A new study published on Friday found that the excess all-cause
mortality for the years 2020 to 2023 in 125 countries is incompatible with a
pandemic viral respiratory disease.
The authors argue that the three primary causes of death associated
with the excess all-cause mortality over this period are due to mandated
measures such as lockdowns; harmful medical interventions such as the use of
ventilators and the denial of use of antibiotics; and, covid injections.
At 521 pages it is a comprehensive report containing hundreds of figures and
a detailed examination of excess all-cause mortality during the years 2020 to
2023 in 125 countries, comprising approximately 2.7 billion people which is
about 35% of the world’s population.
We studied all-cause mortality in 125 countries with
available all-cause mortality data by time (week or month), starting several years prior to the
declared pandemic, and for up to and more than three years of the Covid period
(2020-2023). The studied countries are on six continents and comprise approximately
35 % of the global population (2.70 billion of 7.76 billion, in 2019).
The overall excess all-cause mortality rate in the 93
countries with sufficient data in the 3-year period 2020-2022 is 0.392 ± 0.002 % of 2021
population, which is comparable to the historic rate of approximately 0.97 % of population over
the course of the 1918 “Spanish Flu” pandemic.
We describe plausible mechanisms and argue that the three
primary causes of death associated with the excess all-cause mortality during (and
after) the Covid period are:
(1) Biological (including psychological) stress from
mandates such as lockdowns and associated socio-economic structural changes
(2) Non-COVID-19-vaccine medical interventions such as
mechanical ventilators and drugs (including denial of treatment with antibiotics)
(3) COVID-19 vaccine injection rollouts, including repeated
rollouts on the same Populations
In all cases ― for all three identified primary causes of
death ― a proximal or clinical cause of death associated (such as on death certificates)
with the quantified excess all-cause mortality is respiratory condition or infection.
Therefore, we distinguish (and define) true primary causes of death from the pervasive and
accompanying proximal or clinical cause of death as respiratory.
We understand the Covid-period mortality catastrophe to be
precisely what happens when governments cause global disruptions and assaults
against populations. We emphasize the importance of biological stress from sudden
and profound structural societal changes and of medical assaults (including denial
of treatment for bacterial pneumonias, repeated vaccine injections, etc.). We estimate
that such a campaign of disruptions and assaults in a modern world will produce a
global all-ages mortality rate of >0.1 % of population per year, as was also the case in
the 1918 mortality catastrophe.
Conclusion
There is an overview in the Summary.
We are compelled to state that the public health
establishment and its agents fundamentally caused all the excess mortality in the Covid
period, via assaults on populations, harmful medical interventions and COVID-19
vaccine rollouts.
We conclude that nothing special would have occurred in
terms of mortality had a pandemic not been declared and had the declaration not been
acted upon
The DNC Convention starts tomorrow. I have been requested to repost “THE BIG WHY” explanation. When we
understand just how much corruption was needed in the weaponization of the
modern IC, we start to understand why the effort to hide it
will continue.
President Barack Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder did not create a
weaponized DOJ and FBI; instead, what they did was take the preexisting system
and retool it, so the weapons only targeted one side of the political
continuum. This point is where many people understandably get confused.
In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was
constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all
Americans as potential threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created
specifically for this purpose.
What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the
internal targeting mechanisms so that only their ideological opposition became
the target of the new national security system. This is very important to
understand as you dig deeper into this research outline.
Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and
hurriedly after 9/11/01. DHS came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of
2004 the ODNI was formed. When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few
years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to
create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost
exclusively against their political opposition.
The preexisting
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Dept of Justice (DOJ) were then
repurposed to become two of the four pillars of the domestic national security
apparatus. However, this new construct would have a targeting mechanism
based on political ideology. The DHS, ODNI, DOJ and FBI became the four
pillars of this new institution. Atop these pillars is where you will
find the Fourth Branch of Government.
We were not sleeping when this happened, we were wide awake. However,
we were stunningly distracted by the economic collapse that was taking place in
2006 and 2007 when the engineers behind Obama started to assemble the
design. By the time Obama took office in 2009, we sensed something
profound was shifting, but we can only see exactly what shifted in the
aftermath. The four pillars were put into place, and a new Fourth Branch
of Government was quietly created.
As time passed, and the system operators became familiar with their new
tools, technology allowed the tentacles of the system to reach out and touch
us. That is when we first started to notice that something very disconcerting
was happening. Those four pillars are the root of it, and if we take the
time to understand how the Fourth Branch originated, questions about this
current state of perpetual angst will start to make sense.
Grab a cup of your favorite beverage, and take a walk with me as we outline
how this was put together. You might find many of the questions about our
current state of political affairs beginning to make a lot more sense.
Remember, it is not my intent to outline the entire history of how we got to
this place where the intelligence community now acts as the superseding fourth
branch of government. Such an effort would be exhausting and likely take our
discussion away from understanding the current dynamic.
History provided enough warnings from Dwight D. Eisenhower (military), to
John F. Kennedy (CIA), to Richard Nixon (FBI), to all modern versions of
warnings and frustrations from HPSCI Devin Nunes and ODNI Ric Grenell. None of
those prior reference points are invalid, and all documented outlines of
historic reference are likely true and accurate. However, a generational review
is not useful, as the reference impacting us ‘right now‘ gets lost.
Instead, we pick up the expansive and weaponized intelligence system as it
manifests after 9/11/01, and my goal is to highlight how the modern version of
the total intelligence apparatus has now metastasized into a Fourth Branch of
Government. It is this superseding branch that now touches and influences every
facet of our life.
If we take the modern construct, originating at the speed of technological
change, we can also see how the oversight or “check/balance” in our system of
government became functionally obsolescent.
After many years of granular research about the intelligence apparatus
inside our government, in the summer of 2020 I visited Washington DC to ask
specific questions. My goal was to go where the influence agents within
government actually operate, and to discover the people deep inside the
institutions no one elected and few people pay attention to.
It was during this process when I discovered how information is
purposefully put into containment silos; essentially a formal process to block
the flow of information between agencies and between the original branches.
While frustrating to discover, the silo effect was important because
understanding the communication between networks leads to our ability to
reconcile conflict between what we perceive and what’s actually taking place.
After days of research and meetings in DC during the summer of 2020, the
subsequent discussions were perhaps the most important. After many hours of
specific questions and answers on specific examples, I realized why our nation
is in this mess. That is when I discovered the fourth and superseding branch of
government, the Intelligence Branch.
I am going to explain how the Intelligence Branch works: (1) to control
every other branch of government; (2) how it functions as an entirely
independent branch of government with no oversight; (3) how and why it was
created to be independent from oversight; (4) what is the current mission of
the IC Branch, and most importantly (5) who operates it.
The Intelligence Branch is an independent functioning branch of government,
it is no longer a subsidiary set of agencies within the Executive Branch as
most would think. To understand the Intelligence Branch, we need to drop the
elementary school civics class lessons about three coequal branches of
government and replace that outlook with the modern system that created itself.
The Intelligence Branch functions much like the State Dept, through a unique
set of public-private partnerships that support it. Big Tech industry collaboration
with intelligence operatives is part of that functioning; almost like an NGO.
However, the process is much more important than most think. In this
problematic perspective of a corrupt system of government, the process is the
flaw – not the outcome.
There are people making decisions inside this little known, unregulated and
out-of-control branch of government that impact every facet of our lives.
None of the people operating deep inside the Intelligence Branch were
elected, and our elected representative House members genuinely do not know how
the system works. I assert this position affirmatively because I have talked to
House and Senate staffers, including the chiefs of staff for multiple House
& Senate committee seats. They are not malicious people; however, they are
genuinely clueless of things that happen outside their silo. That is part of
the purpose of me explaining it, with examples, in full detail with sunlight.
We begin….
In April of 2016, the FBI launched a counterintelligence operation against
presidential candidate Donald Trump. The questioning about that operation is
what New York Representative Elise Stefanik cites in March of 2017,
approximately 11 months later (First Two
Minutes).
Things to note:
♦ Notice how FBI Director James Comey just matter-of-factly explains no one
outside the DOJ was informed about the FBI operation. Why? Because that’s just
the way things are done. His justification for unilateral operations was “because
of the sensitivity of the matter“, totally ignoring any constitutional or
regulatory framework for oversight; because, well, quite simply, there isn’t
any. The intelligence apparatus inside the DOJ/FBI can, and does, operate based
on their own independent determinations of authority.
♦ Notice also how FBI Director Comey shares his perspective that informing
the National Security Council (NSC) is the equivalent of notifying the White
House. The FBI leadership expressly believe they bear no responsibility to
brief the Chief Executive. As long as they tell some unknown, unelected,
bureaucratic entity inside the NSC, their unwritten responsibility to inform
the top of their institutional silo is complete. If the IC wants to carve out
the Oval Office, they simply plant information inside the NSC and, from their
perspective, their civic responsibility to follow checks-and-balances is
complete. This is an intentional construct.
♦ Notice how Comey obfuscates notification to the Director of National
Intelligence (DNI), by avoiding the fact James Clapper was the DNI from outset
of the counterintelligence operation throughout the remainder of Obama’s term.
When I get deeper into the process, we will understand how the Intelligence
Branch has intentionally used the creation of the DNI position (established
post 9/11/01) as a method to avoid oversight, not enhance it. Keeping an
oblivious doofus like James Clapper in position held strategic value [Doofus
Reminder HERE].
That video of James Comey being questioned by Elise Stefanik was the first
example given to me by someone who knew the background of everything that was
taking place preceding that March 20, 2017, hearing. That FBI reference point
is a key to understand how the Intelligence Branch operates with unilateral
authority above Congress (legislative branch), above the White House (executive
branch), and even above the court system (judicial branch).
Also, watch this short video of James Clapper because it is likely many
readers have forgotten, and likely even more readers have never seen it. Watch closely how
then White House national security adviser John Brennan is responding in that
video. This is before Brennan became CIA Director, this is when Brennan
was helping Barack Obama put the pillars into place. WATCH:
The video of James Clapper highlights how the ODNI position (created with
good national security intention) ended up becoming the fulcrum for modern
weaponization, and is now an office manipulated by agencies with a vested
interest in retaining power. The Intelligence Branch holds power over the ODNI
through their influence and partnership with the body that authorizes the power
within it, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).
Factually, the modern intelligence apparatus uses checks and balances in
their favor. The checks create silos of proprietary information, classified
information, vaults of information that work around oversight issues. The silos
are part of the problem.
Ironically, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created
in the aftermath of 9/11/01 expressly to eliminate the silos of information
which they felt led to a domestic terrorist attack that could have been
prevented. The ODNI was created specifically upon the recommendation of the
9/11 commission.
The intent was to create a central hub of intelligence information, inside
the Executive Branch, where the CIA, NSA, DoD, DoS, and DIA could deposit their
unique intelligence products and a repository would be created so that domestic
intelligence operations, like the DOJ and FBI could access them when needed to
analyze threats to the U.S. This, they hoped, would ensure the obvious flags
missed in the 9/11 attacks would not be missed again.
The DNI office created a problem for those who operate in the shadows of
proprietary information. You’ll see how it was critical to install a person
uniquely skilled in being an idiot, James Clapper, into that willfully blind
role while intelligence operatives worked around the office to assemble the
Intelligence Branch of Government.
• The last federal budget that flowed through the traditional budgetary
process was signed into law in September of 2007 for fiscal year 2008 by George
W. Bush. Every budget since then has been a fragmented process of continuing
resolutions and individual spending bills.
Why does this matter? Because many people think defunding the Intelligence
Community is a solution; it is not…. at least, not yet. Worse yet, the corrupt
divisions deep inside the U.S. intelligence system can now fund themselves from
multinational private sector partnerships (banks, corporations and foreign
entities).
• When Democrats took over the House of Representatives in January 2007,
they took office with a plan. Nancy Pelosi became Speaker, and Democrats
controlled the Senate where Harry Reid was Majority Leader. Barack Obama was a
junior senator from Illinois.
Pelosi and Reid intentionally did not advance a budget in 2008 (for fiscal
year 2009) because their plan included installing Barack Obama (and all that
came with him) with an open checkbook made even more lucrative by a worsening
financial crisis and a process called baseline budgeting. Baseline budgeting
means the prior fiscal year budget is accepted as the starting point for the
next year budget. All previous expenditures are baked into the cake within
baseline budgeting.
Massive bailouts preceded Obama’s installation due to U.S. economic
collapse, and massive bailouts continued after his installation. This is the
‘never let a crisis go to waste’ aspect. TARP (Troubled Asset Recovery
Program), auto bailouts (GM), and the massive stimulus spending bill, the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, ie. those shovel ready jobs) were
all part of the non budget spending. The federal reserve assisted with
Quantitative Easing (QE1 and QE2) as congress passed various Porkulous spending
bills further spending and replacing the formal budget process.
Note: There has never been a budget passed in the normal/traditional process
since September of 2007.
• While Obama’s radical ‘transformation‘ was triggered across a
broad range of government institutions, simultaneously spending on the U.S.
military was cut, but spending on the intelligence apparatus expanded. We were
all distracted by Obamacare, and the Republican party wanted to keep us that
way. However, in the background there was a process of transformation taking
place that included very specific action by Eric Holder and targeted effort
toward the newest executive agency the ODNI.
The people behind Obama, those same people now behind Joe Biden, knew from
years of strategic planning that ‘radical transformation’ would require control
over specific elements inside the U.S. government. Eric Holder played a key
role in his position as U.S. Attorney General in the DOJ.
AG Holder recruited ideologically aligned political operatives who were
aware of the larger institutional objectives. One of those objectives was
weaponizing the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) a division inside the
DOJ that had no inspector general oversight. For most people the DOJ-NSD
weaponization surfaced with a hindsight awakening of the DOJ-NSD targeting
candidate Donald Trump many years later. However, by then the Holder crew had
executed almost eight full years of background work.
• The second larger Obama/Holder objective was control over the FBI. Why was
that important? Because the FBI does the domestic investigative work on anyone
who needs or holds a security clearance. The removal of security clearances
could be used as a filter to further build the internal ideological army they
were assembling. Additionally, with new power in the ODNI created as a
downstream consequence of the Patriot Act, new protocols for U.S. security
clearances were easy to justify.
Carefully selecting fellow ideological travelers was facilitated by this
filtration within the security clearance process. How does that issue later
manifest? Just look around at how politicized every intelligence agency
has become, specifically including the FBI.
• At the exact same time this new background security clearance process was
ongoing, again everyone distracted by the fight over Obamacare, inside the
Department of State (Secretary Hillary Clinton) a political alignment making
room for the next phase was being assembled. Names like Samantha Power, Susan
Rice and Hillary Clinton were familiar on television while Lisa Monaco worked
as a legal liaison between the Obama White House and Clinton State Department.
Through the Dept of State (DoS) the intelligence apparatus began working on
their first steps to align Big Tech with a larger domestic institutional
objective. Those of you who remember the “Arab Spring”, some say “Islamist
Spring”, will remember it was triggered by Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo – his
first foreign trip. The State Department worked with grassroots organizers
(mostly Muslim Brotherhood) in Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and Libya. Obama
leaned heavily on the organizational network of Turkish President Recep Erdogan
for contacts and support.
Why does this aspect matter to us? Well, you might remember how much effort
the Obama administration put into recruiting Facebook and Twitter as resources
for the various mideast rebellions the White House and DoS supported. This was
the point of modern merge between the U.S. intelligence community and Big Tech
social media.
In many ways, the coordinated political outcomes in Libya and Egypt were the
beta test for the coordinated domestic political outcomes we saw in the 2020
U.S. presidential election. The U.S. intelligence community working with social
media platforms and political operatives.
Overlaying all of that background activity was also a new alignment of the
Obama-era intelligence apparatus with ideological federal “contractors“.
Where does this contractor activity manifest? In the FISA Court opinion of
Rosemary Collyer who cited the “interagency memorandum of understanding”, or
MOU.
Hopefully, you can see a small part of how tentacled the system to
organize/weaponize the intelligence apparatus was. None of this was accidental,
all of this was by design, and the United States Senate was responsible for intentionally
allowing most of this to take place.
That’s the 30,000/ft level backdrop history of what was happening as the
modern IC was created. Next we will go into how all these various intelligence
networks began working in unison and how they currently control all of the
other DC institutions under them; including how they can carve out the
President from knowing their activity.
♦ When Barack Obama was installed in January 2009, the Democrats held a 60
seat majority in the U.S. Senate. As the people behind the Obama installation
began executing their longer-term plan, the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence was a tool to create the Intelligence Branch; it was not an
unintentional series of events.
When Obama was installed, Dianne Feinstein was the Chair of the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and Democrat operative Dan Jones was
her lead staffer. Feinstein was completely controlled by those around her
including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. The CIA was in the process of
turning over personnel following the Bush era, and as a result of a massive
multi-year narrative of diminished credibility (Iraq WMD), a deep purge was
underway. Obama/Holder were in the process of shifting intelligence alignment
and the intensely political Democrat Leader Harry Reid was a key participant.
THE TRAP – Many people say that Congress is the solution to
eliminating the Fourth and superseding Branch of Government, the Intelligence
Branch. This is an exercise in futility because the Legislative Branch,
specifically the SSCI, facilitated the creation of the Intelligence Branch. The
SSCI cannot put the genie they created back in the bottle without admitting
they too are corrupt; and the background story of their corruption is way too
intense to be exposed now.
Every member of the SSCI is compromised in some controlling manner. Those
Senators who disliked the control over them; specifically disliked because the
risk of sunlight was tenuous and, well, possible; have either left completely
or stepped down from the committee. None of the SSCI members past or present
would ever contemplate saying openly what their tenure involved.
[Note: You might remember when Vice Chairman Mark Warner’s text messages
surfaced, there was a controlled Republican SSCI member who came to his defense
in February of 2018. It was not accidental that exact Senator later became the
chair of the SSCI himself. That Republican Senator is Marco Rubio, now
vice-chair since the Senate re-flipped back to the optics of Democrat control
in 2021.]
All of President Obama’s 2009 intelligence appointments required
confirmation from the Senate. The nominees had to first pass through the
Democrat controlled SSCI, and then to a full Senate vote where Democrats held a
60 vote majority. Essentially, Obama got everyone he wanted in place easily.
Rahm Emmanuel was Obama’s Chief of Staff, and Valerie Jarrett was Senior
Advisor.
Tim Geithner was Treasury Secretary in 2010 when the joint DOJ/FBI and IRS
operation to target the Tea Party took place after the midterm “shellacking”
caused by the Obamacare backlash. Mitch McConnell was Minority Leader in the
Senate but supported the targeting of the Tea Party as his Senate colleagues
were getting primaried by an angry and effective grassroots campaign. McConnell’s
friend, Senator Bob Bennett, getting beaten in Utah was the final straw.
Dirty Harry and Mitch McConnell saw the TEA Party through the same prism.
The TEA Party took Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts (Scott Brown); Sharon Angle
was about to take out Harry Reid in Nevada; Arlen Spector was taken down in
Pennsylvania; Senator Robert Byrd died; Senator Lisa Murkowski lost her primary
to Joe Miller in Alaska; McConnell’s nominee Mike Castle lost to Christine
O’Donnell in Delaware; Rand Paul won in Kentucky. This is the background. The
peasants were revolting…. and visibly angry Mitch McConnell desperately made a deal
with the devil to protect himself.
In many ways, the TEA Party movement was/is very similar to the MAGA
movement. The difference in 2010 was the absence of a head of the movement, in
2015 Donald Trump became that head figure who benefited from the TEA Party
energy. Trump came into office in 2017 with the same congressional opposition
as the successful TEA Party candidates in 2011.
Republicans took control of the Senate following the 2014 mid-terms.
Republicans took control of the SSCI in January 2015. Senator Richard Burr
became chairman of the SSCI, and Dianne Feinstein shifted to Vice-Chair. Dirty
Harry Reid left the Senate, and Mitch McConnell took power again.
Republicans were in control of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2015
when the Intelligence Branch operation against candidate Donald Trump was
underway. [Feinstein’s staffer, Dan Jones, left the SSCI so he could act as a
liaison and political operative between private-sector efforts (Fusion GPS,
Chris Steele) and the SSCI.] The SSCI was a participant in that
Fusion-GPS/Chris Steele operation, and as a direct consequence Republicans were
inherently tied to the problem with President Trump taking office in January of
2017. Indiana Republican Senator Dan Coats was a member of the SSCI.
Bottom line…. When it came to the intelligence system targeting Donald Trump
during the 2015/2016 primary, the GOP was just as much at risk as their Democrat
counterparts.
When Trump unexpectedly won the 2016 election, the SSCI was shocked more
than most. They knew countermeasures would need to be deployed to protect
themselves from any exposure of their intelligence conduct. Dianne Feinstein
stepped down, and Senator Mark Warner was elevated to Vice Chairman.
Indiana’s own Mike Pence, now Vice President, recommended fellow Hoosier,
SSCI Senator Dan Coats, to become President Trump’s Director of National
Intelligence (ODNI). [Apply hindsight here]
• To give an idea of the Intelligence Branch power dynamic, remind yourself
how House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Chairman Devin
Nunes, tried to get access to the DOJ/FBI records of the FISA application used
against the Trump campaign via Carter Page.
Remember, Devin Nunes only saw a portion of the FISA trail from his review
of a Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) previously given to President Obama.
Chairman Nunes had to review the PDB at the White House SCIF due to
compartmented intelligence, another example of the silo benefit.
Remember the massive stonewalling and blocking of the DOJ/FBI toward Nunes?
Remember the back and forth battle over declassification surrounding the Nunes
memo?
Remember, after Nunes went directly to House Speaker Paul Ryan for help
(didn’t get any), the DOJ only permitted two members from each party within the
HPSCI to review the documents, and only at the DOJ offices of main justice?
Contrast that amount of House Intel Committee railroading and blocking by
intelligence operatives in the DOJ, DOJ-NSD and FBI, with the simple request by
Senate Intelligence Vice Chairman Mark Warner asking to see the Carter Page
FISA application and immediately a copy being delivered to him on March 17th
2017.
Can you see which intelligence committee is aligned with the deepest part of
the deep state?
The contrast of ideological alignment between the House, Senate and
Intelligence Branch is crystal clear when viewed through the prism of
cooperation. You can see which legislative committee holds the power and
support of the Intelligence Branch. The Senate Intel Committee facilitates the
corrupt existence of the IC Branch, so the IC Branch only cooperates with the
Senate Intel Committee. It really is that simple.
• The Intelligence Branch carefully selects its own members by controlling
how security clearances are investigated and allowed (FBI). The Intelligence
Branch also uses compartmentalization of intelligence as a way to keep each
agency, and each downstream branch of government (executive, legislative and
judicial), at arms length as a method to stop anyone from seeing the larger
picture of their activity. I call this the “silo effect“, and it is done by design.
I have looked at stunned faces when I presented declassified silo product
from one agency to the silo customers of another. You would be astonished at
what they don’t know because it is not in their ‘silo’.
Through the advise and consent rules, the Intelligence Branch uses the SSCI
to keep out people they consider dangerous to their ongoing operations. Any
appointee to the intelligence community must first pass through the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence, before they get a full Senate vote. If the
SSCI rejects the candidate, they simply refuse to take up the nomination. The
president is then blocked from that appointment. This is what happened with
President Trump over-and-over again.
• Additionally, the Intelligence Branch protects itself, and its
facilitating allies through the formal classification process. The Intelligence
Branch gets to decide unilaterally what information will be released and what
information will be kept secret. There is no entity outside the Intelligence
Branch, and yes that includes the President of the United States, who can
supersede the classification authority of the Intelligence Branch. {Go Deep} and {Go Deep} This is something 99.9% of the people on our side
get totally and frustratingly wrong.
No one can declassify, or make public, anything the Intelligence Branch will
not agree to. Doubt this? Ask Ric Grenell, John Ratcliffe, or even
President Trump himself.
• The classification process is determined inside the Intelligence
Branch, all by themselves. They get to choose what rank of classification
exists on any work-product they create; and they get to decide what the
classification status is of any work product that is created by anyone else.
The Intelligence Branch has full control over what is considered classified
information and what is not. The Intelligence Branch defines what is a
“national security interest” and what is not. A great technique for hiding
fingerprints of corrupt and illegal activity.
[For familiar reference see the redactions to Lisa Page and Peter Strzok
text messages. The Intelligence Branch does all redactions.]
• Similarly, the declassification process is a request by an
agency, even a traditionally superior agency like the President of the United
States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information.
The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control. If the head of the
CIA refuses to comply with the declassification instruction of the President,
what can the president do except fire him/her? {Again, GO DEEP} How does the President replace the
non-compliant cabinet member? They have to go through the SSCI
confirmation. See the problem?
Yes, there are ways to break up the Intelligence Branch, but they do not
start with any congressional effort. As you can see above, the process is the
flaw – not the solution. Most conservative pundits have their emphasis on the
wrong syllable. Their cornerstone is false.
For their own self-preservation, the Intelligence Branch has been
interfering in our elections for years. The way to tear this apart begins with STATE
LEVEL election reform that blocks the Legislative Branch from
coordinating with the Intelligence Branch.
The extreme federalism approach is critical and also explains why Joe Biden
has instructed Attorney General Merrick Garland to use the full power of the
DOJ to stop state level election reform efforts. The worry of successful state
level election control is also why the Intelligence Branch now needs to support
the federal takeover of elections.
Our elections have been usurped by the Intelligence Branch. Start with honest
elections and we will see just how much Democrat AND Republican corruption is
dependent on manipulated election results. Start at the state level. Start
there…. everything else is downstream.
♦ People want examples, reference points for work the Intelligence Branch
conducts, specifically how it protects itself.
Here is an example: Julian
Assange.
Yes, the history of the U.S. national security apparatus goes back decades;
however, the weaponization of that apparatus, the creation of an apex branch of
government, the Intelligence Branch, originated –as we currently feel
it– under President Barack Obama.
Obama took the foundational tools created by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush
and used the intelligence system architecture to create a weapon for use in his
fundamental transformation. An alliance of ideologues within government (intel
community) and the private sector (big tech and finance) was assembled, and the
largest government weapon was created. Think about this every time you take
your shoes off at an airport.
After the weapon was assembled and tested (Arab Spring), the Legislative
Branch was enjoined under the auspices of a common enemy, Donald J.
Trump, an outsider who was a risk to every entity in the institutional
construct of Washington DC. Trillions were at stake, and years of affluence and
influence were at risk as the unholy alliance was put together.
To understand the risk that Julian Assange represented to
U.S. Intelligence Branch interests, it is important to understand just how
extensive the operations of the FBI/CIA were in 2016.
It is within the network of foreign and domestic intel operations where
Intelligence Branch political tool, FBI Agent Peter Strzok, was working as a
bridge between the CIA and FBI counterintelligence operations.
By now, people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese
professor generally identified as a western intelligence operative who was
tasked by the FBI/CIA to run an operation against Trump campaign official
George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep}
In a similar fashion, the FBI tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another
Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge
Professor, Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally,
using assistance from a female FBI agent under the false name Azra Turk, Halper
also targeted Papadopoulos.
The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based
overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the
targets much easier.
HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes outlined how very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and
yet withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page that also
mentions George Papadopoulos. The FBI also fabricated information in the FISA.
However, there is an aspect to the domestic U.S. operation that also bears
the fingerprints of the international intelligence apparatus; only this time,
due to the restrictive laws on targets inside the U.S., the CIA aspect is less
prominent. This is where FBI Agent Peter Strzok working for both agencies was
important.
Remember, it’s clear in the text messages Strzok had a working relationship
with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA. Additionally, former CIA
Director John Brennan has admitted Strzok helped write the January 2017
Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative;
and Peter Strzok wrote the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” that
originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane.” Strzok immediately used that EC
to travel to London to debrief allied intelligence officials
connected to the Australian Ambassador to the U.K, Alexander Downer.
In short, Peter Strzok acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The
perfect type of FBI career agent for the Intelligence Branch and CIA Director
John Brennan to utilize.
Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open Source analyst Nellie Ohr
toward the end of 2015; at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA
database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons, the 2015
GOP candidates for President.
It was also Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked
with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskaya. A little reported Russian
Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working double
agents for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya,
and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S.
Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting
with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion-GPS operation using
Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting… back in Russia Deputy
AG Karapetyan died in a helicopter crash.
Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI
operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against republican presidential candidates.
According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s private sector handler [NOTE: remember,
the public-private sector partnership], it was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was
giving Patrick Byrne the instructions on where to send Butina. {Go Deep}
All of this context outlines the extent to which the FBI/CIA was openly
involved in constructing a political operation that eventually settled upon
anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit. The international operations of the
Intelligence Branch were directed by the FBI/CIA; and the domestic operations
were coordinated by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin]
Recap: ♦Mifsud
tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Halper tasked against
Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA), and Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Azra Turk,
pretending to be a Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI). ♦Veselnitskaya
tasked against Donald Trump Jr (CIA, Fusion-GPS). ♦Butina
tasked against Donald Trump Jr (FBI). All of these activities were coordinated.
Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer, hired
by Fusion GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information
within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch,
who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to
participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the
impression of Russian involvement. However, Deripaska refused to participate.
All of this foreign and domestic engagement was directly controlled by
collaborating U.S. intelligence agencies from inside the Intelligence Branch.
And all of this coordinated activity was intended to give a specific Russia
influence/interference impression.
♦ The key point of all that background context is to see how committed the
Intelligence Branch was to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with
the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ and DOJ-NSD, put
a hell of a lot of work into it.
We also know that John Durham looked at the construct of the Intelligence
Community Assessment (ICA); and talked to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of
the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian
interference in the 2016 election. This is important because it ties in to the
next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks.
On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA. From
the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:
The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017,
and it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where
Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed
from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his
investigation, April 2019.
Why the delay?
What was the DOJ waiting for?
Here’s where it gets interesting….
The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017:
“Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party
documents … did not come from Russia.”
(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told
a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party
documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and
promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and
chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first
American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering
at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed
up for years.
Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.
“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the
WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during
last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically
stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of
those emails.”
Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he
had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)
Knowing how much effort the Intelligence Branch put into the false Russia
collusion-conspiracy narrative, it would make sense for the FBI to take keen
interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange,
monitor all activity, and why the FBI would quickly gather specific evidence
(related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury by December 2017.
Within three months of the EDVA grand jury, the DOJ generated an indictment
and sealed it in March 2018.
The DOJ sat on the indictment while the Mueller/Weissmann probe was ongoing.
As soon as the Mueller/Weissmann probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned
and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange
was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and
the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).
As a person who has researched this fiasco; including the ridiculously false
2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia
narrative in December ’16; and then a month later the ridiculously political
Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17; this timing against
Assange is too coincidental.
It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to
control Julian Assange. The Weissmann/Mueller report was dependent on
Russia cybercrimes for justification, and that narrative was contingent
on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes.
♦ This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked
the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in
the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Julian
Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian
Assange on-the-record statements.
The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to
Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community
assessment; and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia
hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic
computer analysis from Crowdstrike, a DNC and FBI contractor.
The CIA holds a self-interest in upholding the Russian hacking claim; the
FBI holds an interest in maintaining that claim; the U.S. media hold an
interest in maintaining that claim. All of the foreign countries whose
intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also have a
self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative.
Julian Assange is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks
gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange has claimed he has evidence it
was not from a hack.
This “Russian hacking” claim was ultimately important to the CIA,
FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K intelligence apparatus, it forms the corner of their
justification. With that level of importance, well, right there is the obvious
motive to shut Julian Assange down as soon as intelligence officials knew the
Weissmann/Mueller report was going to be public.
…. and that’s exactly what they did. They threw a bag over Assange.
♦ COLLAPSED OVERSIGHT – The modern system to ‘check’ the
Executive Branch was the creation of the legislative “Gang of Eight,” a
legislative oversight mechanism intended to provide a bridge of oversight
between the authority of the intelligence community within the Executive
Branch.
The Go8 construct was designed to allow the President authority to carry out
intelligence operations and provide the most sensitive notifications to a
select group within Congress.
The Go8 oversight is directed to the position, not the person, and consists
of: (1) The Speaker of the House; (2) The Minority Leader of the House; (3) The
Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, HPSCI; (4) The
Ranking Member (minority) of the HPSCI; (5) The Leader of the Senate; (6) The
Minority Leader of the Senate; (7) The Chair of the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence, SSCI; and finally (8) the Vice-Chair of the SSCI.
Example: When the Chief Executive (the President) initiates an intelligence
operation on behalf of the United States, the President triggers a “finding
memo.” In essence, the instruction to the intel agency or agencies to authorize
a covert operation. When that process takes place, the Go8 are the first people
notified. Depending on the sensitivity of the operation, sometimes the G08 are
notified immediately after the operation is conducted. The notification can be
a phone call or an in-person briefing.
Because of the sensitivity of their intelligence information, the Gang of
Eight hold security clearances that permit them to receive and review all
intelligence operations. The intelligence community are also responsible for
briefing the Go8 with the same information they use to brief the President.
~ 2021 Gang of Eight ~
The Go8 design is intended to put intelligence oversight upon both political
parties in Congress; it is designed that way by informing the minority leaders
of both the House and Senate as well as the ranking minority members of the
SSCI and HPSCI. Under the concept, the President cannot conduct an intelligence
operation; and the intelligence community cannot carry out intelligence
gathering operations without the majority and minority parties knowing about
it.
The modern design of this oversight system was done to keep rogue and/or
corrupt intelligence operations from happening. However, as we shared in the preview to this entire discussion, the
process was usurped during the Obama era. {GO DEEP}
Former FBI Director James Comey openly admitted to Congress on March 20, 2017, that
the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, DOJ and DOJ-National Security
Division, together with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence
(ODNI) and the CIA, had been conducting independent investigations of Donald
Trump for over a year without informing the Go8. Comey justified the lack of
informing Go8 oversight by saying, “because of the sensitivity of the
matter.”
Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance
was astounding, and the acceptance by Congress was infuriating. However, that
specific example highlighted just how politically corrupt the system had become.
In essence, Team Obama usurped the entire design of congressional oversight….
and Congress just brushed it off.
Keep in mind, Comey did not say the White House was unaware; in fact he said
exactly the opposite, he
said, “The White House was informed through the National Security
Council,” (the NSC). The implication, the very direct and specific
implication; the unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that
everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security
Advisor, Susan Rice, was totally informed of the intelligence operation(s)
against Donald Trump. After all, the NSC reports to the National Security
Advisor.
Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now?
Again, no one saw the immediate issue. What Comey just described on that March
day in 2017 was the total usurpation of the entire reason the Gang of Eight
exists; to eliminate the potential for political weaponization of the
Intelligence Community by the executive branch. The G08 notifications to the
majority and minority are specifically designed to make sure what James Comey
admitted to doing was never supposed to happen.
Team Obama carried out a political operation using the intelligence
community and the checks-and-balances in the system were intentionally usurped.
This is an indisputable fact.
Worse still, the entire legislative branch of Congress, which specifically
includes the Republicans that now controlled the House and Senate, did nothing.
They just ignored what was admitted. The usurpation was willfully
ignored. The mechanism of the G08 was bypassed without a twitch of
condemnation or investigation…. because the common enemy was Donald Trump.
This example highlights the collapse of the system. Obama, the executive
branch, collapsed the system by usurping the process; in essence the process
became the bigger issue and the lack of immediate legislative branch reaction
became evidence of open acceptance. The outcomes of the usurpation played out
over the next four years, Donald J. Trump was kneecapped and lost his
presidency because of it. However, the bigger issue of the collapse still
exists.
The downstream consequence of the Legislative Branch accepting the Executive
Branch usurpation meant both intelligence committees were compromised.
Additionally, the leadership of both the House and Senate were complicit. Think
about this carefully. The Legislative Branch allowance of the intelligence
usurpation meant the Legislative Branch was now subservient to the Intelligence
Branch.
That’s where we are.
Right now.
That’s where we are.
Term-3 Obama is now back in the White House with Joe Biden.
Term-1 and Term-2 Obama usurped the ‘check and balance‘ within the
system and weaponized the intelligence apparatus. During Trump’s term that
weaponization was covered up by a compliant congress, and not a single member
of the oversight called it out. Now, Term-3 Obama steps back in to continue the
cover up and continue the weaponization.
Hopefully, you can now see the scale of the problem that surrounds us with
specific citation for what has taken place. What I just explained to you above
is not conspiracy theory, it is admitted fact that anyone can look upon. Yet….
Have you seen this mentioned anywhere? Have you seen this called out by
anyone in Congress? Have you seen anyone in media (ally or adversary) call this
out? Have you seen any member of the Judicial Branch stand up and say wait, what
is taking place is not okay? Have you seen a single candidate for elected
office point this out? Have you seen anyone advising a candidate point this
out?
This is our current status. It is not deniable. The truth exists regardless
of our comfort.
Not a single person in power will say openly what has taken place. They are
scared of the Fourth Branch. The evidence of what has taken place is right
there in front of our face. The words, actions and activities of those who
participated in this process are not deniable.
There are only two members of the Gang of Eight who have existed in place
from January 2007 (the real beginning of Obama’s term, two years before he took
office when the Congress flipped). Only two members of the G08 have been
consistently in place from January of 2007 to right now, today. All the others
came and went, but two members of the Gang of Eight have been part of that
failed and collapsed oversight throughout the past 15 years, Nancy Pelosi and
Mitch McConnell.
♦ TECHNOLOGY – On a global scale – the modern intelligence
gathering networks are now dependent on data collection to execute their
intelligence missions. In the digital age nations have been executing various
methods to gather that data. Digital surveillance has replaced other methods of
interception. Those surveillance efforts have resulted in a coalescing of
regional data networks based on historic multi-national relationships.
We have a recent frame of reference for the “U.S. data collection
network” within the NSA. Through the allied process the Five Eyes
nations all rely on the NSA surveillance database (U.K, Australia, Canada, New
Zealand and U.S.) The NSA database provides the digital baseline for
intelligence operations in defense of our allies. The portals into the NSA
database are essentially an assembly of allies in like-minded ideological
connection to the United States.
Unfortunately, there have been some revelations about the NSA database being
used to monitor our allies, like in the example of Germany and surveillance on
Angela Merkel’s phone. As long as “the good guys” are operating honorably,
allies of the United States can feel confident about having protection from the
NSA surveillance of global digital data. We warn our friends if we detect
something dangerous etc.
The U.S. has nodes on communication pipelines to intercept and extract data.
We have also launched hundreds, perhaps thousands, of satellites to conduct
surveillance and gather up data. All of this data is fed into the NSA database
where it is monitored (presumably) as a national security mechanism, and in
defense of our allies.
However, what about data collection or data networks that are outside the
NSA database? What do our enemies do? The NSA database is just one intelligence
operation of digital surveillance amid the entire world, and we do not allow
access by adversaries we are monitoring. So what do they do? What do our allies
do who might not trust the United States due to past inconsistencies, ie. the
Middle East?
The answers to those questions highlight other data collection networks. So
a brief review of the major players is needed.
♦ CHINA – China operates their own database. They, like the
NSA, scoop up data for their system. Like us, China launches satellites and
deploys other electronic data collection methods to download into their
database. This is why the issues of electronic devices manufactured in China
becomes problematic. Part of the Chinese data collection system involves the
use of spyware, hacking and extraction.
Issues with Chinese communication company Huawei take on an added dimension
when you consider the goal of the Chinese government to conduct surveillance
and assemble a network of data to compete with the United States via the NSA.
Other Chinese methods of surveillance and data-collection are less subversive,
as in the examples of TicTok and WeChat. These are Chinese social media
companies that are scraping data just like the NSA scrapes data from Facebook,
Twitter and other Silicon Valley tech companies. [ Remember, the Intelligence
Branch is a public-private partnership. ]
♦ RUSSIA – It is very likely that Russia operates their own
database. We know Russia launches satellites, just like China and the USA, for
the same purposes. Russia is also very proficient at hacking into other
databases and extracting information to store and utilize in their own network.
The difference between the U.S., China and Russia is likely that Russia spends
more time on the hacking aspect because they do not generate actual technology systems
as rapidly as the U.S. and China.
The most recent database creation is an outcome of an ally having to take
action because they cannot rely on the ideology of the United States remaining
consistent, as the administrations ping-pong based on ideology.
♦ SAUDI ARABIA – Yes, in 2016 we discovered that Saudi
Arabia was now operating their own intelligence data-gathering operation. It
would make sense, given the nature of the Middle East and the constant
fluctuations in political support from the United States. It is a lesson the
allied Arab community and Gulf Cooperation Council learned quickly when
President Obama went to Cairo in 2009 and launched the Islamist Spring (Arab
Spring) upon them.
I have no doubt the creation of the Saudi intelligence network was
specifically because the Obama administration started supporting radical
Islamists within the Muslim Brotherhood, and threw fuel on the fires of
extremism all over the Arab world.
Think about it., What would you do if you were Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain,
Kuwait, the UAE, Jordan, Oman or Yemen and you knew the United States could
just trigger an internal uprising of al-Qaeda, ISIS and the political arm of
the Muslim Brotherhood to seek your destruction?
Without a doubt, those urgent lessons from 2009, 2010, 2011 triggered the
formation of the Arab Intelligence Network as a network to defend itself with
consistency. They assembled the network and activated it in 2017 as pictured
above.
♦ Israel – Along a similar outlook to the Arab network, no
doubt Israel operates an independent data collection system as a method of
protecting itself from ever-changing U.S. politics amid a region that is
extremely hostile to its very existence. Like the others, Israel launches
proprietary satellites, and we can be sure they use covert methods to gather
electronic data just like the U.S. and China.
As we have recently seen in the Pegasus story, Israel creates spyware
programs that are able to track and monitor cell phone communications of
targets. The spyware would not work unless Israel had access to some network
where the phone meta-data was actually stored. So yeah, it makes sense for
Israel to operate an independent intelligence database.
♦ Summary: As we understand the United States Intelligence
Branch of government as the superseding entity that controls the internal
politics of our nation, we also must consider that multiple nations have the
same issue. There are major intelligence networks around the world beside the
NSA “Five-Eyes” database. China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel all operate
proprietary databases deploying the same tools and techniques for assembly.
The geopolitical conflict that has always existed has now shifted into a
digital battle-space. The Intelligence Agencies from these regions are
now operating as the backbone of the government that uses them, and has become
dependent on them. [<- Reread that].
Once you accept the digital-era intelligence apparatus of China,
Russia, Saudi-Arabia, The United States and Israel, are now the primary
national security mechanisms for stabilization of government; then you accept
the importance of those intelligence operations.
Once you understand how foundational those modern intelligence operations
have become for the stability and continuity of those governments…… then you
begin to understand just how the United States intelligence community became
more important than the government that created it.
♦ Public Private Partnership – The modern Fourth Branch of
Government is only possible because of a Public-Private partnership with the
intelligence apparatus. You do not have to take my word for it, the partnership
is so brazen they have made public admissions.
The biggest names in Big Tech announced in June their partnership with the
Five Eyes intelligence network, ultimately controlled by the NSA, to: (1)
monitor all activity in their platforms; (2) identify extremist content; (3)
look for expressions of Domestic Violent Extremism (DVE); and then, (4) put the
content details into a database where the Five Eyes intelligence agencies
(U.K., U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand) can access it.
Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft are all partnering with the
intelligence apparatus. It might be difficult to fathom how openly they admit
this, but they do. Look at this sentence in the press release (emphasis mine):
[…] “The Group will use lists from
intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes adding
URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters
and neo-Nazis.”
Think about that sentence structure very carefully. They are “adding to” the
preexisting list…. admitting the group (aka Big Tech) already have access to
the the intelligence-sharing database… and also admitting there is a
preexisting list created by the Five Eyes consortium.
Obviously, who and what is defined as “extremist content” will be determined
by the Big Tech insiders themselves. This provides a gateway, another plausible
deniability aspect, to cover the Intelligence Branch from any oversight.
When the Intelligence Branch within government wants to conduct surveillance
and monitor American citizens, they run up against problems due to the
Constitution of the United States. They get around those legal limitations by
sub-contracting the intelligence gathering, the actual data-mining, and
allowing outside parties (contractors) to have access to the central database.
The government cannot conduct electronic searches (4th amendment issue)
without a warrant; however, private individuals can search and report back as
long as they have access. What is being admitted is exactly that preexisting
partnership. The difference is that Big Tech will flag the content from within
their platforms, and now a secondary database filled with the extracted
information will be provided openly for the Intelligence Branch to exploit.
The volume of metadata captured by the NSA has always been a problem because
of the filters needed to make the targeting useful. There is a lot of noise in
collecting all data that makes the parts you really want to identify more
difficult to capture. This new admission puts a new massive filtration system
in the metadata that circumvents any privacy protections for individuals.
Previously, the Intelligence Branch worked around the constitutional and
unlawful search issue by using resources that were not in the United States. A
domestic U.S. agency, working on behalf of the U.S. government, cannot listen
on your calls without a warrant. However, if the U.S. agency sub-contracts to
say a Canadian group, or foreign ally, the privacy invasion is no longer
legally restricted by U.S. law.
What was announced in June 2021 is an alarming admission of a prior
relationship along with open intent to define their domestic political
opposition as extremists.
July 26 (Reuters) – A counterterrorism organization formed
by some of the biggest U.S. tech companies including Facebook (FB.O) and
Microsoft (MSFT.O) is significantly expanding the types of extremist content
shared between firms in a key database, aiming to crack down on material from
white supremacists and far-right militias, the group told Reuters.
Until now, the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT)
database has focused on videos and images from terrorist groups on a United
Nations list and so has largely consisted of content from Islamist extremist
organizations such as Islamic State, al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Over the next few months, the group will add attacker manifestos – often
shared by sympathizers after white supremacist violence – and other
publications and links flagged by U.N. initiative Tech Against Terrorism. It
will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes,
adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three
Percenters and neo-Nazis.
The firms, which include Twitter (TWTR.N) and Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O)
YouTube, share “hashes,” unique numerical representations of original pieces of
content that have been removed from their services. Other platforms use these
to identify the same content on their own sites in order to review or remove
it. (read more)
The influence of the Intelligence Branch now reaches into our lives, our
personal lives. In the decades before 9/11/01 the intelligence apparatus
intersected with government, influenced government, and undoubtedly controlled
many institutions with it. The legislative oversight function was weak and
growing weaker, but it still existed and could have been used to keep the IC in
check. However, after the events of 9/11/01, the short-sighted legislative
reactions opened the door to allow the surveillance state to weaponize.
After the Patriot Act was triggered, not coincidentally only six weeks after
9/11, a slow and dangerous fuse was lit that ends with the intelligence
apparatus being granted a massive amount of power. The problem with assembled
power is always what happens when a Machiavellian network takes control over
that power and begins the process to weaponize the tools for their own
malicious benefit. That is exactly what the installation of Barack Obama was
all about.
The Obama network took pre-assembled intelligence weapons we should never
have allowed to be created, and turned those weapons into tools for his radical
and fundamental change. The target was the essential fabric of our nation.
Ultimately, this corrupt political process gave power to create the Fourth
Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. From that perspective the
fundamental change was successful.
♦ WHAT NOW? There is a way to stop and deconstruct the
Intelligence Branch, but it requires some outside-the-box thinking and reliance
on the Constitution as a tool to radically change one element within
government. In the interim, we must remain focused on the three tiers that we
need for success.
• Tier One is “tactical civics” at a local level. Engaged
and active citizen participation at the community, city, town and hamlet level
of society. This is what might be described as grassroots level, school board
level; city council level; county commissioner level.
• Tier Two is “extreme federalism” at a state level. Engaged
and active citizen participation through your State House and State Senate
representative. This is state level assembly and action demands upon the State
House, State Senate and State Governor.
• Tier Three the challenge of “federal offices” on a
national level {Go Deep}. This is the part where we need President
Donald Trump, and his power to confront the issues comes directly from us.
I am confident that ultimately “We The People” will win. How we can
execute the solution is more challenging; in the interim, tactical
civics and extreme federalism are doable right
now, in this next 2024 election cycle.
