Fifth-generation warfare (5GW) is not waged against standing armies of nation-states or guerrilla insurgents, but against everyday citizens. This form of war is not fought in a battlefield somewhere, but in the mind. Your mind. As previously discussed, Twitter is a 5GW weapon, not a business.
"Joe Biden just rescinded executive branch rules that prevent spying on American citizens."

Robert Malone
https://open.substack.com/pub/rwmalonemd/p/welcome-to-fifth-gen-information?r=103i49&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

Agree 100%

So he did that Oct 7th. Just another brick on the scale showing there is absolutely no evidence against the view he/his policy writer either one-- is a traitor and enemy of America's interests. Most likely serving an overseas global agenda.

It was a SJW weapon that was used 24/7 in auto mode with bots and humans running up to the 2020 election. Now they are turning on their message platform.

I think that also applies to wapo, nyt, the three major news networks, cnn, msnbc, fb, tictok, etc etc

Sid Farkas said:

---

I think that also applies to wapo, nyt, the three major news networks, cnn, msnbc, fb, tictok, etc etc

---

Not Fox News? Honestly anything they people use as their sole source of information could be weaponized if enough people use it. Thankfully Truth Social won't ever get to that point

It was a damn clumsy weapon, then. Open door to live user data for 5,000+ employees? No test environment, production only?

Twitter didn't monitor employee computers at all, it was not uncommon for employees to install spyware on work devices pic.twitter.com/I2po3Ddr5Q

— Avid Halaby (@AvidHalaby) December 12, 2022

[url=https://twitter.com/avidhalaby/status/1602129450740682752?s=61&t=ilrGDS2nVGJI_3YfmUqXtw]

In 2020, Twitter had security incidents serious enough they had to be reported to the federal government on an almost weekly basis. Meanwhile, Parag Agarwal was lying about how secure Twitter was. pic.twitter.com/8oF4WAQTg1

— Avid Halaby (@AvidHalaby) December 12, 2022

[/url]

It's another example of how creative/artistic people (who lean left/are younger) are needed to start many businesses/ideas/organizations, but then actual business people/professionals are needed to take it to a level of operation needed for ongoing success. Paraphrasing, sort of, something I heard from Jordan Peterson a ways back…

It sounds like it will still take months, or longer for them to really transition to a 'normal' way to run such a platform. That's a long thread, I recommend it to those who are interested/know about this stuff.

BluHorseShu said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

I think that also applies to wapo, nyt, the three major news networks, cnn, msnbc, fb, tictok, etc etc

---

Not Fox News? Honestly anything they people use as their sole source of information could be weaponized if enough people use it. Thankfully Truth Social won't ever get to that point

---

If FNC had fomented the summer of riots or supported Covid & lockdown lies, or the Russia collusion hoax or covered up the hunter Biden laptop story I'd agree…

The only outstanding issue to be decided for FNC has to do with the civil case regarding dominion voting machines. At least that case is in court. When do we get accountability from the rest of the media for all that other stuff? (Hint: never, because they are part of the 5GW psyops operations).

If I've left something out about FNC then please let us know. I'm all ears.

and a freedom-loving successful rational guy now has it instead of deep-state leftists

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

Fast, large scale, organic growth will do that. Some of these companies grow so big, so fast they don't have time to plan out infrastructure. They do what needs to be done with the expectation of going back and cleaning it up later, but other things inevitably take priority because things are working and it's easier to deal with the problems than rework what's in place. I've seen the exact same thing even at much smaller and well established companies.

Where is the right raging it's war?

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Where is the right raging it's war?

---

where is it not?

just one example: right now the murdoch empire (fox news, wsj, the ny post) is waging a war to prime its audience for desantis to usurp trump as heir apparent of the gop, and it's working

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

No, I will agree with you there. No question. And can think of some selective narratives. The main difference is they don't have full institutional lined up backing. Academia's world a very good example.

But information warfare does go both directions --- those that value "calling balls and strikes" honesty and accuracy are very few.

Its why don't want Twitter doing the reverse-- just stop censoring period.

nortex97 said:

---

It was a damn clumsy weapon, then. Open door to live user data for 5,000+ employees? No test environment, production only?

Twitter didn't monitor employee computers at all, it was not uncommon for employees to install spyware on work devices pic.twitter.com/I2po3Ddr5Q

— Avid Halaby (@AvidHalaby) December 12, 2022

[url=https://twitter.com/avidhalaby/status/1602129450740682752?s=61&t=ilrGDS2nVGJI_3YfmUqXtw]

In 2020, Twitter had security incidents serious enough they had to be reported to the federal government on an almost weekly basis. Meanwhile, Parag Agarwal was lying about how secure Twitter was. pic.twitter.com/8oF4WAQTg1

— Avid Halaby (@AvidHalaby) December 12, 2022

[/url]

It's another example of how creative/artistic people (who lean left/are younger) are needed to start many businesses/ideas/organizations, but then actual business people/professionals are needed to take it to a level of operation needed for ongoing success. Paraphrasing, sort of, something I heard from Jordan Peterson a ways back…

It sounds like it will still take months, or longer for them to really transition to a 'normal' way to run such a platform. That's a long thread, I recommend it to those who are interested/know about this stuff.

---

Just skimmed it and was astounded. I can not even imagine how they remained in business.

titan said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

No, I will agree with you there. No question. And can think of some selective narratives. The main difference is they don't have full institutional lined up backing. Academia's world a very good example.

But information warfare does go both directions --- those that value "calling balls and strikes" honesty and accuracy are very few.

Its why don't want Twitter doing the reverse-- just stop censoring period.

---

it's also naive to think the right is not coordinated, well-funded, or have institutional weight behind it. the greatest trick they've played on their audiences is making them believe otherwise.

they'll point to legacy media, academia, hollywood being in the pocket of the left as if they don't have their own influential network of donors, talking heads, podcast hosts, bloggers, influencers, and media companies to disseminate messaging and control narratives on their end too. even if big tech isn't neutral ground, the right isn't as helpless and hapless as it pretends to be.

Old McDonald said:

---

titan said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

No, I will agree with you there. No question. And can think of some selective narratives. The main difference is they don't have full institutional lined up backing. Academia's world a very good example.

But information warfare does go both directions --- those that value "calling balls and strikes" honesty and accuracy are very few.

Its why don't want Twitter doing the reverse-- just stop censoring period.

---

it's also naive to think the right is not coordinated, well-funded, or have institutional weight behind it. the greatest trick they've played on their audiences is making them believe otherwise.

they'll point to legacy media, academia, hollywood being in the pocket of the left as if they don't have their own influential network of donors, talking heads, podcast hosts, bloggers, influencers, and media companies to disseminate messaging and control narratives on their end too. even if big tech isn't neutral ground, the right isn't as helpless and hapless as it pretends to be.

---

They don't have anything close to this forced CRT and gender bender agenda on normal people in ordinary situations. Its not even in the ballpark. That said, I do agree they are not as helpless as pretend to be, and further, would say for many, that's deliberate -- very related to the concept of "click bait" and thus $$$$$.

Old McDonald said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Where is the right raging it's war?

---

where is it not?

just one example: right now the murdoch empire (fox news, wsj, the ny post) is waging a war to prime its audience for desantis to usurp trump as heir apparent of the gop, and it's working

---

How does the viewership/readership of those sources compare to those on the left? NYT, ABC, NBC, CBS, Disney, MSNBC, CNN, Facebook, etc?

I would say the sources you list as "the right" are far more balanced than those I listed as "the left".

Twitter, for example, just let "the right" participate. It just no longer has it's finger on the scale.

Old McDonald said:

---

titan said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

No, I will agree with you there. No question. And can think of some selective narratives. The main difference is they don't have full institutional lined up backing. Academia's world a very good example.

But information warfare does go both directions --- those that value "calling balls and strikes" honesty and accuracy are very few.

Its why don't want Twitter doing the reverse-- just stop censoring period.

---

it's also naive to think the right is not coordinated, well-funded, or have institutional weight behind it. the greatest trick they've played on their audiences is making them believe otherwise.

they'll point to legacy media, academia, hollywood being in the pocket of the left as if they don't have their own influential network of donors, talking heads, podcast hosts, bloggers, influencers, and media companies to disseminate messaging and control narratives on their end too. even if big tech isn't neutral ground, the right isn't as helpless and hapless as it pretends to be.

---

While your point is technically true, the scale is very lopsided. Where is the right's Soros or Sam Bankman-Fried? Nothing even close to those guys.

Legacy media, academia and hollywood are indeed in the pocket of the left. Surely you don't dispute that. And while there are media, academics and Hollywood on the right, their influence and scale are not in the same ballpark.

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

Only left-wing information sources are using it to undermine democracy and the constitution, FFS.

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

titan said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

No, I will agree with you there. No question. And can think of some selective narratives. The main difference is they don't have full institutional lined up backing. Academia's world a very good example.

But information warfare does go both directions --- those that value "calling balls and strikes" honesty and accuracy are very few.

Its why don't want Twitter doing the reverse-- just stop censoring period.

---

it's also naive to think the right is not coordinated, well-funded, or have institutional weight behind it. the greatest trick they've played on their audiences is making them believe otherwise.

they'll point to legacy media, academia, hollywood being in the pocket of the left as if they don't have their own influential network of donors, talking heads, podcast hosts, bloggers, influencers, and media companies to disseminate messaging and control narratives on their end too. even if big tech isn't neutral ground, the right isn't as helpless and hapless as it pretends to be.

---

While your point is technically true, the scale is very lopsided. Where is the right's Soros or Sam Bankman-Fried? Nothing even close to those guys.

Legacy media, academia and hollywood are indeed in the pocket of the left. Surely you don't dispute that. And while there are media, academics and Hollywood on the right, their influence and scale are not in the same ballpark.

---

i think the right does a great job making it seem this way. SBF is a great example actually, the conservative news ecosystem worked quickly to cast him as a corrupt dem megadonor (i don't dispute this), but he himself admitted he was secretly donating just as much to republicans.

as for others, here's a handy list of top 20 donors in the 2022 midterms. a few household names like soros, fried, koch, and bloomberg, but also a lot of republicans:

George Soros
Hedge fund founder
Democratic
$128.5M

Elizabeth and Richard Uihlein
Founders of Wisconsin-based shipping and packaging materials company
Republican
$70.2M

Kenneth Griffin
Hedge fund manager
Republican
$65.9M

One Nation
Nonprofit aligned with Senate GOP
Republican
$53.5M

Jeffrey Yass
Investment company founder
Republican
$48.2M

American Action Network
Nonprofit aligned with House GOP
Republican
$47.1M

Sam Bankman-Fried
Cryptocurrency executive and investor
Democratic
$39.2M

Stephen Schwarzman
CEO of Blackstone Group, a global private equity firm
Republican
$32.7M

Timothy Mellon
Chairman of Pan Am Systems, a transportation company
Republican
$32.5M

Larry Ellison
Co-founder and chairman of software company Oracle
Republican
$31M

Majority Forward
Democratic-aligned nonprofit
Democratic
$30.3M

Peter Thiel
Venture capitalist
Republican
$30M

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners
Building trades union
Democratic
$27.3M

Patrick and Shirley Ryan
Insurance executive and philanthropist
Republican
$26.8M

Fund for Policy Reform
A Soros-linked nonprofit
Democratic
$25M

Koch Industries
Industrial conglomerate based in Kansas
Republican
$24.3M

Ryan Salame
Cryptocurrency executive
Republican
$23.5M

National Association of Realtors
Trade association for the real estate industry
Republican
$22.8M

Diane Hendricks
Wisconsin-based billionaire businesswoman
Republican
$22.5M

Michael Bloomberg
Former mayor of New York City
Democratic
$22.2M

Old McDonald said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

titan said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

No, I will agree with you there. No question. And can think of some selective narratives. The main difference is they don't have full institutional lined up backing. Academia's world a very good example.

But information warfare does go both directions --- those that value "calling balls and strikes" honesty and accuracy are very few.

Its why don't want Twitter doing the reverse-- just stop censoring period.

---

it's also naive to think the right is not coordinated, well-funded, or have institutional weight behind it. the greatest trick they've played on their audiences is making them believe otherwise.

they'll point to legacy media, academia, hollywood being in the pocket of the left as if they don't have their own influential network of donors, talking heads, podcast hosts, bloggers, influencers, and media companies to disseminate messaging and control narratives on their end too. even if big tech isn't neutral ground, the right isn't as helpless and hapless as it pretends to be.

---

While your point is technically true, the scale is very lopsided. Where is the right's Soros or Sam Bankman-Fried? Nothing even close to those guys.

Legacy media, academia and hollywood are indeed in the pocket of the left. Surely you don't dispute that. And while there are media, academics and Hollywood on the right, their influence and scale are not in the same ballpark.

---

i think the right does a great job making it seem this way. SBF is a great example actually, the conservative news ecosystem worked quickly to cast him as a corrupt dem megadonor (i don't dispute this), but he himself admitted he was secretly donating just as much to republicans.

as for others, here's a handy list of top 20 donors in the 2022 midterms. a few household names like soros, fried, koch, and bloomberg, but also a lot of republicans:

George Soros
Hedge fund founder
Democratic
$128.5M

Elizabeth and Richard Uihlein
Founders of Wisconsin-based shipping and packaging materials company
Republican
$70.2M

Kenneth Griffin
Hedge fund manager
Republican
$65.9M

One Nation
Nonprofit aligned with Senate GOP
Republican
$53.5M

Jeffrey Yass
Investment company founder
Republican
$48.2M

American Action Network
Nonprofit aligned with House GOP
Republican
$47.1M

Sam Bankman-Fried
Cryptocurrency executive and investor
Democratic
$39.2M

Stephen Schwarzman
CEO of Blackstone Group, a global private equity firm
Republican
$32.7M

Timothy Mellon
Chairman of Pan Am Systems, a transportation company
Republican
$32.5M

Larry Ellison
Co-founder and chairman of software company Oracle
Republican
$31M

Majority Forward
Democratic-aligned nonprofit
Democratic
$30.3M

Peter Thiel
Venture capitalist
Republican
$30M

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners
Building trades union
Democratic
$27.3M

Patrick and Shirley Ryan
Insurance executive and philanthropist
Republican
$26.8M

Fund for Policy Reform
A Soros-linked nonprofit
Democratic
$25M

Koch Industries
Industrial conglomerate based in Kansas
Republican
$24.3M

Ryan Salame
Cryptocurrency executive
Republican
$23.5M

National Association of Realtors
Trade association for the real estate industry
Republican
$22.8M

Diane Hendricks
Wisconsin-based billionaire businesswoman
Republican
$22.5M

Michael Bloomberg
Former mayor of New York City
Democratic
$22.2M

---

Well, the BIGGEST donations are in-kind, suppressing conservative speech and news stories that would be damaging to Dems' campaigns. We KNOW this happened at Twitter.

But as far as hard cash goes...
"With most donations coming from company employees, Alphabet contributed around $21 million to Democrats in the 2020 election cycle, with Amazon contributing around $9.4 million. Facebook, Microsoft and Apple contributed about $6 million, $12.7 million and $6.6 million to Democrats, respectively. The majority of each of the big tech firm's contributions went to Democratic candidates, and excluding Microsoft, the Biden campaign was the top recipient with Ossoff and Warnock ranking in the top 10. Microsoft's top recipient for contributions was the Senate Majority PAC, the super PAC affiliated with Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer. The Democratic National Committee ranked in the top three recipients for all of the companies."

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/01/big-tech-employees-rally-biden/

And I would definitely count Zuckerburg's $400M to "fortify" the elections as a huge benefit to Dems.

https://nypost.com/2021/10/14/zuckerberg-election-spending-was-orchestrated-to-influence-2020-vote/

A huge portion of that went to a "non-profit" run by former Obama staffers.

Excellent article.

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Well, the BIGGEST donations are in-kind, suppressing conservative speech and news stories that would be damaging to Dems' campaigns. We KNOW this happened at Twitter.

But as far as hard cash goes...
"With most donations coming from company employees, Alphabet contributed around $21 million to Democrats in the 2020 election cycle, with Amazon contributing around $9.4 million. Facebook, Microsoft and Apple contributed about $6 million, $12.7 million and $6.6 million to Democrats, respectively. The majority of each of the big tech firm's contributions went to Democratic candidates, and excluding Microsoft, the Biden campaign was the top recipient with Ossoff and Warnock ranking in the top 10. Microsoft's top recipient for contributions was the Senate Majority PAC, the super PAC affiliated with Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer. The Democratic National Committee ranked in the top three recipients for all of the companies."

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/01/big-tech-employees-rally-biden/

And I would definitely count Zuckerburg's $400M to "fortify" the elections as a huge benefit to Dems.

https://nypost.com/2021/10/14/zuckerberg-election-spending-was-orchestrated-to-influence-2020-vote/

A huge portion of that went to a "non-profit" run by former Obama staffers.

---

you asked me who the right's soros was and claimed there were none, i gave you a list that included 14.

i won't sit here and gaslight you about big tech. their employees (and by extension their political donations) are decidedly left leaning. clearly this bias would trickle into content moderation whether intended or not.

I think we are past the "intended or not" argument. The Twitter files clearly indicate the intention.

We’ve already been taken over. It’s 5G warfare. War isn’t like what it’s been in the past. It’s a war for the mind. A psychological war. The Biden administration is controlled by China. Blackmailed by China.

— Tyler Wilson (@tylswil) December 11, 2022

I believe this is an aspect of the 5G warfare campaign being waged against Russia. The elites want to see how much of an illusion they can create with narratives, digital manipulation, and algorithms. We’ve always been at war with East Russia. Orwellian, but distinctively fake.

— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) March 15, 2022

(The globalists, of course, don't care. They consider Ukraine to be the 'semi-periphery' that they are trying to integrate into the 'core,' while marginalizing nationalist states like Russia. That's is what this is all about: 5G warfare to bring about global 'convergence.')

— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) August 20, 2022

5G Warfare.
Dr Malone.
Listen.

Welcome to Fifth Gen (Information) Warfare https://t.co/P7vrW7r3Pj

— anibinani (@anibinani) December 12, 2022

This tweet by that guy is basically true:

Quote:

---

I am no fan of Russia. But I am no fan of pointless wars that waste billions & escalate the odds of a more devastating war.

Let's be realists. Ukraine has always been a buffer zone for Russia against Europe. NATO screwed up. Unwind this war and examine 'lessons learned.'

---

We will be very lucky if this doesn't become a greater disaster. However favorable it may seem at the moment. Lines have been crossed.

1999.......

He got his account back on Twitter…

I'm back...
Welcome to Fifth Gen (Information) Warfare
The battleground is consensus of the swarm and your own mind.
Please share my substack from today.https://t.co/P3ajzoiUbm

— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) December 13, 2022

test

— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) December 13, 2022

His last post in 2021 before reinstated today

“We’re never going to learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it. "
So, let's look at the evidence.
Substack by @RWMaloneMD https://t.co/Od7DwtSozJ

— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) December 29, 2021

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

You're naive such that you don't understand the concept of Information Dominance in 5GW. Myopic in fact.

titan said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

No, I will agree with you there. No question. And can think of some selective narratives. The main difference is they don't have full institutional lined up backing. Academia's world a very good example.

But information warfare does go both directions --- those that value "calling balls and strikes" honesty and accuracy are very few.

Its why don't want Twitter doing the reverse-- just stop censoring period.

---

VitruvianAg said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

the idea that only left-wing information sources are capable of or are currently waging information warfare on their audiences is so hilariously naive that it sounds like trolling, but i know it's not

---

You're naive such that you don't understand the concept of Information Dominance in 5GW. Myopic in fact.

---

Left versus right information wars before the 2020 election until Elon took over twitter was like the left was the USA and the right is Liechtenstein. The poster you reference is using propaganda, not even close to accurate, to dis-inform readers of this thread!

Information Dominance has been around since the days of CBS news and Walter Conkrite and the emergence of the MSM, it was not decoded or acknowledged until pretty much halfway through Reagan's terms, at least for me.

Propaganda and InfoDom are two different animals, one a more pernicious than the other. I'll leave it to you to prioritize.