Imagine if you will that I was an adversary of the nation you live in. Imagine that I wish to destroy your nation by releasing a biological agent into your nation through the water system, through various transport systems, in the air, or just anywhere that I can get as many people exposed as possible. Now imagine this chemical/biological agent caused the affected subjects to abandon all cognitive, rational thinking, act erratically and start acting violently towards anyone not suffering from the same ailments as they are. Imagine that they become increasingly aggressive and those who are highly susceptible to the toxins begin committing outright violence against those not infected.
Now, imagine that the authorities and politicians who, having borne witness to the violence choose to do nothing to stop it, in fact they go on a campaign to punish those who are unaffected and seeking a cure. The authorities and politicians are acting in such a manner because they too have been infected. I, as your nation’s adversary, would have little trouble tearing your nation apart from this tactical disposition. In fact, anyone could probably walk on in and launch a hostile takeover.
This is how subversion works in the greater context of war. A population so demoralised by lack of leadership, weak economy, lack of identity, and loss of social cohesion among other factors begins to view their adversary as a better option than their current system of governance and leadership. Former KGB Officer Yuri Bezmenov goes into great detail about how this strategy was carried out against the USA during the Cold War.
But what would happen if I, your nation’s adversary, was caught midway through this bio-chemical assault on your nation? I would no doubt be dragged before the International Criminal Court and have the book thrown at me under the Biological Weapons Convention and Article 51 of the Geneva conventions for targeting a civilian population.
Now imagine for a moment that my weapon was not a manipulation of human genetics to create chaos and confusion, but rather a manipulation of the mind by creating stimuli that affects human perception. What if I created an alternative reality that – though contradicted by all evidence-backed reality – sought to cause mass confusion with the explicit intent of disorientating the target population and ultimately destroying them? No sanctions or conventions exist to counter such an operation probably because it is, all things considered, a very non-violent method of warfare. Subversion is regarded as the highest form of warfare particularly when combined with precision strikes. Ultimately, the same effects would be seen in my target population whether I use the first or second method of warfare yet only the former carries penalties from the International Criminal Court. Yet that doesn’t mean that the latter form is not without legitimate targets to attack.
During the war that saw the disintegration of Yugoslavia, Radio Televisija Srbije in the centre of Belgrade was targeted by a NATO air strike for its use not only as the national broadcaster, but as a communications hub to co-ordinate Serbian forces and a propaganda tool used to either legitimise or play down the ongoing slaughter against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. This target was legitimised under Article 52 (2) of the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions which states:
“Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.”
In a meeting between Amnesty International and NATO it was argued by NATO officials that the “attack was carried out because RTS was a propaganda organ and that propaganda is direct support for military action”. The British Minister for International Development, Clare Short argued further that “the propaganda machine (RTS) which is prolonging the war and meaning more and more of the brutality continues, is a legitimate target” and that “a propaganda machine that creates false propaganda constantly is a legitimate target that’s why it was hit”. United States Pentagon official Kenneth Bacon stated that the “(RTS) has misreported on what’s going on in a way that has, I think, made it extremely difficult, impossible probably, for the Serb people to grasp the full magnitude of the problem in Kosovo”.
Claims were made by NATO spokespersons and Pentagon officials that RTS was used as a part of “Milosovic’s murder machine” as much as his military. Comparisons were made to the incitement of violence used by Radio Television Des Milles Collines during the Rwandan genocide. In spite of these sentiments the International Criminal Court’s Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) Report determined that it was not claimed that the (Serbian TV-and radio stations) were used to incite violence akin to Radio Television Des Milles Collines during the Rwandan genocide, which might have justified their destruction.
The radio broadcasts during the Rwandan genocide of 1994 are however, a good basis on which to make a case for destroying or silencing media outlets that deliberately broadcast misinformation and propaganda with the intent of supporting violent political action. A study conducted by the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (MIGS) reflected on the manner in which the 2 main radio stations in Rwanda transmitted “hate propaganda to the illiterate masses”. It claims that Radio Rwanda – the public broadcaster – and Radio Television Des Milles (RTLM) were actively involved in pushing violent anti-Tutsi sentiment which was highly reminiscent of Marxist class war rhetoric against the bourgeois. As the MIGS study found:
“From October 1993 to late 1994, RTLM was used by Hutu leaders to advance an extremist Hutu message and anti-Tutsi disinformation, spreading fear of a Tutsi genocide against Hutu, identifying specific Tutsi targets or areas where they could be found, and encouraging the progress of the genocide. In April 1994, Radio Rwanda began to advance a similar message, speaking for the national authorities, issuing directives on how and where to kill Tutsis, and congratulating those who had already taken part.”
Another key detail to note from this same study is that a large tranche of RTLM’s most avid listeners were “unemployed youth and Interhamwe militia”. A factor that bears an eerily close resemblance to the current state of affairs with Western mainstream media outlets and their relationship with University students and Antifa.
In our current political climate we have witnessed politicians and the mainstream media openly incite hatred against all patriotic nationalists who oppose their globalist ideology which venerates and celebrates blatant falsehoods such as gender fluidity, Islam as a peaceful belief system, gender pay gaps and the like. All the while the MSM demonises rational and reasonable sentiments such as love for country, respect for tradition, individual liberty, the rule of law and other ideas that have not only seen Western civilisation flourish but have secured survival of humans for the best part of 600,000 years.
US Congresswoman Maxine Waters has openly incited hatred by telling her followers to “push back” against their ideological opponents by participating in mob intimidation to send a message that they’re “not welcome, anywhere”. When criticised, Rep. Waters (D-CA) only doubled down mockingly stating how she ‘threatens Trump supporters all the time’. President Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder has openly stated “when they go low, we kick ‘em” to a captive audience of supporters. Members of Congress such as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have worked tirelessly to de-legitimise the authority of the Trump administration and made a host of statements that invite their supporters to ‘uprisings all over the country’. We’ve seen Hollywood elites publicly stoke the flames of malcontent, illustrated by violent theatrics featuring props like Trump’s severed head or re-enacting his murder on stage and in film clips.
The constant and frequent dehumanising of all those deemed ‘deplorable’ has no doubt played a major factor in mobilising the Left’s foot soldiers, Antifa being but one example. On March 22nd 2017 James T. Hodgekinson wrote on his Facebook “Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co.” and in February wrote “The Republicans are the Taliban of the US”. Shortly thereafter he shot a Republican member of Congress, Steve Scalise, at a friendly baseball match. Hodgekinson was a staunch Bernie Sanders supporter and firm supporter of ‘progressive politics’. Closer to home we’ve seen leftist mobs attack their ideological adversaries with total impunity, a topic that The XYZ has covered extensively. Everything from eggs to milkshakes, right through to bike locks, fists and capsicum spray have been used to harm the enemies of the establishment Left and their will has been enforced dutifully by their armed paramilitary wings.
The key question is, where do these people get the audacity to commit such blatant acts of political violence? The answer of course is the mainstream media. The mainstream media have whipped the target population into a frenzy by declaring that all conservatives exist illegitimately, and their ideas and statements are akin to violence and therefore responding to their statements or even their mere presence with violence is measured and justified. Whether it’s ‘punch a Nazi’ or Trump/Russia collusion hoax, the intent is to justify physical violence and to demoralise and delegitimise all opponents of Globalist Neo-Marxism.
In recent Tweets and vlogs Philosopher Stefan Molyneux has stated that should outright violence between Right and Left kick off, let it be known that the left started it. There is comprehensive evidence that only keeps mounting that the political left have been first to delegitimise the legitimate, glorify the violent acts of its active combatants and encourage violent action against Conservative nationalists and moderates alike.
Let us now return to the aforementioned statement of the British Minister for International Development during the crisis in Kosovo who, in reference to the Serbian broadcaster, stated:
“..the propaganda machine (RTS) which is prolonging the war and meaning more and more of the brutality continues, is a legitimate target” and that “a propaganda machine that creates false propaganda constantly is a legitimate target that’s why it was hit”.
Let us not forget that a key capability of militant Hutus during the Rwandan genocide was the 2 main pro-Hutu broadcasters whose “hate propaganda to the illiterate masses” was instrumental in both the justification and the mobilisation of roaming squads of murderers. Our adversaries in the streets have been given adequate approval to act in a violent manner by their masters through their system of communication; the mainstream media. The mass censorship of Conservatives online only confirms this desire for total control over information and serves as an auxiliary communication system to achieve the same end state. Should the present situation dissolve into an all-out physical conflict, these outlets are – in accordance with the relevant laws of armed conflict – legitimate targets for total or partial destruction, depending on their effectiveness to achieve military objectives, ie harming and killing Conservatives.
The constant legitimising violence, delegitimising of ideas, denial of democratic outcomes, and dehumanising of political opponents has already seen violent action as a direct result. It is for this reason that we must recognise a daunting and bitter reality and adjust accordingly: The mainstream media is now a full-fledged threat to national security.