Look Into It - TOTAL POPULATION CONTROL Part 2

A closer look at the upcoming Jade Helm military exercise, specifically its “master the human domain” motto, reveals a larger agenda in regards to domestic policy.

In current military terminology, the “human domain” or “human domain analytics” refers to the “global understanding of anything associated with people.”

Breaking down into four specific categories, mastery of the human domain results from obtaining total information awareness on a mass scale.

Who You Are – Collected information includes names, addresses, biometrics, social media accounts .

What You Do – Travel history, communications, financial transactions and movement of physical assets.

Who You Know – Relational information including family, friends, associates and organizations.

Context – Contextual data such as demographics, politics, cultural norms and religion.

“The importance of understanding the Human Domain has increased significantly over the past decade and a half,” writes the US Geospatial Intelligence Foundation. “There has been a shift from concentration on Nation-States, to smaller organizations, to individuals.”

The USGIF also refers to Human Domain Analytics as “arrows in a quiver,” hence the prominent arrows on the Jade Helm logo.

“ABI and Human Domain Analytics are not the answer to every intelligence problem; they are merely new arrows in a quiver of capabilities.”

With modern technological advancements allowing anyone “with a video camera and a laptop computer” to have “worldwide impact,” the federal government has not only hyper-incentivized the collection of data, but the merging of all relevant agencies.

“They’re building an infrastructure of tyranny,” stated Infowars David Knight. “There’s a legal infrastructure with things like the NDAA, there’s a technical infrastructure with things like the capability to do dragnet surveillance, and then of course there is going to be a military and law enforcement infrastructure, and those are merging.”

In fact, James Clapper, the current director of national intelligence, has been a frequent keynote speaker at GEOINT conferences. Before famously lying to Congress on the existence of domestic NSA surveillance, Clapper was even the director of national geospatial intelligence agency.

“Activity Based Surveillance, built on a strong foundation of Human Dimension analysis, will form the intellectual underpinning of how we perform intelligence in the future,” Clapper said in 2009.

As noted on the Alex Jones Show Friday, a 2010 conference on mastering the human domain featuring high level military and intelligence officials openly discussed gathering publicly available data to create detailed maps with layered information.

“We start out with a layered group level analysis… We focus it on groups, ethnicities, religious groups and we start to map out and color code the different locations.” said Lt. Col. Al Di Leonardo. “We start to characterize the location in a color coding simple way… and then we start layering that on top of the tribal aspects and we start to see very distinct patterns…”

Stacking Leonardo’s statement up against the Jade Helm map reveals the event to be much more than a basic training drill.

“If you understand the technologies, you will see that Jade Helm is more an intelligence operation using Geospatial Intelligence mapping than a simple military exercise,” adds David Knight.

Leonardo’s speech goes on to note that the military would next focus in on “key leaders” and other members of the community, a move already being carried out by Jade Helm operatives in Texas and other participating states.

“From the very beginning this has been the NSA, the U.S. Geological Service, law enforcement, military, working to put together all this information…” David Knight said.

As information from low level surveillance technologies such as Stingrays and predictive policing programs gets siphoned up to NSA data centers, a detailed global map will continue to grow with near-endless stats on all individuals.

The military leadership’s deception regarding the exercise was on display this week when Americans confronted Col. John Petkosek on C-SPAN and demanded answers on Jade Helm. Despite the topic making international news, Petkosek alleged that he was completely unaware of the massive multi-state drill.

As Infowars has argued for weeks, Jade Helm will not result in martial law, but will move Americans one step closer to the larger agenda of total domination by the surveillance state and military industrial complex.

What does “Master the Human Domain” on the Jade Helm 15 logo mean? “Human Domain”, like “Unconventional Warfare” are terms of art for military and law enforcement. Painting Texas & Utah red and labeling them “hostile” is just the tip of the intel icebertg that seeks to overlay a human geological map onto a physical geological map to track individuals.

Rob Dew and David Knight take a look at this obscure part of the military/police industrial complex and how it relates to Jade Helm.

Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show

"JADE" is an A.I. quantum computing technology that produces holographic battlefield simulations and has the ability to use vast amounts of data being collected on the human domain to generate human terrain systems in geographic population centric locations to identify and eliminate targets, insurgents, rebels or whatever labels that can be flagged as targets in a Global Information Grid for Network Centric Warfare environments.

The JADE II battle field system is cognitive and intuitive. It can examine prior executed battle plans and and devise 'new and better' strategies to increase the 'kill chain'. The II generation of JADE has the capability for two way communication with drones through the OCCOM technology which is one of the next generation integrations to this system.

In short, JADE HELM will not be battles directed by Generals and Military Commanders, but by a computer. It is a cognitive software program based on a Network Centric Warfare System at the HELM.

** Please get this information out, share, re-post. It would seem the Jade Helm 15 exercise is actually a system roll out and more diabolical than we originally imagined. **

DARPA is working on an embryonic project that would store your every verbal conversation on an Internet server, creating a searchable chat database that would represent the ultimate privacy killer.

Having failed to establish its infamous Total Information Awareness system, although the project was continued under numerous different guises, DARPA is attempting to create a world in which your every utterance is stored in perpetuity.

But don’t worry, the servers on which your conversations are stored will be owned by the individual or their employer, and the government promises to never access the information using their vast new $2 billion dollar spying hub in the middle of the Utah desert. Honest.

“University of Texas computer scientist Matt Lease has studied crowdsourcing for years, including for an earlier Darpa project called Effective Affordable Reusable Speech-to-text, or EARS, which sought to boost the accuracy of automated transcription machines. His work has also attracted enough attention for Darpa to award him a $300,000 award over two years to study the new project, called “Blending Crowdsourcing with Automation for Fast, Cheap, and Accurate Analysis of Spontaneous Speech.” The project envisions a world that is both radically transparent and a little freaky,” reports Wired’s Robert Beckhusen.

Described as being, “like a Twitter feed or e-mail archive for everyday speech,” day to day conversations, “could be stored in archives and easily searched.”

Lease claims that the technology would represent a, “democratizing force of everyday people recording and sharing their daily lives and experiences through their conversations,” and yet the Wired article barely even scratches the surface on examining what a horrendous privacy threat this would pose, with governments and police departments potentially obtaining the ability to Google-search speech.

Imagine a situation where, in the name of preventing terrorism, the Department of Homeland Security is given access to the database and uses it to search for spoken keywords, as it already does online with social networks. Forget slippery slope, this would be a rapid descent into the maelstrom of ubiquitous surveillance – the type George Orwell couldn’t even conjure up in his worst nightmare.

The Wired piece glibly addresses concerns about “respecting the privacy rights of multiple people involved,” as well as whether the conversations would be stored on remote or private servers, but doesn’t even mention the chilling ramifications that could ensue once the state manufactures a justification to access the database.

Former CIA director David Petraeus heralded the arrival of the “smart home” as a boon for “clandestine statecraft,” yet that represents child’s play in comparison to what DARPA is planning.

To get a sense of the motivation behind DARPA’s latest attempt to drive the final nail into any semblance of privacy, one only has to recall the furore over the agency’s Total Information Awareness program, symbolized by its logo of an all-seeing eye atop a pyramid beaming its gaze upon the globe.

As the New York Times’ William Safire wrote in November 2002, the TIA program was based around tracking, “Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as ”a virtual, centralized grand database.”

The program was defunded and mothballed in 2003, but it continued to operate under a number of different sub-projects.

Brought to fruition, DARPA’s new attempt to record verbal communications would represent TIA on steroids, but as long as it is sold to the public on a voluntary basis with a shiny, cool, hip veneer (Google Glass-style), a million tech-heads and transhumanists will jump right on board with no hesitation, leaving refusniks increasingly ostracized in a world where storing your every interaction and experience in some vast database becomes as normal as having a Facebook page.

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

DARPA Wants New Technology to Predict “Societal Unrest”
U.S. Defense Department looks to track "all human activities
that can be measured"

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting companies to provide new technology that would allow the U.S. Department of Defense to predict future “societal unrest” by keeping track of “all human activities that can be measured.”

A solicitation posted on FedBizOpps outlines DARPA’s intent to fund research and development of “game-changing technologies” that will “provide a decisive information advantage for the U.S. and its allies,” opening the door to “powerful ways to gain insight into the world.”

“Essentially all human activities that can be measured, from mercantile to military, are being quantitatively re-examined in the context of this new, “big data”, capability. Early demonstrations have produced remarkable insights into human activities and enabled quantitative decision making,” states the solicitation, adding that the agency is looking to develop new algorithms which can forecast “online correlation for societal unrest.”

DARPA has already been heavily engaged in research aimed at forecasting social unrest, most notably the agency’s Crisis Early Warning System (ICEWS), but the results have been patchy, with ICEWS only successful in predicting four out of sixteen rebellions, political upheavals and incidents of ethnic violence during the time period over which it was applied.

Over the past six years, the Pentagon has shown an increased interest in creating models that can forecast domestic and international disorder.

A report produced in 2008 by the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Institute warned that the United States may experience massive civil unrest in the wake of a series of crises which it termed “strategic shock.”

“Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security,” stated the report, authored by [Ret.] Lt. Col. Nathan Freir, adding that the military may be needed to quell “purposeful domestic resistance.”

We have also reported numerous times over the past several years on how the federal government is gearing up for civil unrest, including the Department of Homeland Security’s purchase last October of 240,000 pepper spray projectiles, 100 pepper spray launchers, as well as 36 “riot expansion kits.”

In 2011, the DHS announced that it would intensify its monitoring of social media in order to pre-empt social dislocation within the United States.

Back in 2012, we reported on FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations, a U.S. Army manual that describes how political activists in prison camps will be indoctrinated by specially assigned psychological operations officers. The document makes numerous references to how government agencies like the DHS, ICE and FEMA will be involved in the domestic internment of U.S. citizens during “civil support operations.”

A second US Army Military Police manual that was leaked months later also outlined how military assets would be used domestically to quell riots, confiscate firearms and even kill Americans on U.S. soil during mass civil unrest in the aftermath of a crisis.

"While there will be great advantages to broadening geolocation services, there will undoubtedly be those who do not want to be part of human-centric GEOINT. When everyone is connected, conspicuous holes in the data may
draw more attentionthan the elements that fit in."

“This is the future if nothing is done to stop it,” is the ominous way The Atlantic describes the recent Big Brother tactics used by LA County Sheriffs to “police” areas such as Compton. Residents were unaware (“A lot of people do have a problem with the eye in the sky, the Big Brother, so to mitigate those kinds of complaints we basically kept it pretty hush hush“)that, as the police stated, “we literally watched all of Compton during the times that we were flying, so we could zoom in anywhere within the city of Compton and follow cars and see people,” as they trialled a new system which if adopted, would mean Americans can be policed like Iraqis and Afghanis under occupation. As The Atlantic concludes, the sheriff didn’t conclude that the “wide area surveillance” wouldn’t be like Big Brother after all, just that Big Brother capabilities would help to solve more crimes… so why not tryout mass surveillance?

In a secret test of mass surveillance technology, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department sent a civilian aircraft over Compton, California, capturing high-resolution video of everything that happened inside that 10-square-mile municipality.

Compton residents weren’t told about the spying, which happened in 2012. “We literally watched all of Compton during the times that we were flying, so we could zoom in anywhere within the city of Compton and follow cars and see people,” Ross McNutt of Persistence Surveillance Systems told the Center for Investigative Reporting, which unearthed and did the first reporting on this important story. The technology he’s trying to sell to police departments all over America can stay aloft for up to six hours. Like Google Earth, it enables police to zoom in on certain areas. And like TiVo, it permits them to rewind, so that they can look back and see what happened anywhere they weren’t watching in real time.

If it’s adopted, Americans can be policed like Iraqis and Afghanis under occupation…

Sgt. Douglas Iketani acknowledges that his agency hid the experiment to avoid public opposition. “This system was kind of kept confidential from everybody in the public,”he said. “A lot of people do have a problem with the eye in the sky, the Big Brother, so to mitigate those kinds of complaints we basically kept it pretty hush hush.” That attitude ought to get a public employee summarily terminated.

Notice that he didn’t conclude that the “wide area surveillance” wouldn’t be like Big Brother after all, just that Big Brother capabilities would help to solve more crimes.

He later explains that while the public may think its against this, we’ll get used to it:

Many Americans elect their own sheriffs. This is the future if nothing is done to stop them.

Privacy group warns “even if you have never been arrested you could be implicated as a criminal suspect”

A leading privacy watchdog has warned that the FBI plans to have up to a third of all Americans on a facial recognition database by next year.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation notes in a communique that some 52 million Americans could be on the Next Generation Identification (NGI) biometric database by 2015, regardless of whether they have ever committed a crime or been arrested.

The group managed to obtain information pertaining to the program via a freedom of information request.

The database will also hold fingerprints, of which the FBI has around 100 million records, as well as retina scans and palm prints. Profiles on the system will contain other personal details such as name, address, age and race.

The system will be capable of searching through millions of facial records obtained not only via mugshots, but also via so called “civil images”, the origin of which is vague at best.

“[T]he FBI does not define either the ‘Special Population Cognizant’ database or the ‘new repositories’ category.” The EFF writes. “This is a problem because we do not know what rules govern these categories, where the data comes from, how the images are gathered, who has access to them, and whose privacy is impacted.”

A map within the EFF’s piece shows which states are already complying with the program, and which ones are close to agreeing deals to do so.

The EFF notes that currently, the FBI has access to fingerprint records of non-criminals who have submitted them for any kind of background check, by an employer or government agency. Going forward, however, all records, both criminal and non-criminal will be stored on the same database.

“This means that even if you have never been arrested for a crime, if your employer requires you to submit a photo as part of your background check, your face image could be searched – and you could be implicated as a criminal suspect, just by virtue of having that image in the non-criminal file,” notes the EFF.

EFF points to a disturbing assertion from the FBI that it will not “make positive identifications,” via the database, but will use it to produce “investigative leads.” The Feds claim that “Therefore, there is no false positive [identification] rate.”

“[T]he FBI only ensures that “the candidate will be returned in the top 50 candidates” 85 percent of the time “when the true candidate exists in the gallery.”” EFF states.

“It is unclear what happens when the “true candidate” does not exist in the gallery—does NGI still return possible matches?” the feature asks, noting that those identified could potentially be subjected to criminal investigation purely because a computer has decided that their face is similar to a suspect’s.

EFF continues: “This doesn’t seem to matter much to the FBI—the Bureau notes that because ‘this is an investigative search and caveats will be prevalent on the return detailing that the [non-FBI] agency is responsible for determining the identity of the subject, there should be NO legal issues.’”

“This is not how our system of justice was designed and should not be a system that Americans tacitly consent to move towards,” the EFF piece concludes.

It is somewhat remarkable that when Google announced the release of its Glass product, it was forced to ban applications with the capability for facial recognition due to a huge privacy backlash. The Federal government, however, continues to use such technology unhindered to create biometric profiles on anyone and everyone.

The Department of Homeland Security also has its own facial recognition program, which it routinely outsources to police departments. Meanwhile, new innovations in facial recognition technology continue to be billed as potential tools for law enforcement, including the prediction of future crime.

Steve Watson is a London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, andPrisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

Local law enforcement across the country are employing high-tech control grid surveillance technology to "stop crime". This doesn't make sense considering most US cities are enjoying a huge drop in violent crime. The truth is, police (and private sector businesses) are assisting in the implementation of a total surveillance panopticon meant to control the American public.

Big Brother - InfraGard - Surveillance on U.S. citizens - with Jesse Ventura

http://www.facebook.com/ConspiracyThe...
Big Brother is watching and it's not who you think. Jesse Ventura's investigation of government surveillance on its citizens tears the lid off a nationwide program that is thought to turn local businessmen and office workers into spies, snooping on their neighbors and ratting on their friends in exchange for information and special privileges from the FBI- including, some charge, a "license to kill."

"The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities."

The intelligence community would have us believe it is willing to move both heaven and earth to keep us secure; yet it can not
simply secure our borders?...

Feds more concerned about running drills and
spying on you than shutting down border

How could there be a War on Terror and actually say that we're having a war against terrorism, and leave the borders wide open? If you were the President of the United States, or I were the President of the United States, and 9/11 really happened the way they want us to believe it happened, the first thing you would do is shut down the borders, so people couldn't get in the country to harm you. But they left the borders wide open. Because the bankers want the borders open, because they want a one-world government. They want a North American Union. They don't want borders here. 9/11 was only a manifestation. It was done to create a fear in the American public, so that we will obey what they want us to do.

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. officials have argued that atrocities committed by the militant group ISIS are barbaric and that the group is a threat to the homeland, but it’s worth remembering that the horrific violence perpetrated just across the U.S. border by Mexican drug cartels is equally barbaric and the cartels also pose a threat to Americans.

This week brought another bloody reminder of the cartel’s brutality. Mexican activist Maria Del Rosario Fuentes Rubio, a physician and citizen journalist who had taken a prominent stand against Mexican cartels on social media, died with a bullet in her head. And her killers, in an obvious effort to terrorize others, tweeted her murder.

Yes, as President Barack Obama noted in his Sept. 24 address to the UN General Assembly, ISIS is leaving a trail of rape, beheadings, dead children and mass graves. The numbers are terrifying: More than 5,500 people have been killed in Iraq since June, according to the United Nations.

But here are some numbers – also terrifying – from just across the U.S.-Mexico border: In 2013, Mexican drug cartels murdered more than 16,000 people, and Human Rights Watch estimates more than 60,000 people were killed in drug-related violence from 2006 to 2012.

Here’s the part, however, that seems to get overlooked. Mexican drug cartels have been spreading out across U.S. cities for years. From Texas, to Columbus, Ohio, to Raleigh, North Carolina – in 2010, at least 1,000 U.S. cities cited the presence of one of the four major drug cartels according to a U.S. Justice Department report. According to that report:

There is no disputing that Mexican cartels are operating in the United States. Drug policy analysts estimate that about 90 percent of the cocaine, heroin, marijuana and methamphetamine on U.S. streets came here courtesy of the cartels and their distribution networks in Mexico and along the Southwestern border. DEA officials say they have documented numerous cases of cartel activity in Houston, Los Angeles, Chicago and Atlanta.

Cartel violence isn’t restricted to one side of the border. “Spillover violence” has taken thousands of U.S. lives, according to the FBI. In other words, the cartel threat – while certainly different from the jihadist-style threat of ISIS – is nevertheless a threat.

A whole stream of disturbing statistics about the Mexican drug cartels was brought to light in an opinion piece written by Musa al-Gharbia, a research fellow at the Southwest Initiative for the Study of Middle East Conflicts. This is not a list for the fainthearted:

Beheadings – Mexico is ranked directly below Iraq on the Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index. On May 13, 2012, Mexican authorities found at least 49 decapitated and dismembered bodies along a highway in Nuevo Leon state, between the cities of Monterrey and Reynosa.

Killing children and women - As if decapitations and hanging dead bodies from bridges wasn’t enough, the drug cartels have made a practice of targeting women and children to further terrorize communities or prove they are tougher than the next gang. Children are shot in cars, in their grandmother’s arms or sitting next to their parents.

Mass graves: Mexican authorities have discovered several mass graves with hundreds of corpses of victims of the drug gangs in recent years. Some are filled with victims of the drug wars, others with those murdered for refusing to join the gangs. Most recently, as part of the search for 43 young Mexicans studying to become teachers, searchers have found six mass graves but so far none of the bodies has been identified as any of the missing students. Six mass graves, and they still haven’t found the right mass grave.

As noted, the comparison between ISIS and the cartels has its limits. Operation Inherent Resolve (the silly name the administration has given America’s military action against ISIS) and the “War on Drugs” are about different threats. ISIS wants to vanquish all sorts of infidels, including Americans. The drug cartels are about business – and anyone who gets in their way – including Americans – is a target.

It comes down to this: If the U.S. is being spurred into action against ISIS because of indignation and a threat to Americans, then it is worth remembering that a beheading in Mexico is just as horrifying as one in Iraq or Syria – and a threat against Americans is still a threat whether it is the result of ideology or criminal drug traffickers.

Want to keep up with all the latest DecodeDC stories and podcasts? Sign up for our weekly newsletter at decodedc.com/newsletter

An independent agency of the United States government responsible for collecting and coordinating intelligence and counterintelligence activities abroad in the national interest; headed by the Director of Central Intelligence under the supervision of the President and National Security Council...There has been considerable criticism of the CIA relating to security and counterintelligence failures, failures in intelligence analysis, human rights concerns, external investigations and document releases, influencing public opinion and law enforcement, drug trafficking, and lying to Congress. In 1987, the former CIA Station Chief in Angola in 1976, John Stockwell, said the CIA is responsible for tens of thousands of covert actions and destablization programs since it was created by Congress with the passage of the National Security Act of 1947. At the time, Stockwell estimated that over 6 million people had died in CIA covert actions.

Secret Pentagon Report Reveals US “Created” ISIS As A “Tool” To Overthrow Syria’s President Assad

From the first sudden, and quite dramatic, appearance of the fanatical Islamic group known as ISIS which was largely unheard of until a year ago, on the world’s stage and which promptly replaced the worn out and tired al Qaeda as the world’s terrorist bogeyman, we suggested that the “straight to beheading YouTube clip” purpose behind the Saudi Arabia-funded Islamic State was a simple one: use the Jihadists as the vehicle of choice to achieve a political goal: depose of Syria’s president Assad, who for years has stood in the way of a critical Qatari natural gas pipeline, one which could dethrone Russia as Europe’s dominant – and belligerent – source of energy, reaching an interim climax with the unsuccessful Mediterranean Sea military build up of 2013, which nearly resulted in quasi-world war.

But it’s one thing to speculate; it’s something entirely different to have hard proof.

And while speculation was rife that just like the CIA-funded al Qaeda had been used as a facade by the US to achieve its own geopolitical and national interests over the past two decades, so ISIS was nothing more than al Qaeda 2.0, there was no actual evidence of just this.

That may all have changed now when a declassified secret US government document obtained by the public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad.

According to investigative reporter Nafeez Ahmed in Medium, the “leaked document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, despite anticipating that doing so could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

And not just that: as we reported last week, now that ISIS is running around the middle east, cutting people’s heads of in 1080p quality and Hollywood-quality (perhaps literally) video, the US has a credible justification to sell billions worth of modern, sophisticated weapons in the region in order to “modernize” and “replenish” the weapons of such US allies as Saudi Arabia, Israel and Iraq.

But that the US military-industrial complex is a winner every time war breaks out anywhere in the world (usually with the assistance of the CIA) is clear to everyone by now. What wasn’t clear is just how the US predetermined the current course of events in the middle east.

Now, thanks to the following declassified report, we have a far better understanding of not only how current events in the middle east came to be, but what America’s puppermaster role leading up to it all, was.

From Nafeez Ahmed: Secret Pentagon report reveals West saw ISIS as strategic asset Anti-ISIS coalition knowingly sponsored violent extremists to ‘isolate’ Assad, rollback ‘Shia expansion’, originally posted in Medium.

The revelations contradict the official line of Western government on their policies in Syria, and raise disturbing questions about secret Western support for violent extremists abroad, while using the burgeoning threat of terror to justify excessive mass surveillance and crackdowns on civil liberties at home.

Among the batch of documents obtained by Judicial Watch through a federal lawsuit, released earlier this week, is a US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document then classified as “secret,” dated 12th August 2012.

The DIA provides military intelligence in support of planners, policymakers and operations for the US Department of Defense and intelligence community.

So far, media reporting has focused on the evidence that the Obama administration knew of arms supplies from a Libyan terrorist stronghold to rebels in Syria.

Some outlets have reported the US intelligence community’s internal prediction of the rise of ISIS. Yet none have accurately acknowledged the disturbing details exposing how the West knowingly fostered a sectarian, al-Qaeda-driven rebellion in Syria.

Charles Shoebridge, a former British Army and Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism intelligence officer, said:

“Given the political leanings of the organisation that obtained these documents, it’s unsurprising that the main emphasis given to them thus far has been an attempt to embarrass Hilary Clinton regarding what was known about the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in 2012. However, the documents also contain far less publicized revelations that raise vitally important questions of the West’s governments and media in their support of Syria’s rebellion.”

The West’s Islamists

The newly declassified DIA document from 2012 confirms that the main component of the anti-Assad rebel forces by this time comprised Islamist insurgents affiliated to groups that would lead to the emergence of ISIS. Despite this, these groups were to continue receiving support from Western militaries and their regional allies.

Noting that “the Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” the document states that “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition,” while Russia, China and Iran “support the [Assad] regime.”

The 7-page DIA document states that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the precursor to the ‘Islamic State in Iraq,’ (ISI) which became the ‘Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,’ “supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both ideologically and through the media.”

The formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the region.

In a section titled ‘The Future Assumptions of the Crisis,’ the DIA report predicts that while Assad’s regime will survive, retaining control over Syrian territory, the crisis will continue to escalate “into proxy war.”

The document also recommends the creation of “safe havens under international sheltering, similar to what transpired in Libya when Benghazi was chosen as the command centre for the temporary government.”

In Libya, anti-Gaddafi rebels, most of whom were al-Qaeda affiliated militias, were protected by NATO ‘safe havens’ (aka ‘no fly zones’).

‘Supporting powers want’ ISIS entity

In a strikingly prescient prediction, the Pentagon document explicitly forecasts the probable declaration of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.”

Nevertheless, “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” fighting to “control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor), adjacent to Western Iraqi provinces (Mosul and Anbar)”:

“… there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist Principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).”

The secret Pentagon document thus provides extraordinary confirmation that the US-led coalition currently fighting ISIS, had three years ago welcomed the emergence of an extremist “Salafist Principality” in the region as a way to undermine Assad, and block off the strategic expansion of Iran. Crucially, Iraq is labeled as an integral part of this “Shia expansion.”

The establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, the DIA document asserts, is “exactly” what the “supporting powers to the [Syrian] opposition want.” Earlier on, the document repeatedly describes those “supporting powers” as “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey.”

Further on, the document reveals that Pentagon analysts were acutely aware of the dire risks of this strategy, yet ploughed ahead anyway.

The establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, it says, would create “the ideal atmosphere for AQI to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi.” Last summer, ISIS conquered Mosul in Iraq, and just this month has also taken control of Ramadi.

Such a quasi-state entity will provide:

“… a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy. ISI could also declare an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of territory.”

The 2012 DIA document is an Intelligence Information Report (IIR), not a “finally evaluated intelligence” assessment, but its contents are vetted before distribution. The report was circulated throughout the US intelligence community, including to the State Department, Central Command, the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, FBI, among other agencies.

In response to my questions about the strategy, the British government simply denied the Pentagon report’s startling revelations of deliberate Western sponsorship of violent extremists in Syria. A British Foreign Office spokesperson said:

“AQ and ISIL are proscribed terrorist organisations. The UK opposes all forms of terrorism. AQ, ISIL, and their affiliates pose a direct threat to the UK’s national security. We are part of a military and political coalition to defeat ISIL in Iraq and Syria, and are working with international partners to counter the threat from AQ and other terrorist groups in that region. In Syria we have always supported those moderate opposition groups who oppose the tyranny of Assad and the brutality of the extremists.”

The DIA did not respond to request for comment.

Strategic asset for regime-change

Security analyst Shoebridge, however, who has tracked Western support for Islamist terrorists in Syria since the beginning of the war, pointed out that the secret Pentagon intelligence report exposes fatal contradictions at the heart of official pronunciations:

“Throughout the early years of the Syria crisis, the US and UK governments, and almost universally the West’s mainstream media, promoted Syria’s rebels as moderate, liberal, secular, democratic, and therefore deserving of the West’s support. Given that these documents wholly undermine this assessment, it’s significant that the West’s media has now, despite their immense significance, almost entirely ignored them.”

According to Brad Hoff, a former US Marine who served during the early years of the Iraq War and as a 9/11 first responder at the Marine Corps Headquarters in Battalion Quantico from 2000 to 2004, the just released Pentagon report for the first time provides stunning affirmation that:

“US intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a US strategic asset.”

Hoff, who is managing editor of Levant Report — ?an online publication run by Texas-based educators who have direct experience of the Middle East?—?points out that the DIA document “matter-of-factly” states that the rise of such an extremist Salafist political entity in the region offers a “tool for regime change in Syria.”

The DIA intelligence report shows, he said, that the rise of ISIS only became possible in the context of the Syrian insurgency?—?“there is no mention of US troop withdrawal from Iraq as a catalyst for Islamic State’s rise, which is the contention of innumerable politicians and pundits.” The report demonstrates that:

“The establishment of a ‘Salafist Principality’ in Eastern Syria is ‘exactly’ what the external powers supporting the opposition want (identified as ‘the West, Gulf Countries, and Turkey’) in order to weaken the Assad government.”

The rise of a Salafist quasi-state entity that might expand into Iraq, and fracture that country, was therefore clearly foreseen by US intelligence as likely?—?but nevertheless strategically useful?—?blowback from the West’s commitment to “isolating Syria.”

Complicity

Critics of the US-led strategy in the region have repeatedly raised questions about the role of coalition allies in intentionally providing extensive support to Islamist terrorist groups in the drive to destabilize the Assad regime in Syria.

The conventional wisdom is that the US government did not retain sufficient oversight on the funding to anti-Assad rebel groups, which was supposed to be monitored and vetted to ensure that only ‘moderate’ groups were supported.

However, the newly declassified Pentagon report proves unambiguously that years before ISIS launched its concerted offensive against Iraq, the US intelligence community was fully aware that Islamist militants constituted the core of Syria’s sectarian insurgency.

Despite that, the Pentagon continued to support the Islamist insurgency, even while anticipating the probability that doing so would establish an extremist Salafi stronghold in Syria and Iraq.

As Shoebridge told me, “The documents show that not only did the US government at the latest by August 2012 know the true extremist nature and likely outcome of Syria’s rebellion”?—?namely, the emergence of ISIS?—?“but that this was considered an advantage for US foreign policy. This also suggests a decision to spend years in an effort to deliberately mislead the West’s public, via a compliant media, into believing that Syria’s rebellion was overwhelmingly ‘moderate.’”

Annie Machon, a former MI5 intelligence officer who blew the whistle in the 1990s on MI6 funding of al-Qaeda to assassinate Libya’s former leader Colonel Gaddafi, similarly said of the revelations:

“This is no surprise to me. Within individual countries there are always multiple intelligence agencies with competing agendas.”

She explained that MI6’s Libya operation in 1996, which resulted in the deaths of innocent people, “happened at precisely the time when MI5 was setting up a new section to investigate al-Qaeda.”

This strategy was repeated on a grand scale in the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, said Machon, where the CIA and MI6 were:

“… supporting the very same Libyan groups, resulting in a failed state, mass murder, displacement and anarchy. So the idea that elements of the American military-security complex have enabled the development of ISIS after their failed attempt to get NATO to once again ‘intervene’ is part of an established pattern. And they remain indifferent to the sheer scale of human suffering that is unleashed as a result of such game-playing.”

Divide and rule

Several US government officials have conceded that their closest allies in the anti-ISIS coalition were funding violent extremist Islamist groups that became integral to ISIS.

US Vice President Joe Biden, for instance, admitted last year that Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Turkey had funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to Islamist rebels in Syria that metamorphosed into ISIS.

But he did not admit what this internal Pentagon document demonstrates?—?that the entire covert strategy was sanctioned and supervised by the US, Britain, France, Israel and other Western powers.

The strategy appears to fit a policy scenario identified by a recent US Army-commissioned RAND Corp report.

The report, published four years before the DIA document, called for the US “to capitalise on the Shia-Sunni conflict by taking the side of the conservative Sunni regimes in a decisive fashion and working with them against all Shiite empowerment movements in the Muslim world.”

The US would need to contain “Iranian power and influence” in the Gulf by “shoring up the traditional Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan.” Simultaneously, the US must maintain “a strong strategic relationship with the Iraqi Shiite government” despite its Iran alliance.

The RAND report confirmed that the “divide and rule” strategy was already being deployed “to create divisions in the jihadist camp. Today in Iraq such a strategy is being used at the tactical level.”

The report observed that the US was forming “temporary alliances” with al-Qaeda affiliated “nationalist insurgent groups” that have fought the US for four years in the form of “weapons and cash.” Although these nationalists “have cooperated with al-Qaeda against US forces,” they are now being supported to exploit “the common threat that al-Qaeda now poses to both parties.”

The 2012 DIA document, however, further shows that while sponsoring purportedly former al-Qaeda insurgents in Iraq to counter al-Qaeda, Western governments were simultaneously arming al-Qaeda insurgents in Syria.

The revelation from an internal US intelligence document that the very US-led coalition supposedly fighting ‘Islamic State’ today, knowingly created ISIS in the first place, raises troubling questions about recent government efforts to justify the expansion of state anti-terror powers.

In the wake of the rise of ISIS, intrusive new measures to combat extremism including mass surveillance, the Orwellian ‘prevent duty’ and even plans to enable government censorship of broadcasters, are being pursued on both sides of the Atlantic, much of which disproportionately targets activists, journalists and ethnic minorities, especially Muslims.

Yet the new Pentagon report reveals that, contrary to Western government claims, the primary cause of the threat comes from their own deeply misguided policies of secretly sponsoring Islamist terrorism for dubious geopolitical purposes.

Dr Nafeez Ahmed is an investigative journalist, bestselling author and international security scholar. A former Guardian writer, he writes the ‘System Shift’ column for VICE’s Motherboard, and is also a columnist for Middle East Eye. He is the winner of a 2015 Project Censored Award, known as the ‘Alternative Pulitzer Prize’, for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for his Guardian work, and was selected in the Evening Standard’s ‘Power 1,000’ most globally influential Londoners.

Nafeez has also written for The Independent, Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Scotsman, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, Quartz, Prospect, New Statesman, Le Monde diplomatique, New Internationalist, Counterpunch, Truthout, among others. He is the author of A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilization: And How to Save It (2010), and the scifi thriller novel ZERO POINT, among other books. His work on the root causes and covert operations linked to international terrorism officially contributed to the 9/11 Commission and the 7/7 Coroner’s Inquest.

US Intelligence Officer: “Every Single Terrorist Attack In US Was A False Flag Attack”

“Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services"

Apart from documents that have outlined supposed terrorist threats, like Al-Qaeda, and their connection to US intelligence agencies, like the CIA, there are a number of whistleblowers that have come out adding more fuel to the fire. Because not many are even aware of these documents, letting people know about a truth that can be hard for people to accept, let alone ponder the possibility is very important. It’s just one aspect of the veil that’s been blinding the masses for quite some time now.

The latest whistleblower is David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps intelligence officer, and the second-highest-ranking civilian in the U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence. He is a former CIA clandestine services case officer, and this is what he had to say:

“Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.”

What Is A “False Flag Attack?”

A great example of a false flag attack is 9/11, something that many people believe to be a creation of US intelligence agencies, or some entity above the government (one that controls what Eisenhower called “the military industrial complex”). The idea is that these so called terrorist attacks are created by this group, in order to justify the infiltration of other countries, and to justify a heightened state of “national security.” As a result, in the eyes of the citizenry, war and mass murder are justified, when the intentions behind these actions are something the citizenry has no idea about. This is why we see a false sense of patriotism programmed into many people, especially in the United States. Men and women join this massive military machine with good hearts, thinking that they are serving their country and fighting terrorism, when they are doing the complete opposite. They are only participating in a fabricated war based on lies and misinformation.

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al-Qaeda, and any informed intelligence officer knows this. But, there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an intensified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive TV watchers to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the United States.” – Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook

Today, we might be seeing the same thing with ISIS. Although there are no verified documents like there are when it comes to Al-Qaeda, given what that information shows us, combined with Wikileaks documents and statements from insiders, we could be looking at the same thing.

“The US is reviving terror scare with ISIS to promote the terror war industry.”

Again, 9/11 is a great example and you can find out more information about that here.

Americans are constantly warned every day that there is a deadly threat from terrorists. From homegrown radical ‘extremists’ to ISIS camps in Mexico, the fear is constantly pumped out to the masses via the mainstream media.

However, there is a much more immediate and deadly threat to Americans across the nation, one that can strike at any time, and one that has killed untold thousands more than lost their lives on September 11th 2001 and every other ‘terrorist’ incident since.

You are at the very least, eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.

Cops in the US are responsible for way more deaths on American soil than terrorism since the year 2000. Indeed, in that time, police have killed at least 5,600 people via gunshots, taserings, beatings and other forms of violence. That figure represents more than the total number of US combat deaths in all wars since 2000.

Those are the findings of Fatal Encounters, an impartial nonprofit organisation working to build a national database of police killings in the US.

The organisation notes that the data it collect is largely “based on public information requests, but the bulk of it–the part that will make it sustain after the structure is built–will use crowdsourcing to update the database.”

“How many people are killed in interactions with law enforcement in the United States of America? Are they increasing? What do those people look like?” the organisation asks on its website.

Vox took the data gathered by Fatal Encounters and created an interactive map of every documented police killing over the past 15 years. It looks like this:

Fatal Encounters states in its mission brief that while the FBI collects vast amounts of information on crime nationwide, it does not release collated statistics on how often police use deadly force.

In addition, it is not even mandatory for local and state agencies to report the circumstances of killings, and consequently, whether police were involved.

Thus, the data collected and used to create the map of police killings is incomplete – significantly incomplete.

Indeed, the organisation estimates that it has only captured about 35 percent of total police killings since 2000 so far. So at best, this map represents a minimum of police related killings over the past 15 years.

By those calculations, around SIXTEEN THOUSAND Americans are likely to have been killed by police in that time. Over 1000, every year.

In comparison with other first world nations; only three people were killed by police in 2014 in the UK; 12 people in Canada, and eight over the past two years in Germany. All this despite the fact that the crime index highlights that countries like the UK aren’t that far behind America in regards to overall crime rate.

The level of police killings only appears to be escalating into an epidemic. It is indicative of an endemic societal divide between Americans and their government (yes police work for the government).

So are you still afraid of phantom ISIS camps on the border? Or does being shot dead merely for having a broken tail light seem a more realistic threat?

Steve Watson is a London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

“The ultimate goal of the NSA is total population control.”—William Binney, NSA whistleblower

We now have a fourth branch of government.

As I document in my new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this fourth branch came into being without any electoral mandate or constitutional referendum, and yet it possesses superpowers, above and beyond those of any other government agency save the military. It is all-knowing, all-seeing and all-powerful. It operates beyond the reach of the president, Congress and the courts, and it marches in lockstep with the corporate elite who really call the shots in Washington, DC.

You might know this branch of government as Surveillance, but I prefer “technotyranny,” a term coined by investigative journalist James Bamford to refer to an age of technological tyranny made possible by government secrets, government lies, government spies and their corporate ties.

Beware of what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, and with whom you communicate, because it will all be recorded, stored and used against you eventually, at a time and place of the government’s choosing. Privacy, as we have known it, is dead.

The police state is about to pass off the baton to the surveillance state.

Having already transformed local police into extensions of the military, the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department and the FBI are preparing to turn the nation’s soldier cops into techno-warriors, complete with iris scanners, body scanners, thermal imaging Doppler radar devices, facial recognition programs, license plate readers, cell phone Stingray devices and so much more.

This is about to be the new face of policing in America.

The National Security Agency (NSA) has been a perfect red herring, distracting us from the government’s broader, technology-driven campaign to render us helpless in the face of its prying eyes. In fact, long before the NSA became the agency we loved to hate, the Justice Department, the FBI, and the Drug Enforcement Administration were carrying out their own secret mass surveillance on an unsuspecting populace.

Just about every branch of the government—from the Postal Service to the Treasury Department and every agency in between—now has its own surveillance sector, authorized to spy on the American people. Then there are the fusion and counterterrorism centers that gather all of the data from the smaller government spies—the police, public health officials, transportation, etc.—and make it accessible for all those in power. And of course that doesn’t even begin to touch on the complicity of the corporate sector, which buys and sells us from cradle to grave, until we have no more data left to mine.

The raging debate over the fate of the NSA’s blatantly unconstitutional, illegal and ongoing domestic surveillance programs is just so much noise, what Shakespeare referred to as “sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

It means nothing: the legislation, the revelations, the task forces, and the filibusters.

The government is not giving up, nor is it giving in. It has stopped listening to us. It has long since ceased to take orders from “we the people.”

If you haven’t figured it out yet, none of it—the military drills, the surveillance, the militarized police, the strip searches, the random pat downs, the stop-and-frisks, even the police-worn body cameras—is about fighting terrorism. It’s about controlling the populace.

Despite the fact that its data snooping has been shown to be ineffective at detecting, let alone stopping, any actual terror attacks, the NSA continues to operate largely in secret, carrying out warrantless mass surveillance on hundreds of millions of Americans’ phone calls, emails, text messages and the like, beyond the scrutiny of most of Congress and the taxpayers who are forced to fund its multi-billion dollar secret black ops budget.

Legislation such as the USA Patriot Act serves only to legitimize the actions of a secret agency run by a shadow government. Even the proposed and ultimately defeated USA Freedom Act, which purported to restrict the reach of the NSA’s phone surveillance program—at least on paper—by requiring the agency to secure a warrant before surveillance could be carried out on American citizens and prohibiting the agency from storing any data collected on Americans, amounted to little more than a paper tiger: threatening in appearance, but lacking any real bite.

The question of how to deal with the NSA—an agency that operates outside of the system of checks and balances established by the Constitution—is a divisive issue that polarizes even those who have opposed the NSA’s warrantless surveillance from the get-go, forcing all of us—cynics, idealists, politicians and realists alike—to grapple with a deeply unsatisfactory and dubious political “solution” to a problem that operates beyond the reach of voters and politicians: how do you trust a government that lies, cheats, steals, sidesteps the law, and then absolves itself of wrongdoing to actually obey the law?

Since its official start in 1952, when President Harry S. Truman issued a secret executive order establishing the NSA as the hub of the government’s foreign intelligence activities, the agency—nicknamed “No Such Agency”—has operated covertly, unaccountable to Congress all the while using taxpayer dollars to fund its secret operations. It was only when the agency ballooned to 90,000 employees in 1969, making it the largest intelligence agency in the world with a significant footprint outside Washington, DC, that it became more difficult to deny its existence.

In the aftermath of Watergate in 1975, the Senate held meetings under the Church Committee in order to determine exactly what sorts of illicit activities the American intelligence apparatus was engaged in under the direction of President Nixon, and how future violations of the law could be stopped. It was the first time the NSA was exposed to public scrutiny since its creation.

The investigation revealed a sophisticated operation whose surveillance programs paid little heed to such things as the Constitution. For instance, under Project SHAMROCK, the NSA spied on telegrams to and from the U.S., as well as the correspondence of American citizens. Moreover, as the Saturday Evening Post reports, “Under Project MINARET, the NSA monitored the communications of civil rights leaders and opponents of the Vietnam War, including targets such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Mohammed Ali, Jane Fonda, and two active U.S. Senators. The NSA had launched this program in 1967 to monitor suspected terrorists and drug traffickers, but successive presidents used it to track all manner of political dissidents.”

Senator Frank Church (D-Ida.), who served as the chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence that investigated the NSA, understood only too well the dangers inherent in allowing the government to overstep its authority in the name of national security. Church recognized that such surveillance powers “at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide.”

Noting that the NSA could enable a dictator “to impose total tyranny” upon an utterly defenseless American public, Church declared that he did not “want to see this country ever go across the bridge” of constitutional protection, congressional oversight and popular demand for privacy. He avowed that “we,” implicating both Congress and its constituency in this duty, “must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”

The result was the passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and the creation of the FISA Court, which was supposed to oversee and correct how intelligence information is collected and collated. The law requires that the NSA get clearance from the FISA Court, a secret surveillance court, before it can carry out surveillance on American citizens. Fast forward to the present day, and the so-called solution to the problem of government entities engaging in unjustified and illegal surveillance—the FISA Court—has unwittingly become the enabler of such activities, rubberstamping almost every warrant request submitted to it.

The 9/11 attacks served as a watershed moment in our nation’s history, ushering in an era in which immoral and/or illegal government activities such as surveillance, torture, strip searches, SWAT team raids are sanctioned as part of the quest to keep us “safe.”

In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, George W. Bush secretly authorized the NSA to conduct warrantless surveillance on Americans’ phone calls and emails. That wireless wiretap program was reportedly ended in 2007 after the New York Times reported on it, to mass indignation.

Nothing changed under Barack Obama. In fact, the violations worsened, with the NSA authorized to secretly collect internet and telephone data on millions of Americans, as well as on foreign governments.

It was only after whistleblower Edward Snowden’s revelations in 2013 that the American people fully understood the extent to which they had been betrayed once again.

What this brief history of the NSA makes clear is that you cannot reform the NSA.

As long as the government is allowed to make a mockery of the law—be it the Constitution, the FISA Act or any other law intended to limit its reach and curtail its activities—and is permitted to operate behind closed doors, relaying on secret courts, secret budgets and secret interpretations of the laws of the land, there will be no reform.

Presidents, politicians, and court rulings have come and gone over the course of the NSA’s 60-year history, but none of them have done much to put an end to the NSA’s “technotyranny.”

The beast has outgrown its chains. It will not be restrained.

The growing tension seen and felt throughout the country is a tension between those who wield power on behalf of the government—the president, Congress, the courts, the military, the militarized police, the technocrats, the faceless unelected bureaucrats who blindly obey and carry out government directives, no matter how immoral or unjust, and the corporations—and those among the populace who are finally waking up to the mounting injustices, seething corruption and endless tyrannies that are transforming our country into a technocrized police state.

At every turn, we have been handicapped in our quest for transparency, accountability and a representative democracy by an establishment culture of secrecy: secret agencies, secret experiments, secret military bases, secret surveillance, secret budgets, and secret court rulings, all of which exist beyond our reach, operate outside our knowledge, and do not answer to “we the people.”

What we have failed to truly comprehend is that the NSA is merely one small part of a shadowy permanent government comprised of unelected bureaucrats who march in lockstep with profit-driven corporations that actually runs Washington, DC, and works to keep us under surveillance and, thus, under control. For example, Google openly works with the NSA, Amazon has built a massive $600 million intelligence database for CIA, and the telecommunications industry is making a fat profit by spying on us for the government.

In other words, Corporate America is making a hefty profit by aiding and abetting the government in its domestic surveillance efforts. Conveniently, as the Intercept recently revealed, many of the NSA’s loudest defenders have financial ties to NSA contractors.

Thus, if this secret regime not only exists but thrives, it is because we have allowed it through our ignorance, apathy and naïve trust in politicians who take their orders from Corporate America rather than the Constitution.

If this shadow government persists, it is because we have yet to get outraged enough to push back against its power grabs and put an end to its high-handed tactics.

And if this unelected bureaucracy succeeds in trampling underfoot our last vestiges of privacy and freedom, it will be because we let ourselves be fooled into believing that politics matters, that voting makes a difference, that politicians actually represent the citizenry, that the courts care about justice, and that everything that is being done is in our best interests.

Indeed, as political scientist Michael J. Glennon warns, you can vote all you want, but the people you elect aren’t actually the ones calling the shots. “The American people are deluded … that the institutions that provide the public face actually set American national security policy,” stated Glennon. “They believe that when they vote for a president or member of Congress or succeed in bringing a case before the courts, that policy is going to change. But … policy by and large in the national security realm is made by the concealed institutions.”

In other words, it doesn’t matter who occupies the White House: the secret government with its secret agencies, secret budgets and secret programs won’t change. It will simply continue to operate in secret until some whistleblower comes along to momentarily pull back the curtain and we dutifully—and fleetingly—play the part of the outraged public, demanding accountability and rattling our cages, all the while bringing about little real reform.

Thus, the lesson of the NSA and its vast network of domestic spy partners is simply this: once you allow the government to start breaking the law, no matter how seemingly justifiable the reason, you relinquish the contract between you and the government which establishes that the government works for and obeys you, the citizen—the employer—the master.

Once the government starts operating outside the law, answerable to no one but itself, there’s no way to rein it back in, short of revolution. And by revolution, I mean doing away with the entire structure, because the corruption and lawlessness have become that pervasive.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Running Time: 1:00:01

Description:This week on The Corbett Report we present a special audio and video edition of the podcast/vodcast. This week we delve into the true history of the illegal NSA wiretap program and how it connects to the bigger picture of government surveillance.

Documentation

Documentation – CALEA and the Stellar Wind (video)
Time Reference:	15:22
Description:	Begin watching the YouTube video version of this episode here.
Link To:	YouTube

Documentation – 22% of the US public trust their government
Time Reference:	17:37
Description:	22% too high…
Link To:	PewResearch

Documentation – Graph of public (mis)trust of government over time
Time Reference:	18:12
Description:	Provided by Pew Research
Link To:	People-Press.org

Documentation – 45% Say Random People From Phone Book Better Than Current Congress
Time Reference:	18:50
Description:	Only 45%?
Link To:	Rasmussen

Documentation – Bush Lies About Wiretapping
Time Reference:	19:27
Description:	Surprise, surprise
Link To:	YouTube

Documentation – Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts
Time Reference:	20:41
Description:	The New York Times article that broke the story in December 2005.
Link To:	NYTimes

Documentation – Amy Goodman interviews Eric Lichtblau About Wiretapping Story
Time Reference:	23:22
Description:	Reporter talks about how the story came to be published.
Link To:	YouTube

Documentation – Wikipedia entry on NSA Wiretapping
Time Reference:	28:15
Description:	Use the references, not the spin.
Link To:	Wikipedia

Documentation – Electronic Frontier Foundation
Time Reference:	29:02
Description:	Online civil liberties group that has been fighting the NSA wiretapping program in the courts since it was first revealed.
Link To:	EFF.org

Documentation – Court Rejects Government’s Executive Power Claims and Rules That Warrantless Wiretapping Violated Law
Time Reference:	29:43
Description:	Good news.
Link To:	EFF.org

Documentation – Interview with Rebecca Jeschke
Time Reference:	31:00
Description:	The Corbett Report talks to Rebecca Jeschke about the EFF’s legal battles against the NSA wiretapping program.
Link To:	The Corbett Report

Documentation – Obama Lies About Ending Wiretapping
Time Reference:	35:11
Description:	Surprise, surprise
Link To:	YouTube

Documentation – Olbermann Exposes Obama on Wiretapping
Time Reference:	36:07
Description:	Obama is worse than Bush.
Link To:	YouTube

Documentation – PBS NOW report on NSA Spy Room in AT&T Hub
Time Reference:	39:36
Description:	Features the story of Mark Klein, AT&T whistleblower who revealed the existence of Room 641A.
Link To:	YouTube

Documentation – CALEA Act
Time Reference:	45:49
Description:	Read the legislation online.
Link To:	ASKCALEA.net

Documentation – EFF vs. CALEA
Time Reference:	46:28
Description:	Information on EFF’s problems with the troubling possibilities for internet spying with recent changes to CALEA.
Link To:	EFF.org

Documentation – Frontline covers Total Information Awareness
Time Reference:	48:00
Description:	Part of a PBS documentary on gov’t spy programs.
Link To:	YouTube

Documentation – Cryptome.org
Time Reference:	51:26
Description:	Cryptome welcomes documents for publication that are prohibited by governments worldwide, in particular material on freedom of expression, privacy, cryptology, dual-use technologies, national security, intelligence, and secret governance — open, sec
Link To:	Cryptome.org

Documentation – John Young on The Corbett Report
Time Reference:	52:30
Description:	We talk to John Young about government surveillance. We also have a lengthy discussion about the Wikileaks phenomenon.
Link To:	The Corbett Report

We all know that privacy is a thing of the past, right? Pfff. The government spying on everyone? That's yesterday's news. But if you think you've heard it all when it comes to the obtrusive police state panopticon, you've got another thing coming. Here are five privacies you didn't even realize you lost.

Amazon’s Alexa ECHO DOT Installed CAMPUS WIDE

- The ORWELLIAN NIGHTMARE Is Here! -

US agency would need a facility the size of Europe to store physical copies of information it will hold

A stunning info-graphic put together by a German data company reveals just how expansive the NSA’s data retention program has become.

In the wake of the Snowden revelations, eyes have been trained on the NSA and its almost completed new facility in the Utah desert.

the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program has grown in gargantuan proportions and now intercepts 1.7 billion US electronic communications every single day. Those communications will soon all be funneled through the top secret $2 billion spy center, which the NSA has refused to provide Congress with details of.

Comparing the NSA to the East German Stasi, experts at Open Data City in Berlin, decided to visualize the scope of both spy agencies, to make a point of how much further advanced the NSA is.

The shaded area on the left shows how much physical space the Stasi encompassed in Berlin, then compares the space the NSA would need if it had physical copies of all the information it is capable of storing.

While the Stasi kept all it’s files in physical form, as revealed by NSA whistleblower William Binney, the NSA data center in Utah will be capable of storing 5 zettabytes of digital information (5 billion terabytes).

“They would have plenty of space with five zettabytes to store at least something on the order of 100 years worth of the worldwide communications, phones and emails and stuff like that,” Binney asserts, “and then have plenty of space left over to do any kind of parallel processing to try to break codes.”

Open Data City notes that a filing cabinet requires 0.4 m square, and can hold about 60 folders containing roughly 30,000 pages of paper, which equates to somewhere in the region of 120 MB of data.

Given these facts, the Utah data center, if it were to store printed copies of all the information it can hold, would consume about 17 million square kilometers of space. The shaded area in the image below shows you how much space that is. It pretty much covers the entire continent of Europe.

In comparison, the Stasi Records Authority spanned a mere 200 kilometers at its facility in Berlin. Consequently, the NSA can hold nearly 1 billion times more data than the Stasi could.

Of course, there is no need to worry, for the NSA vows that it only targets terrorists and extremists, just liked the Stasi did.

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

The United Nations is holding its Biodiversity Conference in Paris this week to further define how mankind should co-exist with nature. The original Global Biodiversity Assessment from 1995 called for a sustainable level of human beings on planet earth: 1-3 Billion people. The GBA was the document that gave substance to Agenda 21, or the Agenda for the 21st Century, produced in 1992 at the first Earth Summit in Rio. This what THEY said, not me.

Stories covered today

James Paul Warburg was a German-born American banker. He was notably well known for being the financial adviser to Franklin D. Roosevelt. His father was banker Paul Warburg, member of the Warburg family and "father" of the Federal Reserve system.

Where Does It End? New 'Monarch' Brain Device
Approved for ADHD

First published at 02:43 UTC on July 26th, 2019.

Featuring Dr. Peter Breggin [The Minds of Men] For more on SPAC, visit Breggin.com.

Premiered Dec 16, 2018
GET $5 OFF when you order the DVD, use code SUBPROJECT119 @ TheMindsofMen.net
(includes extras: extended interview, deleted scene, behind the scenes featurette and trailer).

A failed attempt to recruit Aaron Russo resulted in recent light being shed on the CFR, The Fake War On Terrorism, And A Cashless Society

Several years ago, after his popular video “Mad As Hell” was released and Aaron Russo began his campaign to become Governor of Nevada, Russo was noticed by Nicholas Rockefeller and introduced to him by a female attorney. Seeing Russo’s passion and ability to affect change, Rockefeller set about on a subtle mission to recruit Russo into the elite’s CFR. Watch the full interview here: Reflections and Warnings.

Aaron Russo talks about the CFR,
The Fake War On Terrorism, And A Cashless Society