[FLASH/BREAK] - Your 2020 Geopolitical Read-in (Issue #040)
The new year is here and it has started off with a fairly earth-shaking event that has called the entire world to attention: the assassination of Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and Al Quuds commander Qassem Suleimani. You might have noticed that for 99% of the viewing public, the day Suleimani died was the first time they had heard his name. This is the inevitable result of a culture that focuses on ‘bread and circuses’ than it does on relevant geopolitical events and tradecraft. And even if you aren’t the type to be distracted by our entertainment-centric culture, the needs of work, family, and health leave little time to absorb the copious amount of information needed to form a coherent analysis of the current geopolitical climate.
But fear not! OSI:DI will happily do as much legwork on your behalf as we can. And while we cannot say anything with 100% certainty, we can guarantee a much more accurate assessment events than anything you will find on the television or mainstream press. In a post-truth era where leaks, disinformation, propaganda, and censorship are the norm, accurate information trades at a premium. Distinguishing the ‘signal’ from the ‘noise’ on the strength of the information itself is nearly impossible. Fortunately, there is a solution to this problem; it is a method that OSI:DI has dubbed rolling meta-analysis. We first covered this method way back in Issue #004 on November 17, 2017:
The narrative presented by the mainstream press/ “deep-state” is static. This means that no matter what evidence emerges, that evidence must be altered/distorted to fit the pre-set narrative. The mainstream narrative will only change when there is no other option. On the other hand, the narrative presented here is dynamic. This means that through a rolling meta-analysis the narrative is constantly adjusted to fit known facts in order to accurately forecast the future. The method is not perfect of course, but it is leaps and bounds ahead of CNN and Wall Street Journal headlines. – OSI:DI Issue #004, November 17, 2017
More concisely, every source of information (from an anonymous internet leaker to Andersen Cooper and the President) is assumed to have the same likelihood of being accurate: 50%. From there, each claim is measured against its predictive ability. In 2017, Trump claimed his campaign had been wiretapped and Andersen Cooper said it was a conspiracy. We later find out that there was massive surveillance against Trump and his associates, so Trump’s predictive ability gets a ‘plus-one’ and Andersen Cooper gets a ‘minus-one.’
[Forced narrative change: example of a failed CNN propaganda push]
Over time, good sources stand out, bad sources discredit themselves, ‘signals’ can be separated from ‘noise,’ and the full picture begins to come into focus. And the full picture is shocking to the viewing public who do not realize how much the intelligence agencies (through their assets in media and government) have misinformed them.
More and more, the war-fighting in the last decade has been conducted amongst state and non-state actors in the realm of SIGINT (signals intelligence) The value of dominance in SIGINT cannot be overstated in this increasingly digital world. The results of SIGINT operations are made actionable when intelligence acquired is leveraged against economic, military, and political targets. When the target/objective is control of the general population, these operations become propaganda or psychological operations.
Learning to recognize when a propaganda push or psychological operation is being conducted is absolutely essential if you want a more accurate appraisal of the world around you. Our rolling meta-analysis is one of the more useful methods for doing so. OSI:DI has attracted a significant number of new readers who have not had the time to fully digest the prior 39 issues and the massive amount of information contained there-in. In recognition of this, we have compiled the most relevant points of OSI:DI’s dynamic narrative. This narrative has had excellent predictive value, forecasting many events ranging from the outing of spy Stephen Halper six days before the mainstream press [Issue #016, May 13, 2018] to anticipating the arrest of Mossad asset Jeffrey Epstein twenty-one months in advance [Issue #001, October 10, 2017.]
So without further delay we present to you, dear reader, the “OSI:DI 2020 Geopolitical Read-in” written in SIGINT shorthand:
[Ex-DIA DIR.] Gen. Flynn [exonerated soon] + [Ex-NSA DIR.] Adm. Rogers >> ask Donald Trump [2013] to run for [POTUS] >> effort to oust bad actors in [USGOV]
Trump accepts, NSA prevents [Election interference] in 2016, then [NSA DIR] Adm. Rogers informs POTUS-ELECT of [OP. CROSSFIRE HURRICANE]
[POTUS BHO] >> Auth. Surveillance >> Sabotage incoming POTUS
[CIA] Proxies/Assets >> Sabotage incoming POTUS >> NOKO/SYRIA/IRAN
[CIA] Stay-behind bureaucrats/Leakers >> Sabotage incoming POTUS
[CIA] Force [NSC] Gen. Flynn resignation >> Entrapment
[CONTROLLED MEDIA] Narrative Control >> Sabotage incoming POTUS
[CIA] >> [MS-13] >> [THREATEN/CONTROL][MEMBER US-HOUSE/SEN]
[POTUS] Counter Controlled Media [FAKE NEWS]
[POTUS] Deport [MS-13] >> Eliminate [THREAT/CONTROL][MEMBER US-HOUSE/SEN]
[MI6] Christopher Steele >> Sabotage incoming POTUS
[POTUS] Clean DOJ >> Necessary [pre] indictments
[POTUS] Clean Judiciary [180+] Judges installed >> Necessary [pre] indictments
[CIA] Prevent [SCJ] Kavanaugh >> “Wrap up smear” >> Fail
[POTUS] Supreme Court [2] >> Necessary [pre] indictments
[CIA] Attempt escalation NOKO >> Fail
[CIA] Attempt missile strike [AF1] [ASSASSINATE POTUS][SKUNK BAY, WA]>>Fail
[CIA] Attempt missile strike [HAWAII][FALSE ALERT?] >> Fail
[POTUS] Deal made >> NOKO
[POTUS] Syrian withdrawal attempt [1] >>
[CIA] “Missile attack” in Syria >> force [POTUS] response
[POTUS] Syrian withdrawal attempt [2] >>
[CIA/MOSSAD/WHITEHELMETS] “Chemical attack” in Syria >> force [POTUS] escalation
[POTUS] Syrian Withdrawal attempt [3] >> Success
[CIA] >> No ammunition remaining RE: Syria >> fail
[POTUS] eliminate [ISIS][CIA PROXY] >> Success
[POTUS] Fund wall >> Success
[POTUS + DURHAM] >> Arrest [EPSTEIN] >> PANIC
[MUELLER] >> Delay/Distract/Prevent [POTUS] swamp draining >> Fail
[MUELLER] >> [END] Sept. 2017 >> [PUBLIC END] post-midterms >> Attempt to influence midterms?
[BARR + DURHAM] Conduct [FISA] investigation [ZERO LEAKS][CLASSIFIED]
[US PROSECUTOR HUBER] >> investigate [CLINTON FOUNDATION] >> [ZERO LEAKS]
[BARR + DURHAM + HUBER] Sealed indictments [MANY] >> “Panic in D.C.”
[IMPEACH] >> Delay/Distract/Prevent [POTUS + BARR + DURHAM] swamp draining [RE: PELOSI/BIDEN/ROMNEY/KERRY/SCHIFF Ukraine Connections]
[IMPEACH] >> Leverage over [SENATE]?
[IMPEACH] >> Projection/Distraction from [D] Party crimes?
[IMPEACH] >> Attempt to influence 2020 Election?
[IMPEACH] >> Interrupt/Distract/Prevent indictments?
[IG HOROWITZ] >> [FISA REPORT] >> [BEGIN]
If you can keep up with acronyms, that is the road map that brings us to 2020. If you have been entertaining this narrative, it is plain to see that that there are troubling events occurring behind the scenes all the time. There are many powerful people who are desperate in the face of pending prosecution. Many traitors and criminals within the United States government will stop at nothing to avoid prosecution. This includes impeaching a sitting President with zero cause, facilitating narrative-narrative changing terrorist attacks, and agitating tensions abroad.
Which brings us to the assassination of IRGC General Qassem Suleimani. Iran has been somewhat of a wild-card geopolitically. Initially threatening to invade Iran outright during the George W. Bush years, the globalist/deep-state think-tanks and intelligence analysts have recognized that Iran would be nearly impossible to conquer in a conventional war. It appears as if the strategy shifted significantly during the Obama years. Why would the Obama administration (who represented the exact same swamp as the Bush and Clinton clans) switch policy from threatening a direct invasion to delivering pallets of cash to the Iranian regime and authorizing Iran’s Uranium enrichment in the JCPOA? [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action known as the “Iran Nuclear Deal,” pulled out of by President Trump in May 2018 – OSI:DI]
OSI:DI speculates that this new policy was a mid-range plan to bring nuclear weapons to Shiite Iran in order to provoke a Sunni Saudi Arabian nuclear program, with the eventual goal of having the two countries cripple each-other in a limited nuclear exchange. Needless to say, whatever the deep-states plan for Iran was, President Trump has thrown it out the window.
The Alliance behind President Trump has instead continued their policy of de-escalating every global hot-spot and attempting to neutralize all of the quagmires the CIA has created in the last 20 years. Iran is the last hurdle to achieving this objective. The strategy seems to be getting the Iranian leadership to the negotiating table, and failing that, getting the Iranian people to overthrow their own government. To the first end, the Trump administration has crippled the Iranian economy via sanctions. To the second end, Trump has publicly stated he would support the Iranian people in their attempts to remove the hard-line regime.
One of the most hard-line members of the hard-line regime was Suleimani. The media referred to him as the #2 man in the Iranian hierarchy, but OSI:DI would argue that since Suleimani controlled the military, the special forces, and the intelligence agencies in Iran, he was in fact the most powerful man in the regime. He would also be one of the biggest obstacles to diplomacy or peace. But that obstacle is gone, eliminated along with several other Iranian militia leaders in a surprise, bold, drone strike in Baghdad, ordered by the Trump administration. While the domestic media salivates, hoping for World War Three so they can blame Trump, the truth is that Iran doesn’t want war, and neither does the Trump administration.
OSI:DI would argue that we are simultaneously as close to war and as close to peace as we have ever been with this Iranian regime. And while the media has gone from calling Trump ‘soft on Iran’ to ‘war-mongering and reckless’ in less than 24 hours, those of us looking behind the curtain are asking the relevant, investigative questions that journalists used to ask. Like “Why did Council on Foreign Relations member and New York Times contributor Steven Simon attempt to warn Suleimani that he was being targeted by publishing an open op-ed in the Times? (Hypersonic missiles are a game-changer – New York Times, January 2, 2020)
“Moreover, hypersonics are a weaponized moral hazard for states with a taste for intervention, because they erase barriers to picking fights. Is an adversary building something that might be a weapons factory? Is there an individual in an unfriendly country who cannot be apprehended? What if the former commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, Qassim Suleimani, visits Baghdad for a meeting and you know the address? The temptations to use hypersonic missiles will be many.”
– New York Times, January 2, 2020 [Hours before Suleimani was killed while visting for a secret meeting]
