Gaining Full Control
for people who have very short attention spans
My perspective on social media is that, in order to pull off a fake pandemic or any other large-scale deception, social media must be widely used. This is because it is a completely controlled forum. Yet somehow, people continue to pretend there is some kind of freedom on social media—as if what shows up in your feed is genuinely popular, spontaneous, or grassroots. But would anything truly grassroots be allowed on platforms owned by those who work against the public’s interests?
The six COINTELPRO techniques for dilution, misdirection, and control of an internet forum1 should be studied by everyone who continues to use social media. Only then can people understand what is really happening online. Should I spend some time going over each one? I realize people have very short attention spans, and if we don’t keep this article brief, not much may be learned!
Interrupting the post with my curiosity about how people like to buy others a coffee!
People don’t seem eager to buy me a coffee—or four coffees—by becoming a paid subscriber to my Substack, and the sale is coming to an end. Please leave a comment. I am curious whether this is because you prefer to pay for coffee with cash, and feel the same way about other purchases. Would it be better if there were a way to send “coffee money” directly to me, such as a P.O. Box, or am I just dreaming?
Maybe I am dreaming, because when I see that Robert Malone is very clearly making a million dollars or more a year here just from his Substack, I am fully aware that he is also one of the biggest shills out there, and that the money he gets is totally dirty. Anyway, let me know in the comments!
Before reviewing them one by one, I want to begin with the sixth and final technique.
Technique #6 – “Gaining Full Control”
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings – and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the ‘ultimate victory’ as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a ‘honey pot’ gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
We should look at this carefully because the model for social media is right here within this technique. Social media is fully controlled. We should all know this, but many don’t—or won’t see it. If we did, perhaps we would stop using it. Yet people keep using it, and I can’t get over it. Why use something so obviously owned and manipulated? Nothing is by chance.
I understand, however, that even when people know this deep down, it’s extremely difficult to quit because of the dopamine rush that social media provides. But that same easy dopamine is part of what makes it so destructive.
My own experience illustrates this. In early 2020, I was banned for thirty days on Facebook, for posting that the “virus” could not survive sunlight. That should have been the wake-up call—but I was hooked and kept returning for years.
If you’re wondering what has happened to X, formerly Twitter, it can be summed up by two short sentences:
“One can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the ultimate victory, as the forum is no longer participated in by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms.”
How Many Shills Does It Take to Fabricate a Fake Pandemic?
I am referencing Seven, the Archivist, and drawing on the article “The Shill Sniper Toolkit.” In the future, I plan to review some of the techniques discussed in that piece, particularly their increased use since 2020. Certain people appear to be targeted for their content. For example,






As you know, I greatly value your posts and your insights.
Regards a paying subscription I made a decision a long time ago to a) not offer a paid option myself, and b) not to pay for any others.
There are a number of reasons, foremost of which is where does one draw the line? There are many contributors I would like to support but I simply cannot afford to.
It would be better is SS offered a general subscribers fee which would be then disseminated amongst those one subscribed to. It would be less of an individual contribution but it would (I believe) attract a lot more paid subscribers. Naturally, this money would not be disseminated to the likes of Malone who I would never subscribe to. Just my own personal list.
It shouldn't be difficult, given the mastery these guys have over algorithms!
Another main reason is the simple one of accountability. When do you start to write/react in order to keep your subscribers happy rather than because you 100% believe in what you are writing?
I've had people unsubscribe from my meagre stack because I have vehemently disagreed with them on an issue. I don't care.
But would I care if I was making $1M a month out of it?
This is the "dilemma" I believe a lot of the alt.media are in. The best current example being the whitewash convid enquiries and the blanket dismissal of them by the alt.media.
That's what they want Renee, complete control.
Leslie