Scandal

As if killing 100,000+ people due to messing up the response to COVID-19 (which I think was all part of the plan), Johnson also had a sordid affair with Jennifer Acuri. This has been been confirmed AGAIN in this latest news article. Yet the Police – actually they are just puppets to the state organisation – failed to find anything wrong with channelling £126K of taxpayers money to his lover. So “sordid affair”. Of course all this information was known about BEFORE GE2019, yet the mainstream media and the establishment wanted someone that was easily corruptable rather than Corbyn. Of course, the BBC steers away from reporting the new revelations.

The Real Scandal

But the real scandal is the demonstration AGAIN of Mainstream Media bias towards the Tories and the way the GE2019 election was manipulated by the establishment. Until the news media changes, or there is a revolution, I just don’t know how we will ever achieve Democracy. Perhaps the USA will come and bomb us!

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/inside-boris-johnsons-torrid-love-23808554

Work from First Principles

How do you work against the Mainstream News Media where there is a constant stream of lies? Constant Gaslighting! Pushing an agenda of the few against the many! Donald Trump is even tweeting “they are lying to you” in the same way that the Martians megaphones blasted “We Come in Peace” in the 1996 movie “Mars Attacks!” Regarding Trump: the evidence is clear to see: the media made the monster. How do we get to sanity? Sanity does not mean peace and blissful ignornance.

The Problem

The problem is taboo subjects. If you start saying “free speech” then people (now) assume you mean “hate speech”. Or if you try addressing the systemic failures in our language regarding sexism and racism, then it regarded as “Politically Correct Facism”. The supposed Left / Right argument on such matters is actaully just a tool used by rich capitalists to sow division. There is a middle ground (another term that has been coopted for nefarious purposes) and this the same as it has always been, where Truth does still hold true, and that is: Investigation, Logical Debate and Science. It is (still) the best arbitor of truth.

Investigation: what is actually factual? Can we agree on the facts? Have the facts been “contaminanted”? If you cannot agree on the facts then you know there is no point moving over to the next stage: debate! If the facts are being manipulated then you are being Gaslit!

Logical Debate: is there room for debate? Can we agree on the logic of “A + B = C” or is the debate sullied by Logical Facillies? If there is no reasoned debate, you know you are being Gaslit!

Science: Science is experimentation with tests that are repeatable. If we can agree on the test and test conditions then we know the results is the truth…

How Does This Apply to Today’s Situation?

Let’s examine three terms in use today that stiffle debate, almost always used as an Ad hominem attack on the person rather than the argument:

  • “Conspiracy Theorist”
  • “Anti-Semitic”
  • “Ant-Vaxer”

“Conspiracy Theorist” – a term coined by the CIA to discredit anyone investigating the assassination of JFK. It is extremely foolish to consider that it was Lee Harvey Oswald since he was not a better shot than the countless marksman that have tried and failed to reproduce the official lone gunman, three shot scenario. Oswald himself claimed he was a patsy and was later murdered on live TV at a Police Station. All the evidence points to a CIA plot using Mafia killers – the two organisations being joined at the hip for a plot to kill Castro that was thwarted by JFK. And there is scientific evidence using probablistic analysis by both engineering and acuary methods, that points to the fact that it not was JFK killed by the CIA but also a large network of friends and witnesses.

The term “anti-semitic” has also been weaponised usually by the far right. Used effectively against life-long racial justice campaigner, Jeremy Corbyn, and the Labour Party to enable a Tory win in 2019. It was all Gaslighting! Actually more likely a full on Miltary-style Pyschological Operation.

“Anti-Vaxer” – anybody that seems sceptical about the live RNA and Virus being pumped into our bodies – perhaps against their will – is being labelled an anti-Vaxer. After the treatment that Andrew Wakefield received at the hands – not by the BMA, but Sunday Times Journalist, Bran Deer anybody that questions the safety of vaccines is given a hard time. Why would anyone shame people about fears of safety for a novel medical procedure? Only those surely those with a plan?

Summary

In summary, we need investigations (for example, is our democracy safe? are our vaccines safe?), we need a debate (for example, how can we improve?) and science (What can do to test safety?). This isn’t going to be easy.

Gaslit Brexit

Gaslighting is Tory Policy (apparently)

Just check the definition of Gaslighting against actual policy and actions of this Conservative Government and match against internal Conservative Party Newsletters that is promoting the use of fake news.

Gaslighting

Gaslighting, what is that? Pyschology Today provided all the information you need about the subject a few years back in their article: 11 Warning Signs of Gaslighting

“Gaslighting is a manipulation tactic used to gain power. And it works too well… Anyone is susceptible to gaslighting, and it is a common technique of abusers, dictators, narcissists, and cult leaders. It is done slowly, so the victim doesn’t realize how much they’ve been brainwashed.”

Stephanie Sarkis: http://www.stephaniesarkis.com

Gaslighting is a tactic to gain more power, makes a victim question their reality. It can be applied against a person (as in the 1942 Movie “Gaslight”) or against a whole population. So let’s see how our Brexit Gaslighting is coming along based upon the 11 Warning Signs of Gaslighting…

11 Warning Signs of GaslightingBrexit
1. They tell blatant lies.
You know it’s an outright lie. Yet they are telling you this lie with a straight face. Why are they so blatant? Because they’re setting up a precedent. Once they tell you a huge lie, you’re not sure if anything they say is true. Keeping you unsteady and off-kilter is the goal.
If Johnson tells the truth, it is a mere coincidence.

2. They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof.

“Oven Ready Deal” only applied to the Withdrawal Agreement claimed James Cleverly. Yet there are numerous examples of Johnson saying “the deal” included the Trade Deal.

3. They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition.

Nothing can be nearer and dearer to you than your own livelihoods!

4. They wear you down over time.
How long has Brexit being going on? Add all the time UKIP was hating the EU too.
5. Their actions do not match their words.Busily undermining the Withdrawal Agreement by breaking the Good Friday Agreement
6. They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you.“Let’s clap for our Wonderful NHS” or “UK Fishing Rights” (when the UK Government handed the protection of UK Fishing Rights to a French company in 2019!)
7. They know confusion weakens people.Herd Immunity or a series of arbitrary rules for Lockdown for everyone except for Government Ministers and Dominic Cummings?
8. They project. If they cheat they accuse you of cheating.
Look out for those benefits cheats! Just because they cheat and hand contracts out to their mates.
9. They try to align people against you.Watch out for those Immigrants “invading” our shores: let’s send gunboats (aka our warships) out to sink their ships! (Their rubber rafts – people fleeing conflict that was sown in the west).
10. They tell you or others that you are crazy.


There is no end to the admonishment of the “crazy” population that voted for Brexit. “We’re only implementing their decision”. Yet it is the Tories and their rich friends that are the only beneficiaries to the disaster capitalism arising from Brexit and rigged election result secured by Cambridge Analytica / Big Data methods.
11. They tell you everyone else is a liar.
Back to James Cleverly again: anyone that said we meant Trade Deal when Johnson said “Oven Ready Deal” is a liar.
Your Brexit Gaslight

So just so you know… its not that the EU is some fantastic entity for Democracy, because it isn’t, it’s just that it’s only the rich people that will benefit from Brexit…

Newsletter

Just to confirm that Gaslighting is Tory Policy is this article from The Independent 15th December 2020.

Tory activists have been urged to campaign like Donald Trump by “weaponising fake news” and talking “nonsense” if it works, in a party newsletter.

The bulletin sent out to members in Northamptonshire says “there are lessons that we can learn from Trump”, adding: “A lie can go round the world before the truth can get its boots on.”

It also vows to “fight woke-ism”, attacking Labour’s landmark Equality Act, designed to stamp out prejudice in the workplace and public services – arguing it “legalises discrimination based on gender”.

The newsletter, issued in Peter Bone’s constituency of Wellingborough, sparked a protest from one local Conservative, who says he was then dropped from the candidates’ list for the seat.

The Independent 15th Dec 2020

Modern Labour Gaslighting

While the Tory Leader of the Labour Party, Sir Keir Starmer, states that “Labour deserved to lose last UK election”, it worth noting that there is proof that the Conservatives and Boris Johnson won because of an establishment stitch up. The proof is from the Loughborough University which shows the newspaper industry was overwhelmingly negative against Jeremy Corbyn and Labour while not shining any light on the lightweight policies of Boris Johnson and the inane “Get Brexit Done” sloganeering.

There should be no shock that the press are mainly right wing and owned by the rich billionaires (who finance at least third of Tory funds) and also stand to benefit financially from Brexit.

The fix was in on GE2019 with a well funded, military style full-spectrum pysop campaign using the Press (well that’s a given!), TV – even the BBC showing extreme bias against Labour (even Murdoch-owned Sky News had more balanced coverage), Radio and the latest weapon in media operations: social media technology: big data controlled targetted ads, AI-controlled social media bots and sock puppets. Ground campaign? Nah. They didn’t need traditional campigning on the streets and couldn’t man-it anyhow…

Most readings of the GE2019 election results was that there was a swing from Labour to the Conservatives when in fact the swing was mainly from Labour to the Liberals, opening up many three-way-split seats to Tory wins. This was all predicted by Dominic Cummings that forecast an 80 majority win, confounding all other polls and forecasts, and delivered the exact number of seats predicted. That level of precision needs computers…

We have to assume that despite the likelihood of BJ being forced from office sometime after Brexit, what will happen in GE2024? Labour may win some liberal voters with Starmer’s centrism but will it enough to counter the loss of socialists? They are feeling insulted from Starmer’s apparent blame on them, and Labour’s targetted leader (despite the 2017 and 2019 campaign both being undermined by “Blairites” in Labour HQ) and now currently leaving the party in droves? They are being courted both by the Greens and Liberal Democrats (who have recently backed a good socialist policy of Universal Basic Income).

There are several layers of Gaslighting going on here.

Comedy as a Right Wing Tool

The “Have I Got News For You” Effect

Juliet Jacques (writer, filmmaker and host of the political arts podcast Suite) takes apart the gaslighting within the BBC’s and MSM Comedy in her article “How Corbyn Unmasked Comedy”. She argues that the way comedians treated Jeremy Corbyn demolishes their anti-establishment credentials (and thus exposes the gaslighting from the establishment). This post quotes extensively from Jacques article.

While comedians should have, could have and probably did, make fun of Corbyn’s Jam making and interest in manhole covers, apparently the true fun was apparently re-running the establishment gaslighting of Corbyn as AS, Russia-lover and terrorist sympathizer. So either comedians are no longer anti-establishment, left wingers or they have lost the ability to see how they had been co-opted into a right wing agenda.

While New Labour allowed comedy shows like The Thick Of It to project Labour and Conservatives as “all the same”. This proposition wore thin as Cameron and Osborne’s cuts became harsher. It collapsed when Corbyn assumed the Labour leadership on an anti-austerity platform. Suddenly, the “both-sides -framing” comedian jokes were no longer funny. It was only with Corbyn’s ascent that showed that mainstream comedy had been taken over and completely de-radicalised over the previous two decades. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, one could see Spitting Image taking apart the Conservatives or Fry and Laurie shoving Rupert Murdoch off a bridge for the sake of humanity. Somewhere in the early 21st century comedy was taken over as a tool for the establishment. The fool became the tool.

As many commentators have noted Johnson’s appearance on Have I got News For You made him appear approachable, making him more likely to be elected leader of the Conservative Party (and hence PM) despite his dreadful record with women, children, public money, Russian spies, diplomacy, detail and the truth. Did Corbyn refuse the offer of appearing on the show? Was he ever asked?

Charlie Brooker, who had long cast himself on Screenwipe as an angry outsider, alone on his sofa venting his frustrations about politics and its mediation, did a typically cynical vignette on his 2016 end-of-year show on Corbyn’s argument with Richard Branson over whether seats were available on a Virgin train. Coming right after a gag about Corbyn failing to ‘recognise’ anti-Semitism, with no mention of his record of standing up for Jewish and anti-fascist causes, Brooker spent far more time attacking Corbyn than Branson. He did so with no consideration of why Branson might cast doubt on Corbyn’s story, nor why Sky News would side with Branson, let alone giving any idea of why his willingness to confront corporate interests appealed enough to Labour’s members for them to re-elect him by a landslide that summer. Brooker’s sister-in-law, incidentally, is a Labour MP who supported Owen Smith in that leadership contest.

Juliet Jacques

Another trend that made it harder for satirists to land meaningful blows on the Labour leader was that the media attacked Corbyn from every possible angle, often in mutually contradictory ways: comedians then became no differnt from the establishment!

Mainstream comedy came out of the GE2019 very badly. Russell Howard, with a net worth of £5 million, told his audience that Corbyn and Boris Johnson were politically indistinguishableHave I Got News for You – and the satirical paper Private Eye, edited by regular HIGNFY panellist Ian Hislop – blamed Corbyn for Johnson’s victory without taking responsibility for helping Johnson establish his ‘harmless clown’ persona through repeated appearances on the programme.

In this sense, Johnson stands alongside Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Volodymyr Zelensky and Jar-Jar Binks as right-wing populists who built up a supportive base through mass entertainment. Like them, Johnson is impervious to satire – he doesn’t care how he comes across to ‘respectable’ people. With an 80 seat majority – that was predicted by Cummings and then delivered by the power of Big Data, electoral roll confusion and postal vote fraud, using money from Russian Oligarchs and other Tax Haven users, Johnson can do anything and get away with anything.

There is a Pattern

The Establishment approach to control of comedy reflects the way the press, magazines and music have been infiltrated since WW2.

  • The Press – “free press” dominated by a few billionaires. Read up on Operation Mockingbird and Orwell Rolls in his Grave
  • Music industry was infiltrated, turning the revolutionary zeal of 1950, 60s and 70s to bland pop of the 21st century.
  • Social media – dominated by a few companies: facebook and google – both having support from right wing sources. Note that Tik-Tok is about to be banned!

The comedy you watch is being changed, controlled and steering you in a particular direction. You are being gaslit.

Update

The DailyGasLamp ahead of the game (again). Article from The Telegraph, 31st August 2020

BBC threatens left wing comedians not to mock Government or Trump!

And from the Independent, 2nd September 2020

BBC can’t find enough Right Wing Comedians

June Gaslight

Ripped off from Facebook with Gaslighting Adjustments…

The odd nugget of journalistic genius and wisdom whereby Jeremy Corbyn is blamed for the loss of the election needs to be addressed. This is an attempt at covering-up the widespread PysOp against Corbyn. That’s why people supposedly “didn’t like him.”

The fact that he behaved less ruthlessly than your average politician DID NOT lose him the election at all. If it wasn’t for the illegal rigging of the result he won fair and square. The #antisemitism lies and #propaganda weren’t enough to do the hatchet job on their own. That’s why the Russian interference documents will never be published. Any document that goes anywhere near it will be swamped with redaction lines. This government is corrupt. Observe how the #jobsfortheboys #nepotism is ever present.

Look at the huge areas of gaslighting currently happening in June 2020:

  • Continuing destruction of the environment and health standards. While eyes are on #COVID19 they are dismantling and overwriting all sorts of things such as food labelling and standards to allow the introduction of GMO foods, hormone injected beef and cholrinated chicken… or restarting fracking… or starting the planning process for a SECOND new Nuclear power station. HS2, the whitest elephant in the room, blunders on. We need rail investment, but honestly, it would be cheaper to build a tunnel from London to Birmingham than this nature-blighting, vanity project.
  • Human rights. The small print accompanying everything they do, but we, me, you, everyone, are not informed of the really awful bits. If you dig you’ll find them. Our rights are being eroded by the day, just play around with searches and you’ll find all sorts. #powergrabs
  • Funding for Overseas Aid will go, that was announced this week. Thinly veiled statements of intent to reduce funding for countries with black citizens in favour of white populations. So much for #blacklivesmatter
  • In your face embarassment. A £million for a paint job on an aeroplane for Presidential-style jaunts. Peanut money, I guess, but its return will be increasing British embarassment every time BJ steps out of it.
  • The Rich Getting Away With It. Prince Andrew will see no force applied for him to face old murdered Epstein’s antics. The rich are on holiday… A new royal yacht. Shame about the poor people.
  • Expect Austerity Measures. Austerity is no more a useful or necessary strategy than it ever was. #austerity #unnecessary What we need is a Jobs Guarentee, Modern Monetary Theory and a Green New Deal – the right wing agenda in UK and USA is unlikely to deliver us any change to the current capitalist foot stamping on the face of humanity. Triple lock on pensions is to go. They could also tax the rich! But they won’t of course.
  • The constant lies from the UK government! Lies about COVID death numbers, for instance. The total is at least 20,000 more than the “official” toll. Withholding the newer, higher R number. None of the “5 rules” satisfied. #science A 2nd wave of COVID19 is surely unavoidable; though they try to mould every detail on briefings to sound like all the stupid measures they’re about to take aren’t going to kill lots of people. They stopped “following the science” months ago but they lie about it. They blame Apple for the flop of the contact tracing app but that’s a lie too, they never even spoke to them. Hancock just stood there lying into the camera, not realising that Apple may be able to hear him. #idiot #liar
  • Brexit Disaster Imminent. A worldwide pandemic isn’t important enough to slow that runaway train down! Pile that on top of the #pandemic and see what a catastrophe we’ve got on our hands. A brilliant legacy for our kids and grandkids. All the Brexiteers will be dead, they won’t be the ones to feel the pain.
  • An Un-United Kingdom. #Scotland is likely to not only go Independent but rebuild Hadrian’s Wall!
  • No change in the mainstream media propaganda machine which includes not only the right-wing, billionaire-backed newspapers but also the BBC, all TV, all Hollywood output. Even social media platforms! It is all Gaslighting. If it was just shades of opinion it wouldn’t be so bad. But no the real facts are not even being discussed. Meanwhile, Julian Assange is slowly but surely dying, again where’s the media coverage and outrage? Another hero that should be celebrated, but he’ll die instead. He has committed no crime (that he hasn’t paid for) Unless you say publishing factually correct information on war crimes, a crime. #wikileaks

Welcome to the Brave New 1984 World Order.

Gaslighted by the British Army

The British Army has been reorganised over the last 10 years as part of a plan called Army 2020 Refine. While generally shrinking the Army organisation, there is one area which is new and growing and that is 77th Brigade. This is the UK’s military PysOp group.

At full strength, the Brigade would consist of 453 military and civilian personnel with staff also from FCO and the Stabilisation Unit, of this total there will be 440 military posts in the brigade with up to 42% of these being reservists. A FOI answer in December 2016 stated that the brigade consisted of 182 regular and 266 reserve posts with only half of those posts filled.

In April 2019, a Scottish Labour candidate faced questions over links to a ‘secretive military propaganda unit’ aka 77th Brigade. The implication being is that 77th Brigade was involved in operations to secure the union in the Scottish Referundum, a point made within Craig Murray’s blog. (Craig Murray is now indited, by the way, because of his legal reporting of the failed Alex Salmond court case).

In October 2019, a Twitter exec was accused of working for 77th Brigade… “Twitter Executive Revealed to Be ‘Psyops’ Soldier Linked to Spreading Disinformation Across Social Media”. In this article, it reveals the comments of David Miller, a professor of political sociology in the School for Policy Studies at the University of Bristol, who has been studying propaganda and public relations efforts concerning the British government. He believes that the links being social media and 77th Brigade “threat to our democracy,” saying

“I would say I know a good amount about army propaganda and ‘psyops’ operations as they’re called, but what is interesting is how little information we have 77th Brigade, I suppose it means that all their work is covert, but what I would like to know is what they exactly are they doing? Are they just tracking accounts or are they trying to influence people’s views? …And because we know so little about exactly what they’re doing, we have to look elsewhere for clues. If we look at the documents leaked by Edward Snowden about the NSA and its JTRIG [Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group] program, we can see that governments are clearly lying and deceiving people by creating troll farms and fake accounts that try to influence the way people think. What the governments will say is that they are trying to prevent radicalization and acts of terrorism, but I think it’s deceptive and is a threat to our democracy. Twitter is also deceiving us because it is not acting as transparently as it could. If they are working with army personnel in this way, it is extremely damaging to our democracy.”

David Miller October, 2019
University of Bristol professor David Miller
University of Bristol professor David Miller says that links between the British Army and Twitter are a “threat to democracy”. University of Bristol

Now we know that 77th Brigade has been working to counter disinformation in the CovId-19 lock-down. Is that the disinformation from the UK Government, Donald Trump or where? That bit is not so clear.

What we do now know is captured from a whistleblower and reported UK Column, Friday 24th April, 2020. It’s worth a watch.

June 2020 Update: Kevin Ryan discusses the propspects that Covid-19 pandemic was a PysOps….

Search Engine Manipulation Effect

Big Tech subliminal manipulation of search engines effectively ends democracy as we know it, according to congressional testimony by Dr Robert Epstien in July 2019 (No relative of Jeffrey, by the way). See video below of his testimony.

We know it happens

In April 2015, Hillary Clinton hired Stephanie Hannon from Google to be her chief technology officer. In 2015 Eric Schmidt, chairman of Google’s holding company started a company – The Groundwork – for the specific purpose of electing Clinton. Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, called Google her ‘secret weapon’. Researchers estimated that Google could help her win the nomination and could deliver between 2.6 and 10.4 million general election votes to Clinton via SEME – Search Engine Manipulation Effect. Since search results are ephemeral, legally permissiable evidence could only come via a Google whistleblower or an external hacker. However, Epstien proved this occured with experimental results.

In addition, on June 9, 2016, SourceFed alleged that Google manipulated its searches in favor of Clinton because the recommended searches for her are different than the recommended searches to both Yahoo and Bing and yet the searches for both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are identical to both Yahoo and Bing. When “Hillary Clinton Ind” was entered in the search bar, Google Autocomplete suggested “Hillary Clinton Indiana”, while the other vendors suggested “Hillary Clinton indictment”. Furthermore, SourceFed placed the recommended searches for Clinton on Google Trends and observed that the Google suggestion was searched less than the suggestion from the other vendors.

Dr Epstien’s Video

Robert Epstin’s Video click here from CSPAN.

Relationship to Other Technologies

So search engine results alone can manipulate voters and votes by a huge proportion. This is the impact on intelligent people SEARCHING for information… now consider the impact of Cambridge Analytica’s approach of PUSHING information to casual social media users by ads, messaging and automated “likes”. See 1, 2, 3. Yet the same “ephemeral” characteristics apply to both – both near impossible to detect and only available to the rich and technically savy elite.

Implications for GE2019

The Big Tech effect has been known about for years. The Governments knew what they doing. The anti-Labour, anti-Jeremy Corbyn PysOps was in place since at least 2017 and probably before. Don’t blame the lambs impacted by information manipulation: blame the people that enforced this terrible Tory government onto us.

What is all the fuss about Cambridge Analytica? Part 3

So Part 1 described the background and origins of Cambridge Analytica (CA).

Part 2 described the objective of Robert Mercer and with Carole Cadwallar describing the impact on Vote Leave.

This part is about the methods and implications of CA on electoral processes.

Hitting the Headlines

In March 2018, multiple media outlets broke news of Cambridge Analytica’s business practices: The New York Times and The Observer reported that the company had used Facebook data for its campaign activities and shortly afterwards, Channel 4 News aired undercover investigative videos showing CA CEO Alexander Nix boasting about using prostitutes, bribery sting operations, and honey traps to discredit politicians on whom it conducted “opposition research”. CA claimed it had “ran all of (Donald Trump’s) digital campaign” in 2016 Presidential election. In response in the UK, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) issued a warrant to search the company’s servers. Meanwhile Facebook banned CA from advertising on its platform, saying that it had been deceived. On 23 March 2018, the ICO was granted a warrant to search Cambridge Analytica’s London offices.

Amazon said that they suspended CA from using their Cloud Hosting Services. The governments of India and Brazil demanded that CA report how their data was used in political campaigning.

In early July 2018, the United Kingdom’s Information Commissioner’s Office announced it intended to fine Facebook £500,000 ($663,000) over the data scandal, this being the maximum fine allowed at the time of the breach, saying Facebook “contravened the law by failing to safeguard people’s information”.

Also in July 2019, in the USA, Facebook was fined $5billion for its minor part in the data breach.

Rather too late… CA is now “gone” but their methods, their “genie” is now out of the bottle.

What did they do?

Wikipedia describes the method CA used to gain personal data. CA developed a Facebook app called “This Is Your Digital Life.” Aleksandr Kogan, a data scientist at Cambridge University, developed the app sometimes called “thisisyourdigitallife” and provided the app to CA who then posted it to Facebook. This third-party app then had permission to acquire data from Facebook users that not only entered data into a quiz-like game but also gave the app access to information on the user’s friends network; this resulted in the data of about 87 million users, the majority of whom had no idea their personal data was being collected for political ends. It goes without saying that the app breached Facebook’s terms of service but Facebook did not police any app particularly well (hence the reason for the $5b fine).

Follow this link to hear Alexander Nix describe the CA Big Data approach elections or this one to hear how big data helped Senator Ted Cruz in 2016. Nix claims that CA had 4000 parameters for every voter in the USA. From these parameters, not only demographics and location were uncovered but also psychographic profiles, the attitudes of each person distilled down to a few variables! This allowed, for any given political campaign, what kind of advertisement would be most effective to persuade a particular person for vote (or not vote) for any particular candidate or cause.

What CA has invented is the technology to subvert the traditional election processes to introduce:

  • Personalised messages – Nix claims top down broadcasting is dead. All future elections will be personalised messages based on a person’s psychographic profile.
  • Psychographic profiles are used to identify, and then reinforce, bias and prejudices.
  • Political promises are not on mainstream media, so not open to secutiny and debate, but are on social media. Fired up and forgotten with no follow up – reverting back to before Hansard when politicians were not held to account for any commitments.
  • Complete Situation Awareness of each individual’s motivations so that in all probability, each person can be manipulated using targeted messages to vote in the way expected (plus leaving the election to nefarious manipulation).

What are Psychographics?

Psychographic profiles can be valuable in the fields of marketing, demographics, opinion research, prediction, and social research in general.

All the research for political ends has already been established for marketing and advertising of products. Demographic information includes gender, age, income, marital status – the dry facts. In the past marketing was all about Demographics: making sure your advert went out to males or females of a partical age. Psychographics are kind of like demographics. Psychographic information might be your buyer’s habits, hobbies, spending habits and values. Demographics explain “who” the buyer is, while psychographics explain “why” they buy. Advertisers now reach their target audience both by demographics and psychographics. What does it say about you if you drive BMW and read the Telegraph… or if own an allotment and make jam? All this information has been condensed down into a set of number. This approach was proven in the commercial market, CA weaponised Psychographics for electioneering…

Psychographics gained prominence in the 2016 US presidential election since both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump used them extensively in microtargeting advertisements to narrow constituencies.

So CA’s “This Is Your Digital Life” basically provided a mainline feed into pyschographic data. But CA also collected data on voters using sources such as consumer behaviourinternet activity, and other public and private sources. According to The Guardian, CA used psychological data derived from millions of Facebook users, largely without users’ permission or knowledge. Another source of information was the “Cruz Crew” mobile app that “gamified” election campaigning by giving points for the number of political social media messages circulated by the player. But more than that it tracked physical movements and contacts on the player’s smart phone and so invaded personal data more than any previous electioneering method.

Alexander Nix, chief executive of Cambridge Analytica, October 2016, said “Today in the United States we have somewhere close to four or five thousand data points on every individual … So we model the personality of every adult across the United States, some 230 million people.”

CA’s data analysis methods were to a large degree based on the academic work of Michal Kosinski. In 2008, Kosinski had joined the Psychometrics Centre of Cambridge University where he then developed with his colleagues a profiling system using general online data, Facebook-likes, and smartphone data. He showed that with a limited number of “likes”, people can be analysed better than friends or relatives can do and that individual psychological targeting is a powerful tool to influence people.

This aspect of facebook-likes is absolutely key and – as far as I can tell – is missed in most write-ups of the Presidential Election 2016 and GE2019 Fraud.

Facebook “Likes”

Most, but not all. It was discussed extensively in 2018 by CBS which states “Facebook ‘likes’ can signal a lot about a person. Maybe even enough to fuel a voter-manipulation effort like the one a Trump-affiliated data-mining firm stands accused of — and which Facebook may have enabled. The social network is under fire after The New York Times and The Guardian newspaper reported that former Trump campaign consultant Cambridge Analytica used data, including user likes, inappropriately obtained from roughly 50 million Facebook users to try to influence elections.

The issue of the addictive nature of facebook and the dopamine hit when someone “likes” your post is well known. So how important is that “like” if it just came from a bot? Can they even do that? Yes.

Technology to Support CA

If the data collected by CA was all performed by party workers then would it all be bad? Probably not: doorstepping in elections trys to collect similar type of data. But CA introduced the mechanism to do this quite automatically, without permission, by impersonation and by the the “backdoor”. Besides the (illegal) aggregation of data from a various sources, this is the type of technology that CA used in order to recognise and give facebook “likes”:

  • Artificial Intelligence (AI) – Sentiment Analysis – this sort of AI can read thousands of posts and determine whether any particular post supports the camapign, against it or whether it is just another cat video.
  • Robot Process Automation (RPA) This allows a series of automatic actions to occur online, for instance: read a facebook message, work out if the sentiment supports the camapign, clicks the “like” button.
  • Bots and Sock Puppets – basically fake accounts – either a Bot which is a fake account which performs a repetative RPA action, for example, “liking” a facebook message; or a sock puppet, a human controlled fake account, that can enter into hundreds of discussions online dissing the opponents and/or talking up the camapign with prepared slogans.

The set up and running of this technology requires a huge amount of capital intensive investment (this is where the rich, organised “few” outgun the poor, disorganised “many”). So democracy is now a hidden war between people-powered electioneering (“the people”) against a limitless army of hidden robots controlled and funded by a few billionaires. This technological army is not even in party headquarters but can be outsourced to friendly front organisations, commercial organisations or even foriegn powers.

The Hub

The only thing needed for any political HQ is the data collection hub. HQ will ensure the right campaign messages are being fed in a way that is compelling… to a “plan”. That requires technology again but it is cheaper and readily available off the shelf in the form of a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system. This a tool to manage an organisations interaction with current and potential customers – everytime you phone up a major corporation nowadays you are being managed by a CRM system such as Microsoft Dynamics CRM, Salesforce or SugarCRM. Now replace the word “customers” with “voters” and the tool works just as well. Just look at the (proven) results of CRM and see how they apply to election campaigns.

  1. Enhanced ability to target profitable customers. (Replace “profitable customers” with “likely voters”)
  2. Integrated assistance across channels. (Use of Bots, Sock Puppets, Newspapers or leaflets to promote your propaganda)
  3. Enhanced sales force efficiency and effectiveness. (Replace “salesforce” with “campaign staff”)
  4. Improved pricing. (Instead of pricing, think “extract donations”)
  5. Customized products and services. (Tailor message for particular poltical concern: health, environment, business etc)
  6. Improved customer service efficiency and effectiveness. (Improve approval ratings)
  7. Individualized marketing messages (also called plans). (A set of messages just to engage each individual voter, there can be multiple plans depending on the voter’s concern)
  8. Connect customers and all channels on a single platform. (A complete view of Voter Intentions).

Architect of the Vote Leave and Conservative GE2019, Dominic Cummings, called his central database of voters, the Voter Intention Collection System (VICS). It is described in his blog. He describes how he developed ads for social media, trialed them and targetted them. The data feeding VICS was both “conventional and unconventional” – from that we can assume conventional = demographic data – freely available to political parties – and unconventional = psychographic… as described above – illegal. Illegal to the price of $5billion just to facebook alone for allowing a loophole in its software. How much more illegal is it for people to deliberately exploit that loophole?

But wait there’s more…

Just consider the power now available to the rich elites with such technology at their disposal:

  • A list of every voter.
  • With social media data then the on-line accounts can be linked to voters in the electoral register probably in 80% of all cases.
  • This enables the identification of all people strongly aligned with campaign messages and will vote.
  • And the identification of all people strongly opposing the campaign.
  • This identifies the battle ground! The non-aligned people.

Pyschographics help sort out the battleground. Since the social network shows who is friends with whom, then the probability of voter intentions can be calculated with different levels of certainity… until you have complete and utter situation awareness of how people will vote. People do respond to the information they’ve received but if all the information is biased and plays into pre-set grooves enabled by the mainstream media then, people respond collectively in herd like behaviour. Dominic Cummings tested his “messaging” in carefully selected groups. When the message had the right effect, he sent out targeted political ads and using the AI and Big Data analysis re-calculated the expected voter intentions so that he could predict an 80 seat majority for the Tories. And he got an 80 seat majority for the Tories. This level of estimation precision requires computers. And probably coercion (see below). The Conservative Party was able to deliver an astonishing efficiency at delivering seats in 2019: One seat for every 38264 votes (a 10% efficiency improvement over 2017) while the LibDems were amazingly less efficient: one each seat for every 300,000 votes, a 50% decrease in efficency. And, unlike Jo Swinson travelling the country in a bus (and even losing her seat), Boris Johnson never really needed to go out and campaign or even do many TV interviews.

Minimum Fraud / Maximum Outcome

There are further tools in the toolchest. Having complete situation awareness allows other useful things:

  • it identifies marginal consistencies.
  • it identifies people that are unlikly to vote
  • it identifies people that will be using a postal vote
  • it identifies people that are misaligned with the electoral registers

We know postal voting fraud exists and is widespread. Complete situation awareness of voter intentions now allows two useful forms of election fraud, which can be set at the minimum level that arouses the least suspicion:

  • Voter Suppression for those people of the wrong demographics and pyschometrics that are misaligned with the electoral register and/or registered for postal votes. (eg postal votes not delivered, arrive late or invalidated). Voter suppression is regarded as a non-crime – the voter is always blamed for any administrative error.
  • Ballot Box Stuffing, by postal votes, impersonating people that are unlikely to vote. A virtually undetectable crime!

What’s all the fuss?

Now do you see what the fuss is all about?

  • No need to campaign
  • Lower campaign costs (as long the computer system costs can be hidden)
  • No need to be held to account for any promises or policies
  • Set up the perfect way to secure a seat with the minimum level of fraud – so small that it is hardly detectable.
  • Confidence of predicting the election result nationally (100% accuracy)
  • Confidence of securing any particular local seat (as long as there is a high level of postal votes!)

Propaganda and Gaslighting GE2019

Before completing the Cambridge Analytica series, there is something to discuss. The difference between propaganda and gaslighting and why this matters when considering GE2019 Election Fraud.

Propaganda is a very powerful tool to sway populations to particular viewpoints. It can be used for good or ill. Product advertising uses propaganda techniques – or is that vice versa!? Along with the details of propaganda – taken from experts in the subject – there are also things you can do to counter propaganda.

Propaganda (and how to avoid it)

1 – Truth is not the absence of propaganda; propaganda thrives in presenting different kinds of truth, including half truths, incomplete truths, limited truths, out of context truths. Modern propaganda is most effective when it presents information as accurately as possible. The Big Lie or Tall Tale is the most ineffective propaganda.
Counterpropaganda: A concrete fact is better than propaganda and failing anything scientifically provable, honest opposition is practical, moral and unbiased can counter any false propaganda message. Propaganda if revealed, will be seen as biased and negated. “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:32 New English Bible
2 – Propaganda is not so much designed to change opinions so much as reinforce existing opinions, prejudices, attitudes. The most successful propaganda will lead people to action or inaction through reinforcement of what people already believe to be true.
Counterpropaganda: The only way to defend against it is to be more aware of the tactics being used and counter uneducated opinions and views early.

3 – Education is not necessarily the best protection against propaganda. Intellectuals and “the educated” are the most vulnerable to propaganda campaigns because they (1) tend to absorb the most information (including secondhand information, hearsay, rumors, and unverifiable information); (2) are compelled to have an opinion on matters of the day and thus expose themselves more to others’ opinions and propaganda campaigns; and (3) consider themselves above the influence of propaganda, thereby making themselves more susceptible to propaganda.
Counterpropaganda we are all susceptible of propaganda! To say that one is free of the influence of propaganda is a sure sign of its pervasive existence in society.
4 – What makes the study of propaganda so problematic is that it is generally regarded as the study of the darker side of our nature; the study of their evil versus our good. Those whom we consider evil thrive in propaganda, while we spread only the truth. The best way to study propaganda is to separate one’s ethical judgments from the phenomenon itself. Propaganda thrives and exists, for ethical and unethical purposes.
Counterpropaganda: propaganda is a powerful tool which can be used for good or ill. The way to decide its value is to use the principle of cui bono: “who benefits”.
5 – Propaganda seeks to modify public opinion, particularly to make people conform to the point of view of the propagandist. In this respect, any propaganda is a form of manipulation, to adapt an individual to a particular activity.
Counterpropaganda watch out for arguments that are logically inconsistent or attack the person rather than the point of view.
6 – Modern forms of communication, including mass media, are tools for propaganda. Without the monopoly concentration of mass media, there can be no modern propaganda. (Before mass media there was only rhetoric.) For propaganda to thrive, the media must remain concentrated, news agencies and services must be limited, the press must be under central command, and radio, film, and television monopolies must pervade.
Counterpropaganda: use of different information sources including non-main stream sources allows you to pick apart propaganda. Always treat a single source of information as suspect or fake news.
7 – One must become aware of propaganda: limitations, strengths, influence, and persuasive qualities, for it to be effective.
Counterpropaganda: propaganda only works where there is “fertile ground”. Preparation is required. A need must be articulated. Watch out for prepared Problem/Reaction/Solution scenarios.
8 – In the west private commercial propaganda is as important to notions of democracy as governmental propaganda. Commercial appeals to the people through advertising, which plays on irrational fantasies and impulses, are some of the most pervasive forms of propaganda in existence today.
Counterpropaganda: anything overly simplistic eg “take back control” or “get Brexit done” have only one purpose: to hide complexity and realities.
9 – Propaganda in a democracy establishes truth in the sense that it creates “true believers” who are as ideologically committed to the democratic progress as others are ideologically committed to its control. The perpetuation of democratic ideals and beliefs in the face of concentrated power in propaganda institutions (media, political institutions) is a triumph of propaganda in modern society.
Counterpropaganda: without access to media and political institutions then democracy will fail.

Gaslighting

As mentioned in previous Daily GasLamp articles, GE2019 was more than propaganda – point 9 above should give most people pause for thought. It was a PysOp – another name for “Gaslighting”

What is Gaslighting and how do you know we are subject to it?
Patricia Evans, seven “warning signs” of gaslighting is that the abuser will

  • Withhold information from the victim;
  • Counter information to fit the abuser’s perspective;
  • Discount information;
  • Using verbal abuse, often in the form of jokes;
  • Block and divert the victim’s attention from outside sources;
  • Minimise the victim’s worth; and,
  • Undermining the victim by gradually weakening them

While psychologist Elinor Greenberg describes three common methods of gaslighting:

  • Hiding.
  • Changing.
  • Control.

You can easily see examples in the past where Gaslighting has been carried out, preparing the ground to make propaganda effective.
If the UK electoral has been gaslighted lets look for the warning signs and methods:

  • Withhold information: the unsuitability of BJ as being PM has been withheld. It should have been front page news (it was… but never followed up).
  • Counter information: the leaks about the NHS in US trade talks where countered by Sky News with “it was a leak from Russia”
  • Discount information: the Labour Manifesto hardly mentioned by the BBC
  • Using verbal abuse, often in the form of jokes; Just listen to BBC Radio and TV Comedy: constant potshots over the issue of A-S
  • Block and divert the victim’s attention from outside sources: World wide concerns over the Conservatives Hard Brexit were never mentioned.
  • Minimise worth: the crowds greeting JC as he toured the country were never given any airtime.
  • Undermining the victim by gradually weakening them: constant questions on A-S. Intense interrogations on TV but only on issues that suited
  • Hiding. BJ and other conservatives never given intense interviews.
  • Changing. Trying to change the Labour leadership that had made the UK Labour Party the largest political organisation in Western Europe.
  • Control. Control of airtime, column inches and when there was some exposure, the agenda was changed to meet the propaganda objective.

So Gaslighting is more than propaganda and more than just the control of the Main Stream Media… there’s more. To be followed up in the Daily GasLamp….