Tulsi Gabbard is an Information Warfare Soldier
Clandestine
(bioclandestine.substack.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (29)
sorted by:
So, her story went from:
The narrative shifted to: Tulsi Gabbard now says Iran could produce nuclear weapon 'within weeks' https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c056zqn6vvyo 7 days ago
Then: Gabbard: ‘New intelligence’ confirms Iranian nuclear facilities destroyed https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5369572-gabbard-iran-nuclear-capabilities-strikes/
In terms of shaping narratives, it seems chaotic. However, this is to be expected when one is destroying the previous and fake narrative - the hakneyed Net and Yahoo Iran is about to make a bomb in [insert time period], needs replacing with the new narrative that the nuke facilities have been destroyed. <Iran can claim that this is so, and problem solved.
For extra measure - there is the narrative claim that the uranium was inside the 'mine', and is now somehow 'sealed' in.
Of course the counter-narrative is that this is not so.
In terms of defeating the deep state: maybe people are realizing that Mossad intelligence is made up. Even the idea that the Israeli aggression was a bad mistake, and reversed by Trump in a executive decision. Maybe Palantir will realize this, but I doubt it.
Also the IAEA has been discredited for leaking classified information to Mossad. So not sure how that will play out. Iran is talking about biffing them out - they bent backwards far enough - Iran had the most onerous inspections in the world, only to have vital information leaked. The least that can be done is to fire Grossi.
Optics. There's of course no reason for the DNI to report to the public. She reports to the president. If she makes public comments it could be for the sake of a narrative war or something. Normally the public doesn't even know who that person is.
Further to the DS narrative that the nuke facilities were not destroyed etc.
If they say the possibility of nukes, is still there, then they can start making another plan to attack Iran. Hence the NEED for this counter-narrative. - to keep funding that madness.
They cannot affirm that the nuke ambtion wasn't there in the first place, so it couldn't have been destroyed - for example.
However, if this ia a WH operation, then they need to affirm that the nukes are gone, and Iran has been 'knocked back' - so we don't need to attack Iran some more, for the time being.
I think this is why Tulsi hopped on board with the 'lie' - a White lie, if you like.
The entire show was for the normies.