Crisis Update - Rule By Mind War And Disinformation

AP fires reporter for claiming Russia attacked Poland but was he following orders?

Nov 22, 2022

AP axes reporter (not editor) for report that risked NATO war
Was it an error or a ‘story to order,’ since censorship is prevalent?
NYT reports Ukrainian ‘war crimes’ in a departure from the uniform voice
Col. Michael Aquino wrote MindWars, the guide to mass deception
Intended as warfare, the military no longer separates war and peace
The public necessarily becomes the enemy or, at best, collateral damage
Disinformation is part of a broader technique of confusing the public
Yet the military is under attack from inside via injectables
Military, pharma, fintech complex is Organization Man gone mad

See also:
Why Public Is Enemy #1 - Rant in an age of narrative (Jan 31, 2023)

(2,700 words or about 13 minutes of your time.)

The Army's 350th Tactical Psychological Operations,drop leaflets over Kirkuk, Iraq, 2008. Photo: Staff Sgt. Samuel Bendet, U.S. Air Force

Nov 22, 2022

The news agency Associated Press, which provides stories to thousands of newspaper, television and online outlets, has fired a reporter who claimed an anonymous U.S. intelligence official confirmed that Russia had attacked Poland last week.

Ukraine’s authorities, including president Volodymyr Zelenskiy, lied on three occasions that Russia had struck a NATO member when it was a Ukrainian missile. Indeed, the anti-aircraft missile flew in the opposite direction to any incoming Russian threat — by 100 kilometers.

See Moneycircus, Nov 17, 2022 — Fabled Attack On Poland Risks Escalation

Even the New York Times has turned a critical eye on Ukraine after videos emerged of ten surrendering Russian soldiers forced to lie on the ground before being shot in the head. [1]

Strangely only one AP reporter James LaPorta was fired, while co-author of the report John Leichester has so far kept his job. There is no word of the editor who checked the story nor who approved it for publication, with whom the buck stops.

The company’s explanation is that if a report relies on anonymous sources, there must be at least two such sources.

The 51 intelligence officials who signed a letter claiming the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation should discredit any kind of anonymous verification — allegation, perhaps; verification, no.

It is simply impossible for any story to be published on the say-so of a reporter. This story should have been examined by lawyers if applicable, and it would have required approval by the head of news. But before that it would have gone through a subeditor before a chief editor — executive producer in television — took the decision to publish.

I spent the best part of a decade at Reuters news agency, and also worked for several newspapers and television outlets in each of these roles — and this stinks.

On a story with such significance the assent would have gone higher — to the top: in Sky or Fox that would be Mr M himself, though in AP, being a cooperative, that would be chairman Steven R. Swartz.

I’d go further. Given that this is a national security issue and we have seen for three years of Covid how the press “takes the knee” to military and intelligence — this may have resulted from official guidance and in that case it's hard to see how it wasn't an order.

The motive is another matter. Testing the water... fear mongering... measuring public psychology. Do you remember the 2018 Hawaii alert stating that there was an incoming ballistic missile threat, telling residents to seek shelter, before it concluded: “This is not a drill”? That wasn’t a mistake either.

The life of a lie

Matt Taibbi writes that, “YouTube and Google now become exhibit A in the ultimate truth about any attempt to ‘moderate’ content at scale. If you make even a good-faith effort to weed out ‘disinformation,’ relying on official bodies to help, what you’ll be left with is… official disinformation.” [2]

He is talking about the suppression of a video which collates clips from television networks of anchors assuring the public that the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation.

He’s right to point out that the disinformation comes from officials and it’s happening at the scale of whole society.

Lies take on a life of their own. They hang around and pollute the public square like a San Fransisco sidewalk. Eventually the liars get used to the stench.

As the fecal material piles up they can no longer distinguish between firm ground and skating on sh*t. They adapt to it, like walking on winter ice. They shuffle on lies; they recognize one another by their lies and even by their gait; they can’t get promoted unless they develop those lying reflexes by climbing the pile.

Eventually there is so much manure that it blocks some avenues, they can no longer go that direction — and this is what happens in real life: their lies come back to haunt them.

Old truths are suppressed to accommodate present lies — such as Obama’s 2008 statement that “it's not as if it's only Republicans who have messed around with elections in the past, sometimes Democrats have, too. Whenever people are in power they have this tendency to tilt things in their direction.” [3]

They are forced to work around their previous lies; to rewrite the past to cover up for the present — just as the CDC and U.S. military fiddled past injury rates to try to make current rates look normal.

“I have siginificant concerns that we won’t have a standing army in five years,” says Lt Col Theresa Long, U.S. Army flight surgeon and whistleblower.

In 1974 Henry Kissinger said the globalists needed to reduce the population. That's when policies took a turn to shape the events we witness now.

During an uprecedented, catastrophic event, emergency planners estimate countries would see a 10 per cent rise in mortality. Life insurers say the year-on-year increase is now 40 per cent.

“It is apocalyptic,” says Long. [4]

Lying on purpose

Disinformation is the objective of YouTube and the government manipulators. Social media is part of what Eisenhower called the military industrial complex. It is now the military, pharma, fintech complex.

The public are not supposed to hear certain things. Information and reporting that allow the public to make informed decisions about their lives and health must be suppressed.

Like elections, it may always have been this way — the skewed news. They certainly don't hide it any more. It’s no longer “look, a squirrel,” it is not even a con trick, this is serial abuse. It is disinformation because it is deliberate and strategic. It was the past three years of egregious misgovernment under the Covidian tyranny that laid it bare.

People get wise after a while so, along with propaganda, you must have censorship: the good cop, bad cop routine.

Can mind war go on indefinitely without dumbing down the population along the lines of Brave New World or H.G. Wells’ Eloi and Morlocks? Sometimes the owners of the military, pharma fintech complex give us a glimpse of something that looks quite like it.

Hybrid war

It is not the first time that U.S., NATO or Europe’s military has presented control of human perception as an imperative. Britain’s former Chief of the Defense Staff General Sir Nick Carter has spoken of the enemy at home, of the difficulty of separating the enemy abroad from the man in the corner shop.

Hybrid war is the replacement of the polarities of peace and war by a state of permanent conflict. The UK government under former prime minister Theresa May set up Rapid Response Units across the European Union and NATO to coordinate public messaging between governments — which is apparent in the unified voice of Event Covid.

Nor is it a new idea. It bears some similarities to the report, From PSYOP to MindWar: The Psychology of Victory, by Col Michael A. Aquino, a psychological intelligence officer with the U.S. Army and a founder of the Temple of Set.

“The advantage of Mind War is that it conducts wars in nonlethal, noninjurious, and nondestructive ways. Essentially you overwhelm your enemy with argument. You seize control of all of the means by which his government and populace process information to make up their minds, and you adjust it so that those minds are made up as you desire.
Everyone is happy, no one gets hurt or killed, and nothing is destroyed. Ordinary warfare, on the other hand, is characterized by its lack of reason. The antagonists just maim or kill each other's people, and steal or destroy each other's land, until one side is hurt so badly that it gives up [or both sides are hurt so badly that they agree to stop short of victory. After such a war there is lasting misery, hate, and suffering.” [5]

Whether Aquino believed in Satanism or was, like Jim Jones and his People’s Temple, another dabbler on the fringes of the intelligence community — and perhaps involved in psychological intelligence experiments — he is being scrubbed from Wiki at this very moment. His MindWar co-author Maj Gen Paul Vallely is still there; Aquino’s Wikipedia vanished last year and has reappeared recently as a sparce 300 words.

I suggest this is not because anyone cares about the reputation of the late Michael Aquino. It is more likely to be that his MindWar concept has gone live and perhaps, petty as it seems, the dead Satanist may be overshadowing those very much alive and active.

To give Aquino his due, his idea of replacing tactical psychological operations with a state of mind war was ahead of its time. It was also aimed at foreign enemies. The difference today is that the military is looking for enemies at home.

Heaven and Hell

William Blake wrote: “Truth can never be told so as to be understood, and not be believed.”

Journalists need to read that slowly. It seems paradoxical but it’s not. If you convey the truth, and in a way that people can understand, you’ll be believed. It is found in his strikingly-named Proverbs of Hell, written during the French Revolution and published as The Marriage of Heaven and Hell, between 1790 and 1793.

The word “disinformation” is a clue. It is a Stalinist term of the genus “wrecker” or of the Maoist strain, the “running dogs of imperialism.” Accusations of “counter-revolutionary sabotage” were hurled at “bourgeois nationalist deviationsists.” The adoption of this language by the British military in particular is telling.

It suggests we are in a moment of upheaval but that the sainted revolutionary truth — the ability to chart the path to the future — belongs exclusively to the government, as it did to Stalin. Anyone who draws unwelcome attention to the British government’s cultural revolution is a diversionist engaged in disinformation.

Governments that are used to impose an agenda, rather than represent the people’s will, must reverse the media: rather than reporting it must dictate.

Defence and intelligence spot keywords and track online content in real time, respond with bots and influencers, monitor authors and consumers of information, shadow ban and censor by stealth, create social media groups and honeypots and “disappear” them just as quickly. For more information, just search the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG). The soldier taps the journalist on the shoulder. [6]

Already we can spot a virtuous circle: the more content the spooks monitor, the more they need to counter. The more they counter, the greater the proportion of journalism that is directly working for, or indirectly influenced by, intel.

This virtuous circle originates from concepts like Total Information Awareness and its successors at the National Security Agency.

Former German defense minister Andreas von Bülow said that 80 to 90 per cent of intelligence is gathered from public sources, yet those are increasingly under the control or influence of defense and intelligence agencies. This is creating a feedback loop.

Through influence activities, state ministries and agencies fill newspapers and social media with information to prod the public towards certain perceptions, behaviours and outcomes. At the same time, social media vacuums up that information on behalf of corporations and state, crunching data and feeding it into algorithims and policy decisions, schooling and policing, and the whole cycle begins again.

This only works in the role of God: if you know in advance what outcome is desirable and don’t need any objective feedback or control cohort, because you got it right first time.

As William Casey, the Reagan-era Director of Central Intelligence told Barbara Honegger: “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

More at Moneycircus, Jun 2021 — Journalists! What is to be Done?

Rule by half truth

Officials make policy based on lies for they are concerned only with outcomes. The truth is not something they discover through trial and error. Either they agree “their truth” from the outset (like a cult) or it is a narrative that they invent to justify their actions (ie modern outcomes management).

This requires that one start from what is invariably a half truth (for it serves particular interests) then set the objective and suppress anything that obstructs them reaching that objective.

Marketeers and psychologists monitor how the lies are received in real time and feed them back into the model.

In this world of media-as-instruction the most prominent voices are not even those of government. Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum rolled up at the Group of 20 leading economies’ meeting in Bali.

Schwab is a mystery until you understand that his role is public relations. It was King Charles III of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha who launched The Great Reset in Jun 2000. Schwab’s role is to sell it, with the help of side kick Yuval “Après moi, le déluge” Harari.

For a man who studied at Harvard and lives on the international, “who gives a carbon” jet set circuit, Schwab has a strangely glutinous, sticky accent. He could shed it but it is part of the image, it is an homage or the inheritance of his mentor, Heinz Kissinger. “Ze ghrreat Rrheset” cannot be sold without the hat-tip to one of the keepers of the holy flame.

It allows scribblers to paint him as a Nazi when his agenda, at the most cursory inspection, owes as much to communism. It is both and neither. Those were experiments and selected version of totalitarian future borrows from each.

Schwab openly displays a bust of Lenin in his office — another misdirection to contrast with “ze voice of ze Reich” — but the agenda is pure Rockefeller, Rothschild and Rex (being the royal families). It is all about control, as one can see from the minutes of the Carnegie Foundation, as exposed by Norman Dodd; the Rockefeller takeover of industries from medicine and pharmaceuticals to education and media; and the R, R & R ownership of natural resources.

See Spies, Dupes And Charities (Aug 7, 2021)

When the eco-marionette of big oil, Greta Thunberg sang at last year’s Cop 26 conference in Glasgow, “you can shove your climate crisis up your arse,” she was rubbing hers in your face.

The question of government climate policy (as opposed to the genuine issue) is, how good’s your sense of humour.

The lack of sensibility among a frightening mass is why outlets like The Guardian remain po-faced. Genuine threats don’t disappear when you laugh at them; only fake ones.

This is the rotten kernel of the “hate speech” laws. The force of argument does not need to be protected from criticism by law, only the fraudulent argument cannot stand on its own.

What does the public imagine when it sees Greta, Extinction Rebellion or Insulate Britain — mass social movements or a government with an ideological mission to reshape society? Who inverts the heroic by posing as downtrodden masses who glue themselves to asphalt. Soviet imagery was full of carefree, plump Ruritanians even as the drive to communal agriculture produced famine. The National Socialists layered Nordic and Aryan legends upon the industrial metropolis — the Soviets with propaganda films of well-fed gymnastic plumpkins and the Nazis’ sylvan-techno pseudo-mythology.

With an agenda like that behind one’s back, wouldn’t it call for a little deception? People argue over The Great Reset being fascism or communism like the electorate plays badminton over the reds and the blues.

Churchill in a box

The mayor of Greater London Sadiq Khan has called for more regulation of online speech after Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter. The man who erected siding around the statue of Winston Churchill for fear that it would offend passing Antifa.

Unlike Rishi Sunak, the UK prime minister, who is a billionaire globalist whose family owns the profiteers of digital ID, Infosys, Khan is a posturing politician — though still capable of influencing the woke and gullible. Two acts from the same troupe.

The press routinely photographs him poised against the horizon as some leader to the promised land instead of the incoming nemetic kinesis that he represents.

American readers will be familiar the tales of migrants being bused into the centre of London and dumped with nowhere to go; of school children being primed to “recognize sexist behaviour;” of the people imprisoned for knife crime and subsequently released from prison with ankle tags. [7]

These global problems are all the work of the same network of globalist tools, intended to prompt the same reaction in search of their solution.

Moneycircus