Once upon a time (as far back as 2012), it was illegal to conduct psychological operations (psyop) against the American people.
Then the world (and the White House) was introduced to Barack Obama.
In 2013, an act was signed by Obama that neutralized the Smith-Mundt Act (or the U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948), which “developed to regulate broadcasting of programs for foreign audiences produced under the guidance by the State Department, and it prohibited domestic dissemination of materials produced by such programs as one of its provisions.”
In other words, the 2013 act repealed banning of propaganda to Americans and pushed government-regulated news, which allowed the government to gain assistance in not-so-popular policies.
Now, granted, Obama isn’t the one who authored the bill. That was thanks to then-Representatives Mac Thornberry from Texas and Adam Smith from Washington State. But he sure did sign it, ushering in a whole new world of government freedom to serve up propaganda to Americans on a silver platter (or a screen, as is more appropriate).
< Sign the petition: Ban Federal Vaccine Mandates! >
One unidentified woman who claims to have been a part of psychological operations in the Army in 2003, posted a video explaining when it became illegal to use psyop against Americans.
The Associated Press, of course, took it upon themselves to label this as “false” under their “fact-checking” umbrella in 2019.
“It removes the protection for Americans,” a Pentagon official said at the time. “It removes oversight from the people who want to put out this information. There are no checks and balances. No one knows if the information is accurate, partially accurate, or entirely false.”
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.
Good word! The effort to frighten us into compliance has never been more militant, more desperate.
“Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you. (1 Peter 5:7)
“So we say with confidence, “The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can mere mortals do to me?” (Hebrews 13:6)
And they will keep on keeping on with these operations. eventually the one’s who refuse to comply with end up dead before or after being put in fema camps. Turn off all msm and toss ur tv’s – it is called PROGRAMMING for a reason people.
Hiding from it doesn’t defeat it. You must fight. And to fight you must meet the enemy often on their battlefield and (logically not physically) punch them right in the face every time they spew their BS. It’s NOT to defeat them straight up by yourself, it’s so that OTHER reading their BS will question their words as well. Some simply can’t spot the errors in their stories and schemes. Those who CAN spot them need to share loudly with the world what is between the lines. It needs to be delivered in a fact-based manner while being terse. Often in the form of questions is the best approach. When we are accusing in that way it is forcing people to think and make up their own reasoning…that then becomes THEIR question and not our spin.
When we know the truth we can’t simply hide from their PROGRAMMING… when we know the truth we SEE the programming and MUST reveal it to others. That is the only power that we truly have against these massively deceptive POS in govt and media. Do not ignore it…. FIGHT! But fight intelligently.
Thanks for the advice. Makes a lot of sense. I like the question approach. Let’s keep decrypting all the false information we see and help correct global perception.
oh and she is referring to when obama repealed the smith mundt act….feel free to look it up. gave the govt and the msm the legal right to gaslight us with PROPAGANDA!
Shouldn’t be using TikTok. We’ve all been warned it’s a chinese spy ap, so everything you’re doing with that ap, the chinese are watching. How stupid can you be? You were warned and you use it anyway. YOU are the problem.
Using the enemy’s resources to share negative information about the enemy isn’t a bad thing.
Relying solely on it as the only avenue for sharing information would be a problem.
Why did her text box have Facebook’s new Meta logo in it. Is that a psyop?
It’s probably automatically added…. Metaverse — includes Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp…
Excellent advice.
While I appreciate this woman speaking up, this is far too little to make it actionable or to rally the masses behind it to take action. We must have multiple barrel smoking guns, proof of creators, proof of victims, proof of premeditated planning and execution, all delivered to the public AT THE SAME TIME….not dribbled out like a Project Veritas(which I love the intent but hate how its released drip by drip… he has little real impact because he sensationalizes for traffic to his site, not for a huge and overwhelming sledgehammer blow). While the woman’s comments are interesting and may be 100% truth this isn’t going to catch fire with this approach.
Being RIGHT isn’t enough, PROVING in irrefutable ways with hard evidence, detail and facts is the ONLY way to make the difference. These evil sob’s doing this know that stringing/stretching out bad news/actions over time it BENEFITS them when it drips out and cuts the energy from those seeking justice.
“What difference at this point does it make?” said HRC…she didn’t deny the wrongdoing, she said too much time has passed you dolts and no one cares anymore because people have moved on. People ALWAYS move on which is how the Clintons even HAD a career. Kicking the bad news down the road exhaust the accusors and conditions those judging to “well I guess it’s not that bad” or “nothing is going to be done anyway”.
We 100% know that the media and Dems stall and spin on purpose…effectively letting coffee down into the saucer, which lets it cool, then when they pour it back in the cup to drink it (have to answer to Congress or the public) it doesn’t burn them. (its old news, everyone knows, can’t we just move on, what difference does it make at this point, what I meant at that time, ….)
This kind of information has to be delivered in bulk, has to have solid backing and support via evidence not innuendo, has to name names, has to show proofs. Statements drip delivered prematurely and incompletely only work to steal/diminish the HEAT to burn the guilty. Yes, it can get clicks but it can’t garner convictions of the guilty, only a pathway to never be held to account.