The Algorithmic Groomer
We ponder the hypnotic swirls of a digital cesspool; a betrayal of public trust and an attempt to pervert the most fundamental components of our monster circus: the democratic election. The groomer occupied government (GOG) had reached, squidlike, into every crevice and covered their tracks with rhetorical camouflage; “disinformation”; “safety”; leaving observers to guess over motivation and intent— banished to shadow realm, obnubilated in inky ejecta, with no explanation and no recourse. Trust in “official sources” is at an all time low; flytraps in the ether grow hungry for your engagement.
What many once chalked up to politically motivated decisions by a “woke” tech giant has been shown, upon closer inspection, to be something entirely more grotesque. As CEO and alternate reality game (ARG) master Elon Musk tweeted: “Twitter is both a social media company and a crime scene”
The Files revealed that the FBI was pressuring Twitter to crack down on election ‘misinformation’, as well as asking for information on Twitter users that were related to active investigations. The FBI's social media-specializing task force, which was created after the 2016 election, expanded to 80 agents and was working with Twitter to hunt down election meddling by “foreign actors.”
In addition to close relationships with the DHS, FBI and the CIA, Twitter has been providing assistance to the US military since at least 2017. Documents show that in 2017, a U.S. Central Command official sent Twitter a list of 52 accounts and they were given a "whitelist" tag, exempting them from spam and abuse flags. Despite knowledge of Pentagon cyberwarriors using covert identities, Twitter did not suspend many of these accounts for around two years or more. All the way through 2017-2021, high-level Twitter executives were well aware of the network, yet failed to react. In August 2022, the Stanford Internet Observatory report exposed the network and Twitter was cast as a hero for removing it, when in reality they had enabled it since 2017.
These huge interconnected swarms of accounts were created to appear as if they were ordinary users but were actually operated by the US government’s 60,000 man strong army of “cyberwarriors” that spread propaganda in Kuwait, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and other countries. Twitter’s has long held a public stance of taking aggressive measures to combat state-backed information operations, however, these rules have never been applied to American military efforts. And just as we have seen with every other technology used for foreign wars, it is simply a matter of time before these tactics are implemented against “domestic extremists”, otherwise known as Vanilla Isis.
Early on the Twitter Files were called a “nothingburger” by both the mainstream media and the overstimulated dissident sphere, but the most damning revelations about CENTCOM and the extent of twitter’s involvement with “a vast program of social media surveillance and censorship encompassing agencies across the federal government from the State Department to the Pentagon to the CIA.” has been mostly ignored.
The upshot is that we now have irrefutable confirmation that the FBI had intervened in the 2020 elections by lying to tech giants about the “laptop from hell” and its content in order to convince them to censor salient information. The censorship of scientists discussing the Covid response, the blacklisting, blocking and suspending of prominent political figures, including a sitting US president: these all continue to this day, although the extent of the censorship is still unknown. Musk has publicly stated his willingness to work with the corrupt and discredited ADL and other malicious actors.
For many of us, the contents of Musk’s ARG was underwhelming, but it will serve as the impetus to dive further into the towering center of a Venn diagram where Silicon Valley, the CIA, FBI and DHS, as well as the philanthropic-NGO matrix, all converge. The US federal government and the intelligence community has used the tech industry, from its inception, as a tool to shape public opinion and influence elections around the world. Those same tactics used are now being used against US citizens, and they are far more sophisticated than has been disclosed.
Groomer Occupied Government (GOG)
The use of groomers as a tool of the bioleninist machinery is hardly a new tactic. The goal here is not just to silence “conservative voices” or limit “hate speech”–it’s about indoctrinating everyone into accepting identity politics and erasing any kind of gender or moral boundary–and at its most extreme, leading us into a dystopia where the humiliation rituals of GOG serve to cause total paralysis, the metabolic state of learned helplessness. Transhumanist tyrants employ groomers as an instrument of ideological penetration and sustained surveillance, as well as a mutagenic agent. The culture war propaganda which they are indoctrinated into is invaluable in shaping current popular opinion around topics like sexual orientation and inducing gender identity, using marginalized groups as alchemical apparatus.
These tactics fuel hatred, revulsion and mistrust within families, friends and communities— provoking paranoia and dissolution far worse than any Stasi style surveillance regime—all in an effort to exhaust any existing defenses against cultural revolution. In addition to providing means for calculated intimidation, this grotesque method of control serves them well in gerrymandering compliant citizens out of social-, economic-, political-, ideological- or religious lifestyles- thereby eradicating any possible form of coherent resistance against the extremism propagated through such organizations. Ultimately, meaningful organization is replaced with kink-based activism.
Yoel Roth is a perfect example: his dissertation was about a gay hook-up app, his scholarly works an extension of his kinks, the greasy residue of Grindr algorithms. He is affiliated with the Aspen Institute’s “Commission on Information Disorder” as well as Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center’s “Dangerous Speech Project”. An Roth’s positions on speech regulation are typical of the ruling class, with platitudes about platforms like Grindr focusing on “safely connecting queer young adults”.
The reality is that many elite attitudes and specifically Twitter’s moderation policies were largely shaped by the illicit perversions of the people in charge. The idpol and deconstructionist language of apparatchiks like Roth is little more than an evolving camouflage meant to elide their ever progressing fetishes and sex crimes.
Twitter has long had a problem with child pornography on its platform, with major brands like Dyson, Mazda, Forbes and PBS Kids pulling their campaigns shortly before Elon Musk's acquisition of the company. Three members of the Trusty & Safety Council recently quit the company, claiming in a tweeted screed that the "safety and wellbeing of Twitter's users are on the decline" since Musk took over. It is commonly known that Twitter has refused to take action for years. Former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has denied this fact, but the New York Post outlined how Twitter refused to remove child porn because it "didn't find a violation."
Well, now we know why: the person in charge of “Trust and Safety” was using Twitter as his own personal hook-up app, with Roth’s PhD dissertation specifically naming Twitter as a platform that had become a “general-purpose” site for “connecting queer young adults.” Roth commonly tweeted about his love for pornography, and how it animates his academic curiosity, on his official account,
Reminder that when Roth writes, “‘Twitter will live to porn another day!’ —Thing I just yelled loudly at work” or asks “Can high school students ever meaningfully consent to sex with their teachers?” or signals to his fellow deviants, “That awkward moment when you can’t tell whether your neighbor has a really loud infant or is just watching really loud porn” he is not operating out of pocket, these are simply glimpses into the sensibilities of his vile cohort.
Recently, the term “groomer” was targeted for banning, no surprise considering that Roth’s entire academic career and public persona was based around grooming, or in his words “safely connecting with young queer adults [teenage boys]”. As Elon Musk commented, “Looks like Yoel is arguing in favor of children being able to access adult Internet services in his PhD thesis,” , providing a screenshot of Roth’s University of Pennsylvania PhD thesis.
Another problem with Roth is that his credentials are not backed up by any real substance or knowledge. His education and training are a joke, full of buzz words to cover up the control of speech in the ongoing effort to ruthlessly enact a political and cultural agenda. He has no ability to interrogate this agenda, as he has never encountered the underlying questions, nor would he be capable of doing so since his analysis is merely a bizarre intellectualization of his Grindr adventures.
Roth’s academic career was also driven by wanton malice. In an appalling act of deranged behaviour, Roth brazenly admitted to doxing an anonymous man he had come across on the dating app Grindr in a 2016 Medium post. "For no reason except boredom and prurience and a mild, irrational dislike for athletes left over from high school, I made it my mission to discover the mystery basketball player’s true identity," Roth wrote, adding that he had not posted the man’s name but that enough information was shared that others could easily put together who this person was.
He went on to write his doctoral thesis about privacy, safety, and identity in relation to Grindr, saying it was "to try to deal with my guilt for an afternoon of college stupidity".
The groomer serves as a self-blackmailing agent of socio-technical manipulation, as well as literal epigenetic mutation. The perfect apparatchik for the “globohomo” agenda, Yoel Roth is a prime example of a groomer in action. His work with the Aspen Institute’s “Commission on Information Disorder” and Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center’s “Dangerous Speech Project”, illustrate how he uses his own horrific traumas to create an algorithmically instanced, virtual grooming environment. His scholarship, as well as his infamous admission of doxing an anonymous man he had come across on Grindr, all demonstrate how his betrayal of nature and the divine order lead to endless recursions of this primary treachery. His research and his online, profilic identity, in conjunction with his positions of power, make it clear that he is a groomer not only of children, but of society as well, using marginalized groups to cultivate an eruption of bizarre clowns as a means of control. In other words, sexually traumatized individuals are sought out to serve as enforcers or “super-spreaders” of cybernetically induced "identities" for the purpose of sociocultural engineering.
COVID and the U.S. Government’s Agenda of “Social Inoculation” Against the “Infodemic”
The Twitter Files are further corroborated by America First Legal’s (AFL) series of document releases which provide concrete evidence of collusion between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and social media companies to censor free speech and ghettoize the public square. It uncovers the shocking truth of how the U.S. government has been actively working to “socially inoculate”–or brainwash–the public against information deemed by the government as “misinformation.” In order to do so, it was enlisting Big Tech corporations like Twitter and Facebook to monitor and manipulate users for the purposes of censoring unwanted opinions or information, as well as pushing government propaganda.
The documents reveal that Google hosted a “Trusted Media Summit,” in which CDC Vaccine Confidence Strategist Elisabeth Wilhelm was invited to give a keynote address on the CDC’s work with WHO and other international organizations in order to address what they called an “infodemic” through “social inoculation.” Twitter also ran a “Partner Support Portal,” through which government employees were able to submit posts they deemed as “misinformation” to be removed or flagged. Furthermore, Facebook disclosed that it had removed 16 million “pieces of content” with opinions or information the USG wanted suppressed. Finally, the documents reveal collaboration between CDC, UNICEF, WHO and IFCN member organization Mafindo – a Facebook third-party fact-checking partner based in Indonesia that is funded by Google – in order to mitigate ‘disinformation.’
AFL’s disclosures provide insight into how Big Tech platforms have willingly worked with government agencies and international organizations to undermine American citizens' rights to free speech, instead imposing opinionated censorship on behalf of the Biden Administration. There is no doubt that this partnership works to violate the First Amendment, silence opposition voices, and synthesize disinformation campaigns which could not be more contradictory from a federal government that claims to promote transparency and democracy.
We now know from the Twitter Files that the United States government had been pressuring Twitter to elevate certain content and suppress other content about Covid-19 and the pandemic. Internal emails revealed that both the Trump and Biden administrations had directly reached out to Twitter executives, pushing them to moderate the platform’s content according to their wishes. And the Biden administration had gone a step further, calling on Twitter to shut down “misinformation” about the pandemic. The White House had directly met with Twitter executives and pressured them to take action on a journalist skeptical of lockdowns and mRNA vaccines, who had hundreds of thousands of followers on the platform. But it wasn’t just the government. Twitter had also developed its own internal moderation processes, using bots and decision trees to moderate content. However, these methods had proven too crude to accurately capture the nuances of the pandemic. Contractors operating in places like the Philippines were also moderating content, with decision trees guiding them to predetermined conclusions. And at the top, higher level employees had the ultimate say in what content was allowed. With their own individual and collective biases, they determined what went and what stayed, and what questions went unanswered. All of this only added to the terror of the technocratically manufactured “pandemic.”
Marco Polo USA is a nonprofit organization founded by Justin Wilson to investigate Hunter Biden's laptop and find violations of state and federal law. Justin grew up in Effingham, Illinois, inspired by the MAGA movement when Donald Trump ran for president in 2015. It took his team of six an entire year to write their report which details 459 violations of law and regulations. Using private investigators, forensic accountants, and other resources, the group was able to uncover more than just information on the hard drive; they were also able to corroborate their findings with other official government sources like Senators' letters.
The report not only delves deep into crimes committed but also shows how corruption and nepotism drove the Biden family dynamic. While it has taken some time for mainstream media to submit and accept Marco Polo's findings as true, both CBS and The New York Times have recently attested to their veracity, though the level of coverage in no way matches the weight of the findings. Marco Polo's investigation sets an unprecedented standard that is yet unmatched by any political party or news outlet since its release in October. Such monumental acts of true “investigative journalism” are categorically ignored or suppressed by the legacy media.
All But War is Simulation
The total lockstep discipline with which the media reacted to the NY Post Hunter Biden laptop article can be explained, at least in part, by the fact that they had all attended an extraordinary simulation the month before. The Aspen Institute, a nonprofit funded by a massive philanthropic matrix including the Ford, Tides and Rockefeller foundations, hosted a “tabletop exercise” in September 2020 aimed at influencing the reporting of a potential leak of documents related to Hunter Biden. The 11-day scenario was organized by Vivian Schiller, a former top executive at National Public Radio, Twitter, The New York Times, and NBC News, and attended by Twitter’s then-head of trust and safety, Facebook’s head of security policy and top national security reporters from The New York Times and The Washington Post. Weeks later, The Post broke the news about Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop. The story was predictably ignored or downplayed by most mainstream news outlets and suppressed by both Twitter and Facebook, although major news organizations eventually authenticated key emails from the laptop. Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg have since “apologized” for bringing the bootheel down on The Post’s reporting.
The Aspen Institute's Commission on Information Disorder recently issued their final report, recommending the formalization of a dystopian state-corporate censorship regime. This is just one of several initiatives by elite funded organizations to address the issue of “misinformation and disinformation” (non-sanctioned information), including the Center for Humane Technology, the Institute for Rebooting Social Media at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, The Stanford Internet Observatory, and the Technology and Social Change Research Project at the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School. Additionally, DARPA has its programs such as Influence Campaign Awareness and Sensemaking (INCAS) program and the Semantic Forensics (SemaFor) to investigate this area.
Even this is just the tip of the iceberg. What you are seeing is the emergence of a civilization-wide mobilization that used Trump’s election as a pretext to declare total information war on the citizenry. Starting in earnest around 2017-2018 every major social media company, most traditional media and an enormous web of philanthropic foundations, NGOs and intelligence community cut-outs began implementing the tools and infrastructure necessary to “solve the problem of democracy” forever.
For example, YouTube released a tool in 2017 known as the Redirect Method which ostensibly served anti-ISIS content to users searching for ISIS-related videos. The timing is interesting: a decade after ISIS videos began appearing on the platform but exactly on time for it to be suggested as a solution to the "alt-right ideologies" that led to the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. YouTube’s parent company, Google, has also committed $10 million to a global media literacy initiative, which includes $3 million for the U.S. based partnership between Poynter Institute, Stanford University Education Group, and the Local Media Association to "help young people discern fact from fiction." YouTube, who has added more than 10,000 moderators in recent years, has also been investing in external fact-checking and journalism endeavors, working on its algorithm and adding a fact-checking flag to its news and search results. Facebook, Google and their subsidiaries all have similar initiatives, all in similar time frames with the identical pretext of Trump’s election, Unite the Right in Charlottesville and the January 6th spree of boomer vandalism, which are everywhere discussed as civilization-ending horrors.
This mobilization was predated by developments in the Department of Defense and the federally funded research community. In 2006, the Department of Defense released a Report on Human, Social, and Cultural Behavior Modeling, which evaluated the investment in and status of research and development in this area. It found that military research was not sufficient to generate the technology they needed. A working group of experts from the DoD research community and other relevant departments and agencies, such as DARPA, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the Office of Naval Research, the Army Research Laboratory, and the Air Force Research Laboratory, was convened to assess a key domain of technology: "sociocultural behavior research and engineering." The report recommended broadstream private sector investment in science and technology, as well as in product maturation and transition from the private sector to military use.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Human Social Culture Behavior (HSCB) Modeling Program was established in response to a Defense Research
and Engineering report, which spurred activity across the DoD enterprise. The program supported a wide range of research and technology development, while sponsoring relevant work through Minerva and the Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative. The “stakeholders” were drawn from across the military-industrial complex—many of them small businesses, nearly a quarter each from academia and government labs, with leadership from federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) such as MITRE, RAND, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory at the California Institute of Technology and the Los Alamos National Laboratory. As a result, the defense community developed an entire community for examining sociocultural behavior and “behavioral engineering".
In Progress and Promise, the 2013 progress report for this initiative, the outcomes and applications for this research are discussed. Domestic application is openly and plainly posited, specifically in the context of climate refugees, “demographic shift” and "hate speech," a term which coincidentally skyrocketed in use the same year. The report continues, “[c]yberspace is used for networking and recruiting (e.g., Facebook), fundraising, training, sanctuary, command and control (e.g., Twitter), and strategic communication (e.g., YouTube). These factors indicate the rich opportunity for further sociocultural behavior research and engineering.”
DARPA and IARPA (the rebranding of the Office of Total Information Awareness) have been making moves for the last decade that have had far-reaching implications . All the way back in 2011, with the Social Media in Strategic Communication (SMISC), Strategic Social Interaction Module (SSIM), and Narrative Networks programs, DARPA recognized the significance of social identities, cultural norms and narratives in helping to generate useful intelligence about individuals. The program manager of SMISC describes it thus: