Counter-spell video which essentially summarizes the entire purpose of this site at this point: Links 1 for September 11, 2025

1. This link is to a really excellent lecture which explains political warfare, as we are experiencing right now across the West. It is also an excellent explanation of WHY this site takes the actual approach we do ti most issues. It is just over 32 minutes long and we reccomend it highly. Substack videos can’t be embedded from Substack unfortunately so you have to click through and watch it on Counter-spell’s substack. They also explain why they call it that, and yes, it is important to know why as well. It directly relates to the history of information/political warfare. It is much older than the Soviet Union.

Comments or observations on the video linked above would be very much appreciated here under this post.

From the related article:

Finally, bringing the definitive lecture on the nature of democracy, constitutional republic, and the second American revolution you never heard of.

This is what we, Counterspell Group, are here for. We uncover the true history, aligning our facts and language to observable reality, and apply the lens of political warfare to make it actionable. You can’t win this fight if you don’t even know what kind of fight it is. Let us show you. Become a paid subscriber now, or book us for an engagement at counterspellgroup.com.

2. Maybe we should have a look at some contemporary examples. Remember, a LOT of social media accounts masquerading as counter-narrative sources are doing exactly what the video above describes. And if I haven’t emphasized it enough, please, go watch that video. I plan to watch it several more times today and I already knew the material before I saw it the first time. But its really well laid out here.

Keep in mind that the first time they set fire to, what is it, her family yacht or something? They claimed it was a mysterious drone attacking her and her boat a few hundred yards from what looks like a fun place, when they had set the fire themselves. Ok maybe this isn’t a perfect example in some ways, but as its a reframing of an event to substantiate a narrative, I would say it is.

3. In fact, given the perspective of item 1. the poster of this Tweet is wrong. It makes perfect sense now.

4. MSNBC attempts to shape the narrative so that the murder of Kirk was a good thing and caused by Kirk’s words.

5. Muslim sex-slave gang victims in the UK are referred to by the media as other than victims and even referred to the men who raped a 12 year old as ‘her lovers’.

One of the earlier mass line narrative attacks using the above method outlined in th Counter-Spell video, was the persistent use of one word after EVERY Islamic terrorist attack that took place from 911, which makes it singularly worthwhile mentioning today, to the Boston Marathon attack.

No matter what Muslims did in the name of Islamic jihad, or how many they killed or how horrific it was, all the media across the West, in North America and in Europe used the same word or a translation of that same word. The word was “backlash“. Whatever you did, you must not take a bad view of the ideology which was trying to destroy us all, and especially you must not show any disdain for anyone actually wearing the uniform of those who believe that ideology.

Imagine if our media, I mean of course, media other than the NYT which did do this, took that approach to the Nazis or imperial Japan after Pearl Harbour.

This would be fully in keeping with the Counter-spell video concept of ‘making your enemy invisible to you’. You redefine your enemy so YOU DON’T see them as your enemy. They are the religion of peace. They are the same as you. They may even be BETTER than you because your Christian background is so evil, you colonialists you.

Thank you all for checking out this site when time is so short and things are so serious.

A few related items which scream to be among this list.

Mark Carney has a very special kind of original dialectic style. It is basically somewhere in between word salad and an Emperor’s New Clothes con.

In other words, he uses a kind of word salad where you are meant to feel and look stupid if you don’t understand what he said even though it was indeed crafted to be totally incomprehensible.

In this example he sprinkled in a good dose of that most Canadian of attributes, sanctimony. So that if you question exactly WTF he means by any of this, you look stupid because you didn’t understand, and victious because he is obviously showing great, shall we say, philanthropy. Another word which has come to mean something opposite to what we think, or perhaps like Democracy, always meant something awful and we were conned into thinking it meant kindness at personal expense. No time to check at this point.