Skip to main content

The Russians won it! Psychological Operations in the West.

There was huge interference from the Russians in the Referendum, Leave used funny money to vastly outspend Remain and the message on the bus swung the vote and was illegal.  Why should Remainers give way and accept the result when Leavers were fooled by lies?  Most Remain voters I have met believe this.

It is all obvious nonsense - four years before the Referendum Leave were far ahead in the polls and it was concerted campaigning by the Government and BBC  from 2013 to the Referendum that brought Remain within a hair's breadth of victory.  Cameron was so certain that Remain had swung the vote that he even ordered the Civil Service to drop planning for the possibility of a Leave victory.

But what about the Russians? All real studies of Russian involvement show it was negligible and there is clearly no Russian upsurge visible in Leave support, Leave never recovered it's 2012 support.  Facebook undertook an internal review and found that there was "no evidence of Russian interference" in the Referendum. Investigations of Twitter show a similar outcome.  Prof Laura Cram, director of neuropolitics research at the University of Edinburgh, found that at least 419 Russian accounts tweeted about Brexit a total of 3,468 times – mostly after the referendum had taken place... "the content of the Brexit tweets overall was “quite chaotic and it seems to be aimed at wider disruption. There’s not an absolutely clear thrust. We pick up a lot on refugees and immigration.".   About 78% of the tweets came after the Brexit vote on 23 June 2016 so less than a 1000 tweets came from Russia during the campaign. ( Guardian ).  Compare this with the millions of foreign Social Media Remain posts made during the Referendum by the Irish.  What actually happened is that the media (and the House of Commons Committee investigating Russian involvement) conflated speculations about interference in the US Presidential Election in 2016 with Brexit to make voters believe that the "Russians won it".  Psychological Operations have triumphed among Remain supporters.

The same story is apparent on campaign funding. Remain undoubtedly spent over three times more than Leave but Remain voters believe that somehow Arron Banks cheated the system and secured a huge advantage for Leave. ( See Was the Referendum Fair for full details of funding). PsychOps have triumphed.

We find the same story for the Leave Bus.  Most Remain voters think that the bus advert was a lie and Boris was prosecuted for it.  However, the court case concluded that the bus showed a valid gross figure (the Remain prosecution even admitted this in its testimony). That there was a court case and that there was almost no coverage of the fact that Boris Johnson won and why he won has led Remain voters to believe the bus was all lies. In any case the bus was only used for a couple of months in 2016 and we can see from the opinion poll graph that any alleged "lies" on the bus had negligible effect.  Despite this PsychOps have triumphed, Remain voters believe Leave voters were all just fooled by the bus. Even the vast majority of Leavers who had supported Leave years before the bus are supposed to have been fooled by it.

PsychOps are very powerful when mixed with control of the media. Almost every Remain supporter is now convinced they were cheated despite the fact that they were not cheated and there were two elections held after the Referendum to confirm the result.

The real damage inflicted by PsychOps has been to undermine democracy.  Democracy depends on the losers accepting the right of the winners to govern. The PsychOps operations after the Referendum were not directed at why we should Remain in the EU, they were directed at eroding faith in the underpinnings of democracy itself.

We can see the same pattern of PsychOps in the Ford and Rockefeller Foundation and Soros support for Black Lives Matter.  That Ford and Rockefeller etc. have given over $100 million to organisations that are openly dedicated to violent protest seems strange but only the Left guarantees a high level of street protests and civil unrest in return for funding.  There are undoubtedly problems with race relations globally and the USA is probably only in the top 50% of countries for racial fairness.  The UK is almost at the top of any global league for fairness.  So why was civil unrest on grounds of race provoked by Ford, Rockefeller, Soros etc.? It was PsychOps.  A Nation is partly its historical foundation and the objective of the race protests was to shift the emphasis of history to the history of race relations rather than the vast bulk of a country's history that deals with industrialisation, democratisation, social security and existential threats such as wars.  Undermine a Nation's sense of the legitimacy of its democracy and you can begin to destroy the Nation.

CNN puts "Independence" in quotes

Both the attack on the UK Referendum result and the Black Lives Matter protests are carefully planned campaigns directed at democracy in the UK and USA.  Who is doing this?  What do they want?

We have very strong, direct evidence that the operation against democracy after the Referendum was financed by Soros and other large corporate donors and that the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations and Soros support Black Lives Matter.  It is the same people and organisations in both cases.

What has happened is that the USA has, over the past 20 years, transferred responsibility for much of National Security to private contractors.  This provides a path into the control of the population for those with deep enough pockets to hire the private contractors.  It is amazing but it has happened and before you start thinking "conspiracy theory" reflect on the utter stupidity of privatising much of National Security and what could go wrong in this age Internet connectivity.  These are private companies in it for the money: think of the News of the World phone hacking and multiply it by a million times to grasp the scale of what is happening.

The retired CIA Director, John Brennan, seems to have set up his own network of private contractors such as Stanley, Canadian Global Information (CGI), The Analysis Corporation and Global Strategies Group which have access to the data collected by private contractors that are used by the CIA.  This was the substance of Edward Snowden's revelations about PRISM in 2013.  Snowden worked on the data bridge between the US Government's NSA and private contractors.  PRISM collected data from Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Apple, PalTalk, AOL, Skype and YouTube in 2013 and probably includes everything else by now.

This sharing allowed the FBI to use its contractors'(?) advanced facial recognition systems to identify the Belgian bomber.  The CIA is supposed to operate outside the USA but its network of contractors gave it access even to the US Senate's computer systems.  The FBI operates overseas and the CIA interferes domestically without anyone stopping them.

When General Jones became director of the NSA in 2009 his son got the contract for the Congressional Knowledge Management system, founding a company called Dynology to control the operation. Dynology then got a further contract with the Dept of Defense to run servers for the Congressional system in Germany so that the data was outside of US control. Dynology has branched out with ShadowNet.

As the access of the private contractors has got wider they are now able to use inside information to persuade senior figures into giving ever wider access.  The contractors want data, they do not simply wish to destroy the reputations of those who can supply access to the data. It has been suggested that the Hilary Clinton email hacking was actually a method of putting pressure on Clinton to provide access to State Department data.

Clearforce was created by General Jones (NSA) and John Brennan (CIA) in 2013. Its apparent role was to manage data sharing between CGI and GCHQ in the UK. However,  Clearforce is also being used to identify individuals and groups with influence and provide "access methods" to these people (ie: manipulation based on personal data).  It creates "assets".  Analysts decide what news is needed to influence events and then disseminate the news to the various assets in the media.  

AIs are used to infiltrate groups on Facebook and discussions on Twitter etc. so that they can be activated politically later.  Even telephone conversations are available to the contractors.  The information could be used not just to influence opinions but to blackmail politicians, journalists and other opinion formers and actors.

These contractors are mostly wedded to money.  They were happy to support both sides in the Ukraine and, in the case of companies like Cambridge Analytica may have played for both Trump and the Democrats. This sows vast confusion, for instance a company could overstep the mark by visiting Putin for one side and then release a report on this for the other side.  Fake news created in this manner is saleable.  The politicians who employ these contractors don't realise how slippery they are, they will do anything for money.

The real problem for everyone is that these private contractors can now supply access to the levers of Western democracy to anyone with the money to hire them.  China can use it's offshore funds to pay, Soros can use his billions.

There can be little doubt that the news and media coverage of the EU Referendum and BLM shows that there are forces at work that are using these PsychOps tools to attack the core of Western Democracy.  Any oligarch such as Soros or corporate such as Goldman Sachs that has the cash can buy PsychOps.

Looking back at the history of the Internet we should have expected that all of this would happen.  Even thirty years after the Internet was created our legislators have still failed to grasp the sheer power of an open, global communications network.  China has had no such problem and is a graphic demonstration of how the Internet is the tool of choice for control.

See ShadowGate, the Film.  This covers most of the PsychOps system and has been banned from YouTube on the pretext that it contains "hate speech".  There is no hate speech in the film. The producer of the film, Millie Weaver, has been arrested on the basis of a secret indictment that was subsequently found to be about a call to the police during a family quarrel involving her mother months before.  The mother is not making any charges but Weaver is in jail.  It is easy to intimidate your enemies if you have access to all the phone calls made in a country .



Popular posts from this blog

Practical Idealism by Richard Nicolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi

Coudenhove-Kalergi was a pioneer of European integration. He was the founder and President for 49 years of the Paneuropean Union. His parents were Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an Austro-Hungarian diplomat, and Mitsuko Aoyama, the daughter of an oil merchant, antiques-dealer, and huge landowner family in Tokyo. His "Pan-Europa" was published in 1923 and contained a membership form for the Pan-Europa movement. Coudenhove-Kalergi's movement held its first Congress in Vienna in 1926. In 1927 the French Prime Minister, Aristide Briand was elected honorary president.  Personalities attending included: Albert Einstein, Thomas Mann and Sigmund Freud. Figures who later became central to founding the EU, such as Konrad Adenauer became members . His basic idea was that democracy was a transitional stage that leads to rule by a new aristocracy that is largely taken from the Jewish "master race" (Kalergi's terminology). His movement was reviled by Hitler and H

Political Thoughts

Politics is the struggle for power. The fundamental power struggle is between the people of a place and the mobile classes.  Few people would turn their own garden into a motorway or commit their next door neighbours to slave working.  The mobile classes can do these things without conscience because their garden and their neighbours are not fixed. Locality is central to politics because it separates real issues from ideological issues.  Real issues such as being unable to find work, having insufficient money to pay for the basics of life, having poor schooling and healthcare etc. are all local.  If you are mobile you can move to somewhere that has work and good wages, schools and healthcare. If the answer to any problem is to change locality then the problem is not solved, it is avoided for you personally but the problem remains for others.  If politicians must live among those who suffer the results of their political decisions then those decisions must be humane but if they can move

The Report on Racism

The " Report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities " has just been published.  The Commissioners were nearly all from BAME backgrounds and have produced a robust and fair Report. The Report identified a class divide in which the cycle of advantage maintains a section of the population in wealth and leaves the large bulk of the population in relative poverty.   The wealthy class is largely white British but the poorer class consists of large numbers of white British and other ethnic groups.  This class divide causes a bias in the crude statistics on disadvantage so that majority, poor white British are labelled as "white supremacists" etc. when it is the small wealthy class that actually creates the disparity that causes this analysis. The most striking finding is that different ethnic groups had very different experiences and outcomes.  Educational outcomes demonstrate this at a glance: Red text added for this article Most ethnic groups had better outcome