Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Shop Website | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues |

Tag: war on terror

NSA Whistlebower William Binney; Jake Morphonios. Two Interesting Interviews With Sarah Westall

NSA Whistleblower William Binney joins the program to discuss how the NSA cares more about ensuring the money keeps flowing than to stop terror attacks and bad guys. He also discusses the movie about his time at the NSA, “A Good American”. The film is Oliver Stone’s latest work on the nefarious activities of our government.

Published on Oct 16, 2017

Investigative reporter Jake Morphonios joins the program to discuss the facts after spending time on the ground in Las Vegas. We also discuss the fact that his show has received more views than all mass media channels combined as reported by the Wall Street Journal and USA Today (to their credit). His popularity has resulted in a major crackdown on his channel and personal attacks on him and his family.

See more at https://www.youtube.com/user/prepare333

“Calm Before The Storm” Remark By Trump Has MSM In A frenzy Of Speculation

President Donald Trump declined on Friday to explain what he meant when he described a gathering of military leaders as “the calm before the storm,” but the White House said he was not just being mischievous when he made the remark.

Pressed about what he meant by Thursday’s comment, the U.S. leader declined to elaborate, telling reporters only that, “You’ll find out.” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders also declined to say what Trump meant.

When asked whether Trump was just being mischievous, Sanders denied he was just “messing with the press.”

“I think we have some serious world issues here. I think that North Korea, Iran both continue to be bad actors and the president is somebody who’s going to always look for ways to protect Americans,” Sanders said.

Leon Panetta, a former Defense secretary and CIA director, said Trump’s remarks would be something “you’d really worry about” under a previous U.S. president. But he said Trump’s comments appeared to follow a pattern he’d established on Twitter.

“You begin to assume that it’s more about getting attention than it is about proclaiming some kind of national policy. I don’t think it’s responsible…but I think in this instance we probably all should take a deep breath and try to assume he’s just making a play for attention,” Panetta told CNN.

“There is no indication that there is a strategy or a policy behind that statement,” he added.

Calm Before Storm© REUTERS/Yuri Gripas U.S. President Donald Trump participates in a briefing with senior military leaders at the White House in Washington Trump made the “calm before the storm” comment during a photo opportunity before having dinner with U.S. military leaders and their wives. The dinner followed a meeting in which Trump and the military leaders discussed Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan and the fight against Islamic State.

The president also appeared to criticise the military leaders on Thursday for moving too slowly to provide him advice.

“Moving forward, I also expect you to provide me with a broad range of military options, when needed, at a much faster pace. I know that government bureaucracy is slow, but I am depending on you to overcome the obstacles of bureaucracy,” he said.

Asked if Trump felt like military leaders were deliberately being slow to advise him, Sanders said, “Not at all.”

“As you know, he’s a person who like to take action and take it quickly,” she said. “He wants options on the table so that he can make quick decision.”

(Reporting by James Oliphant, Steve Holland and Tim Ahmann; Writing by David Alexander; Editing by Alistair Bell)

https://www.reuters.com/

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/trump-declines-to-explain-calm-before-the-storm-remark/ar-AAt0cJh?li=BBqdk7Q&ocid=SK2MDHP

 

Note the line: “North Korea, Iran continue to bad actors”. Perhaps I read a different meaning into this than the MSM does, but my response would be “get them some acting lessons”

  Martin

Trump’s Border Wall Approved By House Panel, Includes Drones, DNA Collection, Biometric Scans

It appears  that Trump’s Wall is going ahead, but is it a Trojan Horse for yet more erosion of privacy and freedom?
Read on…

By Derrick Broze

The House Homeland Security Committee has approved a border security bill which includes $10 billion for Trump’s proposed border wall. Supporters of The Border Security for America Act say it is necessary to stop illegal immigration and violence along the U.S.-Mexico border. However, opponents of the bill are concerned about provisions for drones, DNA collection, social media monitoring, and license plate scanning along the border.

On Wednesday the committee debated the impact the border wall would have on border communities and the local environment, but ultimately the bill was passed with a vote of 18-12. Originally introduced by committee Chairman Michael McCaul, the bill now heads to the House floor for a full debate. The bill currently has 62 co-sponsors.

McCaul said the bill was necessary to “achieve full operational control and situational awareness” of the border and to help put “more boots on the ground.”

“Now that we have a partner in the White House who has made this a top priority, it’s time to send a bill to President Trump’s desk so we can deliver the American people the security they have long demanded and deserve,” McCaul said.

The Border Security for America Act will greatly increase the budget and personnel of the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection, with each receiving 5,000 new agents. The bill provides 10 billion for Trump’s wall and another 5 billion to upgrade the nation’s ports. The bill requires new biometric systems to be up and running at the nations 15 busiest airports, seaports, and land ports within two years. After five years all land and sea ports of entry would require biometric systems to be running.

Some of the most worrisome portions of the bill include biometric scanning of all people who exit the United States, both citizens and foreigners. In addition, the text of the bill calls for DNA collection of “any individual filing an application, petition, or other request for immigration benefit or status.” Perhaps most worrisome is a provision which requires the DHS and the Department of Defense to deploy unmanned aerial vehicles (aka drones) and automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) along the border. The bill would allocate $125 million to upgrade the ALPRs of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Finally, the bill allows the National Guard and the military to be called upon for intelligence gathering and surveillance activities in the name of securing the border.

The bill is facing opposition from groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation who claim the bill will “dramatically expand dragnet biometric and other surveillance of U.S. citizens and immigrants alike at and near the U.S. border.” Regarding the use of drones and ALPRs, the EFF says, “it is unclear whether the bill’s new ALPR surveillance would be limited to cars that actually cross the U.S. border, or would also apply more broadly to cars at CBP’s many interior checkpoints, some located as far as 100 miles from the border.”

The bill is supported by the Security Industry Association (SIA), The International Biometrics + Identity Association, and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. The SIA sent a letter to the House Homeland Security Committee expressing their support for the measure.

“Implementation of H.R. 3548 could result in significant expansion of U.S. border protections by physical barriers as appropriate in high-risk areas as part of this border security infrastructure,” SIA CEO Don Erickson said. “Physical barriers are not effective deterrents without the ability of U.S. border patrol agents to detect breaches and breach attempts. Therefore, the use of modern integrated surveillance technology and analytics used in perimeter security will be just as essential to success as a barrier’s structural design.”

It should come as no surprise that these organizations are in favor of the bill – they stand to profit from the project. What the supporters of this bill are not addressing is the fact that it will further the development of a surveillance state and militarized police state along the U.S. Mexico border. This border is already a dangerous place to be because of the so-called “Constitution Free Zones”  where the federal government sets up illegal checkpoints and harasses travelers.

Activist Post previously reported that the Trump administration is using Stingray cell phone surveillance tools to monitor undocumented migrants. When combined with recent plans to scan the face of every person coming in and out of the United States, the growing “biometric wall”, and DHS policy of scanning social media of all immigrants, and a picture of complete and total surveillance comes into view.

One final reason this bill and the building of a border wall would be a disaster deals with the concept of “eminent domain.” Essentially, when the state wants to implement a new project – a border wall, perhaps – but there are homes or businesses in the path of the project, they simply pay the people off and take their land. (Sometimes they don’t even bother paying.) The Border Security for America Act calls on the Secretary of Homeland Security to take all necessary actions to build the wall, including “the removal of obstacles to detection of illegal entrants.” So if your home or business gets in the way of the federal governments project you will lose it.

No matter which way you look at it, the border wall is a horrible idea. It will increase surveillance and militarization along the border and more than likely the wall will be used to keep Americans in the growing police state known as the United States. Do not fall prey to arguments for border security. Do not allow the tyrants to trick you into accepting a loss of privacy and freedom.

Derrick Broze is an investigative journalist and liberty activist. He is the Lead Investigative Reporter for ActivistPost.com and the founder of the TheConsciousResistance.com. Follow him on Twitter. Derrick is the author of three books: The Conscious Resistance: Reflections on Anarchy and Spirituality and Finding Freedom in an Age of Confusion, Vol. 1 and Finding Freedom in an Age of Confusion, Vol. 2

Derrick is available for interviews. Please contact Derrick@activistpost.com

This article (Trump’s Border Wall Approved By House Panel, Includes Drones, DNA C…) was originally published on Activist Post

Thanks to Rose for the alert.

https://thecontrail.com/forum/topics/trump-s-border-wall-approved-by-house-panel-includes-drones-dna-c

Russian submarines fire seven cruise missiles at Isis militants

The Western Media were invited to a rare show of Russian military power in action:

 

 

Russia missiles ISIS
Strikes from eastern Mediterranean are latest effort in assault on Deir Ezzor stronghold

Jon Sharman
Thursday 14 September 2017 15:20 BST

Russian submarines have fired seven cruise missiles at Isis militants in Syria, Russia’s defence ministry reportedly said.
The craft were operating in the eastern Mediterranean, news agencies said, and used Kalibr missiles to strike targets in the suburbs of Deir Ezzor, in Syria’s east.
“The targets were command posts, communication centres, as well as militants’ weapons and ammunition stockpiles in areas of south-east Deir Ezzor under the control of Islamic State,” the ministry said.

The submarines were the Kilo-class boats Velikiy Novgorod and Kolpino, according to Russian state media.
The head of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said buses and vehicles carrying about 400 militants and civilians crossed into Deir Ezzor province on Wednesday.
Syrian government forces broke a three-year Isis siege on parts of the provincial capital last week, and are now battling the extremists inside the city.
The militants control less than half the city and are encircled on three sides with their backs to the Euphrates River. However, they still control rural areas outside the city and the border with Iraq.
US-backed Syrian forces are meanwhile advancing in the surrounding province from the east and north, on the other side of the river, setting up a race to the border with Iraq.

READ THE REST:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/russia-submarines-fire-cruise-missiles-isis-militants-fighters-syria-deir-ezzor-a7946491.html

It’s Official: European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 was a Controlled Demolition

15-years after the attacks on September 11th, the European Scientific Journal, a publication of theEuropean Scientific Institute (ESI), published an article titled “15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses,” in which they analyze the collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings. The results of their findings continue to indicate that the WTC towers were destroyed by controlled demolition, and the fact that this controversial topic was covered by a publication that boasts aneditorial committee from reputable colleges and universities around the world (despite the article’s disclaimer), can be considered yet another small victory for 9/11 Truthers.

The study was written in collaboration by Steven Jones of Brigham Young University (now retired), Robert Korol of McMaster University – a Mechanical Design Engineer in the aerospace industry, Anthony Szamboti, and Ted Walter of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The highly-sourced study breaks down the scientific evidence while revealing the discrepancies in NIST’s official report, and we suggest our readers – especially the skeptics – read it in its entirety.

One of the most important testimonies on the collapse of the World Trade Towers that was brought to attention in the study comes from the head structural engineer of the towers, John Skilling. It is apparently not enough for skeptics to take the findings of thousands of architects and engineersseriously, but should a skeptic choose not to at least consider the expertise of one of the men who built the WTC towers, then they are purposefully remaining blind.

Every sort of catastrophe that can happen to a high-rise building has to be taken into consideration during the design and construction processes, including the impact of an airplane. According to a 1993report from The Seattle Times, the Trade Towers were analyzed years ago, after concern was raised over a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building. It was concluded at the time that the Trade Towers could withstand the impact of a Boeing 707.

In a statement made to The Seattle Times by Skilling:

We looked at every possible thing we could think of that could happen to the buildings, even to the extent of an airplane hitting the side, however back in those days people didn’t think about terrorists very much.” He continues, “Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane)would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed. The building structure would still be there. However, I’m not saying that properly applied explosives – shaped explosives – of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage. I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it.”

As stated in the study: “In other words, Skilling believed the only mechanism that could bring down the Twin Towers was controlled demolition.” It should be pointed out, as well, that a steel-framed high-rise building has never completely collapsed from fire. And yet on September 11, 2001, three buildings supposedly collapsed in this manner, one of which wasn’t even hit by a plane.

It was on this latter point that the authors concluded their study. They state:

It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11. Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists.”

This article (European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 was a Controlled Demolition) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.

Controlled Demolition Expert on 9/11:

Incontrovertible New 911 Documentary

Thanks for all the support , Kasim Khan, Team EIC

 

A nod to Rose at The Con Trail, thanks mate.

US Navy Seals “Who Killed Bin Laden” training Kim ‘assassination’ squad

THE TIMES Reports:

US Navy Seals training Kim ‘assassination’ squad

“South Korean commandos will work with the US Navy Seals who killed Osama bin Laden to create a special unit to assassinate Kim Jong-un in the event of war.
The announcement coincides with a decision by the US to waive restrictions on the size and range of South Korean ballistic missiles, allowing it to develop its own independent capacity to drop bunker-busting bombs on the underground headquarters of the North Korean leadership in Pyongyang.”

Navy

 

I won’t bore you with the rest of the item. Firstly, since they’ve just announced this to the world, it rather takes away the element of surprise, yes?

Secondly, are we going to get some lame story about how they found Kim hiding out in a cardboard box, “and he came out with all guns blazing…no….hang on, he opened the door with a hostage and…no, he just poked his face out the door and we shot him…oh, ya know, the “fog of war” and all that, but anyhow we dumped his body at sea in accordance with North Korean tradition…..”

Bilderberg on Steroids – Meet The Secret CIA-Funded Group Behind The ‘War on Terror’

A foreign policy think tank more secretive than Bilderberg has included both instrumental architects of the “War of Terror” and accusations of CIA funding

bilderberg

Bilderberg has gained a reputation as the world’s most secretive group of billionaires and political leaders who conspire to impact global events—but reports indicate that they don’t hold a candle to another group that includes a host of war criminals responsible for the “War on Terror.”

The group is named Le Cercle. In a report dated Sept. 13, 1982, the German publication Der Spiegel describes it as a “legal cartel” made up of “loyal  Bundesnachrichtendienst agents, foreign intelligence agents, reactionary politicians and ultra-right journalists” who played a crucial role in the 1980 election.

The existence of the group was revealed by Bavarian constitutional protector Hans Langemann. According to the report, he described the group as:

“In the case of CERCLE, which is clearly defamatory,” as far as my earlier knowledge of the BND “and my present knowledge are concerned, a “loose” “concentration “about two times a year and at various” places of conservative- anti-Communist politician,” “publicists, bankers, and VIPs of other professions,” “which originated in the former French Prime Minister Antoine PINAY, and the circle to which guests are invited continues to this day.”

Former U.S. Defense Secretary and President of the World Bank Paul Wolfowitz, former Iraqi Coalition Provisional Authority Leader Paul Bremer, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and former Chairman of the Defense Department’s Defense Policy Board Richard Perle—some of the most notable neoconservative architects of the Iraq War—are all reportedly members.

Other reported American members of Le Cercle include former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Directors of Central Intelligence Bill Casey and William Colby, and former President Richard Nixon after he left the White House.

In a report from The Independent dated June 28, 1997, the “exclusive think-tank said to be funded by the CIA” is mentioned because its chairman at the time, former Member of Parliament Jonathan Aitken, was reportedly going to be removed over a libel trial that ultimately sent him to prison for perjury.

Accusations that Le Cercle receives funding from the CIA have been made by Robin Ramsay, editor of Lobster Magazine; and by John E Lewis, author of “The Mammoth Book of Cover-Ups.”

As the report noted, “the group’s existence is only occasionally disclosed” following its creation in the 1950s:

“Cercle was intended to cement Franco-German relations, as a buffer to Soviet aggression during the Cold War. Down the years, however, it has become much more, advocating  right-wing causes round the world and growing into a confidential talking shop for about 70 politicians, businessmen, polemicists and personnel from the diplomatic and security services. Members are invited to attend its meetings; they cannot ask to be admitted, and as a condition of attending they agree to keep all sessions secret. It meets twice a year, once in Washington DC in the autumn and once in the early part of the year in an ‘overseas’ venue.”

The Independent described senior member Brian Crozier as an “author and well-known Cold-Warrior with close ties to MI6 and the CIA” who wrote a “planning paper” for Le Cercle in 1979. In addition to securing changes of government in Germany and the United Kingdom (where Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister in 1979), the agenda included objectives such as:

  • “Undercover financial transactions for political aims”
  • “International campaigns aiming to discredit hostile personalities or events”
  • “Creation of a (private) intelligence service specializing in a selective point of view”
  • “Establishment of offices under suitable cover each run by a coordinator from the central office. Current plans cover London, Washington, Paris, Munich and Madrid”

 

In a report on the history of Le Cercle, British news source True Publica noted that the 1982 Langemann Papers were “the first significant leak to expose the activities of Le Cercle, confirming that the group was actively involved in influencing Western European elections.

“Its purpose is to subvert the democratic principles and processes of individual countries and are by nature ideologically ‘hawkish’ – distributing propaganda, stoking fear of communist plots from Russia, vote rigging and hacking the accounts of politicians and prominent global figures. Promoting the ‘war on terror’ has been a major factor in their activities of recent years and in so doing broker weapons deals and setting up false flag operations the world over to suit its own agenda.”

While the majority of the information surrounding Le Cercle is covert and secretive—especially regarding its activity in recent years—one of the most important things to remember about the think tank is that its presence is well-documented, its members include influential U.S. politicians, there have been accusations of funding by the CIA, and yet mainstream media in the United States has ignored its existence and influence for decades.

https://thefreethoughtproject.com/bilderberg-on-steroids-meet-the-secretive-cia-funded-group-behind-the-war-on-terror/

Pauline Hanson: ‘I felt terrible wearing the burqa’

By Natalie Cornish

https://honey.nine.com.au/2017/08/18/07/19/pauline-hanson-burqa-parliament

One Nation leader, Pauline Hanson has defended wearing the burqa in parliament yesterday saying she “did it to prove a point” about national security and felt “terrible” but not nervous peering out at the chamber from inside.
Hanson has ignited a heated and divisive debate about religious freedom after she donned the full veil during question time.
The Queensland senator entered parliament in the full black veil, and took her seat as fellow politicians groaned and shook their heads in disbelief.
She then rose to her feet and removed the garment with an arrogant smirk.
Attorney-General George Brandis instantly condemned her actions. His emotional speech, in which he called Hanson out for “ridiculing” Muslims and branded her actions “appalling” was applauded both in the house and on social media.
Now, she’s spoken to Karl Stefanovic on the TODAY show about the stunt saying she wasn’t proud of her actions but “did it to prove a point” about national security and “social cohesion”.
“My private member’s bill that I moved on the floor later in the day was all about banning the burqa in Australia based on national security, based on the fact I’m wanting social cohesion. This is the case in many countries around the world.”
Brandis had hit back at Hanson’s claims in the chamber saying: “I can tell you, Senator Hanson, that it has been the advice of each director-general of security with whom I have worked and each commissioner of the Australian Federal Police with whom I have worked that it is vital for their intelligence and law enforcement work that they work co-operatively with the Muslim community, and to ridicule that community, to drive it into a corner, to mock its religious garments is an appalling thing to do.”

%d bloggers like this: