-
Today in "the fall of western and eastern civilization"
Pentagon running ‘secret army of 60,000 around world’ - Agents are involved in both domestic and foreign operations 🤡 How Data Brokers Sell Access to the Backbone of the Internet 🤡 China's cyberspace watchdog published a long (and unprecedented) set of draft regulations for recommendation algorithms 🤡 Study finds that Pfizer-Biontech "vaccine" reduces the immune response against other viruses than Sars-CoV-2 🤡 People given both doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine were almost 6x more likely to contract a delta infection and 7x more likely to have symptomatic disease than those who recovered 🤡 Moderna Co-Founding Chairman Tells David Rubenstien that he's Made North Of 1,000X ROI 🤡 The new codes governing everyday life in China 🤡 National Taiwan University Hospital promoting vaccines with US & Japan Flags on ads 🤡 Extinction Rebellion demo left 120 tonnes of rubbish on London's streets 🤡 Remember when the government said it wanted to ban plastic straws to save the environment?
-
Winterwatch.net - Investigative journalism focused on the New Underworld Order and the lowest common denominator Global Crime Syndicate Kakistocracy that runs humanity into the ground.
#Cryptocracy #History #Politics #Economics #Military #Narrative
-
13 Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, controlled press and a mere token opposition party. David Martin created a matrix of methods:
- Dummy up. If it’s not reported, if it’s not news, it didn’t happen.
- Wax indignant. This is also known as the “how dare you” gambit.
- Characterize the charges as “rumors” or, better yet, “wild rumors.” If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through “rumors.”
- Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
- Call the skeptics names like “conspiracy theorist,” “nut,” “ranter,” “kook,” “crackpot” and, of course, “rumor monger.” You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned.
- Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money.
- Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
- Dismiss the charges as “old news.”
- Come half-clean. This is also known as “confession and avoidance” or “taking the limited hang-out route.” This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal “mistakes.” This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken.
- Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
- Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For example: We have a completely free press. If they know of evidence that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing they would have reported it. They haven’t reported it, so there was no prior knowledge by the BATF. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press that would report it.
- Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely.
- Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or reporting a distraction.
Related Presentation: Truth Telling & Truth Suppression:Lies, Myths. and Realities
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Disinformation is a subset of propaganda and is false information that is spread deliberately to deceive. It is also known as black propaganda. It is sometimes confused with misinformation, which is false information but is not deliberate.
- Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
- Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.
- Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.
- Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
- Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia", "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
- Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
- Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
- Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
- Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
- Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
- Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the "high road" and "confess" with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
- Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
- Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.
- Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.
- Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
- Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
- Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
- Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".
- Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
- False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
- Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.
- Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
- Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
- Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
- Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
#Cryptocracy #Media #Politics #Economics #InfoSec #Military #Narrative
-
The Occult Technology of Power - An international banker instructs his son in the arcane mysteries of population control through money manipulation, bribery, corruption and terror.
"We are much beholden to Machiavelli and others, that write what men do, and not what they ought to do." --- Francis Bacon
-
The civil disobedience tipping point
A dirty secret of all authoritarian dictators across the world is the civil disobedience tipping point: The maximum capacity of the police to arrest people, of the jails to hold people and the courts to process people. In countries like Australia or Germany, this is around 100'000 people at one time. Anything more than that and the system comes crashing down.
Given the speed of people waking up and organizing against the elites current de-stabilization and genocide campaign being waged in the name of "health", we will likely reach this tipping point before the end of the year across the world.
Hence, keep an eye open for false flag operations - such as massive terror attacks etc. - which would take people's attention off the issue. In any case, the outcomes of successful civil disobedience or revolution will likely not be what most except: History teaches us that cryptocrats in power are usually well ahead of the curve (and often the hidden hand driving all sides) on such issues and in the case of any type of revolution (such as the french revolution, the soviet revolution, the nazi revolution, etc.) they are insulated through sophisticated risk-management techniques - and will re-constitute their power with in a few short years.
‘Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state has become lawless or corrupt. And a citizen who barters with such a state shares in its corruption and lawlessness.’ — Gandhi
#Cryptocracy #Military #Politics #Education #Culture #Comment
-
A-Albionic "conspiracy" theories claim basic conflicts amongst the factions of the ruling class instead of the more common "Master Conspiracy Theories" or "Unified Ruling Class" theories."
Excerpt from "Everything is Under Control" - by Robert Anton Wilson (Full book PDF)
The most plausible of the multiconspiracy theories--i.e., those scenarios that do not claim that one super secret criminal gang rules this planet, but rather that at least two such "gangs" exist, at war with each other--comes forth from an outfit styling itself A-Albionic Consulting and Research, in Ferndale, Michigan.
A-Albionic began in 1985 with a common or garden-variety uniconspiracy theory, blaming everything on the British royal family--rather like Lyndon LaRouche, who may have served as their original inspiration. In 1989, however, A-Albionic revised their model of the world (yes, they actually use the scientific word "model" and show other signs of some technical education). The post-1989 A-Albionic scenario holds that, in their own words (capitals included), "The Overt and Covert Organs of the Vatican and the British Empire are Locked in Mortal Combat for Control of the World."
A-Albionic traces this Mortal Combat back to the reign of the first Queen Elizabeth, when Protestant-Catholic warfare raged all over Europe--the time when the English, typically, made their pioneer scientific rationalist, Sir Francis Bacon, a high government official, while the Vatican took their pioneer scientific rationalist, Giordano Bruno, and burned him at the stake. The British Crown and the Throne of Peter have continued to make war on each other ever since, in this model, and every other "interest group," "trade union," "association of manufacturers," Mafia family, international bank or intelligence agency--everything that might qualify as a conspiracy in anybody's mind--have all become puppets, unknowingly, in this megastruggle. Thus, the Windsor Family Mega-Conspiracy manipulates a motley crew, which A-Albionic sums up as "Comsymp-International Banker-Judeo-Masonic-Labour Party-British Intelligence-SocialistInternational-Social Democrat-Fabian- AFL-CIO-UAW-KGB"--the same unlikely bedfellows that appear in many anti-Illuminati theories. The Vatican, on the opposite side of the world power struggle, controls an assembly of "CIA-Fascist International-Georgetown Jesuits-McCarthyite-Buckleyite-Knights of Malta." (See Knights of Malta and P2.)
Duo-conspiracy theories, like uniconspiracy theories, often lead to logical conclusions that seem bizarre to outsiders. Thus, the late Carroll Quigley, professor of history at Georgetown University, appears as a member of the Insiders in the John Birch Society theory, and these alleged Insiders, who sound a lot like the Illuminati, all belong to the British Royal Family Jumbo Conspiracy in A-Albionic's system. In fact, many right-wing theories become compatible if one identifies Insiders with Illuminati and both with international bankers (Jewish, Dutch, or whichever suspects you prefer). . . . Ergo, Quigley was an agent of the Windsor Gang.
But Prof. Quiqley taught at Georgetown, which the Jesuits own, so this makes him actually a tool of the Vatican conspiracy according to A-Albionic. He had entered the Windsor-Insider-International Banker-Illuminati conspiracy, A-Albionic says, but only to expose it. Quigley's book, _Tragedy and Hope_, usually cited by right-wingers as "inadvertently" revealing the Insider's plot for world government, had nothing inadvertent about it at all. The Jesuits sent Quigley to spy out the enemy and publish their secrets, according to A-Albionic.
This minor detail in the conspiratorial mosaic became a matter of passionate debate among conspiriologists during the 1992 presidential race, because Bill Clinton, in one speech, mentioned Prof. Quigley as a teacher who had vastly inspired him in his youth. To the majority of right-wing conspiracy buffs, this "proved" that Clinton worked for the Insiders, or the Illuminati or at least the international bankers. But A-Albionic insisted on their own analysis. If President Clinton really received inspiration from a Jesuit school, they claim, then he has become a tool of the Vatican/CIA, or anti-Illuminati, conspiracy.
-
AI gave Val Kilmer his voice back
The Hollywood actor lost his natural voice after a surgery for throat cancer in 2015, shattering his career and permanently altering the way he communicates. That is, until late last year when Sonantic, a U.K.-based software firm that clones voices for actors and studios, helped Kilmer to speak again. A wave of start-ups are deploying artificially intelligent voice-cloning services for digital assistants, video games and movie studios. The generated voices have gotten more realistic in the age of deepfakes and sound deceptively real.
