This article appears in the May 22, 2020 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
LAROUCHE PAC FIRESIDE CHAT
The Countercoup:
A Treasure Trove Released
[Print version of this article]
Mrs. Boyd was a featured guest on the May 14 webcast of the LaRouche PAC Fireside Chat along with Bill Binney, a former technical director for the U.S. National Security Agency. This report is taken from her notes for that presentation. Subheads and embedded links have been added. A video of the full program is available here.
We said that we were going to tell you about big developments in the countercoup tonight. The short way of talking about that is that we now have a lot of meat on the proposition many of us have been arguing since 2017, Bill Binney in particular: Russiagate is the biggest hoax in history; it’s all a lie built on a foundation of sand, which is completely demonstrated once sunlight is shined on the entire affair.
The new developments involve the release of 50-plus classified transcripts from the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation of Russiagate, which I am working my way through. It also involves the all-out fight to get justice for Michael Flynn and Roger Stone. In the Flynn case, an independent U.S. Attorney appointed by Bill Barr provided the basis for the DOJ to dismiss the Flynn case based on outrageous government misconduct. Right now, Judge Emmet Sullivan, Barack Obama, and Eric Holder are trying to block that result and get Barr fired because it is obvious he is a huge danger to Obama and his friends.
Finally the Director of National Intelligence released the names of the unmaskers of Michael Flynn’s name in the Obama Administration spy operation against him yesterday. That release revealed the heavy involvement of the oval office directly, including former Vice President Joe Biden, but also the involvement of NATO, which has served as a core center of the information warfare directed against the United States, the Treasury Department, and others you might not think of. We have repeatedly talked about that NATO involvement.
What is missing in this release is the unmaskers of Flynn’s conversations with the Russian Ambassador, Sergey Kislyak. It’s a common and hopeful belief that the reason those names are missing is because that information is being used in a criminal leak probe by John Durham. It’s a ten-year felony for whoever provided the contents of these communications to David Ignatius of the Washington Post.
We have also learned that the so-called Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) never happened, not just because of Bill Binney’s proof of that proposition, but because one of the key fabricators, Shawn Henry of CrowdStrike, admitted that CrowdStrike could not prove that any files allegedly staged for exfiltration by Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear, alleged tools and tactics of Russian cyber espionage groups, ever went anywhere. It further turns out that the intelligence community had been effectively inside the DNC’s computers from September of 2015 forward. We can come back and explore this in more depth.
Portents of the Future
But first, I want to call your attention to a couple of developments, I call them portents of the future, as described by our enemies that we have to think about. I don’t want to do anything other than to describe their nature to you, because I think our side spends entirely too much time giving these enemies an inflated importance when they, the enemy forces, are reacting on the basis of weakness. As they see, and we should see, you can describe the present situation as an emergent catastrophe, or you can describe it as a huge opportunity for a completely new beginning, as was the 15th century Italian Renaissance, a leap from the past, but one that always involves a terrible cost and a serious reckoning.
The latter seems to me much closer to the reality. Taking that opportunity is the mission I think we all have to undertake.
The Economist magazine, which might be called, with the Financial Times, the leading publications of the extant British Empire, published a cover story this week titled “Dangerous Times.” It features a map with Wall Street and Main Street separated by an ugly, deep, and very obvious moat. They obviously recognize the environment in which they are operating, and that they have to somehow close the gap with Main Street to survive. How they intend to do this, to suck the population into yet another fraudulent scheme that maintains their power, is not at all clear. They just recognize that they have a big problem if the real underpinnings as to why the world’s response to a lower form of life, namely the coronavirus, resulted in mass death, are exposed.
And, it appears their intention is to accomplish this with the same surveillance and mass manipulation tools they have been using to manipulate much of the world since September 11, 2001. That is why the exposure of these tools in the ongoing countercoup is of absolute, paramount importance.
The Washington Post published an article on May 1 outlining how retired Army General Stanley McChrystal, former head of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, was advising a new anti-Trump political action committee called “DefeatDisinfo PAC,” which would utilize tactics, employed against terrorists in Afghanistan, against Donald Trump. Another Washington Post article featured a similar company, Main Street One, which received Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) funding to counter terrorist propaganda and Russian propaganda in Eastern Europe. I think they are talking about Ukraine when they reference Eastern Europe. And this capability is now also being employed against Donald Trump. These companies—literally popping up all over the political landscape now—are devoted to the proposition that you will wake up in November and welcome Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as the next President and Vice President of the United States.
‘Information Dominance’
How might these tactics differ from your typical political advertising? Here is how Christopher Wylie, a former employee of the British military contractor SCL Group described the difference in his recently released testimony before the House Intelligence Committee investigating Russiagate.
In military information operations and counterterrorism operations there is something called “information dominance.” In your target’s universe you want to gain access to as many channels of information that affect the decision-making of your target as possible, so that you can inject information into those channels, and then exploit mistakes or altered perceptions of that target.... The goal is to change a person’s perception of what’s happening. If you want to change someone’s perception of something, you will send them information that looks— that is not branded like an advertisement and that may look like a blob, that may look like a news source, that may look like just a chat room with regular people talking.
And if you take this notion of gaining informational dominance, and you take your target and you put—you inject sort of ads, or blogs, or various digital context everywhere where they travel through the Internet, whether you’re clicking or—whether they’re on a search engine, whether they’re on Facebook, they start to see all of this information, and it starts to change how they think about a particular issue, or what is real and what is not real. And so that is something that is quite problematic because that is a fundamental denial of someone’s agency, because if they start to think that something is real when it’s not, then they aren’t making a free choice when they’re going and voting, because they’re basing it on a warped perception.
Wylie is describing, in short, a form of mass brainwashing, the project which evolved when Barack Obama first took office and started talking, through his information czar, Cass Sunstein, about creating “cognitive dissonance” in potential political revolutionaries, rendering them impotent as the result of rage and an inability to think coherently.
Brutalizing New York City
Finally, I want to refer you to an article posted May 8 to The Intercept by Naomi Klein, called the “Screen New Deal—Under Cover of Mass Death, Andrew Cuomo calls in Billionaires to Build a High Tech Dystopia.” Andrew Cuomo has invited Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, Bill and Melinda Gates, and Michael Bloomberg to reinvent New York during and after the pandemic. The Gateses will handle education, without physical classrooms, Bloomberg has been assigned to recruit and train contact tracers who will medically profile the population and make sure that they are social distancing and receiving cheap telehealth services through devices they install on themselves. The surveillance state’s premise is that we will install our own chains.
As Klein describes it, “This is a future in which for the privileged, almost everything is home-delivered then screen-shared on a mediated platform. It’s a future that employs far fewer teachers, doctors and drivers. It accepts no cash or credit cards (under guise of virus control) and has skeletal mass transit and far less live art. It is a future that claims to be run on “artificial intelligence” but is actually held together by tens of millions of anonymous workers tucked away in warehouses, data centers, content-moderation mills, electronic sweatshops, lithium mines, industrial farms, meat processing plants and prisons, where they are left unprotected from disease and hyper-exploitation.
This after all was Mike Bloomberg’s vision of New York City as I have covered for LaRouche PAC in some detail. Now, Naomi Klein says, against a harrowing backdrop of mass death, it is being sold to us on the dubious promise that these technologies are the only way possible to pandemic-proof our lives, the indispensable keys to keeping ourselves and our loved ones safe.
As Klein documents, Eric Schmidt is the chair of the Defense Innovation Board and co-chair of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence. Schmidt has been arguing that since the Chinese government is willing to spend limitless public money building the infrastructure of high-tech surveillance, while Chinese tech companies pocket the profits from commercial applications, the U.S. dominant position in the global economy is about to collapse. Schmidt is arguing that what he views as the Chinese model for mass surveillance is allowing them to triumph over the U.S. and that only by adopting these mass surveillance methodologies can the U.S. continue to succeed in the world. To be clear, I am not here to talk about China. I am here to tell you what Eric Schmidt and his billionaire colleagues are trying to concoct as the post-pandemic nature of the United States.
I do not subscribe to any conspiracy theory concerning the novel coronavirus, although I remain highly suspicious of the systems analysis models, particularly that of the Imperial College of London, which have been wrong by gross magnitudes. I do subscribe to the idea that the entire span of time from September 11, 2001 forward has been rife with the overt brainwashing techniques described by Christopher Wylie in his House Intelligence Committee testimony, with the explicit goal of destroying the mental powers of this population.
LaRouche’s Winning Method
Yet, the population has continued to revolt against the national security state, against the professional class that serves the very rich, and against the very rich themselves. More and more people are now revolting against every perceived imposition on their freedoms and their ability to make a living. To the extent people act irrationally, it is because they have not been provided with enough of the food of Socratic reason and the actual intellectual American tradition as the baseline identity by which to wage the fight they must wage.
That was the primary mission, if you read him right, of Lyndon LaRouche, bringing back the fundamental identity of the American Republic rooted in science, creativity, and technological progress, but most of all founded on the philosophic tradition from which we sprang—willing to bet, as Franklin did, that Leibniz would win out against Kant and the Enlightenment, that you could trust people with individual freedom if you kept the cultural and scientific levels of the population high enough.
And now, with the mass surveillance systems that have been employed against us being exposed, we have a huge chance to regain that identity, provided we actually identify what it is we are fighting for, what the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments are actually all about. What is freedom about? LaRouche visualized it as the ability to think through paradox and resolve the apparently irreconcilable on a higher level of reality. Why is individual freedom so important? Because, ironically, it is a few individuals, geniuses, acting freely and outside a present society’s norms and ideas who actually advance all of humanity.
The tendency toward irrational tribalism can be inflamed, obviously and ironically—as the results of this ongoing coup come out. Given the profound proofs which we are seeing that everything said over the past four years was an outright lie—a lie, which, however, has incapacitated the reasoning powers of almost half of our population, why would anyone believe any authority, even if their life was at stake? But that is only if you don’t realize that this division and inability to govern the United States were and are the primary intention of the coup against Trump. And now, from our enemy’s standpoint, the virus represents a perfect opportunity to further inflame our divisions. It is the great unknown to which hysteria and fear are not atypical human responses, and it is these responses, this fear, which the news media propaganda machine is seeking to fan, daily.
Science will solve the virus and shine the light on every nation’s failures in reality, but that takes time. In the meantime, the answer to the enemy’s offensive lies in our ability to sketch a new beginning, to change, to progress out of the way our enemy has profiled us, to build a brand-new future.
They believe we are linear, that our appetites control us. They believe we are habituated to reacting. They believe we can’t think long term, with discipline, and create a future like our greatest, most optimistic generations did. They believe they have stomped out all of our greatest history and ideas and that people are solidly bought into money, the irrational hand of the market, and popular narcissism. In other words, they believe they have succeeded in cultivating our fear and our pessimism at a time which, in reality, the poet Percy Shelley tells us, is the time for poets, for great leaps in the human mind and its understanding of the universe.
If you ever read Friedrich Schiller’s History of the Thirty Years’ War, you will find that he is at war with nominalism, the arbitrary assignment of cause, rather than the accurate description of dynamics in processes from which hypotheses about causes emerge to be validated.
So, within that context, we can discuss specific developments in the Flynn case, in the DNC “hack,” and in the unmasking, but only in this much more dynamic context, in which I hope you will situate these developments.
