In intelligence there's the pro-narrative, which is run by the media and in public typically, and the con narrative, which is run by "underground" movements. Both of these are supported by various agencies globally. They're two sides of the same coin.

I can't 100% agree with that. I am part of the con/underground narrative and I am not in anyway connected to the media, government or elites. I can't be bought - I would rather die than sell my soul to these people.

I don't completely disagree with you either - most of the alt-media is controlled by the government which is what I more less said in this post, and my last post. This is what I said:

Wikileaks main agenda is to dominate the alternative media narrative.

I also wrote this:

Good dis-info agents often tell the truth - particularly when they are starting out. It makes them more difficult to identify. Assange and Wikileaks have shared a lot of truth. If they didn’t, very few people would view them as genuine, credible and trustworthy sources of information.

I think that I may have covered most of the points that you raised in Part 1 of this series?

Irrespective, thank you for commenting and engaging. I appreciate it, always!