During the Cold War, we prioritized conventional military
But in the social media age, we’re losing our political support because people spread “anti-NATO narratives and conspiracies” online
So we need to think of war as stopping our own citizens from speaking freely online
We need to switch our censorship focus from external enemies to our own citizens
Because our own citizens talk badly about us online, we need to treat their tweets as a theatre of war
We need to remove the basic distinction between peace and war
We must preserve our political mandate
We need to push national censorship policies across all NATO countries
We, NATO, need to spy on and psychologically dissect our own citizens in order to see how they interpret narratives online that threaten our political mandate
We need “24/7 disinformation monitoring system driven by artificial intelligence”
Every word our citizens speak. Every sentence they write. Analyzed by a NATO political thoughtcrime radar system.
We need to use our muscle as the military to get political bodies across NATO to pump millions of dollars into brainwashing our citizens (“psychological defense”) & financially steroid-injecting censorship NGOs.
Oh and we need to capture the media.
The, erm, independent media
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
NATO should target people who post “misinformation” online with sanctions
Sanctions.
Also, promoting the censorspeak concept of “media literacy” which means mental brainwashing presupposing that reading the wrong news sources online makes you cognitively “illiterate”
NATO should co-opt domestic media to mindwar citizens into increasing government commitment to NATO
NATO should pump up “digital literacy” (cognitive brainwashing) so opposition is seen as mis, dis & malinformation (MDM)
Remember, “resilience” is a censorspeak word for psychologically or censoriously stopping citizens from believing or spreading populist news or narratives online
See @FFO_Freedom guide:
@FFO_Freedom Here’s the fuller @FFO_Freedom entry on the censorspeak term “resilience” 👇
Plug this translation into the NATO article above when you read it:
I was joking with friends over the weekend that the State Dept was probably having an emergency meeting to remove Prigozhin's sanctions & reframe Wagner as a pro-democracy organization.
I'm not weighing in on Ukraine-Russia here, I'm weighing in on US sanctions policy -- because it's the exact same group responsible for US censorship industry.
The message sent here is US sanctions have no basis in universal principles - just cold, hard, cynical self-interests.
This is the same way the State Dept obviously leaned on Facebook to uncensor Azov Battalion from FB's "dangerous orgs" list when the conflict started.
The message to the world was clear: censorship is not basis on principle, just whatever's good for us.
Graphika has gotten $7 million in Pentagon cash in just the past 2 years. That money goes toward pumping up a marquee domestic censorship org.
Add up ISD, NewsGuard, Graphika & others and you're in the ten millions - all to pay salaries of domestic censorship professionals.
Just imagine, now, every other House committee copying this template, for:
- National Science Foundation grants
- State Dept grants
- USAID grants
- National Endowment for Democracy grants
- DHS grants
- & heck, we can dream, CDC/NIH misinfo grants
Reminder: it’s quite conceivable Hunter Biden was a witting or unwitting intermediary for CIA activities in Ukraine to pry Ukraine’s gas market off of Russia.
Conceivable CIA leaned on Justice Dept to avoid trial.
Saying this bc of huge CIA-Burisma ties to censorship industry.