Kurt Nimmo | Infowars,
Supposedly designed to prevent recruitment, it will flood social media with war propaganda.
Back in October 2013, Infowars reported on a meeting held by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) in Vienna. A document released during the conference focused on how terrorists and other criminals use the internet for nefarious purposes. This is possible, the UNODC claimed, because there “is the lack of an internationally agreed framework for retention of data held by ISPs,” particularly in the United States.
The UN had the UNODC recommendations and other recipes on the back burner for a couple years, but earlier this month we learned they are ready to float another control scheme.
On May 17, a Security Council presidential statement asked for a proposal from the organization’s counter-terrorism committee to devise a “comprehensive international framework” to “curb incitement, recruitment” of terrorism on the internet.
Globalist Pro-War Propaganda Effort
In addition to working with social networks as part of an effort to take down “extremist” material, the Council “proposed that the international community consider a number of concrete actions, such as developing a counter-narrative campaign to encourage and amplify those actively denouncing terrorism. Other proposed actions included developing the most effective means to counter terrorist propaganda, incitement and recruitment, including through the Internet, and raising public awareness of counter-terrorist narratives, including through education.”
In other words, a concerted propaganda effort aimed at official enemies—enemies largely created, encouraged, armed and trained by the intelligence and military agencies of nations present at the meeting (in particular, the United States, Israel, France, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, and the European Union).
Russia, understanding how the United States exploits such meetings and mandates for its own foreign policy ends, “emphasized the importance of a Security Council free of double standards and that did not distinguish between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ terrorists, saying it was fundamentally important that it focus on combating radicalization and incitement to terrorism.”
The Russian Federation’s call for an unbiased effort to combat the language of “terrorism” (a noun the internationalist organization and participating states use with ideologically well-tuned selectivity) will be ignored and the emphasis on silencing and countering with propaganda (on social networks and elsewhere on the internet) the Islamic State and other official enemies will proceed with high bias, as usual.
Facebook’s War Against Conservatives
In the United States, a campaign against “extremism” on the internet is already in motion, led this week by Mark Zuckerberg and his Facebook empire. Mr. Zuckerberg has not marshaled forces to produce counter-propaganda aimed at “extremists” (in this case, conservatives), but rather has denied ranking on its highly visible trending news service to sources that do not tote the establishment line or echo The New York Times, The Washington Post and the rest of the Mockingbird media.
There is, however, a United Nations angle to the story. In September, Zuckerberg was caught discussing the censorship of anti-migrant posts at a United Nations development summit while speaking with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Mr. Zuckerberg has demonstrated his willingness to cleanse his social media platform of all voices not in lockstep with the government and the United Nations, no matter how destructive their policies.
UN Calls for Internet License
In 2010, the year before ISIS crawled into the news, the UN strategy to control speech on the internet surfaced when UN International Telcommunications Union secretary general Hamadoun Toure told the World Economic Forum at Davos global treaties must be put in place to combat one of the latest bugaboos favored by government—cyber terrorism.
Craig Mundie, chief research and strategy officer for Microsoft, told globalists at the summit that the Internet needed to be policed by means of introducing licenses similar to drivers licenses—in other words government permission to use the web, Infowars reported on February 1, 2010.
Governments love to use licenses, fees, taxes, penalties, surcharges, etc, to control the masses, and the United Nations, a world government organization, is no exception. “If you want to drive a car you have to have a license to say that you are capable of driving a car, the car has to pass a test to say it is fit to drive and you have to have insurance,” said Mundie, making an argument for an internet licensing system.
The DMV would not issue a license to a person deemed by the state to be dangerous on the highway and, likewise, a licensing bureau established by the UN will not issue one to a person determined to be a “terrorist” or “extremist” by its member states.
Propaganda Platform for Never Ending War
For now, the UN seems to be satisfied working to build a massive propaganda platform to compete with the “recruitment” efforts of shadowy terrorist organizations, many spawned by member state intelligence organizations.
The effort is not designed to prevent hapless would-be terrorists from joining the Islamic State or other jihadi groups—this, after all, is at best a marginal issue, more related to the mental health of adolescents and young adults attracted to lurid sensationalism—but will rather serve as a propaganda megaphone in the forever war waged against manufactured terrorism.
Instead of persuading those supposedly at risk of falling victim to IS recruitment, the UN globalist propaganda platform will concentrate on the dissemination of pro-war propaganda.
“Propaganda strategies developed in tandem with war plans will include those arguments explaining and defending U.S. actions that have the widest popular appeal,” explained Joyce Battle in 2002, prior to the illegal invasion of Iraq by George W. Bush and his coterie of neocons.
Considering the outrageous and often unverified activity of the Islamic State—mass murder of innocents, beheadings of declared “apostates,” slavery, rape, theft, etc.—gaining the “widest popular appeal” for open-ended war spanning decades and possibly generations will be a more manageable task than in the past.