A Former Conspiracy Theorist Confesses

Three and a half years ago I published A Conspiracy Theorist Confesses. I tried to explain the history of the "conspiracy theorist" label as a propaganda construct. I traced its development from the Roman Empire, through the academic opinions of 20th century political philosophers and historians, all the way to the modern definition, with all its connotations, as initially formulated by the CIA in late 1960s.

Now, the completely useless propaganda outlet the Guardian has published the story of Brent Lee—full name: Brent Lee Regan—a self-proclaimed "former" conspiracy theorist. The article was written by Amelia Gentleman, who is Boris Johnson's—yes, that Boris Johnson—sister-in-law.

If Lee's and the Guardian's anecdote can be believed, Brent certainly held some pretty wacky beliefs. He is probably relieved to be rid of them. Who wouldn't be?

Apparently, he used to hold to the following:

[. . .] that secret societies were running politics, banks, religious institutions and the entertainment industry, and that most terrorist attacks were actually government-organised ritual sacrifices.

He added:

Don’t try to get me to make it make sense because it doesn’t. This is why I get so embarrassed about what I believed. You just buy into this ideology and think that’s the way the world works.

Brent Lee is presumably using exposure therapy to overcome his anxiety-inducing "embarrassment." He very publicly talks about nothing else but the shameful beliefs he claims to have now eschewed. That said, his well-concealed embarrassment is understandable.

Most of us like to think of ourselves as rational beings, so, coming to the realisation that you believed nonsense for years is a painful process. Few people are willing to confront their own cognitive dissonance. Certainly, if you think false flag attacks are "ritual sacrifices" or that "secret societies" run the world, you are ultimately going to be disappointed when you realise you can't actually find any verifiable evidence to support your unhinged belief system.

To believe, as Brent reportedly did, that you will one day find evidence of a "secret" is psychological self-flagellation. If there is evidence relating to anything, whatever it is, it can't possibly be a secret.

Skull and Bones, the Bullingdon Club, the Bilderberg Group, the Club of Rome, the CFR, the WEF and the Trilateral Commission, etc. hold their discussions under Chatham House Rules. Their private discussions are indeed "secret." That said, their existence, and their influence, isn't a "secret," regardless of Brent Lee's abandoned imagination. These supposed "thought leaders" publish reams of documents and reports from which we can glean a pretty good idea about what they discuss in "secret."

People believe all sorts of ludicrous things. For example, there are plenty of people who are sufficiently naive to perpetuate the myth that the parasite class' clubs, societies and think-tanks don't have an inordinate influence on our polity.

Perhaps even more remarkably, there are still some people who actually believe that state orchestrated false flag terrorism isn't a commonly used tool for political and geopolitical manipulation. For them, it is as if Operation Gladio never happened. These apparently gullible fools actually think, contrary to all the available evidence, that states don't regularly use the strategy of tension. As we've just discussed, there is no accounting for what some people will accept.

The evidence does not stop propagandists denying apparent facts by falsely claiming they are "secrets." Anyone who mentions intelligence operations like Able Danger, or PTech's exposure as a likely CIA funding source behind the 9/11 attacks, will be dismissed as a "conspiracy theorists" by people like Gentleman and Lee. This is accomplished by framing reasonable, evidence-based suspicions as allusions to "secrets." Whereas, in reality, those raising their concerns are pointing squarely at established facts and evidence, not secrets.

Still, as Brent Lee rightly observed, "once you have such a skewed view of the world, you can be convinced of other stuff." Unfortunately for Brent, this appears to be true in his case. He now seemingly thinks that everyone who highlights the evidence revealing obvious criminality and state deception are "being manipulated with misinformation." Poor old Brent appears to have replaced his tin-foil hat with a blindfold.

The problem with the Guardian’s propaganda—and it is propaganda—is that it is solely reliant upon a composition fallacy. Lee's rather bizarre beliefs, both former and current, are offered up to the public as if they somehow represent the opinions of everyone else the Guardian calls conspiracy theorists. This is tantamount to claiming Novak Djokavic's opinions represent the opinions of everyone who plays tennis. Brent Lee's reported off-the-wall delusions do not encapsulate the views of the millions of people labelled as conspiracy theorists.

But accuracy, or indeed plausibility, doesn't apparently matter too much to the Guardian's "journalist." Gentleman wants her readers to imagine that Lee was the archetypal conspiracy theorists. Which is a reasonably effective propaganda technique but also illogical dross.

A sure sign that we are dealing with propaganda, and not journalism, is the constant QAnon refrain absent any exploration of what QAnon is. Gentleman's article is a classic example. She wrote:

[. . .] the influence of QAnon has shifted from the fringes to the mainstream, and social media has been flooded with the group’s misinformation. [. . .] The emergence of QAnon (which propagates the baseless theory that Trump was battling a cabal of sex-trafficking satanists, some of whom were Democrats) has attracted more people to this [conspiracy theory] world.

This is commonplace for legacy media journalists who want to use the composition fallacy to discredit vast swaths of public opinion by illegitimately linking all of it to QAnon. What none of these alleged investigative journalists ever do is report the evidence that strongly suggests that QAnon is a state run disinformation operation akin to the COINTELPRO programme.

QAnon first appeared in 2017 on the internet site 4Chan as a series of alleged leaks—'Q' drops—from a purported intelligence "whistle-blower." The anonymous account holder, who claimed to have Q clearance, went by the name "Q Clearance Patriot"; "Q" for short. Named QAnon by the account's followers, a series of claims were made that then US President Donald Trump was in some sort of "secret" battle with the deep state.

QAnon promoted a slew of so-called pro-Trump "conspiracy theories." Unnecessarily cryptic clues and supposedly "secret" messages were often used, presumably intended to foster additional intrigue. The legacy media relied heavily upon QAnon to allege that Trump was a conspiracy theorist or was promoting conspiracy theories. Yet they were all completely disinterested in finding out who 'Q' was.

Two separate teams of investigators, one based in France, the other in Switzerland, used stylometry techniques to track down "Q's" possible origin. They each independently identified the South African software developer Paul Furber as the potential original "Q" and both alleged that Ron Watkins took over as "Q" from Furber in 2018. Both analytics teams separately identified further evidence, such as the continuity of unique password-protected tripcodes, that seemingly pointed towards Furber and Watkins. Both men deny they are or were 'Q.'

FBI documents reveal that the bureau thought the 'Q' drops evidenced "an activity constituting a federal crime." Consequently, the FBI decided to "open a preliminary investigation" into QAnon. The FBI was granted the power to subpoena witnesses, including "highly sensitive intelligence sources," and was free to deploy the full technological capability of the FBI's Cyber Division in its investigation.

The FBI's investigation report concluded that it couldn't identify "Q" and thus couldn't proceed:

No criminal subject was identified after logical and reasonable preliminary investigation. [. . .] FBI New York has taken all logical and reasonable investigative steps warranted by the situation.

Despite private cyber analytics firms in France and Switzerland both independently providing sufficient evidence to seemingly warrant the further investigation of named individuals, the FBI's "logical and reasonable" steps did not include interviewing any potential suspects. The FBI can supposedly infiltrate and disrupt highly sophisticated cyber warfare operations run by the Federal Security Service (FSB) of the Russian Federation, and yet, apparently, it can't identify someone, or some group, posting on a public social media platform, or even proceed with an investigation when it is handed evidence on a plate. This story isn't remotely credible.

Combined with all the other evidence, including the legacy media's habitual use of the inexplicable QAnon "mystery," a COINTELPRO like operation is a distinct possibility. By not seriously investigating QAnon at all, and never mentioning any of the relevant evidence, both the legacy media and the state can point at the frequently ridiculous QAnon "conspiracy theories" and thereby attach the absurd to any opinion they choose to discredit be equally calling it a "conspiracy theory."

In another legacy media interview with the Times, Brent Lee reportedly said that the conspiracy theory related notion of being “awake” had its roots in QAnon. This was complete nonsense. Speaking to students at Oberlin College in 1965 the civil rights leader Dr Martin Luther King advised them to “remain awake through this social revolution.”

In the introduction to the seminal 1991 “conspiracy theory” book Behold A Pale Horse, the author, William Cooper, quoted a poem—published under the pseudonym of Delamer Duverus—which on part read:

[. . .] the shock waves of the revelation of the truth reverberate, and continue to reverberate throughout the Earth for generations to follow, awakening even those people who had no desire to be awakened to the truth.

The reference to being “awake to the truth” or “awakening” was widely used by geopolitical researchers, historians and analysts long before QAnon emerged in 2016. Every self respecting “conspiracy theorist” knows this. For someone supposedly steeped in so-called conspiracy theory lore, Brent often seems quite clueless.

Lee started his YouTube channel in 2009, supposedly at the height of his “conspiracy theory” addiction. His first posted video was purportedly filmed in 2010. It records Brent performing some poetry at a political protest seemingly against the baseless fear that Sharia Law would be introduced in the UK. He posted a second video, again from 2010, expressing his thoughts about the 7/7 London bombings through the medium of rap. His thick American accent is notable in both 2010 videos, as is his current, heavy, UK-west country accent.

The Guardian reported that in 2003 Brent was working in a garage in Peterborough, UK. Seemingly, his American accent persisted for the next 7 years and changed to a Bristolian accent over the subsequent decade. The American accent could have been an affectation in his 2010 performances, but it should also be noted that the Guardian reported that Lee’s step father served in the US military and Lee’s formative years were spent in the US.

The first video Brent posted disavowing his former beliefs was titled Escaping The Rabbit Hole #Cult Of Conspiracy (Tin Foil Confessions). Brent posted it to YouTube in 2021. Despite supposedly being a conspiracy theorist with his own YouTube channel, Brent didn’t post anything related to any alleged conspiracy theory for 9 conspiracy addled years and a further two “new man” years.

In the 2021 video, his accent has both American and Bristolian characteristics, suggesting that Brent was undergoing the chameleon effect. This is the process through which we sub-consciously emulate those we most commonly interact with. While the speed of this transition differs significantly between individuals, the fact that his lingering American accent is evident in Bent’s 2021 speech casts some doubt on the claim that he was working in a garage in Peterborough, and was therefore UK based, twenty years ago.

As reported by Igor Chudov, there are some other strange aspects to Brent’s backstory. According to Brent he was a committed “conspiracy theorist” until 2018, yet his social media history, going back to 2008, carries virtually no mention of any of his alleged obsessions. These accounts suggest that Brent had little to no engagement with the “conspiracy theory” movement within which he was supposedly enmeshed.

His video channel currently has 1.4k subscribers, his ‘X’ account nearly 23K and his Meta profile is followed by 164 people. Brent’s Some Dare Call It Conspiracy podcast has 1.3K followers on ‘X’ and 720 Meta subscribers. Yet, despite his relatively small reach, he has no problem at all getting his opinions published by the largest legacy media outlets. The BBC , the Daily Mail, the Times and the Guardian, to name a few, have all publicised Brent Lee’s opinions.

As reported by the Guardian, Brent has now been invited to deliver a presentation to the 2023 EU DisinfoLab conference in Krakow, Poland. Perhaps as a result of his widespread exposure by the UK legacy media.

EU DisinfoLab was sanctioned by the French and Belgian data protection authorities in November 2021 because it engaged in the doxing, harassment and attempted censorship of 55,000 social media accounts that shared evidence about the crimes of Alexandre Benalla, a close friend of the French President Emmanuel Macron. This resulted in the removal of its “direct” funding from the European Union (EU). However, EU DisinfoLab remains closely linked to the EU funded EUvsDsisnfo which operates a number of EU DinsinfoLab “online tools.”

EUvsDisinfo is a counter-disinformation initiative run by the EU's External Action Service:

EUvsDisinfo is the flagship project of the European External Action Service’s [EEAS’s] East StratCom Task Force. It was established in 2015 to better forecast, address, and respond to the Russian Federation’s ongoing disinformation campaigns [. . .]. EUvsDisinfo’s core objective is to [. . .] help citizens in Europe and beyond develop resistance to digital information and media manipulation.

StatCom---Strategic Communications---means:

[. . .] to shift and shape long-term discourses in society. Strategic communicators aim to align their output with their own values and interests, desiring ‘positive change’. While changing the attitudes and behaviour of their target audiences, they [StratCom operations such as EUvs Disinfo] pursue strategic outcomes in politics and geopolitics. Strategic Communications is ever present as states seek to gain advantage over other states [. . .].

"StratCom" is a euphemism for propaganda. The EEAS focuses its StratCom activities on East European countries, such as Ukraine.

Brent Lee has been invited to speak at a conference hosted by an aggressive disinformation and censorship operation with a history of defending criminals—which the Guardian seemingly endorses—and is closely linked to a much larger EU StratCom initiative actively engaged in propaganda operations in a war zone. Whether he knows it or not, state propagandists consider Brent useful. It seems feasible that the BBC, The Guardian and other Western LM outlets like reporting Brent’s opinions for precisely the same reasons.

This doesn't necessarily mean that Brent Lee is aware of how his views are exploited. Having supposedly believed for years that the world was run by "secret cabals," perhaps he isn't particularly well attuned to spotting a propaganda operation when he is involved in one.

The Crux of the Guardians propaganda is in the title of the article which talks about "dangerous beliefs." Apparently, Lee thinks they are "very dangerous." The article doesn't make it clear why these alleged beliefs are dangerous, making the headline and Lee’s comment somewhat confusing. It was suggested that conspiracy theories lead to Holocaust denial by referencing David Icke who, as a supposedly leading conspiracy theorist, has never denied the Holocaust.

Gentleman referred to the truther "movement." She stated that this alleged movement, which doesn't have a stated political ideology, leadership or anything that could identify it as a "movement," is concerned that "official accounts of big events are designed to conceal the truth from the public." Why she thinks scepticism of state narratives is "dangerous" is hard to say. Perhaps she thinks questioning power is anti-democratic or something? If so, she couldn't be more wrong.

Given that this article claimed that so-called conspiracy theory is a dangerous belief, the manner in which Lee apparently expressed sorrow for the death of Ashli Babbit was a tragic irony. She was reportedly shot dead by police, but Lee effectively blamed Babbitt for holding the "dangerous beliefs" that led to her own death. If the account of her death and Lee's interpretation are accurate, they were certainly dangerous for Ashli Babbit.

It was suggested that Brent Lee laments that he has been "ostracised by his former online community" of conspiracy theorists who have, he claims, treated him "like a pariah." I am certainly someone Brent Lee would call a conspiracy theorist and I have been trying to reach out to Brent for some time. Admittedly, this has only extended to my frequent comments on his 'X' posts, so, for all I know, he hasn't seen any of them. Nonetheless, as yet, Brent hasn't responded.

If you read this Brent, for what it's worth, the offer is there. Perhaps we can work through this issue constructively. I would be happy to discuss your concerns about alleged "conspiracy theories" anytime.

*******************

Update: 06-10-2023

I am delighted to say that Brent has responded to me on X. He has shared a number of links, evidencing his past activities:

View This X Thread

It seems pretty clear that Brent was primarily interested in the more esoteric aspects of alleged conspiracy theory. Numerology, occultism, symbology and allegedly “secret” societies, are all interesting subjects but do not feature much in the views of the majority of people who are labelled as conspiracy theorists.

Based on this evidence, in no way can Brent’s former opinion be considered as representative of the views of the vast majority of people called conspiracy theorists, such as the millions who question the COVID jabs.