Biological, Information, And Social Media Warfare - Granite Grok

Biological, Information, And Social Media Warfare

Nasa sattelite earth at night

The People’s Republic of China in their 2021 five-year planning reports published a variety of details about the country’s plans to continue to invest in biological and information warfare. These terms sound interesting to the geopolitical strategist and fanciful to the common citizen. But what do they mean exactly when the rubber hits the road?

If we consider the context of the current situation in the United States of America and the larger English-speaking world as a whole, we will be able to clearly realize some insight into both of these complex fields of warfare.

First, the reader should be aware that war is constant. Much as law is constant. It is always present in a perpetual state. Peace is a state of war. This is a way to view the world. Whether or not you agree with it does not have any relevance whatsoever. There are people living on this planet today who are at war with you, no matter what you do. You can live peacefully, and they will be very easily able to control you and put you where they want you to be.

If you do not fight for what you believe in or stand up for how you want the world to be, you will be nothing. Accordingly, even if there is not a hot war with weapons and explosions, there are wars of information and of ideology, and of more fields as well. They are being fought in this moment. In fact, you being able to access the information in this report and read it are part of that war.

We want to thank Kensley Vitoria for this Op-Ed. If you have an Op-Ed or LTE
you want us to consider, please submit it to

This being understood, let us consider the present context of the global coronavirus pandemic. This is a project that has long been in the works. It is a complex endeavor employing many stakeholders across governments, corporations, and private institutions.

The project has several key purposes to be considered – the generation of capital profits, industry for the pharmaceutical companies and infrastructures, trade in pharmaceutical goods and services, population control, and the checking of growth in certain countries globally.

Specifically, these countries compose the power axis known as Five Eyes, a collection of countries cooperating in the field of geopolitical intelligence. This is composed of the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and France.

These countries have been the hardest hit by the effects of the coronavirus pandemic, almost entirely because of the decision-making abilities and understanding of how to wield power by their national and federal leadership.

What composes any given country’s national and federal leadership? A very complex process goes into selecting who gets to lead a country and how that power takes shape. Which offices within the country are able to influence decision making in a quick and decisive manner.

Within the scope of several days or weeks, sometimes minutes or hours, decisions are made that can change the arc of a country’s future. For example, whether an economy is locked down for a week or two years. Or whether a country decides to apply a protective mask mandate, or to impose any restrictions on mask-wearing at all.

Prior to 2020, in the Five Eyes countries, such mandates were almost unheard of in the general population.

Information warfare plays a critical role in determining whether these policies are implemented. In these Five Eyes countries, all of which have generally been considered as western liberal democracies, power-holders typically remain in positions within the government for a fixed period of time.

Using modern techniques in big data analysis, it is very easy to track these individuals as well as any individuals who are possibly considering candidacy in elections. The next part is where it gets dangerous.

Signals intelligence is a major component of information warfare under consideration. On a given day, the individual citizen may be subjected to hundreds if not thousands of signals. These include mass media via television networks and broadcast journalism and advertisements displayed on mobile phones, tablets, and computers.

At a more specific level, this also includes the clothing people wear, the road signs people see, the posters that are put on places people will go, the words and phrases people hear from their colleagues or friends. With the right amount of resources and attention to detail, one single individual can essentially be totally manipulated into a certain course of action. Similarly, a group of people can be manipulated into permitting a certain course of action.

Drawn out over twenty to thirty years, one individual may be exposed to a certain range of ideologies while being prohibited or discouraged from accessing competing perspectives or ideologies. The result is a purposeful skewing of perspective.

Certain individuals can be highly targeted in this regard, with the effect being that they are groomed for specific roles against their better judgment. One example of this is Anthony Fauci, who was groomed to become a nightmare of a totalitarian health nazi. This man was directed towards certain information so that he would make certain decisions when the time came.

The Social Dilemma, a documentary focusing on the downsides of a society with an integrated connection to social media, demonstrates how a single individual can be controlled to view certain things, buy into certain ideas, or even feel a certain way. If that individual is subjected to a certain amount of screen time and takes in information that has purposefully been planted in their path, they will be able to be pushed towards a specific decision.

This is illustrated in the film for one individual. But what if that process is expanded across hundreds or thousands of individuals. What if those individuals are all placed in certain positions of power, and they are specifically told that following any competing information sources is somehow taboo.

Furthermore, what if those information sources are all centralized in one network. Who determines where that network receives its information or how the people at that network make decisions?

And that person, who determines what the people at the information network decide to talk about, which in turn is relayed to a wide network of people in positions of power – who influences that person? Well, maybe someone does.

Or maybe that person is simply of low real intelligence when it comes to geopolitics. It is possible to be very effective at national politics but have little to no expertise in international politics. Without such experience or awareness, they become just a tool.

It may be the case that this is what has happened to the Five Eyes countries – the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and France. The people of these countries have all been deceived.

The leaders of these countries have been selected for them by other countries. These countries are not currently sovereign. They may have lost or sacrificed much of their sovereignty due to this confluence of biological and information warfare.

This is a facet of warfare through language.

It is no small coincidence that these countries are all English-language speaking countries. In fact, these countries are the major English-speaking countries on the planet. They compose what could be considered as the backbone of the Anglosphere – the empire of countries that speaks English. What about the countries that don’t speak English? Are they treating coronavirus any differently?

For the individual in the Anglosphere with no knowledge of other languages besides English and no way to travel internationally, there is no way to discover this. The only information available to such a person is in English and provided through English-speaking media channels.

There may be a better way to approach coronavirus that these decision-makers in the English-speaking countries do not know of. They cannot know of it if they are monolingual. Furthermore, if they are subjected to certain information warfare techniques, they have no capacity to even understand any alternatives to their own very narrow and very controlled perspective.