Posted originally on the CTH on December 20, 2022 | sundance 

In addition to confirming more of the basic construct behind Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop, Twitter File Release #8 also reveals that Twitter officers are carefully curating information to protect their interests.  When information is curated to protect political interests, it puts a question mark behind all prior releases.

In release #8, the basic outline is showing how the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and U.S. State Department (DoS) work with the social media platforms to amplify messaging and create specifically anonymous government accounts intended to spread propaganda globally. [Twitter File Release #8 Here]  The government then asks the platform engineering side to boost the messaging of the government accounts and use the internal tools to promote government users.  Essentially, social media propaganda.

The United States intelligence apparatus was/is actively using and working with the Twitter platform to align with U.S. government interests.  The govt was coordinating, instructing, assisting and benefitting from the relationship.  Pro govt positions were amplified, and information adverse to the interests of the Pentagon and State Dept was removed, hidden, throttled.

Unfortunately, as admitted by Twitter File #8 Author Lee Fang, a writer for The intercept, “The searches were carried out by a Twitter attorney, so what I saw could be limited.” There is no ‘could be‘ in that statement.  The searches were limited, specifically time limited putting all of the scrutiny on the timeline when Donald Trump was in office.

CTH has no vested interest in this pretending nonsense.  We all know, hell, its public record, the use of Twitter and Facebook as a tool to advance U.S. foreign policy began during the Obama administration.  There are dozens of mainstream press accounts of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton reaching out to Twitter and Facebook for support during the ’11/’12 Arab Spring.   This is not controversial, it happened.

However, the current release uses a carefully applied time filter only showing DoD and DoS use of the platform (to assist foreign policy) starting in 2017, when President Trump took office.  This is intentional.  The origin of the practice starts with Barack Obama.

Let me be very, very clear.  This release of information was filtered to avoid revealing that President Obama was the originator of this activity.

Twitter is trying to protect President Obama because, beyond the ideological alignment, the monopolistic social media system – a partnership between the U.S. government and Big Tech, was essentially designed as a purposeful oligarchical system.  As long as each platform Oligarch retains the code of omerta the system survives.

Within that design, if any one oligarch turns against the group interest, he/she becomes a target of the system.  Remaining in alignment with the group is why Twitter lawyers carefully filtered out the trail to former President Barack Obama.  The One is always protected.

Barack Obama established the partnership between government and social media, and within this release Twitter is protecting Barack Obama.

This release is so over-the-top-obvious in its intent to protect the Obama legacy, that the nature of the DoS/DoD admissions within it become almost secondary.

Twitter gave approval & special protection to the U.S. military’s online psychological influence ops. Despite knowledge that Pentagon propaganda accounts used covert identities, Twitter did not suspend many for around 2 years or more. Some remain active.

In 2017, a U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) official sent Twitter a list of 52 Arab language accounts “we use to amplify certain messages.” The official asked for priority service for six accounts, verification for one & “whitelist” abilities for the others.

[Read Full Twitter File Release #8 Here]

The Obama administration first created the public-private partnership with Twitter and Facebook to support the “Arab Spring” uprising.

As a consequence, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was the first elected official to be taken out by former President Obama’s deployment of Twitter as a community activist tool for revolution in 2011. In direct and consequential ways, Egypt was the BETA test for a process that surface a decade later in the United States during the 2020 election.

Using and influencing social media was a tool created by the Obama state department, as noted years ago in Mic.Com:

[…] In countries like Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen, rising action plans such as protests made up of thousands, have been organized through social media such Facebook and Twitter. “We use Facebook to schedule the protests” an Arab Spring activist from Egypt announced “and [we use] Twitter to coordinate, and YouTube to tell the world.” The role that technology has taken in allowing the distribution of public information such as the kinds stated by the aforementioned activist, had been essential in establishing the democratic movement that has helped guide abused civilians to overthrow their oppressor. (link)

(NationalPulse) The most popular Twitter hashtags in the Arab region in the first three months of this year were “Egypt”, “Jan25”, “Libya”, “Bahrain” and “protest”.

Nearly 9 in 10 Egyptians and Tunisians surveyed in March said they were using Facebook to organise protests or spread awareness about them. All but one of the protests called for on Facebook ended up coming to life on the streets.

These and other findings from the newly released second edition of the Arab Social Media Report by the Dubai School of Government give empirical heft to the conventional wisdom that Facebook and Twitter abetted if not enabled the historic region-wide uprisings of early 2011. (link)

Fast forward to 2020, and those same elements deployed against the Egyptian government were deployed in the United States in a coordinated public-private partnership with Twitter, Facebook and social media.

The U.S. government control over these social media platforms is ultimately what lies at the heart of the latest Twitter Files release.

And it goes much deeper… much more purposefully deeper.

The ideological interests behind the 2010/ ’11 “Arab Spring” uprising were the same ideological interests behind the 2020 “Black Lives Matter” protests/uprising.  Not merely similar people, but the exact same people.

The exact same group of U.S. people who were promoting the mid-east Arab Spring in 2010/’11 are the same people who promoted the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests.   The same politicians; the same media voices; the same newspapers; the same social media activists. Almost every participant, and their support for the uprising ’10 -vs- ’20 was identical, including the platforms deployed.

In the background of the Arab Spring, the root control organization was The Muslim Brotherhood.  Considering all of the connective similarities and considering the U.S. advocates for the brotherhood were the same voices advocating for BLM; the BLM movement as an extension of the same overarching ideology becomes clear.

It is not an esoteric intellectual exercise to compare the two movements because we were not only talking about a similar level of protest, but we also saw an identical set of actions in both groups.  Not only were the advocates the same voices, but the behavior also to remove and destroy common cultural connection/heritage was the same.

The Brotherhood is essentially the umbrella organization for a multitude of Islamic factions.  In essence, the Muslim Brotherhood represents political Islam. Similarly, if you look at the structure of Black Lives Matter, they too represent an umbrella-type structure for a network of individual political grievance groups.  Both groups represent a cultural revolution by the results of their activity.

In 2010 the Brotherhood had al-Qaeda and militant factions within ISIS.  In 2020 BLM had the New Black Panthers and militant factions within Antifa.

In 2010 the Brotherhood tore down statues and symbols they identified as culturally oppressive to their political views.  In 2020 BLM tore down statues and symbols they identified as oppressive to their political views.

In 2010 the Brotherhood burned books, destroyed history and removed their cultural opposition by force.  In 2020 BLM promoted burning books, destroying history and cancelling their cultural opposition by force.

In 2010 the Brotherhood used social media to organize their political activity and Big Tech facilitated by setting up local networks for protest.  In 2020 BLM used social media to organize their political media and Big Tech facilitated by deploying all local networks to assist.

In 2010 the Brotherhood attacked the police and framed their Islamist movement as oppressed by law enforcement.  In 2020 BLM attacked the police and framed their movement as oppressed by law enforcement.

In 2010 the Brotherhood destroyed the notions of secularism and viciously attacked any form of Christianity, including burning churches. In 2020 BLM advocated against secularism and viciously attacked Christianity – including the burning of churches, while conspicuously never criticizing any element of Islam.

In 2010 the Brotherhood was very strategic as they hoodwinked moderate Islamic supporters into voting them into power.  Once in power they removed all of the institutional systems, government offices, judges, constitutional balances, local elections, and anything that would impede their ultimate stranglehold on power.  Sharia Law replaced common legislative law.   As a result, the ordinary population was brutalized, property was taken by force; businesses were taken by force and the Islamic regime now controlled every element of their lives.

In 2020 the approach of the BLM movement appeared very strategic as they also hoodwinked a multitude of supporters, voters and even corporations, by defining their victim class and role.  Donations to the BLM group funded Joe Biden.  Much like the 2010 Brotherhood approach, grievances were made personal.   Bonds between families and friends are severed by force and demands to adhere to the movement’s ideology.  Now look at the severity of what policies are being advanced.

In 2010, despite the visibility of the radical elements of Islam, Egyptian candidate Mohammed Morsi ran on a platform for change as a moderate.  He was supported by Obama, Clinton and the social media messaging deployed by the U.S. government.  Once he achieved victory Morsi governed as a hardline leftist.

In 2020, despite the visibility of the radical leftists (BLM, Antifa), U.S. candidate Joe Biden ran on a platform for change as a moderate.  He was supported by Obama, James Clyburn and the social media messaging deployed by the U.S. government.  Once he achieved victory Biden governed as a hardline leftist.

These strategic political similarities are not coincidental.

As you can see from above, the use of social media had both an international and domestic value as considered by those in the Obama sphere who constructed the partnership with government.   Twitter’s curation of the timeline is intended to hide this ‘Bigger Picture.’