Frantic British Censors
Strike YouTube and Google
—Exposing Themselves Yet Again

by Barbara Boyd

[Print version of this article]

July 18—YouTube permanently removed the video, “The Special Relationship is for Traitors,” from LaRouche PAC’s YouTube channel on June 5, 2019. The video presents historical fact about the British Empire’s colonial atrocities and its role in sparking two world wars. It documents the prevalent American belief, following these catastrophes, that the British Empire (not the British people) was and is our sworn enemy. YouTube says the video violated its ever expanding “community standards.” You can view the video which offended You Tube’s censors here.

According to various news reports, YouTube’s community standards were updated on June 4 to cover what YouTube’s machine algorithms and “Trusted Flaggers” (the name for its outside censors), consider “borderline hate speech.” According to YouTube’s insiders, videos expressing what the YouTube censors call “conspiracy theories” are the targets of the new standards. Numerous mainstream academic and history sites were censored or disabled in the June purge, and it scooped up journalists nominally on the left, such as Max Blumenthal, as the machine algorithm and YouTube’s “Trusted Flaggers” marched on.

As this article goes to press, word emerges that Twitter has suspended the main twitter account for Julian Assange supporters and that the popular Consortium News website, which has reported on the Assange case among other atrocities by our ruling elites, has been subject to a malware attack.

Taking out these voices occurs just as CNN has published another fact-less piece of hate propaganda claiming that Assange and WikiLeaks were working with the Russians to swing the 2016 U.S. elections. According to CNN’s fabricators, Assange did this from a “command post” in the Ecuadorian Embassy, in London. CNN of course, fails to reference the 24-hour-a-day surveillance then operating against Assange in the very capital of the imperial oligarchy, the City of London.

Apparently, as we head into hitman Robert Mueller’s scheduled July 24 testimony before Congress, the Russiagate narrative, having completely flopped with the American people, requires hands on cyberwarfare for its attempted resurrection. More and more people have realized that they have been fooled, not by the Russians, but by all of those “authoritative” and “trusted” corporate media who have been caught lying to them, outright and brazenly, for full on three years now. The public has either tuned out, because of the gargantuan nature of the fraud, or become incredibly angry and await leadership as to how to respond. Now, the flipside of this fraud is becoming the most prominent dynamic. The enemy went all in and exposed themselves, including the long-time instruments of social control resident in the individual laptop. The time has become ripe for taking both the nation and your mind back.

We have repeatedly demonstrated, that the British intelligence services, their vassals in the then government of Ukraine, and the Obama Administration intervened to swing the 2016 presidential election to Hillary Clinton, and then to nullify Donald Trump’s election. They thought Hillary Clinton was going to win the election and their actions would never be known. As of November 8, having acted criminally, their choice was either to continue that course in the hopes of overturning the election, or to await inevitable discovery given the number of people they employed in their grand conspiracy. Pursuing the former course, however, has now publicly exposed even more of their operations. Similarly, the frantic censorship measures now being undertaken invite inquiry into all that these companies have been doing previously, further exposing those who formerly lived behind the classified curtain.

This article intends to trace the wholly British evolution of the present campaign and reference its primary fallacy—that artificial intelligence or machine learning can ever account for, or control truly human behavior. Donald Trump’s election proved that. He used Silicon Valley as a tool—rather than being used by them. Hillary Clinton’s total reliance on deep data, making electoral decisions based on computer models of social media behavior, also proved that, albeit negatively. The reason Hillary Clinton did not visit the Rust Belt states—the states that sealed Trump’s victory—is that a computer, called Ada by her deep data team, told her not to.

As Lyndon LaRouche urged throughout his lifetime, no artificial intelligence regime can defeat a mobilized and creative human mind consciously seeking a higher form of human existence. They can, however, inflame fixed, linear, and irrational modes of behavior, into a force of destruction—witness the violence caused by killer video games and the cognitive passivity engendered by both drug and pornography addictions.

The Present Purge

Since November of 2016, Facebook and Google, which owns YouTube, have been relentlessly attacked by the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, numerous Parliamentary big wigs in Britain, and the mainstream corporate media, for fostering allegedly fake Russian posts, conspiracy theories, and other “disinformation” through their news feeds, resulting, according to them, in Brexit and Donald Trump’s election in the United States. Not incidental to the media’s outrage was the fact that major mainstream media were shutting down in the United States, at record rates, as bored and disgusted readers and viewers migrated to the internet, hoping to find websites and blogs more reflective of their outlook.

In response to these attacks, and the surprise changes to its business model demanded by its former enthusiasts turned critics, in April of 2017, Google announced that it was going to promote and boost traffic to “authoritative” viewpoints, namely, corporate media, over those it dubbed “alternative” viewpoints. In May of 2018, Google cemented a formal alliance with the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Financial Times, and other corporate media to promote their products. Facebook announced a similar promotion of “trusted sources” on its news feeds. In other words, the nation’s major social media platforms were being brought under control by the fake news media. All of these steps were in addition to 2016 announcements altering machine learning algorithms and content policies in order to prevent traffic from reaching certain sites designated as extremist, discriminatory, or, simply, “controversial.”

Even these perverse steps by Google and Facebook, however, failed to satisfy the aspiring ministers of truth. At its annual developers’ conference in April 2019, Facebook announced that it was completely changing its algorithms to favor posts within groups rather than favoring reposting or boosting of news feeds. Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s CEO, noted that the change was made to eliminate the “town square” type of debates about ideas taking place on the platform as the result of the former emphasis on news feeds.

As the result of all of these steps, there has been a huge drop in engagement on independent internet “news” sites, silencing independent voices who depended on Facebook advertising and YouTube views for revenue. In addition, Facebook’s private group format is intended to foster the type of small group dynamics which favor identity politics, small bore tribalism, and cult-like group think and brainwashing—dynamics which prevent the development of universal human identities and values required for effective political action, while encouraging outright fascism. Facebook has now also assigned censors to these groups to make sure that they are appropriately policing their own speech. The pornography, violent killer video games, and other platforms for mass popular derangement are obviously not a target of this censorship effort. Silicon Valley intends for this income stream to continue.

It is unclear how Google and Facebook’s algorithms and machine learning will be impacted by the current purge. For years, astute analysts have pointed out that social network engagement algorithms drive people into siloed behaviors and the extremes of identity politics. Once a teenager, for example, questions politically correct ideas of behavior, he or she is very often presented with a menu of successively extreme videos and messages prompting a deep dive into racial, sexual, or other forms of identity dynamics in order to sustain “engagement.”

It is a well-known psychological and sociological fact that propaganda has a limited if visceral impact on targeted populations. The impact of any single wave of lies wears off quickly and requires constant repetition under closed conditions to have an impact. What is being proposed here, by Facebook, is the type of closed system which shrinks heads and produces the type of irrational hysteria now dominating entire sections of the American population as the result of being saturated with “trusted” “authoritative” mainstream media feeds for the last three years in the hoax called Russiagate.

Empire’s ‘Trusted Flaggers’

YouTube, owned by Google, and Facebook, get away with this censorship because they have thus far successfully argued that their social media platforms are “privately” owned and hence not subject to the free speech provisions of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Their argument, of course, ignores the inconvenient fact that all of these platforms were developed by the Defense Department’s DARPA program and, as demonstrated by Edward Snowden’s revelations, have been open government spying platforms for years. On July 9, by contrast, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York City ruled that President Trump’s Twitter account, is a “public forum” subject to the First Amendment and, as a result, the President may not block the hate speech directed at him by trolls, many of whom are paid to attack the President 24/7.

This, of course, degrades the platform this President has chosen as his primary communication mechanism with the American people.

The Trusted Flagger censors employed by YouTube, and in a similar program at Facebook, include the Anti-Defamation League of B’Nai B’rith (ADL), exposed in a 1990s scandal as working with the CIA, FBI, and elements of Israeli intelligence, to spy on perceived opponents of Israeli policies, the widely discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, the British government, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (also British), a host of British and Israeli private companies and NGOs, various U.S. intelligence and military components, and the Atlantic Council’s Digital Research Lab—a font of NATO and home to CrowdStrike’s Dmitri Alperovitch and the British Integrity Initiative’s Ben Nimmo.

Dmitri Alperovitch played an essential role in fabricating the myth that the files published by WikiLeaks documenting how Hillary Clinton and the DNC were rigging the 2016 Democratic Presidential primaries, were stolen by the Russian GRU (Russian military intelligence) via a hack of servers at the Democratic National Committee. Nimmo has played a major role in the Integrity Initiative, a British military intelligence operation squarely aimed at smearing Trump and his supporters and those dissenting from globalist policies. Prior to its Facebook gig, the Digital Research Lab had been retained by the British government to identify alleged Russian disinformation agents using Twitter, resulting in a long casualty list of false claims involving ordinary British people expressing their views.

Brits Declare War on Trump’s Base

In December of 2018, the British House of Lords published a report, “UK Foreign Policy in a Shifting World Order,” discussing, in no uncertain terms, the Trump Presidency and the British imperative to prevent a second term for this President. The unhinged Report targeted Trump’s use of social media as a communications tool—creating a base of popular support completely outside established population control mechanisms, like the mainstream media. This, according to the Lords, provided the average citizen with impermissible power:

Digital communications tools have also intensified public pressure on governments, and increased the audience for foreign policy making. . . . The foundations of British foreign policy—the construction and maintenance of a rules-based international order, the relationship with the U.S. and EU membership—are being challenged as a direct consequence of political and social waves caused by people’s access to information, boosted by instant connectivity on an unprecedented scale and speed. Governments are responding to short-term demands of their citizens, who have been empowered by their access to information and opinion. . . . Sir Tony Brenton called cyber a ‘poor man’s weapon’; it had lowered the ‘barrier to entry’ into international relations. Mr. [Paul] Maidment [Director of Analysis, Oxford Analytica], said ‘International relations have not been immune to the cheap digital revolution that the commercial and business world has experienced. That also means now that very small numbers of people can become international actors in international affairs in a way they never could in the past.'

In 2016, “poor” men and women, the people Hillary Clinton called “the deplorables,” used Facebook to form the types of affinity groups which turned out newly registered, unpolled, and formerly inactive voters (those who had given up hope of change) to vote, in droves, for Trump. It was a genuine revolt against the economic carnage of globalization, and the endless war policy dictated by the “rules based international order.” According to the Trump Campaign, the Facebook ads which actually worked in 2016 and which were endlessly recapitulated by them and shared by their supporters, all involved building infrastructure across the formerly industrial Rustbelt states which delivered the President’s victory.

In shell shock and panic from that victory, the elites created a hoax, falsely blaming Trump’s victory on Russian social media trickery and cyberwarfare, and the alleged racial and conspiracy theories advocated by those they view as his unwashed plebeian supporters. They realized that they not only had to take out Trump, they also had to demoralize, fragment, and eliminate the political force which had elected him. That effort is now about to totally backfire as the American population searches out the people and policies which they recognize have almost destroyed them. Americans are now seeking a leadership that will put into place the types of economic and scientific policies that will ensure a prosperous future. Those ideas and policies reside uniquely in the published works of Lyndon LaRouche and are there for their taking.

Obama Administration’s Information Warfare Machine

The current censorship campaign revealed itself in the United States on November 24, 2016, soon after President Trump’s election, when the Washington Post gave a section of its front page to anonymous authors branding themselves “PropOrNot,” or “Propaganda Or Not.” PropOrNot, boosted by the Post, blacklisted hundreds of websites, from conspiracy sites to libertarian and progressive publications, as witting or unwitting Russian propaganda agents who should be prosecuted under the Espionage Act because of Trump’s election.

Included in the Post/Prop blacklist were Truthdig, Consortium News, Antiwar.com, David Stockman’s blog, Paul Craig Roberts, the Ron Paul Institute, Jeff Rense, the Drudge Report, Truthout.org, nakedcapitalism.com, CounterPunch.org, zerohedge.com, Infowars.com, and numerous libertarian and conspiracy sites. In short, it was a list of many of the dissenting media voices in the U.S., particularly those opposing war with Russia or with those deemed its proxies, like Syria. The document claimed Russia was the author of the 9/11 truth movement and all websites favorable to Syria and Crimea.

Subsequent investigations of PropOrNot by journalist George Eliason, among others, have traced its genesis, literally in screen shots, to The Interpreter magazine, formerly the flagship publication of the exiled anti-Putin oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s Institute for Modern Russia. Khodorkovsky, a City of London agent who criminally looted Russia and owes billions of dollars in taxes, has used his ill-gotten gains to service a variety of intelligence operations against the Putin government.

In naming those behind PropOrNot, Eliason focuses on Michael Weiss, The Interpreter’s editor and a hyper-aggressive product of Britain’s Henry Jackson Society, and the deceased journalist Christopher Hitchens, who was Weiss’ mentor. While at the Henry Jackson Society, Britain’s premier neo-con intelligence pod, Weiss branded himself as an expert in Russian disinformation without once studying that nation’s language, culture, or history. It is not incidental to our story that the Henry Jackson Society is largely run by Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, MI6 (1999-2004), and his friends—fathers of the Iraq War and mentors to MI6’s Christopher Steele in his dirty dossier full-spectrum information warfare campaign against candidate Donald Trump.

Additionally, PropOrNot involved Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Liberty, the publishers of The Interpreter magazine at the time, and the organization StopFake of Ukrainian intelligence pedigree. It also appears to have involved at least one of the Ukrainian-American Chalupa sisters—Irene Chalupa—if not others.

Alexandra Chalupa worked for the DNC on opposition research against Trump; was the key Clinton liaison with Ukrainian intelligence in the campaign against Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort and Donald Trump; and was celebrated by none other than Yahoo News’ Michael Isikoff as a key orchestrator of the Trump/Russia hoax. Irene Chalupa is a longtime employee of Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Liberty, and an anchor for the webcasts of StopFake. Andrea Chalupa ran essential digital operations for the Ukraine coup. All the Chalupas have deep relationships with the neo-Nazi Banderist grouping that played the enforcer role for the United States and London in the 2014 Ukraine coup. This grouping includes the hacking and information warfare operation known as Shaltai Boltai.

In 2014, Michael Weiss and his British colleague Peter Pomerantsev published a paper, widely hailed in Britain, and a signal piece elsewhere, announcing that Russia had established a vast propaganda apparatus in Western countries dedicated to promulgating conspiracy theories in order to produce confusion and inflame existing social divisions. Pomerantsev’s “credentials” include official Russian ex-pat opposition status and a previous tour flacking the Magnitsky Act for British intelligence thief and fraudster Bill Browder. The Weiss/Pomerantsev paper wholly depends on claims about Russian disinformation prowess made by Mark Galeotti of the British military intelligence operation known as the Integrity Initiative. Galeotti’s claims about a super-potent Russian hybrid warfare machine have since been retracted as utterly false.

British Lords to Protect Us from Putin

Nonetheless, the paper was the opening salvo in the British intelligence campaign against alleged Russian disinformation founded on the realities of western decadence and decline. It argues that to shield American and British citizens from Putin injecting them with deadly Russian disinformation poisons, media and social media platforms should employ “counter-disinformation editors” who “would pick apart what might be called all the news that is unfit to print.” According to Weiss and Pomerantsev, the Kremlin is able to “exploit systemic weak spots in the Western system, providing a sort of X-ray of the underbelly of liberal democracy.” Information guides would, presumably, blind the public to such “weak spots.”

While PropOrNot provoked outrage when it was published, its lies about super-potent Russian influence operations have been repeatedly fed to the American public for three years now, muting the necessary protest. We have documented the roles of NATO’s Strategic Communications Center, the British military’s 77th Brigade, the British Integrity Initiative, and a host of newly minted Washington think tanks, featuring overlapping personnel with these British entities in regime change operations directed at Russia in a series of articles including Part I: “The British Role in the Coup Against the President Is Now Exposed. Will You Act Now to Save the Nation?” Part II: “The Integrity Initiative’s Foreign Agents of Influence Invade the United States,” and Part III: “A British Intelligence Fraud Creates the Coup Against Donald Trump.”

These think tanks include the Center for European Policy Analysis, the Alliance for Securing Democracies, the U.S. State Department’s Global Engagement Center, the Center for Naval Analysis, and the Atlantic Council.

Each of these Washington, D.C. outposts hosted the traveling British Lords when they came to Washington while concocting their 2018 British foreign policy manifesto against a second Presidential term for Trump. Of particular note is the Atlantic Council, home to Facebook censor, the Digital Research Lab. Funded to the tune of millions by the British Foreign Office, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi billionaire Bahaa R. Hariri, and now Facebook, the Atlantic Council is the U.S. public relations front for NATO and the British government, and, in the recent period, the center for regime change operations directed at Russia.

Prior to its exposure in December 2018 and January 2019 by a hacking group calling itself Anonymous, the Integrity Initiative was already implementing the House of Lords Report, recruiting opposition to a Trump second term here in the United States, while working closely with the Global Engagement Center at Mike Pompeo’s State Department.

Barack Obama, of course, pioneered the use of social media, “big data mining,” and micro-targeting in political campaigns in 2008 with his allies in Silicon Valley. Obama and friends knew that controlling these internet tools was essential to future political survival. In January of 2008, Cass Sunstein, the husband of Obama’s UN Ambassador Samantha Power, penned a University of Chicago Law School review article, “Conspiracy Theories,” calling for a program to censor and disrupt those advocating “conspiracy theories” online.

The chief concern at the time was those who refused to believe the various myths surrounding 9/11 or acquiesce in the police state measures which followed in its wake, and the looming financial collapse which occurred in 2008. Sunstein proposed various solutions including, forbidding conspiracy theories outright, taxing those who promote them, and/or the government engaging “third parties” in counter-discussion, and “cognitive infiltration” and neutralization of groups advocating these theories.

GCHQ

On February 24, 2014, Glenn Greenwald published documents in the Intercept demonstrating exactly how Sunstein’s program had been implemented by the surveillance state of the British GCHQ and the Five Eyes—an intelligence-sharing alliance among Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

The Edward Snowden trove of documents demonstrated that GCHQ dramatically expanded its internet surveillance and intervention activities between 2009 and 2012, President Barack Obama’s first term. Getting into the act, the U.S. Congress in 2012 repealed the U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (the Smith-Mundt Act), which for 64 years had outlawed propaganda and psychological warfare operations created by U.S. intelligence and military agencies for purposes of foreign wars and interventions from being used against the U.S. population. The “modernized” version of the bill was incorporated into the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act and allows for propaganda and other active measures to be targeted at U.S. citizens.

The documents Greenwald released showed a wide-ranging COINTELPRO (COunter INTELligence PROgram) type of operation against political targets by Five Eyes. Greenwald concluded, based on the trove of classified GCHQ documents he released on February 14, that:

These agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself. Among the core self-identified purposes of [GCHQ’s Joint Threat Research and Intelligence Group, JTRIG] are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false information into the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. . . . They boast of using, false flag operations, fake victim blog posts, and posting “negative information” on various forums, . . . and other tactics aimed at . . . “discrediting a target.”

I urge those reading this article to pull down this February 24 Intercept piece, by Greenwald, and the one cited immediately below, and read them. The documents presented there will show you how the British imperial state and its U.S. assets think they can control you by manipulating your fixed or irrational and animal-like behaviors and the dynamics which occur in all small group contexts. Self-conscious change, a human activity, provides the basis for utterly defeating all their “systems.”

Glenn Greenwald followed up his researches on GCHQ’s JTRIG by releasing more documents on June 22, 2015, demonstrating that JTRIG was involved in domestic operations against “extremist groups,” deployed sexual honey traps to discredit targets, launched denial-of-service attacks to shutdown internet forums, pushed counter-propaganda into various internet sites, and conducted economic and judicial espionage for its “customers.” The documents brag that JTRIG is conducting online “HUMINT” (HUMan INTelligence) in all areas of the globe. Particular targets were those it deemed politically “radical.” JTRIG used such criteria as visits to WikiLeaks to specify who was a “radical.” These operations are psychologically designed to foster “obedience” and “conformity.” “Obedience” and “Conformity” are JTRIG’s words, not Greenwald’s. The Intercept releases included JTRIG’s customer list. The Bank of England is listed as the first customer.

British Ad Boycott to Enforce Blacklist

While all of this surveillance and intervention was taking place, the social media platforms were profiting, hugely, through their data mining operations. They sold the data gathered daily about the internet habits and searches of those using their platforms, to corporate interests trolling for sales. This was, in fact, their business model. Cambridge Analytica, the Steve Bannon/Robert Mercer subdivision of the British military defense firm SCL, whose vile practices were exposed in the aftermath of Russiagate and Brexit, was really no different than other firms existing in the twilight zone created by the intersection of British, NATO and Israeli intelligence; Wall Street and London privateers; and politician retainers needing election throughout the world.

While the Trump Campaign inherited Cambridge when Bannon and other staffers supporting Ted Cruz came over for the general election, Facebook itself embedded with the Trump Campaign, showing the campaign’s digital director Brad Parscale, how to use the Facebook ad platform’s powerful tools. When accompanied by the fact that Trump actually had a powerful message of economic redemption, the results were predictable: Parscale says that Cambridge’s voter profiles did not work. The combination of Facebook’s tools, the Trump Campaign’s messaging, and the President’s personal 24-hour campaigning on behalf of the “forgotten men and women of the country” in the formerly industrialized states, produced the 2016 victory.

Facebook’s “mistake” in actively campaigning with Trump, an opportunity Facebook also offered to the Clinton Campaign to no avail, is the main reason why the company finds itself under such savage attack from those who previously threw it government and Wall Street money like there was no tomorrow.

Like most things in the Clinton Campaign, Hillary’s strategy combined gross intellectual incompetence with amazing arrogance. According to numerous press reports, the Clinton Campaign was entirely data driven, with major decisions being based on algorithms developed by a machine dubbed Ada Countess of Lovelace. The Ada referred to was Lord Byron’s daughter, who is widely credited with inventing the first algorithm in conjunction with her work with Charles Babbage. Ada would not have countenanced this use of her name or her invention. All machine-created algorithms are limited to linear processes and closed systems and, as Kurt Gödel proved, suffer from a systemic incompleteness which can never fully systematize or predict human behavior. Behave in a creative way, break your habits, exploit your human mind and capacity for change, and the spies and censors are left pounding dirt, as they were on November 8, 2016.

According to the Russiagate hoax, however, neither Trump’s message nor the Clinton team’s arguments against the laws of the universe were determinative. Instead, as the fake narrative goes, the evil Russians intervened using an all-powerful social media campaign run through the Internet Research Agency (IRA) troll farm in St. Petersburg and by hacking the DNC’s computers and John Podesta, and gave documents obtained from those hacks to WikiLeaks for publication. The deceased Senator John McCain led the charge, claiming that the hacks and the social media campaign constituted an act of war requiring a new and burgeoning infrastructure of organizations and entities funded to the tune of billions of dollars to prevent any further poisoning of the American mind.

Following the publication of PropOrNot, the British government directly intervened on Google and Facebook to ensure they got the message. They organized an advertising boycott beginning in June of 2017, pulling millions of dollars from the companies because their advertisers’ ads were appearing next to “inappropriate content”—namely, the alternative news sites cited by PropOrNot and others.

Russiagate Hoax Debunked

In the discussion of the WikiLeaks published documents at the center of the Russiagate hoax, the fact that those documents were truthful has all but been forgotten. The documents demonstrated that Hillary Clinton was a craven servant of Wall Street and that the Democratic National Committee was actively subverting Bernie Sanders’ campaign.

Now, as the result of discovery in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s criminal case against Roger Stone, we know that Mueller’s indictment of 12 Russian GRU agents for the claimed hack of the DNC, relied on incomplete and redacted reports from CrowdStrike, the wildly anti-Russian computer security operation retained by the DNC. The FBI did not do any independent forensics concerning the alleged hack, but instead accepted CrowdStrike’s incomplete and redacted analysis wholesale. This is on top of the numerous gaping holes that have already been demonstrated in the Russian hack narrative, the most glaring being the forensic studies conducted by former National Security Agency (NSA) technical director Bill Binney and what Binney says about the capabilities of the NSA.

Binney had demonstrated, well prior to Mueller’s Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election or the GRU indictment, that the most likely source of the WikiLeaks published documents was a thumb drive download, not an internet intrusion. This is based on the calculated file transfer speeds and other metadata for the documents published by WikiLeaks.

Mueller’s Report, for the first time, concedes that a thumb drive might have been the transfer route to WikiLeaks. But, the report insists, without presenting any evidence, that this must have occurred as a hand-off from the hackers to other Russians who came to the United States to pick up the thumb drives. The Report, at the same time, evinces uncertainty about the hack itself, saying it “appears” to be the case. Nowhere does the Mueller Report definitively tell us how the documents got to WikiLeaks, a hole which even Barack Obama acknowledged when presented with the intelligence community’s Russian meddling “evidence.”

Bill Binney also insists, based on NSA programs which he helped write, that if there was a Russian hack over the internet, the NSA would have been able to trace it and demonstrate its existence. Neither the Mueller Report nor the GRU indictment include any such NSA evidence. Further, the Mueller Report timeline has WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange announcing the publication of the Democratic Party emails not only before he received the documents but before he even communicated with the source that provided them!

Thanks to the work of Aaron Mate and Gareth Porter, it has also has been repeatedly demonstrated that the IRA’s social media campaign was minuscule and juvenile, with most of their ads appearing after the election and/or never mentioning the candidates!

Then, on July 1, U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich ordered prosecutors to stop referring to the IRA as connected to the Russian government in any way, because so far the evidence in Robert Mueller’s case against the IRA simply does not show that. Friedrich’s ruling follows numerous ex parte, in camera submissions of classified information to her by Mueller’s team. The IRA contends that it is a for-profit internet marketing firm—profiting by producing clickbait.

In addition, the entire IRA legend is just another warmed-over British intelligence yarn, imported wholesale into the United States. The entire weight of Britain’s intelligence and propaganda programs, such as JTRIG, have focused since 2014, on the alleged prowess of the Russian trolls at the IRA in St. Petersburg, even claiming that Putin has succeeded in “weaponizing” jokes. Please note, once again, dear reader, that jokes, are uniquely human, paradoxical, and ironical, and cannot be “weaponized” by algorithm, despite the wild claims of British intelligence.

The Flim-Flam Censors

Finally, a short note concerning two of the newly minted social media censors, as they are representative of the whole. The ADL is now headed by former Obama White House advisor Jonathan Greenblatt. Greenblatt has persistently characterized President Trump as a racist and sought and received huge grants from Silicon Valley for the ADL’s new role in censoring and policing so-called internet hate speech. Chief among those funders is Pierre Omidyar, the founder of eBay, who is building a command center for the ADL censors in Silicon Valley. Omidyar, with his buddies Tom Steyer and George Soros, provided millions to finance private spy efforts to remove the President, including funding MI6’s Christopher Steele after he was fired by the FBI. The same Silicon Valley billionaires are the key funders of RESIST.

The Southern Poverty Law Center fired its founder, Morris Dees, back in March, amidst charges of sexual harassment and racial discrimination. An article by a former staffer at the time in the New Yorker magazine states that staffers often joked over drinks about what should have been the Center’s slogan, “The SPLC, Making Hate Pay.”

Endowed to the tune of $430 million by guilt-ridden northern liberals, the Center has repeatedly smeared conservative figures and is now making money off its campaign against Donald Trump. It has called HUD Secretary Ben Carson an “extremist,” and branded the Family Research Council a “hate group.” Recently, it had to pay $3.375 million to Maajid Nawaz, a British citizen fighting Muslim extremism, who it falsely claimed was an anti-Muslim extremist.

The Policy Answers

I hope this article has demonstrated the sorry state of our British imperial adversary. They simply don’t know how to create a functioning economy that can reproduce itself at a higher level, something Lyndon LaRouche knew all about and fully developed. Their system is about to crash. Their coup is failing as they have exposed more and more of the measures they have employed repeatedly to dupe and control this population.

As the result of both the coup and the censorship, there are moves afoot to break up Google, Facebook, Amazon, and other Big Tech monopolies under the Anti-Trust laws. This should be fully supported. But the discussion and investigations, which must accompany the anti-trust drive, must focus on a full examination of the intended nature of these entities, and their collaboration with this anti-American, Anglo-American intelligence apparatus to control and shape public discourse and behavior. It must expose their collaboration in imposing the regimes of violent video games, pornography, identity politics, and other forms of extreme and degraded behavior on this population, consciously—as they censor rational inquiry—and exposure of the hands that guide them.

As Lyndon LaRouche noted, Silicon Valley’s artificial intelligence and algorithms are designed with an end in mind:

The systemic effect of such types of habituation, is a diseased moral and formal-intellectual state of mind which echoes the criminalized state of mind which impelled Pericles’ Athens into its Peloponnesian War. Athens never regained, to the present day, what it had lost through that folly, then. We, fortunately, have inherited the advantage of the greatness which the tradition of Solon of Athens expressed as the heritage of the Pythagoreans and Plato’s other circles.

That inheritance is the actual font of the American Revolution, which, now, in the process of being freed, can be set loose upon the land. The Moon-to-Mars space program, a crash program for fusion energy, new international agreements with China, Russia, and India to finally fully develop this world, are currently under quiet discussion in various provinces of the Trump Administration and elsewhere. They require an actual national mission orientation and human creativity for their success, something the humans amongst us must now, willfully, bring into existence. The internet can be a powerful tool supporting that mission.