Nearly half of the people on the U.S. government’s widely shared database of terrorist suspects are not connected to any known terrorist group, according to classified government documents obtained by The Intercept.
Of the 680,000 people caught up in the government’s Terrorist Screening Database—a watchlist of “known or suspected terrorists” that is shared with local law enforcement agencies, private contractors, and foreign governments—more than 40 percent are described by the government as having “no recognized terrorist group affiliation.” That category—280,000 people—dwarfs the number of watchlisted people suspected of ties to al Qaeda, Hamas, and Hezbollah combined.
The documents, obtained from a source in the intelligence community, also reveal that the Obama Administration has presided over an unprecedented expansion of the terrorist screening system. Since taking office, Obama has boosted the number of people on the no fly list more than ten-fold, to an all-time high of 47,000—surpassing the number of people barred from flying under George W. Bush. …
A document released by the U.S. Army details preparations for “full scale riots” within the United States during which troops may be forced to engage in a “lethal response” to deal with unruly crowds of demonstrators.
The appearance of the document amidst growing unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, with the National Guard now being called in to deal with the disorder, is an ominous coincidence.
The document makes it clear that the techniques detailed therein are to be applied both outside and inside the “continental United States (CONUS)” in the event of “unruly and violent crowds” where it is “necessary to quell riots and restore public order.”
The training manual outlines scenarios under which, “Civil unrest may range from simple, nonviolent protests that address specific issues, to events that turn into full-scale riots.”
The most shocking aspect of the document is the fact that it describes the deployment of a “lethal response” directed against “unarmed civilians,” including “sniper response” and “small arms direct fire.”
Under the heading “sniper response,” the document states, “Ensure that target leaders or troublemakers are targeted,” in addition to a passage which states, “Exploit the psychological effect of an attack.” …
Another graphic which depicts “escalation of trauma” directs soldiers how to use “riot batons” in order to cause the necessary level of injury or death to the subject. “Deadly force final target areas” include the back of the neck, the solar plexus, the neck, the spine and the head. …
Why would they be preparing for mass civil unrest? Because the banksters who think they own everything and everyone are busy creating the conditions for it. They have planned for the second Great Ripoff very long and very well. Except this time they won’t be seen as saviors, but as perpetrators. This is why brzezinski raised the issue of killing vs controlling a million people in his chatham house speech. There’s still a lot of ignorance out there, but they’ve lost control of public opinion, so they’re going to have to kill a lot of people to stay in power.
The US air war in Iraq has moved into its second week, and they are continuing to announce new, broader war goals virtually every today, with the White House today announcing a new notification was sent to Congress.
President Obama informed Congress that the latest war goal, the Kurdish capture of Mosul Dam, would require US airstrikes to support it, and claimed the loss of the dam would be a threat to the US Embassy in Baghdad.
Obama initially made the war just about protecting US troops in Irbil, then expanded it to Baghdad as well, then broadened it further to denying ISIS territory, and is now focusing on the Mosul Dam. …
With the National Guard now being sent to Ferguson, Missouri as the unrest extends into a second week, questions are being asked as to whether provocateurs are being used by authorities to stage violence in order to justify the militarized police crackdown.
Trouble flared once again last night as demonstrators threw molotov cocktails at police officers while cops deployed tear gas and rubber bullets before the midnight curfew even came into effect. Numerous reporters said they were threatened with violence and arrest by cops if they didn’t leave the area.
Despite the fact that some of the violence and looting is obviously being carried out by criminal opportunists and frustrated locals, many are beginning to question whether agent provocateurs are being used to demonize peaceful protesters and create a justification for heavy-handed police tactics.
Corporal Justin Wheetley of the Missouri State Highway Patrol last night blamed “outsiders” for the mayhem, with KMOV reporting that the trouble was, “stirred up by influences from outside of Ferguson.”
Radio host Dave Hodges also claims to have spoken to a source from within the Department of Homeland Security who told him that violent rioting and looting, “was encouraged and exacerbated by undercover DHS agents posing as members of the Black Panthers.”
“In the past five days I have been contacted, via one of my most trusted sources, a member of DHS, who is opposed to the events and DHS involvement in Ferguson, Missouri. This source stated that DHS is running the Ferguson Police Department and that their actions are designed to antagonize and to provoke the locals to violence. He further stated that he believed that the ultimate goal is to inflame the local citizens to such a point martial law will be declared,” writes Hodges.
Indeed, video footage of a member of the New Black Panthers leading a chant which calls for the death of Darren Wilson, the officer who shot 18-year-old Michael Brown, confirms that individuals from the militant group are intent on radicalizing the demonstrators.
Members of the New Black Panthers have been caught working undercover for the federal government in the past, with the most recent example being Richard Aoki, who was outed as an FBI informant in 2012.
A key question surrounding the police response to the unrest has been why law enforcement officers were ordered to stand down during looting on Friday night. During the first night of looting on Sunday last week, cops were also completely AWOL.
Whereas militarized police have been out in force to intimidate and target peaceful demonstrators and members of the press, they have failed to respond to the very same looting that has been used as a justification for their crackdown.
“Why did the police in Ferguson refuse to do their jobs?” asks Michael Snyder. “Who told them to stand down? Someone in the mainstream media needs to start asking some of these hard questions.” …
The presence of provocateurs during riots and unrest is by no means a new phenomenon.
Following the SPP protests in Canada back in 2007, Quebec provincial authorities were forced to admit that three rock-wielding black mask-wearing “anarchists” were in fact police infiltrators used to gather information on protesters.
During the G20 Summit in Pittsburgh in 2009, police also dressed up as anarchists in an attempt to infiltrate protesters.
Alex Jones’ film Police State 2: The Takeover also exposed how the black bloc anarchists were completely infiltrated and provocateured by the authorities during the violent 1999 WTO protests in Seattle.
Numerous observers of the unfolding situation in Ferguson are also starting to ask hard questions about whether provocateurs are responsible for at least some of the violence. …
Any government capable of inflicting radical muslim fundamentalism on the middle east and staging 9/11 for empire games is capable of using the same tactics for domestic political purposes. But in fact there’s no need to speculate. The history of the FBI’s cointelpro program in the 60′s and 70′s is a matter of public record. Not to mention the fabulously lucrative “drug war” where the feds play on both sides of the fence. And implanting the white house with the first “black” president presents special opportunities for domestic psyops.
It will lead to a few sacrificial groupies but not to the intelligence apparatus embedded in the whole enterprise.
The US has pledged assistance for victims of and even possible “airstrikes” against terrorists who have surrounded and threaten to eradicate thousands of religious minorities in Iraq. However, the terrorists themselves are a product of US foreign policy in the Middle East and North Africa, and instrumental in achieving Western objectives across the region. Punitive strikes and aid to the victims of what is essentially a Western mercenary army is part of maintaining plausible deniability.
The terror hordes originated from NATO territory and have inundated Syria, Iraq, and now Lebanon. The goal of this well funded, heavily armed, professionally organized mercenary force is clearly to supplant pro-Iranian political and military fronts across Tehran’s arc of influence – from Baghdad to Damascus, to Lebanon and Hezbollah along the Mediterranean. In the process, the heavily indoctrinated rank and file have committed horrific atrocities ranging from rape and torture to mass executions and sectarian genocide. While such war crimes have been taking place in Syria since 2011, it is becoming increasingly difficult to cover up similar crimes beyond Syria’s borders under narratives of “civil war” linked to the so-called “Arab Spring.”
Instead, various stories have been used by the West to explain the appearance of ISIS in Iraq, the unprecedented scale of its operations, its convoys of matching vehicles and now military trucks, artillery, and even tanks. While the world is meant to believe ISIS spontaneously rose from the desert and “stole” billions in cash, weapons, and gear, a much simpler and documented explanation exists – Western state sponsorship – and state sponsorship that continues even as the West denounces the monsters of their own creation.
Beginning in 2011 – and actually even as early as 2007 – the United States has been arming, funding, and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and a myriad of armed terrorist organizations to overthrow the government of Syria, fight Hezbollah in Lebanon, and undermine the power and influence of Iran, which of course includes any other government or group in the MENA region friendly toward Tehran.
Billions in cash have been funneled into the hands of terrorist groups including Al Nusra, Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), and what is now being called “Islamic State in Iraq and Syria” or ISIS. One can see clearly by any map of ISIS held territory that it butts up directly against Turkey’s borders with defined corridors ISIS uses to invade southward – this is because it is precisely from NATO territory this terrorist scourge originated.
ISIS was harbored on NATO territory, armed and funded by US CIA agents with cash and weapons brought in from the Saudis, Qataris, and NATO members themselves. The “non-lethal aid” the US and British sent including the vehicles we now see ISIS driving around in.
They didn’t “take” this gear from “moderates.” There were never any moderates to begin with. The deadly sectarian genocide we now see unfolding was long ago predicted by those in the Pentagon – current and former officials – interviewed in 2007 by Pulitzer Prize-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh.
Hersh’s 9-page 2007 report, “The Redirection” states explicitly:
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
“Extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam” and are “sympathetic to Al Qaeda” – is a verbatim definition of what ISIS is today. Clearly the words of Hersh were as prophetic as they were factually informed, grounded in the reality of a regional conflict already engineered and taking shape as early as 2007. Hersh’s report would also forewarn the sectarian nature of the coming conflict, and in particular mention the region’s Christians who were admittedly being protected by Hezbollah. …
What else could you call it but satanism/statanism? Islamic fundamentalism is the swiss army knife of the anglo-american luciferian theocracy. Or do you think all this modern military equipment and the USA’s seeming impotence is just an indication of allah’s support for the cause? Then it’s just a coincidence that the head of ISIS is a graduate of a US detention/brainwashing center.
What could Monsanto and the Ukrainian conflict possibly have in common? Let’s just take a look:
The stakes around Ukraine’s vast agricultural sector, the world’s third largest exporter of corn and fifth largest exporter of wheat, constitute a critical factor that has been overlooked. With ample fields of fertile black soil that allow for high production volumes of grains, Ukraine is the breadbasket of Europe.
Ukraine is the breadbasket of Europe and it is GMO-Free, but not for long.
It appears that an alignment with the EU carries with it a mandate to implement genetic engineering into its farming practices.
Article 404 of the EU agreement, which relates to agriculture, includes a clause that has generally gone unnoticed: it indicates, among other things, that both parties will cooperate to extend the use of biotechnologies.
There is no doubt that this provision meets the expectations of the agribusiness industry.
As observed by Michael Cox, research director at the investment bank Piper Jaffray, “Ukraine and, to a wider extent, Eastern Europe, are among the “most promising growth markets for farm-equipment giant Deere, as well as seed producers Monsanto and DuPont.
I think it is ironic, to say the least, that the EU, which has GMO labeling laws, is playing a key role in forcing Ukraine to accept GMOs. So much for labeling, eh? But let’s just keep on fooling ourselves into believing that the labeling movement is not about misdirection and spreading the cultivation of GMOs. It’s so much more comfortable that way. …
This website is designed to provide comprehensive yet simple guidelines for each individual to approach their respective city council with tools on how to end GMO cultivation and toxic pesticides associated with them in their own city or county.
This has been done in San Juan County, Washington and other cities across the nation. Proactive citizens all across the country have taken a stance and made their voices heard, and have made a positive change in their cities by urgently requesting the end of GMO cultivation – this can be done and is being done on local levels, right now, in over 30 cities across the U.S. – but there are as many as 30,000 cities across the nation – we need your help!
“Power of The People” is the foundation of our nation; it is the freedoms and liberties that we hold sacred still to this day – you, are the singular voice of The People – let it be heard loud and clear.
With that in mind, this website’s sole purpose is to offer you the necessary information to complete the courageous task of banning GMOs in your city by:
1. Offering the GMO FAQ brochure, to the right, to your city council members for quick info about GMOs.
2. Visiting State and Local Government Directory to find your city council phone number and location.
3. Downloading the PDF file below, which include references on how to request GMO ban ordinance. …