The British government’s covert history of “mind control” is designed to to limit people’s justified outrage over Muslim terrorist attacks committed against British citizens.
Zerohedge (h/t Nita) In 1993, the United Kingdom granted asylum to a couple named Ramadan Abedi and Samia Tabbal, who claimed they had faced persecution in their home country of Libya. A year later, the couple welcomed a baby boy they named Salman.
Twenty three years later, Salman Abedi walked into Manchester Arena during an Ariana Grande concert and detonated a bomb he wore in a backpack filled with nuts and bolts to act as shrapnel. He murdered 22 concert goers and wounded at least 59 of them.
Two weeks later, there was a benefit concert held for the victims of the bombing, which included Chris Martin singing the Oasis hit “Don’t Look Back In Anger.” The concert coincided with a social media campaign including Twitter hashtags and the rest.
This was apparently part of a “mind control” plan by the British government, one that started prior to the 2012 Olympics in Britain and continues to this day. This was described in an article in Middle East Eye in 2019, an article that went viral last week in the wake of the latest terrorist atrocity in England.
‘Controlled Spontaneity’: The secret UK government blueprints shaping post-terror planning. After the 2017 London Bridge attack, local officials were told: ‘We’re sending you a hundred imams.’
Middle East EyeThe British government has prepared for Muslim terrorist incidents by pre-planning social media campaigns which are designed to appear to be a spontaneous public response to attacks. Hashtags are carefully tested before attacks happen, Instagram images selected, and “impromptu” street posters are printed.
The campaigns have been deployed during every UK Muslim terrorist incident in recent years, including the London Bridge attack in June 2017 and the Finsbury Park mosque attack that took place two weeks later
Within hours of an incident, campaigns are swiftly organised, with I “heart” posters designed and distributed according to the location of the attack. Plans are also drawn up for people to hand out flowers at the scene of the crime, in apparently unprompted gestures of love and support.
The purpose of the operations, according to a number of people involved in their creation is to shape public responses, encouraging individuals to focus on empathy for the victims and a sense of unity with strangers, rather than reacting with violence and anger at the Muslim terrorists.
Examples of “controlled spontaneity” within the UK include:
A media campaign that was swiftly deployed after British and American aid workers were beheaded by Islamic State militants in 2014.
The use of hashtags, posters and vigils after the London Bridge Muslim terror attacks of June 2017, in which eight people were murdered and almost 50 injured.
Twitter, Facebook and mainstream media campaign that was employed later that month, shortly after a Muslim drove his van into a group of people outside a mosque in north London, killing one person and injuring 10 others.
Although covert messaging developed as part of the Prevent programme is aimed at Muslims, particularly young men, plans for “controlled spontaneity” following a terrorist attack are targeted at the wider population.
The day after the London Bridge attack, a team of men arrived at the scene of the murders in an unmarked van. They were admitted behind the police cordon, before plastering walls with posters bearing images of London and hashtags that were already circulating on Twitter, including #TurnToLove, #ForLondon and #LoveWillWin.
This practice, known in the UK as fly-posting, is a minor criminal offence, but police allowed the members of the fly-posting team behind their cordon and took no action. The men doing this work declined to tell journalists who they were, or where they were from.
After Alan Henning and David Haines, British aid workers, were murdered by ISIS (Islamic State) in October 2014, the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU) – a controversial propaganda unit that is part of the Office of Security and Counterterrorism at the UK Home Office – turned to a striking image that had already been developed by one of its private sector contractors.
The image, designed by Breakthrough Media, a London-based communications company, showed a woman wearing a Union Jack hijab.
It had been developed, according to an internal Breakthrough document seen by MEE, because “the UK authorities wanted to challenge ultraconservative and misogynistic interpretations of Islam – particularly those around women – in order to promote the true face of Islam among vulnerable UK communities”.
The document explains that RICU’s objective was to “establish a platform for British Muslim women to set out an alternative interpretation of Islam and to take a lead in countering extremism in their communities”.
The result, the document continues, was Making A Stand, “a new British Muslim women’s campaigning organisation and network active within British Muslim communities and with an increasingly high-profile in the national media”.
A few days after the murder of Henning, Making A Stand approached The Sun, a tabloid newspaper, which agreed to dedicate all its front page to the Union Jack hijab photograph.
When the cordon was eventually lifted and the public were able to return to the scene of the attacks, they found themselves surrounded by apparently impromptu signs of public defiance and unity.
It’s understandable that the British government wouldn’t want terrorist acts to lead to vigilante reprisals, but maybe rethinking its immigration policy would be a more healthy response to these atrocities than “don’t look back in anger”. Sometimes anger is necessary for change.
After the latest Muslim atrocity come MORE calls for tolerance…even from the victims’ parents. Disgraceful.
Last Tuesday, a West African migrant stabbed three Britons to death in Nottingham, before running over others with a van. In response, the mothers of the two young victims gave speeches essentially saying, “Don’t look back in anger”, but by this time the Middle East Eye article had begun to spread, causing some observers to cast a jaundiced eye on the proceedings.
Like both of these mothers said basically the same thing, using nearly the same words, 24 hours after their children were stabbed to death. https://t.co/XZEcAXJgHX
— Upstate Federalist (@upstatefederlst) June 17, 2023