Tag: propaganda

Reid Hoffman Funds SICK Propaganda Ad Showing Republicans SNATCHING Girlfriends For Deportation

A resurfaced ad funded by Reid Hoffman, the LinkedIn co-founder mired in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, depicts a fictional Republican congressman abducting and threatening a young woman on a date simply because she “looks like” an illegal immigrant—despite her being a U.S. citizen.

The vile spot, part of a series of fear-mongering propaganda from the Progressive Action Fund, aims to terrify voters into opposing America’s long-overdue crackdown on illegal immigration, painting border security as a threat to everyday citizens.

The ad opens with a young couple wrapping up a pleasant date. As the man walks his girlfriend to her car, black-clad agents suddenly appear, grabbing her and declaring, “She’s coming with us.”

Confused and outraged, the boyfriend demands, “What are you talking about? Who are you?”

Enter the bald, suit-wearing “Republican congressman,” who smugly announces, “I’m your Republican congressman. Now that we’re in charge, we’re rounding up illegals.”

When the boyfriend protests that she’s a citizen born in the U.S., the congressman retorts, “I don’t care. She looks like one of them.” He then callously adds that she’ll have “lots of company” in an El Salvador prison.

This disgusting piece of propaganda isn’t new—it’s from June 2024, during the height of the election cycle when Democrats were desperate to block Trump’s return. The Progressive Action Fund, a Democrat-aligned super PAC, produced a whole series featuring this creepy “Republican congressman” character invading private moments to enforce caricatured conservative policies.

Keep reading

CIA ends publication of its popular World Factbook reference tool

Close the cover on the CIA World Factbook: The spy agency announced Wednesday that after more than 60 years, it is shuttering the popular reference manual.

The announcement posted to the CIA’s website offered no reason for the decision to end the Factbook, but it follows a vow from Director John Ratcliffe to end programs that don’t advance the agency’s core missions.

First launched in 1962 as a printed, classified reference manual for intelligence officers, the Factbook offered a detailed, by-the-numbers picture of foreign nations, their economies, militaries, resources and societies. The Factbook proved so useful that other federal agencies began using it, and within a decade, an unclassified version was released to the public.

After going online in 1997, the Factbook quickly became a popular reference site for journalists, trivia aficionados and the writers of college essays, racking up millions of visits per year.

The White House has moved to cut staffing at the CIA and the National Security Agency early in Trump’s second term, forcing the agency to do more with less.

The CIA did not return a message seeking comment Wednesday about the decision to cease publication of the Factbook.

Watchdog alleges Netflix coordinated with FBI to promote left-wing narratives

A new report alleges that the streaming giant Netflix has worked closely with federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies in ways that amount to government-assisted propaganda.

The report released Tuesday by the Oversight Project, a government watchdog group, contends that the FBI, the CIA, and the Defense Department (now the War Department) exercised influence over film and television productions—particularly those distributed by Netflix.

“Based on all publicly available evidence and analysis, Netflix appears to have an outsized role in socially engineering millions of Americans into a predisposition to accept preferred left-wing ideological dogma,” the Oversight Project report states.

“Netflix did so with the help of the federal government, especially the FBI, and intelligence community. In fact, the FBI plays an outsized active role in content moderation for projects it is involved in.”

Keep reading

Stockholm Politicians Call For Review Of SLAUGHTER TO PREVAIL Concert Over Propaganda Concerns

Stockholm politicians have raised concerns over an upcoming concert by hard rock band Slaughter To Prevail, following accusations that the group has spread Russian propaganda.

According to the Nordic Ukraine Forum, the band has engaged in messaging aligned with Russian propaganda narratives. In response, representatives from both the Moderate Party (M) and the Social Democrats (S) have reacted ahead of the band’s scheduled performance in Stockholm on Friday, January 30.

Opposition city councilor Christofer Fjellner (M) said he believes it would be inappropriate for the band to perform under the current circumstances. “I think it’s quite inappropriate. I don’t think a band that lends itself to Russian propaganda should be playing in Stockholm right now,” Fjellner told SVT Kulturnyheterna.

Stockholm’s Finance City Councilor Karin Wanngård (S) also commented on the situation, stating in a written response that the City of Stockholm is currently in dialogue with the concert organizer. According to Wanngård, the aim is to ensure that anti-democratic messages are not conveyed during the event.

Slaughter To Prevail previously performed in Gothenburg on Tuesday. Concert promoter Live Nation, which is organizing the Stockholm show, has declined to comment on SVT’s inquiries regarding the allegations. At the time of publication, the concert remains scheduled to proceed as planned.

Keep reading

Amelia Victorious: How to Lose the Culture War With a Video Game

There’s something genuinely funny going on in the United Kingdom right now.

The British government’s Prevent office, housed under the Home Office (think Department of the Interior, but allergic to dissent), partnered with a media nonprofit called Shout Out UK (like a PBS focused on preventing “radicalism”) to come up with a clever new way to re-educate British youth.

The concern, as always, was “radicalization.” They thought the solution was inspired: a choice-based video game. Kids like games. Games involve decisions. Decisions shape values. What could possibly go wrong?

Thus Pathways was born, a government-funded interactive morality play designed to gently shepherd British children toward being properly antiracist, properly accepting, and properly enthusiastic about the ever-increasing number of migrants reshaping their country. Civics class, but fun. And digital. And corrective.

As part of this effort, the designers introduced a character named Amelia, a cute, purple-haired, vaguely goth girl who carries a Union Jack and talks about Britain being for the British. She was meant to function as a warning, a living illustration of how nationalism can look attractive, even charming, and yet be dangerous to the impressionable youths of Britain who may not have fully internalized the idea that Brexit is bad and they are to obey their elitist overlords.

What they did not anticipate was that the public would take one look at adorable, charming Amelia and decide she was the good guy.

What Prevent Was Supposed to Be

To understand how Pathways ended up here, you have to rewind to what Prevent was originally meant to do. The program emerged from the post-9/11 security logic that shaped Western counter-terror policy across the board. The target was not opinions or aesthetics. It was violence, and specifically Islamist terrorism and the recruitment pipelines that fed it. “Radicalization” meant movement toward planning or committing acts of terror.

The rationale was simple and, frankly, understandable. Governments have a duty to stop people from blowing up buses and concert halls. Identifying grooming networks, interrupting recruitment, and diverting individuals away from violent ideologies was the job. That’s why Prevent sat under the Home Office in the first place. Bombs and bodies are not abstract problems.

Over time, however, the definition of “radicalization” began to stretch. Then it stretched again. Eventually it stopped describing a trajectory toward violence at all and started describing a trajectory away from approved social and political consensus. The concern shifted from what someone might do to what someone might think, or worse, what they might feel attached to.

This is where Prevent quietly stopped being about prevention and started becoming about management, and specifically the management of populations rather than threats. Cultural signals like flags, language, and other symbols of national belonging were reclassified as early warning indicators. Discomfort with mass migration was treated less as a political opinion than as a diagnostic symptom. Belonging itself became something to be solved.

Once the mission changed, the tools followed.

Keep reading

MORE BETRAYAL: House Votes to KEEP Funding Globalist NGO Responsible for Global Censorship and Domestic Propaganda — 81 Republicans Side With Democrats to Kill Defund Push

In yet another stunning display of Uniparty betrayal, the House of Representatives has voted to continue funneling taxpayer dollars to the shadowy National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – a globalist NGO notorious for meddling in foreign elections, fueling censorship worldwide, and even pushing domestic propaganda right here at home.

By a lopsided 127–291 vote, lawmakers rejected an amendment offered by Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) to prohibit $315 million in funding for the NED as part of the FY2026 spending package.

Following the vote, a disgusted Rep. Eli Crane took to X to vent his frustrations with the rot inside the halls of Congress.

“The swamp is real. But we did pass the Shower Act this week. I could use one after spending so much time in this awful place,” Crane wrote.

He followed up with a stinging rebuke of the 81 Republicans who turned their backs on the base:

“Tonight, the Uniparty rejected my amendment to defund NED. 81 ‘Republicans’ voted with Democrats to fund this rogue organization that fuels global censorship and domestic propaganda. We will keep fighting.”

Keep reading

UK Government Video Game Teaches Teens Questioning Mass Immigration Could Make Them Terror Suspects

Britain’s globalist—and increasingly authoritarian—state has found a new way to ‘fight extremism’: teach teenagers that asking the ‘wrong questions’ about mass immigration could make them terrorists.

According to newly surfaced materials, a government-funded video game now warns schoolchildren that doubting the positive effects of unrelenting  mass migration will land them in the crosshairs of counter-terrorism authorities.

The program, called Pathways, is marketed as an “educational” interactive experience for students aged 11 to 18. In practice, however, it functions as a digital loyalty test, funded in part by the Home Office’s Prevent program, Britain’s controversial anti-extremism scheme.

The game goes something like this. Players are placed in the role of a white teenage character named Charlie, newly enrolled in college and navigating modern Britain’s ideological minefield. Every decision—what videos to watch, what opinions to express, even whether to research immigration statistics—is tracked by an in-game extremism meter.

The premise is simple and utterly unmistakable: curiosity is dangerous, skepticism is suspect, and deviation from approved liberal-globalist, views carries severe consequences. Choose the wrong dialogue option, and Charlie is flagged for “extreme right-wing ideology,” a category that now appears to include asking basic questions about national identity.

Even the character’s gender is carefully flattened. Regardless of whether players select a male or female avatar, Charlie is referred to exclusively as “they,” a telling detail in a game obsessed with left-liberal ideological conformity.

Early scenarios in the game set the tone. Charlie struggles academically and is outperformed by an Afro-British classmate, after which players are nudged toward ‘correct’ emotional responses while being warned against drawing conclusions about immigration or competition.

At several points, the game introduces online posts claiming the government prioritizes migrants over British veterans for housing. Players are encouraged to scroll past these claims silently. Engaging, questioning, or researching them triggers ominous warnings.

Attempting to “learn more” is portrayed as especially risky. The game depicts Charlie being overwhelmed by statistics, reports, and protest information. Instead of being framed as civic engagement, the game clearly suggests it’s a slippery slope into ideological contamination.

Keep reading

The Washington Post’s ‘Analysis’ Of The Minneapolis Shooting Is Pure Propaganda

Don’t believe your lying eyes.

That’s effectively what the hoax-peddling Washington Post told its readers when it ran what can only be surmised as the most dishonest piece of left-wing propaganda published (so far) this year.

Splattered across the top of the outlet’s homepage on Thursday was an ” analysis” titled, “Video shows ICE agent in Minneapolis fired at driver as vehicle veered past him.” (An earlier version of the article had the headline, “ICE agent was not in the vehicle’s path when he fired at driver, video shows.”)

Right from the get-go, it’s clear that make-pretend “reporters” Aaron Davis and Jonathan Baran aren’t trying to inform their audience of what actually happened but are instead seeking to advance the Democrat Party’s anti-ICE agenda.

Upon navigating the Orwellian article, readers are immediately bombarded with the presumption that the Trump administration’s central (and well-documented) claim — that the now-deceased woman disobeyed ICE and then hit an agent with her car — is false. In typical legacy media fashion, Davis and Baran play up such framing by asserting that their “frame-by-frame analysis” “raises questions” about the administration’s account of the incident.

“The SUV did move toward the ICE agent as he stood in front of it. But the agent was able to move out of the way and fire at least two of three shots from the side of the vehicle as it veered past him, according to the analysis,” the propaganda-style article reads.

The authors then take readers on a trip through different video frames of the moment in question, in which they even call into question the documented fact that the agent was hit by the suspect’s vehicle. With little hesitation, they write, “Videos examined by The Post, including one shared on Truth Social by Trump, do not clearly show whether the agent is struck or how close the front of the vehicle comes to striking him.”

Really? Readers are supposed to believe that?

Keep reading

More fool you: 10 modus operandi of the mass manipulators

We are immersed in a behavioural psychology programme. The global elite is manipulating everything from incidents to information, in the process of building an authoritarian technocracy.

The powerful do not wait for events such as a pandemic to happen and then exploit; instead, they create the events, which are scripted for a predetermined outcome. But the masses must be kept in the dark about the real motives, while being steered into supporting policies that are against their interests. The modus operandi features the following means of deception.

1. Dual messaging

There are two audiences for public announcements and media reports on events. The vast majority (‘normies’) are told the official story and believe what they are told. They know it happened, because they saw it on ‘the news’. There is also a minority of critical thinkers, who the authorities know will ask questions and suspect that the narrative is not the full truth. These people are led to believe a parallel story.

For example, as David Fleming and I wrote on the Covid-19 ‘psy-op’, critical thinkers (who are mostly not as critical as they like to think) were given clues about the virus being leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China. Unwittingly, these self-limited sceptics reinforced the hoax of a novel and deadly pathogen (they believed that mortality was exaggerated but couldn’t see that the whole show was staged).

Another example was the ‘assassination’ of Charlie Kirk. People saw it on the internet or television in shocking detail. The story for the masses was that a leftist ‘tranny’ fired the shot from the roof of a nearby building. Critical thinkers were fed another story: that Kirk had been criticising Israel and was exterminated by a skilled sniper working for Mossad. Again, the alternative truth was useful to the powers-that-be, because it emphasised that anyone speaking out against the Israeli government or Zionism would be risking their life. Kash Patel, Donald Trump’s FBI chief, implied to the more alert critic that Kirk was not killed, because he hoped to see the allegedly deceased in Valhalla (the name of the federal witness protection programme, which can give a person a new identity).

Whenever a major incident occurs, the most popular alternative media figures (e.g. Alex Jones, Joe Rogan, Russell Brand) typically follow the lead given for critical thinkers by the scriptwriters.

It is not too extreme to start from the position that the presented story is completely false: the burden of proof should be on the official reporter rather than the critic. The only important consideration is the desired outcome: why are they doing this?

2. Inversion of purpose

The declared rationale for a policy may be hard to oppose, as it often promises convenience, cost savings or security, but the real purpose is usually to boost control. The masters of deception are clearly at work with the clampdown on freedom of expression on the internet. The Westminster government boasted that it would make the UK the safest country in the world for children online. The Online Safety Act was promoted as the instrument to save children from sexually inappropriate content and abuse, following years of propaganda about a ‘mental health crisis’ in younger people. However, this statute is used by the media regulator Ofcom for censorship of political opinion, indirectly administered by threatening social media platforms with mind-boggling fines.

Returning to child safety, if the authorities really wanted to reduce harm they would have acted more effectively to stop the Pakistani-origin ‘grooming gangs’ preying on white working-class girls, or they would tackle hard pornography at source. Arguably, the stated aim of policy is inverted. While schools teach awareness of mental health and ‘neurodiversity’, they make children feel less safe. And that is apparent in the compliance culture and lack of risk-taking and boisterous behaviour that you would previously have expected of teenagers.

Despite (or because of) the focus on mental health, the outcome of the education system is young people with pervading anxiety and learned vulnerability. This is what the powers-that-be want, and not only for children. Adults too are kept on their toes with stranger danger and other scares. The barrage of ‘see it, say it, sorted’ messages on the British railway network is to instil in minds dependence on the state. Government does not want you to feel safe, any more than pharmaceutical companies want you to be healthy.

Inversion was also apparent in the contrived Covid-19 contagion, which was used to launch the ‘Great Reset’. Among many achievements of this scam was a cull of the elderly (including discharge of older patients from hospital to care homes, where they were medicated with the terminal care combination of morphine and midazolam). The people, however, were told that lockdown and vaccines were necessary to ‘save Granny’.

Keep reading

TALKING POINTS: Kimmel, Colbert, and Fallon All Make the Same Stupid Joke About Trump and Venezuela

Late night TV shows are dying for a very good reason. They’ve become unfunny, overly-political, and they’re all the same, with the single exception of Greg Gutfeld, who gets better ratings than all of the others.

During the course of the last week, Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, and Jimmy Fallon, all made the same stupid joke about Trump and Venezuela. Talking points clearly went out.

These guys are such talentless hacks.

NewsBusters reports:

On ABC, Jimmy Kimmel quipped that “President Trump said his New Year’s resolution this year is peace on earth, and that lasted for just under two days. If you are wondering how bad these Epstein files are for Trump; turns out they’re ‘invade Venezuela bad.’ This is literally the plot of the movie Wag the Dog. The president gets caught in a sex scandal, so he attacks a smaller country to distract us, and here we are, distracted.”…

Back on CBS, Stephen Colbert began The Late Show’s final year by echoing Kimmel, “Do you know what this means? Those Epstein files must be crazy! I mean, bomb something! Bomb anything! This operation, launched just two days into the New Year, came as a shock, especially since—and this is true — Trump’s New Year’s resolution was ‘Peace on Earth.’ Well, that didn’t last long. And as a result, neither did my resolution to switch to clear liquor.”…

Earlier, Meyers’s NBC colleague, The Tonight Show’s Jimmy Fallon, echoed Kimmel and Colbert on the Epstein point, “Good luck to everyone who’s made New Year’s resolutions. Yeah, some people want to lose weight while others want to gain Venezuela and—. Yeah, the big news from this weekend is that President Trump sent U.S. troops into Venezuela to capture the country’s president, Nicolas Maduro. Yup, the news took everyone by surprise. When I heard there was an operation to extract a president, I just assumed Trump got stuck in his tanning bed… it turns out Trump’s New Year’s resolution was to distract everyone from the Epstein files.”

Keep reading