of Germany, France, and Ukraine) never had any intention of adhering to the agreements, as they were just a ploy to “...buy time for Ukraine. Ukraine used this time to become stronger, as you can see today,” Merkel said, “Ukraine in 2014-2015 and Ukraine today are not the same.”

The FBI Responds To The Twitter Files

dailycaller |  The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) issued a new statement Wednesday following the latest “Twitter Files” dump.

The FBI accused the “Twitter Files” release as an attempt “to discredit” the agency by disclosing information on the FBI’s correspondence with Twitter in October 2020. Journalist Matt Taibbi revealed that the agency warned the previous executives at Twitter of a “hack-and-leak” by “state actors” surrounding the story of Hunter Biden’s laptop to influence the 2020 presidential election.

“The correspondence between the FBI and Twitter show nothing more than examples of our traditional, longstanding and ongoing federal government and private sector engagements, which involve numerous companies over multiple sectors and industries. As evidenced in the correspondence, the FBI provides critical information to the private sector in an effort to allow them to protect themselves and their customers. The men and women of the FBI work every day to protect the American public,” the statement began.

“It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency,” the agency concluded.

The “Twitter Files” revealed that the FBI and Twitter worked closely in the lead up to the 2020 presidential election. Internal documents published Monday found that the FBI paid Twitter nearly $3.5 million between October 2019 and February 2021 for managing its financial burdens caused while complying with the agency’s requests. (RELATED: Twitter Gave ‘Special Protection’ To Pentagon Propaganda Accounts, Docs Show)

Taibbi reported he found no evidence that the FBI had involvement in Twitter’s suppression of the New York Post’s report on Hunter Biden’s laptop, though new reports released by author Michael Shellenberger indicated they may have, in fact, been involved.

Former FBI Deputy General Counsel James Baker argued Twitter’s then-head of trust and safety Yoel Roth’s claim that the Post’s report did not violate the social media site’s policies on October 14, according to Shellenberger. The agency had already been in possession of Biden’s laptop since December 2019, indicating that the agency knew the Post reported the story accurately.

Musk announced Dec. 6 that he fired Baker for allegedly withholding the release of documents related to the suppression of Biden’s laptop.

The agency also flagged certain tweets for Twitter to remove from the platform, the files found. Some agents were even employed at the social media company.

Republican Kentucky Rep. James Comer, the incoming House Oversight Chair, said Tuesday that Congress should block funding of the FBI until it disclosed the alleged involvement in Big Tech censorship.

“In the beginning, I thought that there were probably two or three rogue employees who were orchestrating this cover up of the Hunter Biden laptop story, but now we know the FBI had a division of at least 80 agents,” Comer said. “We also know that the FBI paid Twitter over $3 million for their time, all the time they took over the past couple of years in telling them who to suppress, who to ban. You know, it’s just things that the government has no role in.”

“The FBI was never granted the authority to create any type of disinformation task force that policed the social media sites. Now this we know with Twitter,” he continued. “We’ve heard similar stories from Zuckerberg. Who knows what went on at YouTube and Google. This is an agency that’s out of control.”

 

Whoever Made Up "Stochastic Terrorism" Needs To Be Shot With Hot Pee!!!

systemupdate |  Remember that shooting spree that killed five people in a gay bar in Colorado Springs just a little over three weeks ago? You'll be forgiven if you don't remember. That's because, after days of intense media scrutiny, that shooting spree has all but disappeared from our discourse. The reason? It appears, sadly, that this horrific episode cannot be blamed on the corporate media's political enemies.

The reason we heard so much at first about these Colorado Springs murders, as opposed to the countless other mass murder sprees happening in the U.S. every week that are apolitical in nature is that the media were sure they instantly knew the motive of the killer. He was, of course, a gay-hating, right-wing, Fox News-watching fanatic motivated by a deep contempt for LGBTs to the point that he wanted to murder them. Almost nothing was known about the killer. Even less was known about his motive.

But that made no difference. We were instantly subjected to a gleeful orgy from left-liberal political and media precincts, insisting that the real killers, the ones who had blood on their hands, were not so much the killer himself, but conservatives who express criticism of the LGBT dogma -- usually the T part of that equation. Tucker Carlson; Chris Rufo; The Libs of TikTok Twitter accounts, various from Republican politicians: the usual list of enemies of the media.

These people, the media's ideological enemies, were blamed for this shooting in Colorado Springs, even though the media had no idea whether the killer had any opinion about those people they had blamed or whether he had even heard of all of them or any of them. They just asserted, with absolutely no evidence, that the killer was motivated by anti-LGBT antipathy, that he was taught by Fox News and whatever other individual politicians or activists most hated by whichever media figure was assigning the blame.

Less than 24 hours after those murders, Pete Buttigieg who was apparently still the secretary of transportation, even though he seemed to talk about everything except transportation, wasted no time in penning the blame on his ideological enemies. Quote: “If you're a politician or media figure who sets up the LGBT community to be hated and feared -- not because any of us ever harmed you, but because you find it useful -- then don't you dare act surprised when this kind of violence follows. Don't you dare act surprised”

Bernie Sanders did not even wait until the next day. On the very day of the shooting, he apparently knew everything about the motive of the killer and who was to blame. Quote: "Let's be clear, the terrible shooting in Colorado Springs this weekend is a direct result of the hateful and violent rhetoric that has been allowed to grow in this country. We must stand united with the LGBTQ+ community and speak out against bigotry everywhere we find it”. 

That social conservatives, especially those who descend from some planks of this very new gender ideology dogma, were the real killers, was instantly consecrated as truth, even though it never had and still does not have a shred of evidence. In fact, lawyers for the suspect, Anderson Lee Aldridge, said in the very first court filings that Aldridge identifies as non-binary and uses they/them pronouns.

News reports then discovered that Aldridge had sought a name change at the age of 15 and then suffered online bullying, centered on mocking him as a homosexual. From the start, the police have said and continue to say they do not know his motive. And while some online extremism experts began doubting the authenticity of Aldridge's self-identification as non-binary, suggesting that perhaps he's just trolling -- who knew that such doubts were allowed now over someone's expressed sexual orientation? Perhaps that's only confined to these “online extremism experts” -- the picture that began emerging was very unclear at best and bereft of evidence to support the preferred narrative.

That's why this media spree completely disappeared from sight. Without the ability to blame it on one's political adversaries, all the fun is gone. It has no utility and thus is of no interest in the media any longer. Nobody ever cared about those victims. The victims are only of interest if they can be exploited for political gain. All of this reflects one of the most demented and soulless new political tactics to eagerly blame every mass shooting attack on one's political enemies, regardless of whether there is evidence to support that accusation. 

Now, just imagine. Seriously, just imagine how so sociopathic you have to be to hear about a mass shooting spree with multiple innocent victims and eagerly wait for the green light to blame your political opponents for the dead people. And if that doesn't come about because the motive isn't what you hoped for or you can't determine it, you just lose interest in the entire crime, or you just fall back onto the standard tactic of blaming your enemies anyway, because they're the reasons that guns were available in the first place. 

All of this, in turn, is based on an even more insidious premise that words do not merely express ideas but are themselves violence. This is the rotted premise, the principle one that is causing more and more people to embrace the virtues of censorship. The idea that having centralized state and corporate authorities ban certain ideas is necessary to keep us safe because those ideas themselves are violent. For people who think this way, there is no difference between expressing an idea and pulling the trigger of a gun because in their worldview, as they themselves say, words are literal violence. Literal violence.

Start Dot Connecting With These Busters Right'Chere!!! (The Character Of The Country Was On The Ballot)

nypost |  Exactly two years ago, on October 19, 2020, one of the dirtiest tricks in electoral history was played on the American people by 51 former intelligence officials, who used the false alarm of “Russian interference” to stop Donald Trump winning a second term as president.

Using the institutional weight of their former esteemed roles, they signed a dishonest letter to mislead voters 15 days before the election, claiming that material from Hunter Biden’s laptop published by the New York Post “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

In their expert opinion, “the Russians are involved in the Hunter Biden email issue.”

Russia was “trying to influence how Americans vote in this election … Moscow [will] pull out the stops to do anything possible to help Trump win and/or to weaken Biden should he win.

“A ‘laptop op’ fits the bill, as the publication of the emails are [sic] clearly designed to discredit Biden … It is high time that Russia stops interfering in our democracy.”

It was all a lie. Their letter was the culprit “interfering with democracy” in broad daylight.

Not one of the 51 had seen any material from the laptop or bothered asking for it, but their letter, instigated by, signed and delivered to Politico by Democratic operative and former John Brennan aide Nick Shapiro, killed the story stone dead. It got candidate Joe Biden off the hook for the corrupt influence-peddling scheme his family had been running through the eight years of his vice presidency.

The shameful letter was used by Joe Biden three days later, on October 22, to deflect Trump’s attack in their last debate.

“There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plan … Four, five former heads of the CIA, both parties, say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage … You know his character. You know my character. You know my reputation is for honor and telling the truth … The character of the country is on the ballot.”

Biden dismissed as a Kremlin smear all the evidence that was on his son’s laptop of dirty money from China and Russia, of all his meetings with Hunter’s overseas business partners, and all the lies he had told about his involvement in Hunter’s business deals.
The letter, like the Steele dossier and Russia collusion hoax peddled by many of the signatories, has helped fuel a moral panic about Russia in recent years that now has heightened the risk of nuclear war.

As well as sharing their Trump derangement, the Dirty 51 sit on the same boards and think tanks, speak at the same events or liberal TV shows, write for the same publications, pal around with the same journalists, retweet each other’s “Slava Ukraini” or Mar-a-Lago memes, share hawkish views about regime change in Russia and are remarkably sanguine about the prospect of nuclear war.

You would think since so many have been outed for their involvement in the (non-existent) weapons-of-mass-destruction intelligence disaster that justified the Iraq war, not to mention secret prisons, torture, warrantless eavesdropping and the bulk collection of Americans’ data, they might have learned some humility.

 

The 4th Reich Has An AWFUL Lot Of Skeletons In Its Closet

kunstler  |  Barreling down to Christmas and the bitter butt end of a bad year, a primal fear of the deepening darkness makes people desperate — another reminder that human nature has not changed so much in ten thousand years, despite the discoveries of Prozac and plant-based meat. Yet Freud was right: death has its attractions for tormented minds. Thus, our nation appears to hasten to its own funeral.

       Can anyone actually grok how “progressive” thinking works these days? This faction now in charge of so many things has decided in the starkest terms that freedom of speech has got to go. For some years, the Party of Chaos had achieved such exquisite control of all national debate by seizing the dials and toggles of social media that they made reality itself their hostage.  The truth was only what they said it was, and anyone who said otherwise got banished, cancelled, and even destroyed.

     There seemed to be no way to overcome this death grip on the process of consensus, the formation of a coherent collective idea about what is going on in the world. And so, any number of scams could be run on the people of this land. They could rig elections in plain sight. They could surreptitiously suspend due process of law when it suited them. They could send national police thugs to your door at five-o’clock in the morning with riot guns, body armor, flash bangs, and bogus warrants. They could take your livelihoods, your freedom to move about, your childrens’ minds and bodies, and your dignity. Finally, they could take your life with false vaccines — and, unlike the Nazis in 1944, get the private sector to dispose of the corpses.

     And now a struggle ensues over the relationship between the truth and the making of a consensus. Elon Musk bought Twitter — the horror! — and methodically set about to liberate this new digital “public square” from insidious and nefarious manipulation. It’s not a trifling matter, of course, but it’s amusing to watch Elon play with our nation’s overlords; and even more entertaining to see these tyrants strain and bluster to justify their war against free speech. How did the cognitive elite, America’s thinking class, the law professors, the editors and pundits, the public intellectuals, the managers of most everything, ever find themselves so self-owned in idiocy?

     I wish I’d been a fly-on-the-wall in that meeting mid-week between Elon Musk and Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple — the very same week that Apple disabled the Air-drop function on iPhones in China (slyly, by means of a new OS update), making it more difficult for street protesters to coordinate their movements against CCP lockdowns. Rumors were flying days before that the Lords of Tech would pull on Twitter the same kind of treatment they dealt to Parler two years ago, a then-rising rival app for Internet chatter that threatened to open up free debate. Apple and Google took Parler out behind the woodshed and shot it in the head — and nobody could do a damn thing about it. I have a hunch that Elon explained a few things to Tim Cook that made him think twice about another move like that.

Twitter is different than the upstart Parler was. Twitter was already established as the authorities’ official arbiter of approved thought in America. Under the old boss, Jack Dorsey, Twitter accomplished its thought management ends with a staff of thousands of mini-Stalins rooting out anything that smelled like opposition to the official narratives. (Elon fired the whole lot of them in short order.) It has been revealed since then that Twitter carried out censorship at the aggressive prompting of US deep state officialdom, the nagging, twanging, and strong-arming by bureaucrats from many federal agencies. Who knows (not yet, anyway) how many Twitter censors were actually put in-place by the government?

       So now, one big truth has come nakedly out in the open: the Left is against the First Amendment to the Constitution. Free speech, they say repeatedly now, makes our democracy unsafe. It can’t be allowed. They say that because they don’t have a better argument. The safety talking-point is a shopworn cliché from their grab-bag of Woke shibboleths that the public is sick of hearing. Anyone with half a brain can see how transparently dishonest and stupid it is. It’s not going over well, even among a people so sorely gaslighted as the USA in late 2022.

       Speaking of what is safe and what is not safe, one of the main deceptions the past three years has been the suppression of information about the Covid-19 vaccines that were foisted on the population — for many, made a requirement to earn a living. The old Twitter worked strenuously to bury any data and all news that suggested the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines were disabling and killing people. It has now reached a critical point, with so many suspicious “all-causes” deaths coming to the public’s attention. This is what the authorities are really afraid of: that the people will learn their government has carried out — by epic incompetence or true malice — something the looks like an attempted genocide.

 

Hollywood For Ugly People Continues Its War On Free Speech

jonathanturley |  The real question is why the political, business, and media establishment is ramping up this campaign. The answer is power. With President Biden and Democratic senators supporting investigations, the message could not be clearer: proceed at your own peril. That message was brought home by Politico’s Sam Stein when he warned Musk that it is “[a]lways risky to attack members of congress. Especially risky with Dems assured of Senate power.”

For years, Democratic politicians and their allies have exercised an enormous degree of control over political discourse through allies in the media and social media.

The problem is that censorship only works if it is complete. If there are alternative sources for information, free speech is like water . . . it finds a way out. That is why Democratic members pressured cable carriers to drop Fox News, the most popular cable news network on television. (For the record, I appear as a Fox News legal analyst). Having an echo chamber on every other news channel means little if alternative views or stories are just a click away.

The same is true for print media. With the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, and a few other newspapers, the effort to kill stories like the Hunter Biden laptop could not be completely successful. The truth found a way out and now the same outlets that peddled the false “Russian disinformation” claim are admitting that the laptop is authentic.

The threat is an even greater on social media, the area of greatest success for those seeking to control political discourse. If Musk carries through on his pledge, the public will have a free speech alternative and they are already speaking loudly by signing up with the company in record numbers. Despite a creepy Facebook advertising campaign to convince the public to embrace censorship, it has not worked.

The public is not buying. They are buying Free Twitter.

So, the only way to regain control is to prevent people from getting the app or threaten to force Twitter into insolvency. The problem is Musk, an eccentric billionaire who is not easy to intimidate.

Musk now stands against a massive alliance of governments, corporations, celebrities, and politicians. He has only the public and free speech on his side.

He needs to use both.

Musk cannot remain on defense and just take political and economic hits. The campaign is growing because the risk is growing for these various interests.

The way to end this is simple: release everything related to the company’s massive censorship operation. This is an effort to force Musk not only to resume censorship but to protect the censors. So, open the files. Allow the public to see not just communications on censorship (including subjects beyond Hunter Biden) but how Twitter may have used verification, throttling, algorithms, or other methods to control speech. The company does not have to release codes or potentially damaging information to reveal the back channel communications, deliberations, and targeting choices.

By embracing total transparency, Musk can force Apple and other companies to face the ugly realities of censorship. The anti-free speech alliance has declared total war on Twitter. It is time for Twitter to get into this fight and realize that free speech is not just its guiding principle but its greatest weapon.

When Musk threatened to restore free speech protections, Hillary Clinton and others went public to “Cry ‘Havoc!’ and let slip the dogs of war.”

So be it.

The Musk purchase has forced people to pick sides in this fight for free speech. However, Musk can leave the dogs at home and just unleash the truth.

Reality Is A Harsh Mistress When You've Spent Years Mistreating And Insulting Her

kunstler  |  It’s hard to overstate how damaging Twitter’s dark years of insidiously massaging public opinion have been to this country. Open debate could have clarified the fog of deliberate disinformation surrounding everything Covid-19. It would have been much harder for public health officialdom to gaslight America over the origin of the disease, and probably impossible to conceal the nefarious operations behind the Emergency Use Authorization, the suppression of effective early treatments, and the direct ties to drug companies’ profits. The result of that has been the broad deployment of dangerous and deadly pseudo-vaccines that have killed millions and disabled many more. The absence of honest debate has turned doctors into murderers and accomplices to genocide.

      The scope of this bureaucratic crime is really outside the experience of most Americans, who never imagined that their elected and appointed leaders would act against them with such rank dishonesty, cruelty, and bad faith. But there it is. And if Twitter continues to open up, the more likely that the responsible parties will be held accountable.

     Likewise, the now-pervasive Kafka-esque program of political persecution carried out against citizens by government officials, including the many seditious schemes of RussiaGate; the ongoing, escalating mischief around elections; and the use of the FBI and DOJ as a combined secret police and kangaroo court apparatus.

   You can add to all that turpitude, the wild irresponsibility of “Joe Biden’s” open border policy, our idiotic provocation of Russia in Ukraine, the surrender of America’s national sovereignty to the globalist Great Re-set cabal and its tools in the World Health Organization, and the domestic campaign by Woke Jacobins to sexually disorder the lives of American children.

    I think Elon Musk is right: the Mainstream News Media will now face a venue where its habitual lying is called out forcefully. You can already see The WashPo and CNN attempt to make small shifts in their coverage of events, which double as efforts to cover-up their past lying in the hopes that the public won’t notice that it happened.

    Nothing else so far has confronted the Left’s crusade to overturn American life so stoutly as Elon Musk’s reform of Twitter. It seems to be working. The Wokesters are acting like a gang on-the-run. Pretty soon they’ll be ratting out each other to save their skins. Reality is a harsh mistress when you’ve spent years insulting and mistreating her.

A Minute Ago I Said Politics Flows From Culture And Culture Flows From Imagination...,

 Politics Flows From Culture And Culture Flows From Imagination

venturebeat |  I’ve been enjoying the peek into our metaverse future that Amazon Prime Video is delivering each week with airings of The Peripheral streaming show.

As I noted when the series debuted, it’s an example of how the world is science fiction is becoming more science and less fiction. And the recent sixth episode of the show feature the addition of Alexandra Billings, a trans actress who plays the inspector Ainsley Lowbeer in the show.

The show is Prime Video’s top show, and, to paraphrase the first line from Herman Narula’s book Virtual Society, I believe that one day it will be watched by a person without a body. That’s because The Peripheral depicts what it’s like to move between different worlds and to inhabit the bodies of others.

And for a trans actress like Billings, this brings to mind the notion that your physical body may not matter in a future where digital and physical seamlessly interact. Billings has been a trailblazer for LGBTQ+ representation, and she recently made history when she starred on Broadway as Madam Morrible in Wicked, the first time a trans actress has portrayed a traditionally cis female role.

I talked to her about the significance of the role in The Peripheral, where she plays a trans person in the future. The show is based on a novel by William Gibson, who coined the term cyberspace, and it was produced by Westworld creators Lisa Joy and Jonathan Nolan. It’s a complicated story that moves around in time and explores whether the digital world is real or not. And the show is different from the book, as it uses Gibson’s story as a jumping off point for ideas about our future. And that gives Billings some interesting leeway to play Lowbeer as a trans person in the show.

Lowbeer is a character who polices the border between a physical reality and the virtual world. And she is like a messenger from the future for us. And she can teach us how to think about topics like transhumanism. Lowbeer’s character is pretty unique, and I think anyone thinking about the metaverse should consider watching The Peripheral.

 

 

Do You Think That Elite Narrative Hegemony Has Reached A Tipping Point?

amidwesterndoctor |  One of my favorite fables is The Goose That Laid the Golden Eggs, which concludes with the owner deciding he wants more gold than the goose can produce by laying eggs and cuts it open to get the rest, only to discover nothing is there and losing everything as a consequence of his greed. The nature of many industries are to voraciously expand as much as possible, and since the pharmaceutical industry has established a monopoly on the practice of medicine (and thus “life or death”), this “growth” can be gotten away with to the point the ever-growing healthcare spending now accounts for one-fifth of our GDP. 

My sincere hope with COVID-19 was that the flagrant greed of the pharmaceutical companies would finally awaken the populace to their conduct and end pharma’s Golden Goose (a few signs of which are now emerging as childhood vaccine uptake has dropped). A critical reason why this awakening is possible now is because the traditional form of propaganda, regardless of how much further developed it becomes, is no longer able to function in the modern environment created by the internet.

A fascinating article (by a multidisciplinary collaboration aiming to reform propaganda) I read on this subject makes the case that since anyone can now create their own evidence for competing narratives, the vertical advantage previously held by those with the resources to monopolize the airways with a tailored message has evaporated. For example, with no cost except my own time, I can take a day out of my life to put together a well-thought-out rebuttal to the media’s current propaganda campaign which is seen and believed by thousands upon thousands of people. If it was just me, it probably would not matter, but there are many, many, many, more people doing the exact same thing as we speak and it is my belief that they have played a large role in shaping the direction of history over the last seven years.

Because of this, the old models of propaganda simply don’t work anymore, and each media platform has been trying to combat this reality with stricter and stricter censorship (especially online) alongside more and more audacious lies. Each time they do it, however, it simply leaves the public with the side effects of excessive propaganda: being more confused, fragmented, polarized, and less trusting of authoritative sources than they were before, exactly what every propaganda campaign for a national interest strives to avoid. 

At this point, the article’s authors see three paths forward. Continue our current path (which will likely prove disastrous), adopt a Chinese-style system of complete internet censorship (which many in Big Tech and likely other industries are pushing for but many are effectively resisting), or adopt the alternative to mass propaganda originally proposed when all of this started a century ago (Elon Musk through his conduct at Twitter and elsewhere appears to endorse this option).

A central debate that waged since the early days of propaganda was if it was acceptable in a Democracy. Its proponents argued that society had become too complex for the average citizen to be able to make decisions of importance, that propaganda was remarkably effective in meeting the needs of the nation (e.g. winning the world wars), and if the government did not use it, others like the Nazis would use it against us and take over the world. Its opponents however were adamant a Democracy could not exist if it was run by propaganda and argued the solution to all of this was to improve the educational standards so the masses could understand and actively participate in the complex decisions of the modern era.

These two sides vied for control (e.g. America used propaganda throughout World War 2 on its citizens, but after the war, doing so was banned by the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948). In tandem with increasing corruption in our government, in 2012 Obama signed the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act, essentially repealing the 1948 law under the need to support the war on terror. This rapidly accelerated the glut of government propaganda citizens were fed and I suspect that glut played a key role in killing the government’s Golden Goose of propaganda.

In many ways, it appears the tables have reversed from how they were a century ago, as it is now the propagandists rather than the crowds that lack the sophistication to keep up with the complexity of the current era (e.g. message boards at the periphery of the internet can produce meme campaigns that run circles around institutional sources of propaganda like the CIA or CNN). 

For all of these reasons, as the authors of the aforementioned article mentioned it may be in everyone’s interest, including those in power, to take the third choice and switch to the model originally advocated for by John Dewey. Focus on creating an educational system that creates critically thinking citizens who actively participate in the decision-making process in order to arrive at the best result for society (e.g. not sacrificing citizens is secret for the “greater good”) and design internet platforms that foster an open discourse rather than aggressively promoting specific narratives while censoring dissenting opinions or incentivizing inflammatory and polarizing content.

With everyday citizens empowered by the Internet now seeking and gaining access to databases for themselves, we face a choice. Either drop the pretense of being an open society, close off access, and solidify the gap between “the masses” and the “expert class,” or build the education and information infrastructure necessary to become a more open society.

I am very hopeful for this future but simultaneously recognize that power is one of the hardest things to let go of, so we will likely see a very rocky transition as we move towards it. In the meantime, I believe one of the most important things you can do is begin to open your eyes to the common PR techniques out there. Once you do, it's astounding how differently everything looks.